What Did You Pass Up Today? Winter/Spring 2012

[tommyj1986]

An EC 18 at $45 and a Lot 'B' at $56.

[mosugoji64]

What's wild is she has told me they have already sold 1.5 cases of the 2 they had at that price. :bigeyes: :bigeyes: I told her that I would take one right then for $70, of course she said no but I gave her my info and told her to call if the price dropped at all.

Haven't seen Tornado in Indy yet, but a couple of stores still have the Single Barrel - for $99. :bigeyes:

[jtexaslonestar]

Haven't seen Tornado in Indy yet, but a couple of stores still have the Single Barrel - for $99. :bigeyes:

It has all the marketing tools for a mark-up: fancy cardboard tube, BIB on label and Single Barrel on label and limited release status to boot!

I passed up a WTAS today and noticed there were three more scattered around in different areas of the store. It was priced at $89.99.

[BarrelChar]

PVW 23 for $280.

Since Harlen said the 23 still had some SW juice, it was tempting, but after some obnoxious consternation and contemplation, I passed. Figure I'll keep the powder dry for this year's Four Roses LE releases. And yet my drama queen side wants someone to tell me I made a big mistake.

[Young Blacksmith]

BarrelChar!!! Go spend your money on some real SW whiskey! If you don't you'll wake up in the middle of the night, sweating, and wonder if you've really tasted the true thing.

(even though I'm doing as you did, saving my $ for the 4R products)

[BradleyC]

I passed on an EC18 distilled in 1982 for $79. I grabbed the '99 rare breed (on sale for $36) instead.

[BarrelChar]

BarrelChar!!! Go spend your money on some real SW whiskey! If you don't you'll wake up in the middle of the night, sweating, and wonder if you've really tasted the true thing. (even though I'm doing as you did, saving my $ for the 4R products)

YES YES, that is what I want to hear!!! Well, I still have my minis of the true old school, tax-stamped SW, so until I can until I can give Harlen & Julian the sodium pentathol truth serum, that'll have to do.

That store was also doing a tasting of Woodford Double Oaked. Granted, Brown-Forman isn't exactly a heavy hitter, but this was absolutely vile, hideous bourbon. Huge cloying aspartame-like sweetness upfront and an nauseating bitter, sour finish. It was as close to an "F" as bourbon gets, and I wouldn't have taken a bottle if they gave it to me for free. Needed a full bottle of water just to remove the taste. Grade-A nightmare fuel.

[clingman71]

YES YES, that is what I want to hear!!! Well, I still have my minis of the true old school, tax-stamped SW, so until I can until I can give Harlen & Julian the sodium pentathol truth serum, that'll have to do.

That store was also doing a tasting of Woodford Double Oaked. Granted, Brown-Forman isn't exactly a heavy hitter, but this was absolutely vile, hideous bourbon. Huge cloying aspartame-like sweetness upfront and an nauseating bitter, sour finish. It was as close to an "F" as bourbon gets, and I wouldn't have taken a bottle if they gave it to me for free. Needed a full bottle of water just to remove the taste. Grade-A nightmare fuel.

Sadly, it IS an improvement over regular Woodford.

[LostBottle]

That store was also doing a tasting of Woodford Double Oaked. Granted, Brown-Forman isn't exactly a heavy hitter, but this was absolutely vile, hideous bourbon. Huge cloying aspartame-like sweetness upfront and an nauseating bitter, sour finish. It was as close to an "F" as bourbon gets, and I wouldn't have taken a bottle if they gave it to me for free. Needed a full bottle of water just to remove the taste. Grade-A nightmare fuel.

You made me laugh out loud, you made the Hansell review of the BTEC Oat sound absolutely complimentary in comparison! I have always had a strong dislike of Woodford, so I'll take you at your word on the Double Oaked.

[c2walker]

I have always had a strong dislike of Woodford, so I'll take you at your word on the Double Oaked.

As have I and as will I!

That store was also doing a tasting of Woodford Double Oaked. Granted, Brown-Forman isn't exactly a heavy hitter, but this was absolutely vile, hideous bourbon. Huge cloying aspartame-like sweetness upfront and an nauseating bitter, sour finish. It was as close to an "F" as bourbon gets, and I wouldn't have taken a bottle if they gave it to me for free. Needed a full bottle of water just to remove the taste. Grade-A nightmare fuel.

Time for you start a review blog! Many people here may disagree with you on many issues, but I have to imagine that most find your writing enormously entertaining.

[BarrelChar]

Time for you start a review blog! Many people here may disagree with you on many issues, but I have to imagine that most find your writing enormously entertaining.

But if I start releasing honest reviews, I'll never enjoy the constant flow of free samples, gift bottles and comped tickets to gala whiskey events! And frankly, that's a price I'm not willing to pay. It's smarter to give almost everything a "B" or better and just rehash a bunch of fluffy industry press releases.

In fact, allow me to restate my review: "I just received this sample yesterday and tasted it last night. I really enjoy it. It’s richer and creamier than the standard Woodford Reserve. Smooth too, with a kiss of sweetness to it." Wait, no scratch that. Here is my super-duper final rewrite: "I am hard pressed to pick a favorite, but ultimately I think Double Oaked is a slight improvement over an already fine whiskey. A-."

Damnit, turns out I just plagiarized twice. As you can see, I'm not cut out for the kind of ferocious integrity required for the business of professional whiskey criticism.

In all seriousness, it's dreadful, overpriced releases like Double Oaked that give me a greater appreciation for the brutal honesty and expert palates of the writers at LA Whiskey Society, especially Sku. His notes on this poison were dead-on.

[clingman71]

But if I start releasing honest reviews, I'll never enjoy the constant flow of free samples, gift bottles and comped tickets to gala whiskey events! And frankly, that's a price I'm not willing to pay. It's smarter to give almost everything a "B" or better and just rehash a bunch of fluffy industry press releases.

In fact, allow me to restate my review: "I just received this sample yesterday and tasted it last night. I really enjoy it. It’s richer and creamier than the standard Woodford Reserve. Smooth too, with a kiss of sweetness to it." Wait, no scratch that. Here is my super-duper final rewrite: "I am hard pressed to pick a favorite, but ultimately I think Double Oaked is a slight improvement over an already fine whiskey. A-."

Damnit, turns out I just plagiarized twice. As you can see, I'm not cut out for the kind of ferocious integrity required for the business of professional whiskey criticism.

In all seriousness, it's dreadful, overpriced releases like Double Oaked that give me a greater appreciation for the brutal honesty and expert palates of the writers at LA Whiskey Society, especially Sku. His notes on this poison were dead-on.

Not just over priced, crazy over priced - $50ish is what I've seen. In the past month I've bought a WSR7, WTR101, & TPS AAA for $49.73 total!

[bgageus]

Went to the low end store down the street and saw 3 bottles of PHC Cognac, at retail, most expensive bourbon on the shelf by a good $40. Is it wrong for me to ask the owner how long it will be before he puts them on the clearance shelf?

[Trey Manthey]

As you can see, I'm not cut out for the kind of ferocious integrity required for the business of professional whiskey criticism.

Since you're always dousing your "tasting notes" with dollops of sarcasm how are we supposed to take you seriously? Did you even really try the whiskey in question? Or maybe you forgot to mention that you ate a handful of wasabi peas right before doing your tasting...

[bgageus]

Two Jugs of Evan Williams Master Distillers Select, not sure how full they are given that I have heard they have evaporation problems.

[BarrelChar]

Since you're always dousing your "tasting notes" with dollops of sarcasm how are we supposed to take you seriously? Did you even really try the whiskey in question? Or maybe you forgot to mention that you ate a handful of wasabi peas right before doing your tasting...

I love the quotation marks around (ahem) "tasting notes," as if my use of humor makes them somehow "less than." Yes, Double Oaked is total dross, and no, it wasn't an acid flashback.

Sure, it's highly unusual for bourbon drinkers read such stridently negative tasting notes, especially since we're inundated with gushing reviews from a few industry pimps who adore everything--and, naturally, raved about Double Oaked. But I assure you, even though I don't like wasabi peas, they would have been a welcome palate cleanser.

Sku is one of the most forthright critics and he agreed: it's sweet and bitter, little more. He gave it a C+, which, if you didn't factor in cost, is roughly where I'd place it (I'd say more like D+). But considering BF has the nerve to sell it for $40+, I'd say it's a straight-up F.

Now, back to the topic of the board: What Did I Pass Up Today? Well, it was Thursday, but Pappy 23 for $280, Lot B for $72, ORVW 10/107 for $60, a 1.75 mL handle of Weller 12 (old white label) for $42.

One store was also pushing some truly terrifying rye called "Tap Maple 357" which is a blend of 3, 5 and 7 year Canadian rye with maple syrup and other "natural flavors" blended in at 81 proof. Imagine my total and complete shock when I saw DrinkHacker gave it a B+. Uh oh, there's that darn sarcasm of mine acting up again.

[BarrelChar]

Funny story from my hunt today. Have you ever wanted to stop a fellow shopper from buying bad or overpriced bourbon? Last week I saw a guy buy a Rebel Yell and almost ran to stop him, but figured it would have looked pretentious and invasive. Still, I felt as though I'd let him down. My regret festered.

Well, today my chance for redemption arrived: two nice kids next to me were shopping for bourbon but looked confused. He picked up the bottle of Old Pogue ($42) and I wanted to intervene. He read the label and attached card and seem perplexed. Then he picked up the Willet Pot Still ($42) and I had to stop him.

So I pointed him to the Vintage 17 ($52) and Four Roses Single Barrel ($33) and gave a description of each. They were looking for something spicier, so they picked the FR.

It's another lesson in why Specs, the major retailer here, is a gift and curse. On the one hand, they get some bottles the smaller shops can't, and their prices are pretty fair. Alternatively, the service is non-existent; if you can ever actually find a clerk, they'll usually upsell bad juice that their managers push on them. They're also totally unreliable at ordering special bottles. Rarely shop there and hate to support that kind of retailer, but I thought they might have the 2012 Four Roses LE. No luck.

[jeanraulmitchell]

GTS $130

THH $100

ER17$130

PHC cognac

4 willet expressions

I may go for the Handy, if my go to store sells out the 4 I saw last week. I do want another one.

[Trey Manthey]

Sure, it's highly unusual for bourbon drinkers read such stridently negative tasting notes, especially since we're inundated with gushing reviews from a few industry pimps who adore everything--and, naturally, raved about Double Oaked.

So you have a problem with a few "industry pimps", whose tastes don't match up with your palate. In another thread you emphasize how valuable it is for enthusiasts to just follow the tastes of a whiskey reviewer to determine their buying patterns, rather than do their own research.

I'm thinking you've found your calling; instead of reviewing whiskey products, you should just review the whiskey industry. You could do a weekly column and write reviews of bloggers, websites, or master distillers.

[c2walker]

So you have a problem with a few "industry pimps", whose tastes don't match up with your palate. In another thread you emphasize how valuable it is for enthusiasts to just follow the tastes of a whiskey reviewer to determine their buying patterns, rather than do their own research.

I'm thinking you've found your calling; instead of reviewing whiskey products, you should just review the whiskey industry. You could do a weekly column and write reviews of bloggers, websites, or master distillers.

Can we please avoid personal attacks and stay on topic?

[Trey Manthey]

Can we please avoid personal attacks and stay on topic?

Very well. Today I passed up:

Woodford Reserve Double Oaked $49.95

Touche, BarrelChar. Touche.

[BarrelChar]

So you have a problem with a few "industry pimps", whose tastes don't match up with your palate. In another thread you emphasize how valuable it is for enthusiasts to just follow the tastes of a whiskey reviewer to determine their buying patterns, rather than do their own research.

I'm thinking you've found your calling; instead of reviewing whiskey products, you should just review the whiskey industry. You could do a weekly column and write reviews of bloggers, websites, or master distillers.

Honest reviews are extremely useful. I enjoy reading the LAWhiskey Society, Sku's RecentEats, Jason Pyle's SourMashManifesto and many others. They're great educational resources. Do I always agree with them? Of course not. But they're independent and objective. Alternatively, there exist the paid professionals who are so in-bed with industry and addicted to the freebies that their independence is compromised.

The difference is clear.

And yes, master distillers who release terrible, expensive whiskey should be ashamed. And bottlers who might be misrepresenting their whiskey's provenance should be called to answer. Doing so sets higher standards for the industry. If we let a bunch of professional hacks say everything tastes great and nobody should ever dare ask uncomfortable questions, we'll keep getting more overpriced, mediocre bourbon of dubious origins; and more boring PR releases masquerading as journalism.

One of the worst offenders recently gave Rebel Yell a B+. If that's not a sign of a problem, I'm not sure what is.

[CoMobourbon]

Honest reviews are extremely useful. I enjoy reading the LAWhiskey Society, Sku's RecentEats, Jason Pyle's SourMashManifesto and many others. They're great educational resources. Do I always agree with them? Of course not. But they're independent and objective. Alternatively, there exist the paid professionals who are so in-bed with industry and addicted to the freebies that their independence is compromised.

The difference is clear.

And yes, master distillers who release terrible, expensive whiskey should be ashamed. And bottlers who might be misrepresenting their whiskey's provenance should be called to answer. Doing so sets higher standards for the industry. If we let a bunch of professional hacks say everything tastes great and nobody should ever dare ask uncomfortable questions, we'll keep getting more overpriced, mediocre bourbon of dubious origins; and more boring PR releases masquerading as journalism.

One of the worst offenders recently gave Rebel Yell a B+. If that's not a sign of a problem, I'm not sure what is.

Hear Hear!

Really, though, I am tempted to find some trivial quibble with this post, blow it up into some would-be clever cynical remark, and get BarrelChar back in the rhetorical driver seat. Anything so I can hear more sweeping, righteously indignant, intellectually self-indulgent and generally very entertaining arguments from SB's most needlessly eloquent poster.

But really BarrelChar, I love you man (man, I assume?). I hope you will forgive me for laughing both with you and at you most of the time.

Oh yeah, and my token relevant comment. I have been on the hunt for a new experience (cheap novice looking to expand his range a little) but found myself passing on prices for all but my own staples. $30 for ER10, $28 for EC12, etc. If I can get WT101 for $17, WSR 7 for $14, and a single barrel select BT for $19 at this same place (and I am poor), why bother expanding my range just yet?

[BarrelChar]

Hear Hear!

Really, though, I am tempted to find some trivial quibble with this post, blow it up into some would-be clever cynical remark, and get BarrelChar back in the rhetorical driver seat. Anything so I can hear more sweeping, righteously indignant, intellectually self-indulgent and generally very entertaining arguments from SB's most needlessly eloquent poster.

But really BarrelChar, I love you man (man, I assume?). I hope you will forgive me for laughing both with you and at you most of the time.

No worries, laughter is healthy. Similarly, I got a hearty chuckle at being called "intellectually self-indulgent" by the same guy who posted this: http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showthread.php?p=285356#post285356

And I quote:

"So as a student and teacher of English, I love language. Accordingly, I realize that much of the delicious mystery and vitality of words consists in their wonderful ambiguity and slipperyness - and I would never want to subject them to the cloroform and dissection that is precise and systematic definition. Truly, there is nothing outside context, and if we tried to reduce words to absolutely fixed specimens, we would lose much of the real thing."

Actually, there's probably some PoMo journal just dying to get your latest review: "Deconstructing the Ontological Heuristic of Weller 12: Commodified Wheat, Semiotic Ambiguity and The Other."

[CoMobourbon]

No worries, laughter is healthy. Similarly, I got a hearty chuckle at being called "intellectually self-indulgent" by the same guy who posted this: http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showthread.php?p=285356#post285356

And I quote:

"So as a student and teacher of English, I love language. Accordingly, I realize that much of the delicious mystery and vitality of words consists in their wonderful ambiguity and slipperyness - and I would never want to subject them to the cloroform and dissection that is precise and systematic definition. Truly, there is nothing outside context, and if we tried to reduce words to absolutely fixed specimens, we would lose much of the real thing."

Actually, there's probably some PoMo journal just dying to get your latest review: "Deconstructing the Ontological Heuristic of Weller 12: Commodified Wheat, Semiotic Ambiguity and The Other."

Nicely done, nicely done.

Really, I can only respond with something cliche but obviously true, like "it takes one to know one" or "come on, I'm not THAT bad" - neither of which would help me very much.

My hat is off to you, sir. Keep on with your noble task of keeping all of us bullshitters straight.

And I do actually have a topic-relevant question here addressed to you or anyone; given my situation described above, are these mid-shelf options (EC12, ER10, FRsmB, etc.) really worth 2X the low and low-mid stuff that I am used to (WSR 7, WT101, BT, etc.)? In other words, is the better stuff good enough to be worth buying less whiskey, which my budget would demand? I realize that what is worth it to one man is not worth it to another, and the whole process from beginning to end is subjective, blah blah blah, but can somebody give me a straight (not necessarily definitively correct) answer? Even if it is only their personal take on the issue?