Does the ‘perfect’ bourbon exist? Buffalo Trace's quest for "The Holy Grail".

[MacinJosh]

Hey guys,

Stumbled across this article today. It was posted back in mid-March. Some of you might have already seen it (and yes Thad, I combed through the open threads and I didn't see one on this topic yet ).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/food/does-the-perfect-bourbon-exist/2011/03/01/ABBy9tY_story.html

What do you guys think? Does Harlen Wheatley have something up his sleeve and in the works to be released later this month? Something that goes beyond just the Experimental Collection?

As a huge Buffalo Trace fan (they set the bar and are the industry standard in my humble opinion) I certainly hope so. While I can't imagine better bourbons or ryes than The Antique Collection.....I for one would be thrilled to be proven wrong!

Let's hope it happens....

Josh

[OscarV]

I ain't holding my breath.

I don't think Buffalo Trace has anything that comes close to the best of WT or 4R.

Except for BT's Antique Collection the rest of their line up is to piney/grassy for me.

But they do put on a good show.

I will say havever they are better than the Old Forester/Woodford/Jack Daniels line and Jim Beams of the world.

[Tony]

Howdy Josh:

I hope you are great.

Thanks for sharing this, it was very interesting. Wonder what this will cost???

Best regards, tony

[soad]

They're wasting their time, I'm drinking the Holy Grail right now....OGD 114. Last night I drank the Holy Grail....Weller 12. The night before the Holy Grail was ORVW 107......

[fishnbowljoe]

Hmmm. :skep: I thought it was Weller Centennial. Maybe they should start making it again. Dooooh! I forgot we already covered that in another thread. My bad. :grin: Cheers! Joe

[CorvallisCracker]

A number of semi random thoughts here.

First, seems to me that the goal of getting 100 points from Malt Advocate reflects an implicit assumption that such a rating would be compellingly persuasive. I think they're wrong about that. Although Hansell is a respected reviewer, he does not carry the same status in the whiskey community that Parker does in the wine community (and Parker's influence has diminished; more on that later). The serious whiskey drinking commmunity is small compared to the number of people who are trying to identify & buy top wines, and is, I believe, qualitatively different in that the former trust to their own evaluations much more than do the latter.

Second, just as no two consumers are likely to agree on every whiskey, neither are any two reviewers. Even if they got a 100 from MA, they would probably get less from Murray, Pacult, or BTI. Who ya gonna believe?

Third, reviewers reduce their own credibility when they hand out 100 point scores. Some years ago, the aformentioned Robert Parker gave 100pts to a Bordeaux, the 1990 Chateau Montrose. I happened to have acquired a half case of this as a futures purchase, getting them for $27 each (after the WA score was published, prices shot up to $150). I'd also bought a half case of the 1989 (94pts) and over the years pitted the two against each other in a number of tastings. It wasn't until 2008, when I opened the last of each, that the 1990 was judged better by a majority of those at the tasting. Even then, as good as it was, it was not the best Bordeaux I'd ever had (that would be the 1986 Lafite-Rothschild, which Mr. Parker gave a 99).

I can cite other examples.

As consumers themselves become more experienced, they replicate these results, and learn to trust to their own taste rather than rely on "experts". As I said before, I think most serious whiskey drinkers have already reached this point.

Finally, if you want to go by BTI (Beverage Tasting Institute, www.tastings.com), the "perfect" bourbon has already been named: Pappy van Winkle 20yo, which is the only one to ever get 99 points (if you analyze the BTI scoring system you'll realize it's not possible to get 100 points). Do I think PVW 20 is perfect? Sometimes. Other times, it seems too woody. So much for perfection.

[BFerguson]

Will is be something outstanding that they come up with, absolutely.

Will is be something that each one of will go "That was the best glass/bottle that I ever had in my life....." probably not, but it will still be a very fine glass, I'm sure of that.

Besides, the best ever, could have already existed, or may exist, or not even be barreled yet. That is the mystique. I can remember my dad saying, "No matter how good you are, there is always somebody better out there. You may never meet them, but they exist nonetheless.

The mystique of the perfect is what keeps most of us in the hunt and the love of what we do.

Ahhh....but the real question is, will I buy it when/if is comes out? Without a doubt!:grin:

[NorCalBoozer]

I find it weird that their basis for success is when Malt Advocate anoints it as such. It's hard to read that article and not sense that they are really on a marketing quest to find and badge something as a holy grail before someone else does.

[White Dog]

To get 100 from Hansell is "perfect" for Sazerac because then they will sell lots of Bourbon. Nothing more, nothing less. :rolleyes:

[tehbeardman]

Perfect leaves a lot to interpretation as well. Perfect doesn't have to mean it is the most awesome super magically wet yourself best whiskey to ever grace this earth.

What if perfection is the best tasting well rounded whiskey at a value that can't be beat. Maybe they don't even care (much) about ratings?

I think most of us could agree that it is a marketing/talking point to easily create a buzz in the community.

Also, if they are trying to make the 'perfect' tasting bourbon, they need to be careful, because 'perfection' can be boring.

[MacinJosh]

Great points everyone. And I agree on the marketing ploy. MA isn't the end all be all in ratings.....although I'll freely admit to being a big fan of Hansell, Broom, Roskrow, Smith, and Bryson.

I think we all can agree "perfection" is subjective.....

Josh

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[T Comp]

Hey guys,

Stumbled across this article today. It was posted back in mid-March. Some of you might have already seen it (and yes Thad, I combed through the open threads and I didn't see one on this topic yet ).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/food/does-the-perfect-bourbon-exist/2011/03/01/ABBy9tY_story.html

What do you guys think? Does Harlen Wheatley have something up his sleeve and in the works to be released later this month? Something that goes beyond just the Experimental Collection?

As a huge Buffalo Trace fan (they set the bar and are the industry standard in my humble opinion) I certainly hope so. While I can't imagine better bourbons or ryes than The Antique Collection.....I for one would be thrilled to be proven wrong!

Let's hope it happens....

Josh

That's all I know but I will be there for the announcement.

They let this out to the Washington Post.

Well Josh you got me on the topic but Chuck did link to the article in this thread on "Harlan Wheatley talks BT and Pappy" back on 3/16/11.

http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showthread.php?p=237921&highlight=washington+post#post237921

And sorry for being snarky about that previous KC thread but I'm blaming it on that Sunday Morning Coming Down Thing...at least I think it was Sunday morning. Peace. Thad.

[cowdery]

There's another thread about the Washington Post article and I think I posted there that I will be your eyes and ears at the unveiling of this product or products on Friday, April 29. Look for my post around noon. I love the smell of whiskey in the morning.

[sku]

There's another thread about the Washington Post article and I think I posted there that I will be your eyes and ears at the unveiling of this product or products on Friday, April 29. Look for my post around noon. I love the smell of whiskey in the morning.

Glad to hear it Chuck. I know you'll give us the real deal.

[ethangsmith]

This certainly does seem like an ambitious undertaking, but I don't think they will be successful in their plan. Like has been said already, everyone has their own tastes. I've had quite a few different Buffalo Trace products and I've ended up dumping most of them down the drain. To me, they all tasted moldy, acidic, and very industrial. Too harsh and obnoxious. So would I like this "perfect" bourbon they're going to unveil? Will I like it more than my all-time favorite Old Grand Dad BIB? I highly doubt it. And I'm sure I won't be the only person that feels the same way. I'm sure the bourbon will get high praise from many in the industry and be a fine bourbon, but to call it "perfect" is going a bit far to me. There are quite a few people saying Weller 107 is near perfect, but I dumped my bottle down the drain. Even the smell turned me off. So I guess the gist of what I'm getting at by saying all this is that it's pretty high-and-mighty to even attach the word "perfect" to a bourbon that hasn't even been bottled yet! Sounds like Buffalo Trace's fame is going to their heads. I wish them well in their endeavor and I hope the bourbon is an excellent bourbon, but I just wish they wouldn't be so seemingly full of themselves about it.

[Parkersback]

There are quite a few people saying Weller 107 is near perfect, but I dumped my bottle down the drain.

Don't they sell ginger ale where you live? Sweet vermouth? :skep:

I can see not liking it much, but down the drain? Are you trying to drive Fishbowl to an early grave by telling us this?

[JohnHansell]

I think it is a worthy effort, and I respect BT for undertaking an ambitious project to create the perfect bourbon. I know from what Mark Brown has told me, he's been working on this for many years.

If I were him, I'm not sure I would have chosen the same whiskey writers' reviews to formulate the "perfect" bourbon. (I think there are better whisky reviewers than me that BT didn't choose.) Still, it will be interesting to see what the end result tastes like.

I am not going to the press event--Chuck is covering it for Malt Advocate. That's probably for the best, given that I might feel a little uncomfortable watching him explain how he dissected whiskey reviews (including mine) to formulate a perfect whiskey.

Mark always said he wanted to create a whisky where Paul, Gary and I would each give it a 100 rating. He has his work cut out for him--the highest rating I ever gave a whiskey (orwhisky) is 97.

[sku]

Mark always said he wanted to create a whisky where Paul, Gary and I would each give it a 100 rating. He has his work cut out for him--the highest rating I ever gave a whiskey (orwhisky) is 97.

John, do you feel like this puts you in a difficult position as a professional reviewer? Is it awkward to have someone saying outright that they forumulated a bourbon to get a 100 from you? It seems like they are trying to break down a reviewer/product wall in some ways. I guess now you know what it's like to be Robert Parker.

[ethangsmith]

Don't they sell ginger ale where you live? Sweet vermouth? :skep:

I can see not liking it much, but down the drain? Are you trying to drive Fishbowl to an early grave by telling us this?

There are plenty of brands of sodas and things to mix it in around here and I did do that a few times. But it just ended up sitting around and I eventually dumped it so I had more space for my bottles of Bookers and OGD 114. At the time, if I would have known there were people that actually like the stuff, I would have been more than happy to see it go to someone who appreciates it! It's been a long time since I had another Buffalo Trace product on my shelves and my tastes have changed a lot (whiskey-wise) but there was something in all of the bourbons I tried that just made me nauseated. I'm very leery about trying any other because of those experiences. While Buffalo Trace may very well end up making the perfect bourbon for most people, I'm not so sure it's going to be MY perfect bourbon.

[tmckenzie]

Send it to me next time, I love bt's products.

[TNbourbon]

Here's the problem I have with even a 'quest' for a perfect bourbon, as Mark Brown proclaims: who's going to buy it?

By and large, I'd posit, it's NOT going to be the bourbon drinkers most eligible and likely to enjoy it (and I'd argue a large portion of them reside on this forum!). I think it's most likely to be a handful of tasters -- like John Hansell, Pacult, Regan, our own Chuck Cowdery, Lew Bryson, who have samples provided to them -- and the collectors with enough money to seek out and enjoy owning one-of-a-kind, expensive items.

Or, will Buffalo Trace -- once they've concocted this 'perfect' bourbon -- manufacture and market it in Jim Beam White-like quantities so that all of us can afford and enjoy it?

Yeah -- the latter scenario doesn't seem likely to me, either.:skep:

Also, I could offer many comments, questions, and doubts about how to even determine a 'perfect' bourbon, but you guys seem to have that angle pretty much covered already.

Two points, finally: it's damned disheartening to suspect that only rich guys and insiders will be able to afford and obtain this so-called "perfection" -- but, it has ever been thus, so I can live with that; and, unless and until I get to taste and affirm it, I simply won't believe it's better than the 'perfect' bourbon I once received in a trade with Preston Van Winkle (an unfiltered, barrel-proof sample of 21+yo "Pappy", described here: http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showpost.php?p=91237&postcount=1, and here: http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showpost.php?p=91402&postcount=1).

For me, anyway, it ain't perfect until it beats that one!:bigeyes: :shocked: And, I'd bet I'm more the rule than the exception in having an experience and attitude like that. So, Mark Brown is kinda wasting his rhetoric, isn't he? (Probably not wasting his time, though. I'm sure there's money in it. We're here talking about it, aren't we?)

[cowdery]

Let's not piss all over this until we have a little better idea of what it is, shall we?

Of course it's an attempt to create buzz and sell product.

And since we're all of legal drinking age, I doubt anyone here is naive enough to think the 'perfect bourbon' will, indeed, be achieved. We're not children. We're capable of approaching this realistically while still allowing a little room for wonder.

No, it won't, in fact, be perfect but it might be interesting. It might be fun. It might be cool. It might be something to legitimately talk about. It might even, and this is the most ambitious part, move the ball and genuinely change the industry.

You have to admit that as something new to release in the spring goes, it's ballsy. That's really all we know at this point. They're sticking their necks out. And by debuting it to writers and not to distributors and the rest of the trade, they're trying to go directly to the people with it, which shows a lot of respect for the people here.

No, I haven't drunk the Kool Aid. I have yet to be presented with the Kool Aid. But I'm willing to keep an open mind and allow my fancy to be tickled.

[fishnbowljoe]

It would be nice to try some at the Gazebo Friday night Chuck. Invite the folks from BT to stop by. What better place for them to get some feedback. :grin: Joe

[silverfish]

John, do you feel like this puts you in a difficult position as a professional reviewer? Is it awkward to have someone saying outright that they formulated a bourbon to get a 100 from you?

I was wondering the same thing. I imagine Chuck and the others are

professional enough to not be swayed when someone presents them

with "Here, give this a try. We think it's our perfect, 100 scoring

bourbon." but I wouldn't envy anyone put in that position.

[CaptainQ]

I was wondering the same thing. I imagine Chuck and the others are

professional enough to not be swayed when someone presents them

with "Here, give this a try. We think it's our perfect, 100 scoring

bourbon." but I wouldn't envy anyone put in that position.

Tough job, but somebodys gotta do it. Glad it's not me.