jinenjo Posted April 26, 2007 Share Posted April 26, 2007 Just picked up my one and only bottle from Ledger's in Berkeley. Big thanks go out to Doug, Drew, and Neil. Cheers! :bowdown: I probably won't open it for a while as I have my older bottle (the first issue) to finish. I've been taking my time with that one. Roger popped one open at his place last saturday during our study group. I don't know why I didn't go for a taste then, I think I was too full or only sticking with the wheaters by that point.Anyhow, some questions regarding the label: The bottle amount (x out of 216), barrel number (8), location (warehouse G, rick N4), and date of distillate (4/10/1984) are clearly different from the first 22 year-old straight rye (I forget the stats on that one), but being close to one year later now the age statement and proof are exactly the same (22y.o. at 68.35%, 136.7 proof).My guess is that it was actually bottled this year before April 10th. So it's still considered 22 years-old. The same proof puzzles me though. Was it the same by sheer coincidence?p.s. By the way, for any local folk, Ed Ledger recently got in some Pappy 20 and 23. He also dropped the price for the first Willett. I'm not sure if he ships to other states though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake_Parrott Posted May 14, 2007 Share Posted May 14, 2007 Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. This is bigger than Willett 1, with less floral and more sweet-spice and chocolate elements. There is slightly more wood tannin than Willett 1, but it dissipates with even a soupcon of water or some airing. Yum. Yum. Yum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake_Parrott Posted May 18, 2007 Share Posted May 18, 2007 <chirp, chirp, chirp> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pharaoh Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 <chirp, chirp, chirp>LOL, Jake.More like. . . <slurp, slurp, slurp> :grin: Comparing WII, I agree with your assessment: More oak, more rye. In one word or less, I'd describe it as "deep". Currently I'm finding Willett II an excellent contrast to Willett I. Initially I thought I could but right now I'm having a tough time deciding which is more to my liking as both have their expressed purpose & place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jinenjo Posted May 25, 2007 Author Share Posted May 25, 2007 Great praise from you two. Still, I have yet to crack mine open.Is there not any others to chime in on this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BourbonJoe Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 Accolades to Doug Philips and the west coast study group. You guys picked another fine rye. Maybe a wee bit more interesting than Willett's #1. I've had the pleasure of drinking this stuff from two opened bottles. Excellent.Joe :usflag: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luv2hunt Posted May 26, 2007 Share Posted May 26, 2007 I don't have mine yet!!Dawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCalBoozer Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. This is bigger than Willett 1, with less floral and more sweet-spice and chocolate elements. There is slightly more wood tannin than Willett 1, but it dissipates with even a soupcon of water or some airing. Yum. Yum. Yum.I pretty much agree with your assesment. Lots of wood up front that then goes to typical rye spice and lots of chocolate on the finish.A much shorted ride than W1 in terms of flavors and how long those flavors last, but W1 was truly a rare bottling. This is quite good and I would liken it to a Stagg. Very robust highlighted by one or two very distinct well rounded flavors. Looking forward to seeing how it tastes as I get further into the bottle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts