Four Kings Whiskey

[TunnelTiger]

Not offending me. I do like/love some oddball whiskeys, I'd put Balcones in that group. I'm just not buying them anymore without some input from SB members. Doesn't have to be a majority, I'm just looking for some positive before I purchase.

That is unless my curiosity is just killing me.

[mbroo5880i]

Not offending me. I do like/love some oddball whiskeys, I'd put Balcones in that group. I'm just not buying them anymore without some input from SB members. Doesn't have to be a majority, I'm just looking for some positive before I purchase.

That is unless my curiosity is just killing me.

Fair point! And smart strategy! I just remember going through all the oddball offerings in the micro beer universe. I know folks who have tried the Quinoa Whiskey and like it.

[Paddy]

I like 'em all! Just call it what it is and don't call it what it ain't. If you play by the rules....I'm all in. If you want to play with smoke and mirrors....

[cowdery]

A blend is defined as a mixture of whiskeys of different types, or a mixture of whiskey with GNS, although no GNS is involved here. If this is a mixture of bourbons with a smoked wheat whiskey, then it's a blend, even if they can calculate that the whole mixture is more than 51% corn. It's possible they talked TTB into something like that, as screwier things have happened, but it's not right.

I've read Andrew's response and what's still not clear is whether or not this smoked wheat product is a bourbon that has smoked wheat as the flavor grain, or if it's a wheat whiskey (i.e., 51% wheat). I think the folks who are being critical are jumping to conclusions. We really don't have all the facts. Perhaps Andrew will clarify. But before you do, Andrew, if anything in that mixture is not bourbon, then you shouldn't call it bourbon, regardless of what the often clueless TTB says.

Andrew is correct that a mixture of straight bourbons may only be called 'straight bourbon' if all of the components were made in the same state. It's a weird rule, but it is a real rule. As for not being able to call it a blend, I don't think that's correct, but if the TTB has shown us anything in recent years, it is that it doesn't know it's own rules very well. If TTB approves something, and it's something good for your product, then you run with it. Which is not to say the TTB won't reverse itself when shown the error of its ways.

If one of the component whiskeys is not bourbon, but the blend is more than 50% bourbon, then you can call it 'blended bourbon' or 'bourbon, a blend.' State of origin is irrelevant.

I'm excited about this project and expect to taste it at WhiskeyFest in a couple weeks. These are four of the really outstanding micro-distilleries who are doing it right but also being creative. They definitely deserve a fair hearing (i.e., tasting) on this. It's a shame they're getting a little bogged down here with the TTB stuff and giving the haters something to sink their teeth into.

Edited April 12, 2014 by cowdery

[MyOldKyDram]

I fail to see how any of this equals a distillery doing things right.

[callmeox]

I'm excited about this project and expect to taste it at WhiskeyFest in a couple weeks. These are four of the really outstanding micro-distilleries who are doing it right but also being creative. They definitely deserve a fair hearing (i.e., tasting) on this. It's a shame they're getting a little bogged down here with the TTB stuff and giving the haters something to sink their teeth into.

You had me until the last sentence, Chuck. If asking that something be labeled properly means that one is a hater, then there is lots of company on that side of the room.

I was hoping that Andrew would come back to answer our questions as he left some real whoppers in his attempt to explain the product and justify the labeling.

[MyOldKyDram]

Haters. How old are you?

At any rate, I'll just bow out on the subject now.

[cowdery]

Have you seen the label on a bottle on a shelf? Have you even seen a COLA? We don't have complete information about what the product actually is nor how it's actually labeled. We have some information from people who may not have complete information, or may inadvertently be expressing themselves in an unclear way, and we have an often very frustrating and opaque agency in the TTB, which is hardly the distillers' fault, and then we have a few people drawing conclusions and saying nasty things based on things they don't really know. Call that whatever you will.

I know all four of those distillers and know they are honest guys who try very hard to respect the craft and the heritage of the industry and do things the right way. If my testimony doesn't count for anything with some of you, I don't very much care. This is what I do and I'm just telling you what I know and admitting what I don't know. You could do worse.

[HighInTheMtns]

Haters. How old are you?

At any rate, I'll just bow out on the subject now.

Buck Nasty, show some respect. One of these men could be your grandfather.

[benpearson]

COLA states it is bourbon: https://www.ttbonline.gov/colasonline/viewColaDetails.do?action=publicDisplaySearchBasic&ttbid=13325001000034

Press Release states it contains wheat whiskey: http://www.mrdistilling.com/frame/products_bourbon.shtml

Not to hard to connect the dots. Hopefully some clarification will come. I will be reaching out to the distilleries on Monday to see if I can get some information.

[benpearson]

Fair point! And smart strategy! I just remember going through all the oddball offerings in the micro beer universe. I know folks who have tried the Quinoa Whiskey and like it.

I like the corsair quinoa whiskey. But after reading this I hope it actually contains quinoa.

[cowdery]

The COLA does say bourbon, but a COLA is not a product on the shelf. I would characterize the press release as ambiguous, not definitive. That, in itself, is unfortunate but it's not the same as a willfully mislabeled product.

Look, I share your concerns. Just remember the old saw about what happens when you assume.

[callmeox]

Here's another "source" indicating that it is a bourbon and a smoked wheat whiskey combined.

http://whiskeyreviewer.com/2014/04/four-kings-bourbon-review_041614/

It really is a shame that the principals won't clarify.

Edited April 16, 2014 by callmeox

[squire]

Guess I'll just have to live without it. Oh well, there's lotsa other stuff out there.

[MyOldKyDram]

It's a damned shame these writers don't seem to care about it either.

[TunnelTiger]

Guess I'll just have to live without it. Oh well, there's lotsa other stuff out there.

So true. It's our choice. I don't particullary care to buy products made in China (especially sea food) if I can get a similar item produced here but sometimes there aren't any options. However it is still up to me whether I purchase or not.

[T Comp]

Here's another "source" indicating that it is a bourbon and a smoked wheat whiskey combined.

http://whiskeyreviewer.com/2014/04/four-kings-bourbon-review_041614/

It really is a shame that the principals won't clarify.

And stop croaking dammit!

From the Whiskey Reviewer "Some questions have been raised in the internet forums whether a blend with wheat whiskey content should be labeled “bourbon,†but the bottom line on that is the product and its labeling was approved by the TTB. This being America, a handful of croakers think they always know better than the professional regulators or pontificate while misunderstanding the approval process."

:grin:

[fishnbowljoe]

And stop croaking dammit!

From the Whiskey Reviewer "Some questions have been raised in the internet forums whether a blend with wheat whiskey content should be labeled “bourbon,†but the bottom line on that is the product and its labeling was approved by the TTB. This being America, a handful of croakers think they always know better than the professional regulators or pontificate while misunderstanding the approval process."

:grin:

RIBIT! RIBIT! RIBIT! :slappin:

[callmeox]

Ahh, the appeal to authority fallacy is alive and well in the blogsphere.

Now I'm kind of sorry that I linked to that blog and inadvertently gave the guy clicks.

Thread moved to correct forum.

Ribbit.

Edited April 17, 2014 by callmeox

[Josh]

Yeah, Sean, stop being an anonymous jerk. Somebody whose mother named him "Gadfly" said so.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

[smknjoe]

...and this is the scourge of the modern Internet. The proliferation of misinformation and pseudo pundits. I have seen misinformation like this before on other sites that talk about bourbon and rye. It's common to see people confuse ryed bourbon with rye whiskey and wheated bourbon with wheat whiskey on those sites. I've even seen some say that it doesn't matter what the mashbill is as long as the end result is correct. That's why I think it's important to make sure you get your information from a reputable source. The most reputable source on the Internet for American whiskey information is right here folks.

Would this blend of bourbon with a wheat whiskey qualify to be labeled as bourbon and not straight bourbon, or a bourbon blend? I don't see straight bourbon on the label.

Edited April 17, 2014 by smknjoe

[MyOldKyDram]

I'm not only a frog but a douchebag frog according to his readers. :ribbit:

Edited April 17, 2014 by MyOldKyDram

[callmeox]

Would this blend of bourbon with a wheat whiskey qualify to be labeled as bourbon and not straight bourbon, or a bourbon blend? I don't see straight bourbon on the label.

If you combine properly aged bourbon from multiple sources in the same state, you can use 'straight' on the label. Since the sources are in different states, they couldn't use straight even if the disqualifying wheat whiskey component was removed.

This product should be the same class/type as Wild Turkey Forgiven (whiskey) and be labeled as a blend of bourbon and wheat whiskies.

[squire]

From the Whiskey Reviewer "Some questions have been raised . . . . but the bottom line on that is the product and its labeling was approved by the TTB. . . . . a handful of croakers think they always know better than the professional regulators . . . .

That's funny. Having spent a career in the Federal Courts and dealing with Federal Regulatory Agencies I do not have a child like faith in the infallibility of Agency bureaucrats. They are government employees, not professionals. Some of them become professionals though after they retire and go to work for the private sector where they're paid to get results. Those are the cats than can play Agency Regs like a stringed instrument.

[smknjoe]

That's funny. Having spent a career in the Federal Courts and dealing with Federal Regulatory Agencies I do not have a child like faith in the infallibility of Agency bureaucrats. They are government employees, not professionals.

So, that's where the term "close enough for Government work" comes from? I thought it meant that it was perfect and always correct. :slappin: