Covid in the Sky with Ungulates

Early this week, I woke up with the sniffles. Since I fell asleep with the window open, I figured that allergies had finally struck for the first time in 2024. The sniffles turned into sinus pain, which turned into muscle pain, which turned into full body weakness. And then, shocker, I tested positive for Covid-19 for the third time.

My senses of taste and smell didn't abandon me, yay! But this round was almost a brutal as my first battle with the coronavirus. Wild, almost migraine-level, headaches prevented me from watching movies (so no movie content this week), seeing with both eyeballs consistently, and napping most of the time. And then there were other things.

On two occasions, a song I've never heard before (one a wordless hooky pop tune, the other, EDM) manifested their way into my brain, and I found myself humming them as I exited from some liminal plane into consciousness.

Later, a giraffe, the height of two blue-bottle flies fucking, walked across my coffee table when I tried to get up from the couch, and told me in Homer Simpson's voice, "Stay. Good boy. Good boy. Good boy. Good boy. Good boy." I was in no shape to argue, so I did what the giraffe told me to do.

Before puberty struck, I would hallucinate when I was very sick. A pine tree grew out of a bonfire. The creatures on my Animal Crackers blanket would actively change cages, all except the gorilla. Marmaduke walked into my bedroom, and then looked at me as his skin fell off and he dissolved into a puddle of blood and fat.

Thus, Homer the Giraffe was a welcome experience. A good trip.

So what I'm saying is, Balblair is going to have to wait until next week.

Dispatch from home, post-Paris

Assembling another blog post via my phone became too much of a hassle, so I spent my Parisian quiet time either reading dozens of J.G. Ballard's fever dream short stories or drinking Chablis, or both.

Using my iPhone notes, I will now attempt to reproduce what should have been my second blog post from Paris:

from Chaïm Soutaine's La Juene Anglais

— My previous dispatch may have come across dismissive of art and art history. To clarify (or not), I react emotionally, not intellectually, to art. While The Louvre is tremendous and I recommend it to everyone, it reminds me of Washington, DC, designed to confuse invaders. Its floors and routes are disorienting, and perhaps that's why people stay in the building for so long. Hell, it took me 20 minutes to figure out how to exit the place. Anyway, back to Art. My only emotional connections at The Louvre happened among the sculptures and non-European art. Otherwise it felt very intellectual, and a little cold.

— The Musée D’Orsay was another story. Near tears a half dozen times within the first 30 minutes, I lingered on every angle of every creation. It felt as if the museum's curators and I function on the same emotional level. Yes, I know that’s vague. Just know that Musée D’Orsay is remarkable (and intuitively structured). I spent six hours there, and only left the building because security wouldn't let me sleep at the base of The Gates of Hell.

— A peaceful marriage of Kyoto's gardens and the French countryside, Monet's home in Giverny offered one of the richest experiences of the trip. The waterlilies, the river, the bridge, they're all still there, all somehow even quieter than Monet's paintings.

— A different Monet immersion overwhelmed me at Musée de l'Orangerie, where eight massive impressions of les nymphéas curl around, forming a giant infinity symbol.

— Then there was this:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Michael Kravitz (@whiskykravitz)

— On a related note: Despite walking 10 to 20 miles per day, I've returned to The States carrying some croissant weight. Is there such a thing as the French Fifteen? I'm asking for a friend. My tummy.

— And finally, yes, I drank some whisky. More about that on Friday.

Dispatch from Paris

Because I’m tapping this out on my iPhone, today’s post will be in bullet form. We Americans prefer to write in bullets anyway.

— PARIS BE VAPIN’! You cannot stop Paris from vapin’. Though once a day I still see at least one pair of ladies balancing cigarettes as elegantly as Bette Davis and Kate Hepburn.

Stairs de Triomphe

— I wasn’t going to buy any whisky but……you know where this is going……then I visited all three LMDWs.

— I did not pack appropriately for this trip. The forecast showed low-60s to low-70s several days before I left. Instead, temperatures haven’t gotten out the low-50s and every morning is in the 30s when I start my adventures. So yeah, did you know that one can buy clothes in Paris?

That guy

— What an alcohol culture! There are four places inside the Eiffel Tower to get wine.

— Speaking of Tour Eiffel here are my notes:

1. If you have any health concerns, don’t be a hero, don’t walk up the first two levels. Take the elevator.

2. If you choose to take the stairs, don’t smoke beforehand nor eat before the climb.

3. They should offer hot brandy toddies at the top, not champagne. The ground temperature was 50 degrees, but at the top I was met by sheets of sleet.

4 The tower was much more impressive than I’d expected. Its sturdy industrial style looks almost steampunk to modern eyes.

— Where do Parisians pee? No it’s not a riddle. Or maybe it is. The Paris tourism website brags about 400 public toilets. I have visited 16 so far, all of them broken. Yours truly has now publicly whizzed in the bushes in three European countries.

— My, the girls here are purdy.

— Guidebooks say it would take days to get through The Louvre. I knocked it out in four hours, and I never hurried. Having been to Versailles a couple days earlier, I’d had my fill of the Louiez’ decor and extravagance, so I skipped that section. More importantly, I’d already seen enough depictions of milky-white Jeezus to last me several lifetimes, so I skimmed those hallways. If you have not had your fill of said paintings, be prepared to add 2+ hours to your visit. Even more importantly, here is the Tushie de Milo.

I hope this has been informative. Perhaps another dispatch will find its way here before the trip is over.

A quick personal update, April 2024

You may or may not have noticed that the timing of my weekly posts has become more uneven than usual. Blame it on a house. Because I bought one! And going through it all on my own has been more difficult than I had anticipated.

From an emotional distance, it's a wonderful house. The basement is huge, my daughters will have one half and I'll have the other. There's a backyard, soon to be populated by a grill and firepit. A big open living space that can easily fit a TV room and an office. My girls will finally each have their own room. And I'll have two bars.

But the place is slowly becoming a money pit because the previous owners treated their property like a toilet. And that's not entirely an exaggeration. Unfucking their horrors has absorbed the majority of my non-work life, except.....I'm also on day 10 out of 17 consecutive days with my daughters, alone. We all still love each other very much, but not one of us are mellow humans at this point in our lives.

Also I do work, which pays for all the above, kinda.

The key to managing the stress is dialing down the alcohol and dialing UP THE CAFFEINE. When I do drink whisky, I pair a glass of something tasty with whatever psychotronic-giallo-oddball film (100 minutes or less) that I can find on my streaming channels. Sitting down to take official tasting notes usually leads to looking at my schedule and email to see what I've forgotten to do today, checking the news (briefly, because fuck), and zoning out. Last night, I poured a 1975 Bushmills, which of course smelled fruitylicious but had oxidized into soap on the palate. So I dumped it out and went straight to a highball.

I hope you have enjoyed this extensive excuse. The reviews will continue but won't always post on the same days during the week. So it goes. Someday my life will get back into a rhythm. Oh, I forgot to mention I booked a springtime trip to Paris before I'd even considered buying a house. And the flight to CDG isn't too far away...

Four Roses: 10 Private Barrels, 10 Recipes, 10 years too late

Diving for Pearls celebrated 13 years of whisky reviews last month! Or rather it/I didn't. Children, work, and a certain Bunnahabhain cluster had my attention.

Also around that time, Columbus Scotch Night held an event that offered me a moment to be part of the audience rather than holding court as the edjumacator. Two very generous fellows, Anuj P. and Matt M., opened their whisk(e)y bunkers and provided bottles of 10 Four Roses private barrel picks of all 10 Four Roses mash/yeast recipes, all of which were distilled during the Jim Rutledge Era. As usual, I took my wee pours home for dissection.

It's been a while since I've said anything about Four Roses on this site, so here's a quick recap of the Four Roses recipe naming convention:

Four Letters:

O = Four Roses Distillery

B or E = Mash bills: B is 35% rye, E is 20% rye

S = Straight distillation

F or K or O or Q or V = Yeast strands

So there are really two variables, not four. Two mash bills * five yeast strains = ten combinations.

PAUSE FOR COMMENTARY.

I can't write this without thinking how much more vital and exciting this post would have been in 2013, when whisk(e)y geek hunger for honest, independent exploration was more vivid. And at least some private picks would have been easier to obtain ten years ago, when FOMO levels were less destructive. I remain deeply grateful for all the folks who offer up their bottles for group tastings, especially when at a fraction of the secondary market's price. They may be the only people keeping whisky enthusiasm alive.

UN-PAUSE.

In order to prevent untold disasters, I am splitting this into two tastings, "B" Tasting and "E" Tasting. I will nose and taste ~15mL of each whiskey from wee glencairns, and give the bourbons letter-based grade ranges. OBSK has always(?) been my favorite recipe, but I can't remember the last time I tried an OBSK (or any single recipe), so I don't know why I preferred it. Thus I'm going into this kinda fresh. Here I go...

---

The "B" Mashbill (35% rye) Tasting

OBSF Recipe

10 years 8 months, bottled in November 2021 for Bottle Republic, 57.7%abv

Nose - It leads with a wallop of barrel char, VOCs, and Heath Bar, with milder notes of black pepper and brine appearing later.

Palate - Doesn't begin great with ethyl, chlorine, and tannins, but it does pick up salty corn on the cob and gingerbread with time.

Finish - Perhaps its best aspect, with some dried berries and gingerbread.

Comments - This is not the quality I remember from Four Roses, as the bourbon reads both undercooked and too oaky at the same time, Craft-style. I do enjoy the gingerbread and Heath Bar notes though.

Rating Range: C/C+ (76-78)

OBSK Recipe

10 years 2 months old, bottled for Ponte Vedra Inn & Club, 52.8%abv

Nose - A complete change of pace from the OBSF. Peach nectar, apricot jam, milk chocolate, vanilla extract, and a slight prickle of rye whiskey.

Palate - More on almonds, than vanilla or caramel. Irish soda bread, fresh ginger, jalapeño oil, and medium sweetness.

Finish - Mirrors the palate well, with the ginger and jalapeños registering loudest, and vanilla and brown sugar quieter.

Comments - Ha! This is a happy reminder of why I used to enjoy this lively, delicious combination. SPOILER: It's my favorite of the Bs.

Rating Range: B+ (87-89)

OBSO Recipe

9 years 3 months, bottled in April 2021 for OHLQ(!), 55.6%abv

Nose - Sort of blank at first. Then, in order: pine, caramel, vanilla, black cherry ice cream, and a hint of halvah materialize.

Palate - Whew, hot and peppery. Sour. I taste tannins for miles and miles. A little bit of shortbread in the background.

Finish - Hot, sour, and peppery, like the palate, but now with apples.

Comments - With easily my least favorite palate of the B group, this bourbon also slumps like Craft whiskey. I'm not sure what the Ohio pickers saw in this one, or if they even had a choice.

Rating Range: C (74-76)

OBSQ Recipe

11 years 7 months, bottled in October 2022 for ???, 54.1%abv

Nose - Very chocolatey, with subtle notes of earth, dried cherries, and rosemary. Vanilla and floral notes expand with time.

Palate - It's a big burly whiskey, not hot though. Lots of baked goods and roasted nuts. Hint o' figs.

Finish - Salt, grains, almonds, Fig Newtons, and a hint of smoke.

Comments - This one, the oldest of the ten, has caught me by surprise. It's unique and of a high quality, sort of a single malt lover's bourbon, and good pour for the winter.

Rating Range: B/B+ (85-87)

OBSV Recipe

9 years 10 months, bottled in November 2021 for ???, 53.6%abv

Nose - Like Q and K, it's dessert-y. Chocolate mousse pie and German chocolate cake. Roses and dried apricots.

Palate - Dried cherries, dried currants, dried cranberries, and maple syrup...but it's not too sweet. There's a good tartness and pepperiness going on in the background, and a nibble of Irish soda bread.

Finish - Soda bread, dried cherries, and toasted nuts.

Comments - With a palate more complex than its nose, this bourbon reminds me that I used to like the OBSV recipe too! It also seems like it could pair very well with desserts.

Rating Range: B/B+ (85-87)

CONCLUSION: There's a very clear split here: 3 "yes" bourbons (which I'd be happy to buy or drink any day), and 2 "pass" bourbons (which I wouldn't). I also appreciate the bottle strength of all 5, with all staying below 120 US proof. Not a lot of commonalities between these five, so the yeast strands and maturation locations (only F and Q have the same warehouse) are doing most of the work. The actual rye element stayed mostly quiet, speaking loudest in OBSK, the top scorer in the group. I wonder how the Es will differ...

---

The "E" Mashbill (20% rye) Tasting

OESF Recipe

9 years 10 months, bottled for Loch & K(e)y Society, 55.8%abv

Nose - Straightforward: vanilla, bubblegum, caramel sauce, and cinnamon.

Palate - Ethyl, salt, lemons, and honey arrive first, then tart cherries and cherry lollipops. Just a hint of vanilla in the background.

Finish - A decent balance of those tart cherries, cherry lollies, and honey.

Comments - It's very different than its OBSF cousin, with the hot hot palate being their only similarity. It's also better than the B version, with a better mix of oak and spirit, and some fun cherry notes.

Rating Range: B- (82-84)

OESK Recipe

10 years 6 months, bottled for Luekens Wine & Spirits, 56.6%abv

Nose - Some figurative fireworks here. Flowers, bubblegum, Dr. Brown's cherry soda, vanilla, and pickle juice!

Palate - Less hot than OESF, but similarly lemony. Charred serranos and cayenne pepper meet Big Red gum.

Finish - It's a mix of bubblegum, cayenne, and tart citrus, with the sweetness winning out.

Comments - The wild nose works, but the palate's excitement never catches up. Nothing technically wrong with it, but it's missing the B version's complexity.

Rating Range: B-/B (83-85)

OESO Recipe

9 years 5 months, bottled in August 2022 for Corners Fine Wine & Spirits, 57.5%abv

Nose - Ooh, a good one. Candy shop + oranges blossom + cinnamon roll.

Palate - Baking spices rule this one. Cinnamon, cloves, cardamom, and brown sugar first. Orange candy and dried cherries, second.

Finish - Cinnamon, cardamom, and orange candy last the longest.

Comments - While not the deepest whiskey, this bourbon is very pleasant all around, and a very easy drinker (especially at its strength). It's significantly better than its B cousin, providing an example of a lower-rye bourbon coming together better than a high-rye.

Rating Range: B (84-86)

OESQ Recipe

10 years 8 months, bottled in August 2022 for ???, 54.4%abv

Nose - Starts off a bit rough, with nothing but barrel char, but then the cherries roll in, followed by roses, maple syrup, and cherry-flavored cough syrup.

Palate - Very woody here too. It's like licking furniture. Add in its artificial lemon flavor, and maybe I'm looking at Pledge spray. Curiously, even with some sawdust added on, it's not terrible. Maybe the hints of brown sugar and black pepper help?

Finish - Drying and tannic, with a hint of cherry.

Comments - Here's the "E" group's oak monster. The nose works; the palate. a little less so; the finish, not really. It bears no resemblance to its OBSQ cousin.

Rating Range: C+ (77-79)

OESV Recipe

10 years 1 month, bottled February 18, 2020 for Schneider's of Capitol Hill, 59.6%abv

Nose - Dessert time again! Hershey's chocolate, whipped cream, mocha, and vanilla extract. You can smell the calories!

Palate - Less sugary than expected. Instead ground cloves and ginger powder layer on top of each other, with cream soda underneath, and a decent bitterness in the back.

Finish - Ground cloves, ginger powder, and a dab of chile oil.

Comments - Of all five pairs, this one comes closest to its cousin, but even here it's only in the nose. Otherwise it has its own zingy, spritely style in the mouth. I prefer the "B" version, but this one remains very good.

Rating Range: B (84-86)

CONCLUSION: Unlike the "B"s, the "E"s show some similar notes, like flowers, bubblegum, citrus, and cherries, though ultimately they are five very different bourbons (from five different warehouses). This group was less raw on the palate, but also a little less exciting. None of these were a big "yes", though none were a clearly ugly "no". 

---

FINAL THOUGHTS

The "E" Recipes' scores have a tighter grouping than the "B"s', though the two groups average out similarly (high B- for both). The wider quality variety in the "B" recipe also delivered more excitement and complexity. I'd like to think the extra rye had something to do with it. There were small connections between some of the whiskies, but these were ultimately ten different bourbons, which made the two tastings more entertaining than expected.

For the sake of completeness, here's how these bottles rank:

1. OBSK - Yes

2. OBSV - Yes

3. OBSQ - Yes

4. OESO

5. OESV

6. OESK

7. OESF

8. OESQ - Pass

9. OBSF - Pass

10. OBSO - Pass

So OBSK, OBSV, and high-rye bourbon in general still do it for me, thirteen years later.

Concluding the Ardmore Cluster

(Ardmore cluster homepage)

I'm pretty sure I am the only one who benefitted from this cluster. Here are the things I "learned":

1. Ardmore is a very very very good single malt.
2. When matured in hogsheads it can be too young, too oaky, or fabulous.
3. When matured, even partially, in sherry casks it can be amazing or not.

We all knew this, yes?

The intent behind this cluster really wasn't to glean any deep understanding of the Great and Powerful Ard. Rather, I wanted to greet 2023 with a dozen pours of decently aged malt from this Kennethmont distillery as a way to convince the universe that this January didn't need to be the 37th month of 2020; like a prayer to appease the Whisky Kami, Whisky Buddhas, and Whisky Ganesha. And with all that heresy, I've probably doomed us all. At least the whisky was good.

The cluster did bring the blog its first and second 90+ point non-1992 Ardmores, including my Whisky Doris bottle, and possibly the best sherry cask Ardmore I've ever had. In fact, the cluster members were so good overall that I forgot there was one semi-stinker. But the most satisfying result was the proof that there isn't just one magical Ardmore vintage (aka 1992), rather the distillery's direct fired stills produced excellent stuff right up until the end. As for the steam-coil heated stills......that's a tale for another day.

Whisky 1500: Macallan-Glenlivet 32 yo 1937 Gordon & MacPhail (Donini)

This isn't actually my 1500th review. I miscounted, so my actual 1500th whisky review was the Ballechin Bunny. Or maybe it wasn't because I don't think I've documented all of my re-reviews. I've also reviewed an additional ~100 whiskies without giving a number grade (due to sample size), plus another 70+ in my Killing Whisky History series. I'm probably close to the 1700-mark, but who knows. Quantifying whisky is a fool's game, so numbers don't mean anything.

Except here's a 32 year old Macallan that was distilled in 1937.

Those numbers mean something. A time, a place, patience.

I've had some 1960s Macallan but that's as far back as I've gone. Here are two links to folks who may have a better idea of what this era's Macallan tastes like. Since I have no frame of reference, I'll just offer some thank yous.

I want to thank Cobo for including me in this bottle split almost exactly seven years ago. We discussed the bottle's provenance, and then each took part in some cLs. The sample's fill level hasn't moved in seven years, about which I am very thankful. I'm a dope for waiting so long.

And thank you to the individual who elected to open his bottle of 1937 Macallan, and split it at a fraction of the market value. You are a mensch.

I also want to thank the old Italian importers, because without them we wouldn't have so many fake Italian dusties examples of single malt history to study, in our mouths.

And finally, thank you to my readers! I can't believe you're still here. Seriously, look at all of these words! 

Okay, I've delayed this long enough.

Distillery: Macallan
Ownership: The Edrington Group
Ownership at time of distillation: Roderick Kemp's Trust
Region: Speyside (Central)
Bottler: Gordon & MacPhail
Imported by: Donini S.R.L., Milano
Distillation year: 1937
Age: at least 32 years
Maturation: sherry casks
Alcohol by Volume: 43%

So many notes swirl through the nose at the same time. Ocean and dandelions. Nectarines and blackberry juice. Dried currants and dried leaves. Daifuku and hints of tobacco, earth, parmesan and malt. It both charms and overwhelms.

The palate tricks one into thinking it's going to be too sugary, then takes a left turn into tartness. Yes there are black mission figs, daifuku and a mouthful of sweet shisha smoke. But there are also dried cranberries and currants that someone forgot to sweeten, and some tart citrus around the edges.

It has a very long sticky finish that's like a mix of black fig liqueur and German bitter herbal digestifs. Rainier cherries in the background and some more good bitterness right down the middle.

This has become a fragile whisky, requiring time in the glass, but not too much time. It's both a vibrant dessert malt, and something that calls for silence. One can treat these old bottles casually, as they can be fabulous drinkers, but I think to really indulge one needs to wrap oneself in the moment, put all the other things away, and just sit. It's a fair thing to do on a weeknight. Thank you all.

Availability - Secondary market, maybe?
Pricing - High
Rating - 91

A few brief thoughts before I continue

Three months divorced, though separated at heart for nearly two years, I have come to the end of my first Covid spell and I have a few thoughts.

---

The American Brand is Sad™ and™ Horny™. I mean, I'm obviously projecting, but there are infinite ways we have communicated that brand over the years, from Wordle posts to Casablanca to Interpol. Speaking of which, about 16 years ago I lied to a work friend saying that I loved Turn On the Bright Lights. I hadn't listened to it even once, but my friend was so brilliant and beautiful and I didn't want to interrupt the reverie she was in, detailing how much that album meant to her. She died eight years later of cancer, survived by her husband and son. Taylor, I'm sorry I lied then, but you were right, I'm listening to it now, it is a great album. 

---

When one stops drinking, one suddenly gets a lot of one's night back, especially if Covid has stolen one's ability to sleep. I'd like to pat myself on the back for falling into very few internet rabbit holes, avoiding most cat videos, and ignoring all performative parenting social media posts.

I did watch some films (French New Wave stuff (Contempt, Elevator to the Gallows, etc.), Star Wars things, Pig, The Green Knight, Blade Runner 2049, etc.), read books (Middle Passage (holy shit) and a slew of baseball history tomes), and did some cooking because I can still smell and taste.

---

Five-word commentary:

Contempt - Makes much more sense now
Elevator to the Gallows - Jeanne + Miles + Louis = WANT MORE
The Force Awakened - Created with emotion, not thought
Pig - Rewatched Nicolas Cage's monologue thrice
The Green Knight - Improves as the journey progresses
Blade Runner 2049 - Earth needs more grownup SciFi

---

On that note: Before getting back into liquid reviews, I tested my senses to make sure that cognac tasted like cognac, Ardmore tasted like Ardmore, and bourbon tasted like shit. ZING! Those spirits did not change while I was gone. Pending no viral relapses, I'll post my 1500th review on Wednesday.

Covid-19 Pause

Mathilda, recently vaccinated, caught Da 'Rona one week, and rebounded within 48 hours. Beatrice, who is too young for a vaccine, caught it the next week. She is on day 9 and is finally recovering. Across those two weeks, I took four Covid antigen home tests, scoring a negative each time. But when I woke up this Saturday morning, the first thing I thought was, I have Covid. Sure enough, fifth time's the charm.

I welcomed the booster five weeks ago, so I think it's helping me avoid the scary stuff. Mostly, the virus has been a sinus fucker. It's been almost three years since I had a real head cold, so I'm a bit out of practice with this whole under-the-weather thing. Not sure if these symptoms have become the worst "cold" I've ever had, or if colds were always this gross. [Update: This ain't no cold.]

I had a very fun whisky post scheduled for today, but it's going to have to wait. My sense of taste (LOL, because Covid makes this so much funnier) hasn't abandoned me entirely, but I'm not going to poison my immune system since it's fighting the Battle of Stalingrad right now.

To everyone out there, please make good choices, not just for you and your family, but for everyone else. Not all of us will be so lucky to write a blog post about this.

Concluding the Bowmore cluster

(Bowmore cluster homepage)

I needed something to get me to the end of 2021, something emotionless and focused, a simple trail to follow. This cluster served that purpose. And now I'm here and the end of the 24th month of 2020 has arrived. I'm going to take a break from clusters for a while, bringing back variety, or perhaps even a little chaos in 2022, since chaos has been the order of the day. But before that, I need to complete this series.

At the Bowmore cluster's halfway point, I highlighted how there was little difference in the quality between the OBs and the IBs. The second half of the series had zero official bottlings, and by the end I became interested in the Sherry Casks vs. the Bourbon Casks.

The Rankings!

Total Bowmores - 19

Mean - 85.58

Median - 86

Mode - 86

In the first half, the sherry casks had a ratings lead over the bourbon casks: 84.4 to 81.3. But the story flipped in the second half. In the latter half alone, the bourbon casks won out, 85.5 vs. 88.6. And though there were way more bourbon casks than sherry casks in the second half, 7 versus 2, it was the other way around in the first half, 3 berbs versus 7 sherries. So, unintentionally, the two types nearly equal in number.

Overall, the bourbon cask Bowmores edge out the sherry cask Bowmores, 86.4 to 84.7. If I lop off the highest and lowest score in each category, the scores get even closer: 87.3 to 86.3.

Because the sample size of one type was very small on each side of the midpoint, it's difficult to come to a solid conclusion. But it did seem like time and mild casks worked wonders for the bourbon vessel share, while youth and perky butts helped the sherried portion. So the victor depends what one's palate desires. Though a sherry cask release took first prize, the consistent high quality of the older hoggies won my heart in the end.

The Notes!

Because the '80s (and the ‘80s distillery management) were unkind to Bowmore's spirit, I'm only going to focus on the latter 17 members of this series. Also, please note, I am not counting descriptors like "peat", "smoke" and "sweet" unless my notes are more specific. I'm looking for more detail here.

The most used NOSE notes:

This surprised me because I thought I was using "Coastal", "Kiln" and "Seaweed" in almost every review. To me, those are part of the soul of the Bowmore spirit. But I'm glad to see there was a lot of variety in the nose notes across the cluster, and it's great to see that apricots and manure made the list! And I only said yuzu twice.

The most used PALATE notes:

Well, "herbal bitterness" and I go way back. The "pepper" category includes chiles, chile oil and cayenne, FWIW. What's curious about the limes, lemons and "tart citrus" is that those notes almost never overlapped. Combining them (and grapefruit) into one category would have put them in first place with 14. So my palate finds the citrus and salt in Bowmore very frequently.

The most used FINISH notes:

This confirms my unoriginal theory that Bowmore is one of the saltiest single malts. And when that salt mixes with fruits and phenolics, I am one happy drinker. Curiously, the whole tart citrus sensation only carried over into the finish about half the time. Salt and bitterness seemed to have more stamina.

The End!

The key to the pleasure of this cluster may have been the gentleness of the majority of the casks, especially the hogsheads. (Note the lack of "vanilla" and "tannic" and "woody bitterness" in those lists above.) The Bowmore spirit, since 1990, has been a glorious thing, and may even become a bit classy in its 20s. If Suntory can't figure out how to keep the oak levels down in their official releases, I hope more casks somehow find their way to the independent bottlers. If not, then we'll all miss out on something special.

Glenrothes 1972-2005

I began this week essentially nominating Glenrothes for the The Great Meh Distillery title. Since then, I've had three very good Glenrothee. But surely a 30-something year old single malt distilled in 1972 will be bog water. Right?

Distillery: Glenrothes

Ownership: The Edrington Group
Region: Speyside (Rothes!)
Age: 32-33 years (1972 - 2005)
Maturation: ???

Outturn: ???
Alcohol by Volume: 43%

(thank you to the man who pilfered this dusty from The 213)

NOTES

The nose begins almost like an old Calvados, with baked apples and pears. Then there's the honey cake we had at kiddush in the synagogue when I was a kid. My notes then say "macrons"; did I mean macarons? Or does the whisky smell like France's first family? You decide. After that: hints of maple sugar, iodine and seaweed. Finally, again quoting my notes, "Sticky Icky in the BG". I can't imagine what that's supposed to mean.

Musty oak, sandalwood incense and a hint of cigarettes start off the palate. Tiny notes of dried herbs, dried apricots and dried leaves. But it's mostly a series of old oak tones, though not as far down the path as liquid furniture (see Pappy 23).

A little bit of sherry cask appears in the finish, along side cracked peppercorns, dried leaves and the palate's bitterness.

WORDS WORDS WORDS

This is unlike any Glenrothes I've had before. But then again, I don't think I'd tried too many older than 20yo. Having completed three decades in a cask, and starting a fourth, the whisky has gradually taken on plenty of oak; the key word being "gradually." The result is a remarkably expressive nose. Though I liked the palate's aged tobacco-like style, the oak's dominance didn't leave room for much else. Again I wonder what this was like at cask strength, and what was lost in the dilution.

Availability - ???
Pricing - ???

Rating - 86

Glenrothes 16 year old 1979

I've never had Glenrothes from the 1970s, so this will be a first — and a second, since I have another sample from the Malaise Decade. Both whiskies are official bottlings weighing in at an overwhelming 43%abv. The first one was distilled in 1979, the year Pops Stargell and the Pirates knocked out the Orioles in the Series.

Distillery: Glenrothes

Ownership: The Edrington Group
Region: Speyside (Rothes!)
Age: 16 years (3 August 1979 - 1995)
Maturation: ???

Outturn: ???
Alcohol by Volume: 43%
(sample from a bottle split)

NOTES

At first sniff, the whisky noses of roasted meat and roasted nuts with a side of paint VOCs. Then things get interesting. Mothballs and olive juice. Then caramel applies. Yuzu. Vanilla Bean. And finally, guava.

The palate begins very dusty, but by the third sip it takes off. First toffee, salt, lemons and Sugar Daddies (the candy). Then hints of tobacco ash and horseradish.

The finish comes in sweeter than the palate, but it also has the tobacco ash and hints of chile oil and tannin.

WORDS WORDS WORDS

I've found my new favorite Glenrothes! Had it been bottled stronger (yes this song again), it may have been pretty fabulous. But at 43%abv, we're left with just pretty darned good. Though it has touches of tannin, vanilla and caramel, it doesn't feel like a contemporary woody thing because those elements take a backseat to much more interesting stuff. The nose itself is delightful.

Three high quality Glenrothes in a row? This is the strangest life I've ever known.

Availability - ???
Pricing - ???

Rating - 87

Two Glenrothes single malts distilled in 2001

You're screaming at your screen, "You stopped reviewing Highland Parks for THIS?"

And I'm like, "Yes?"

I recently marked ten years of Diving for Pearls whisky reviews with a re-review of the first Single Malt Report, Balvenie DoubleWood 12 year old. Ten years ago today, I started a streak of Glenrothes single malt reviews. That streak ended on 9/28/2011. There hasn't been a single Glenrothes post on this site since.

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I have found Glenrothes to be one of the least inspiring single malts. It's a consistent C grade whisky that can hit B- range when it's hitting on all cylinders. And that's only when it's from a bourbon cask. Otherwise, it serves a blank canvas for other cask types. I tend to see it as malt filler for the sometimes-preferable Famous Grouse.

But then again, I haven't had a Glenrothes for more than six years, so I'm willing to give this Speysider another chance. My palate has gone through many changes, and I have four samples that aren't going to drink themselves. So here I go with the first two, both about 14 years old, both distilled in 2001, both bottled by indies, and both from fortified wine casks.

FROM SMWS...

Distillery: Glenrothes

Ownership: The Edrington Group
Region: Speyside (Rothes!)
Independent Bottler: Scotch Malt Whisky Society
Age: 14 years (27 March 2001 - 2015)
Maturation: refill port pipe

Cask #: 30.87

Cask "name": A skinny dipping dram
Outturn: 738 bottles
Alcohol by Volume: 55.6%
(Thank you to St. Brett for the sample!)

The nose leads with a surprising stinky aged cheese note (which alters one's view of the name SMWS bestowed upon the cask). Sugary things follow, like Luxardo cherries, gummy worms and black Twizzlers. Ginger ale and roses in the background. But that aged cheese note keeps everything from going overboard. The nose picks up a coastal note once the whisky is reduced to 46%abv. There's more salt and raw almonds, less candy.

Grapes and berries appear early in the palate, but so do salt and savory notes, thus it never gets too sweet. Lemons and minerals fill out the background. It shifts around a bit at 46%abv, with almonds, salt and hay up front; honey, pepper and bitterness in the back.

No sweetness in the finish, as the fruits (berries and citrus) are quite tart. A little bit of tannin, a few roses as well. At 46%abv it finishes with honey, oranges and black pepper.

I like this? I like this. The port pipe is certainly refill, but not dead. The spirit isn't particularly unique nor complex but it's solid and slightly spartan. I'd drink this any day. The nose works better without dilution, in my opinion, while the palate and finish do well with a little water. This was unexpected.

Rating - 86

---

AND ONE FROM MALTS OF SCOTLAND

Distillery: Glenrothes

Ownership: The Edrington Group
Region: Speyside (Rothes!)
Independent Bottler: Malts of Scotland
Age: 14-ish years (2001 - 2015)
Maturation: sherry hogshead

Cask #: MoS 15029

Outturn: 182 bottles
Alcohol by Volume: 52.8%
(sample from a bottle split)

The nose says clean cask. Loud cask. Rolos and Three Musketeers meet root beer and cherry popsicles. A little of bit of orange peel in the background. There are more nuts and berries at 46%abv, and less chocolate. Strawberry jam and roses fill the background.

Lotsa cask in the palate too. Bags of dried fruit, nearly overwhelm everything else. One may find candied lemon peel, sharp ginger beer and a hint bitterness way in the back. Reducing the whisky to 46%abv seems to thicken the palate's texture, and maybe brings out a touch of malt. Otherwise it's all almonds, dried sweet potato, caramel and a hint of chiles.

The finish mostly matches the palate with dried fruits, ginger and sugar leading the way. The sweetness nearly vanishes at 46%abv, and some tannins jump in. Then there are nuts, black peppercorns and dried sweet potatoes.

With its style and dark coloring, this is the sort of whisky that would have certain whisky fans vigorously stroking......the refresh button on their auction bids. It's not really my style, as it's one of those blank canvas 'Rotheses. But the cask is pretty good. It's a dessert thing at full power, nearly a liqueur, though I prefer it diluted.

Rating - 84

---

Those were the two best Glenrothes I've ever reviewed, and I would certainly sip both again, something I've never said about a Glenrothes single malt. Perhaps I should stop fooling around and get to the 1970s stuff...

Ten Years of Whisky Reviews + Balvenie 12 year old DoubleWood (2019)

I had already been dishing out #SingleMaltReports on Twitter for a few weeks before I posted my first whisky review here on September 8, 2011 (with admirably concise notes, I must say). The blog had been used for observations on film, music, sports, and the writing life before that; sort of a site for offline friends and Facebook "friends".

Diving for Pearls entered into the whisky blog game just as the single malt craze was blossoming. Since then I've watched age-stated and NAS whiskies rise and fall, formerly independent whisky writers do the industry's bidding as that same industry abandoned most of its loyal consumers for a newer, wealthier crowd, while producing products that appeal to my palate less and less with time.

While I do chase the occasional dusty, and resupply my cabinet with everyday sippers, I have not dished out funds for a fancy new release or new single cask since the pre-Covid era. Instead I've been joining bottle splits, which make up the majority of the reviews, or spending my money on other things. That's due to the two factors referenced above. I'm not interested in the worldwide focus on cask technology, nor do I care to pay the current prices for moderately-aged single cask scotch whiskies. Plus, my god, we whisky people have SO MANY BOTTLES already.

I've considered shutting the blog down, or at least pausing it, on a few occasions when personal matters became overwhelming, or when I went though a period of uninspiring tastings. But I never did stop. Writing this blog has led me to offline friendships, a few published reviews, some independent paid gigs, and a flood of dopamine.

I don't know how many more years this will continue. At this point the blog has returned to a tasting journal of mostly irrelevant whiskies — and the occasional Killing Whisky History video and Randy Brandy cameo — which suits me right now. To all those who are still reading, from the seasoned Boomers, to m-m-m-m-my whisky generation to the monied newbs: Thank you. Thank you for reading my words, for being my captive audience for a few minutes a few times a week. Your support means more than you will ever know.

---

Now to the whisky. Ten years ago today, my first review was of Balvenie 12 year old Doublewood, a regular presence in my tiny whisky cabinet back then. It's been at least six years since I've tasted Doublewood, so this will be a reintroduction between the two of us. Can we still be friends?

Distillery: Balvenie
Ownership: William Grant & Sons
Region: Speyside (Dufftown)
Age: minimum 12 years
Maturation: American oak casks then Spanish oak sherry casks
Bottling year: 2019
Alcohol by Volume: 43%
Chillfiltered: Yep
Colorant added: Yep
(from my bottle)

NOTES

Pear, honey and cassia lead off the nose and stay there for a while. After 20ish minutes, the golden raisins, apple juice and kiwis appear. Hints of prunes, flowers and kirsch stay in the background.

The palate is hotter than expected, yet has a watery mouthfeel. It's more sour than tart, but thankfully it doesn't get too sweet once the brown sugar arrives. Oranges and vanilla sit in the middle, a touch of molasses in the back.

Lumber, lemons and vanilla finish off the first few sips. Later sips gain dried apricots and just a little sweetness.

WORDS WORDS WORDS

Ten years ago I said Balvenie 12 year old DoubleWood "makes a great gateway Scotch." I cannot disagree with that now. But in previous decades this specific bottling's quality would have been topped by many 12 year old blends. There's not much going on in the glass(es). I'm not crazy about the oak in the finish nor the very thin texture, but the whisky never gets cloying nor too vanilla-ed. Water and ice bring out a little more raisiny fortified wine and bitterness. The second half of this bottle may find its way into highballs and cocktails because I can't summon up the interest to sip it neatly any further. I will move on.

Availability - Wide!
Pricing - $55 - $85 (what?)

Rating - 79

2021 will be different......on the blog, I mean

Yeah, sorry, I can't make any promises about everything else in 2021, but Diving for Pearls will take a different route than in previous years. It's going to be a year made up almost entirely of deep dives. There won't be one-week themes, there will be two- to six-week themes, often focusing on a single distillery or brand. I've previously tested this out with Ben Nevis, Glenfiddich and Black & White. But this year the review clusters will be longer and often consecutive.

I recognize this may not be a popular approach, and I may lose some or many of my readers. It also doesn't follow the current system through which we all receive information, with new data being blasted constantly in our direction. And that's fine. Whisky reviews are disposable things, but I'd rather create something more interesting for me, something potentially more constructive for someone out there or right here.

By taking this approach I am not criticizing bloggers who post a half-dozen or more whisky reviews in one sitting. That's their approach, and they cover a hell of a lot more ground than I do. I just don't have the capacity, with my health or my time, to burn through whisky at that pace. And I wouldn't trust my senses after the third pour anyway. I'm not built like that.

2021 will not only mark my tenth full year of whisky reviews, but it may also bring my 1500th review. So I'm going to try to focus, slow things down and maybe learn something. Feel free to duck in and duck out as I go down this path. Each extensive series will have a HQ/Home post with links to each review, so hopefully folks can follow along. This blog doesn't work without its readers, but it's also worthless if the writer isn't fully engaged with his subject matter. We begin again tomorrow.

Nine years of whisky reviews...

The ninth anniversary of Diving for Pearls whisky reviews approacheth. As a thank you to my most excellent readers, I will unleash four weeks of Ben Nevis reviews upon the world in September. Yes, really. So buckle up. And thank you.

But first, I'm doing a sweep-up of old samples on Wednesday. Specifically five dead distilleries.

This tenth year of reviews will be loaded with sample cleanouts and week- or month-long distillery themes. A bunch of bottles have been and will be opened. By the time the 10th anniversary arrives, I'll be darned close to whisky #1500. At that point I'll assess what a second decade of whisky reviews would look like. But let's all just get there first.

An Elijah Craig Taste Off

This tasting was supposed to be for gits and shiggles, but as all the tasters' notes came in, I started learning things. A narrative or two — and you know there always MUST be narratives — emerged from the bourbon haze. And something remarkable happened. With eyes closed, the tasters could see.

FIVE ELIJAHS

Here the bourbons be, in order of bottling date:

From left to right:
--12 year old, bottled ca. 2001, distilled at the old distillery, before the fire.
--12 year old Small Batch with the red 12 on the front label.
--12 year old Small Batch with the age statement moved to the back label.
--Small Batch, no age statement, previous bottle/label style
--Small Batch, no age statement, current bottle/label style

Again, these are the ECs in order of bottling date. This not the order of the blind samples. Maybe.

THE SETUP

Taking a step back and really seeing these five different Elijah Craigs clustered together in the whisky cabinet, I realized a public tasting was in order. I liked Elijah Craig Small Batch enough to gather these bottlings from three states and two countries, but when was I going to have time drinking them all? The idea was to compare them someday, but that's a lot of tempered poison to consume. And if opinions are like livers, wouldn't it better to have 21 of them?

So I recruited 20 other livers tasters. Actually I recruited 16. Five wives joined in to assist their husbands with this terrifying task. Some tasters were bourbon geeks, many were not. I would guess less than a third had tried pre-fire Elijah Craig before. Most of us were innocents before, but now we know.

Everyone received five samples marked A through E. In my case, Kristen shuffled the glasses. Without knowing which was which, we each provided notes, rankings and the occasional guess.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Gridley’s Redemption (@gridleysredemption) on Jun 20, 2019 at 5:42pm PDT

(thank you, Gridley's Redemption)

I'll begin with how the bourbons were ranked, then I'll cover the tasting notes and show the guesses. After that comes the REVEAL(!). With the reveal in mind, we all can go back and look at the rankings and guesswork. Onwards!

RANKINGS

21 tasters (20 of y'all, plus me) ranked the five samples in order of preference. Most favoritest to Least Favoritest (words used in a number of replies). As I tallied these up, I assigned points similar to the NCAA Coaches Polls, since no one ever disagrees with those. 5 points for first place, 4 points for second place, down to 1 point for 5th place. That way the winner had the most points. Because America.

First Place

SAMPLE A with 81 points

Its mean was 3.86. In other words it averaged nearly a second place finish.

12 first place votes.

3 last place votes.

Two-thirds of the tasters ranked it first or second.

Second Place (tie!)

SAMPLE E with 64 points

Its mean was 3.05, almost exactly a third place average.

2 first place votes

2 last place votes

It had the smallest standard deviation overall because 80% of the tasters ranked it 2nd, 3rd or 4th.

Second Place (tie!)

SAMPLE C with 64 points

Its mean was 3.05, almost exactly a third place average.

2 first place votes

4 last place votes

Yeah, I can't believe there was a tie, either.

Fourth Place

SAMPLE D with 54 points

Its mean was 2.57.

4 first place votes

5 first place votes

Feelings were all over the place with this one.

Fifth Place

SAMPLE B with 52 points

Its mean was 2.48.

1 first place vote

7 last place votes

More than half of the tasters voted this one fourth or fifth.

Hooray for Sample A! There was quite a gap between first and second place. Even so, some people really didn't like Sample A, while others enjoyed Sample B. I'll try to capture this variety of opinion in this next section...

TASTING NOTES

One of the first things one sees when compiling the notes of 20 tasters is......chaos. I've hosted a number of group tastings, and when several people share their notes aloud their experiences converge to a greater measure than when several people write their notes down secretly. When TWENTY people write their notes down, there are approximately TWENTY different experiences.

I've attempted to group some of the notes together in this section because most of the bourbons had over 100 notes. I don't want to force any similarities that aren't there, but let's see if there are any consistencies.

thank you Mystery Photographer!

SAMPLE A - 81 points, 3.86 avg
Many tasters were confident about this one from the start.

The nose generated similar declarations from 5 different tasters: old bottle effect (twice), dusty profundity, classic dusty aroma and "that nameless smell of old bourbon". Other common descriptors included:
4 mentions each for Oak and Vanilla
3 mentions of Maple (syrup and candies)
2 mentions each of Armagnac and Corn products
There was also tobacco, leather, peach cobbler, hops, iron, fuel and anise cough drops among dozens of other notes.

Seven tasters referenced Oak when describing the palate. Other popular notes were:
4 mentions each for Pepper and Heat
3 mentions for Yeast
2 mentions each for Leather, Caramel and Cloves
They also said it tasted like dill, mole sauce, cotton candy, red wine, chocolate and a dank well.

Oak received 4 mentions in the finish notes.
Good length had 2
Vanilla had 3
Also cloves, rye, maple, mint, tobacco leaf and cellar funk were referenced.

Among the comments, this was the biggest, but also the thinnest of the group. It was delightful, yet unpleasant. A quarter of the reviewers raved about its nose. Others said the whole thing was complex, unique and well-aged.


SAMPLE B - 52 points, 2.48 avg
Though this sample had much lower overall scores than A, it had a wider variety of descriptors. Some drinkers seemed to think it was younger than A as well.

The nose seemed to be about the corn (4x), including "dry corn in an old wood grain bin". Other popular notes were:
3 mentions each for Maple and Peanuts
2 mentions each for Caramel, Bananas and Sweetness
Lots of other sugary stuff including candy apple coating, cake, vanilla frosting, confectioners' sugar and toffee. There were also greener notes such as yeast, mint, vegetables, sunflower seeds and fresh cut grass. A curious lack of "oak" in the descriptions here.

Oak was mentioned 5 times in the palate notes. Other notes include:
4 mentions each for Nuts/Nut products and Cinnamon
3 mentions each for Fruit, Caramel and Bitterness
2 mentions each for Almond products (milk and extract), Sweet, Spicy, Dry and Peanuts
Those notes sound pretty, but then there were notes like: thin, astringent, hot and savory.

The finish received some tough notes like young, raw, craft whiskey, watery and short. Others included:
2 mentions each for Oak, Dry, Medium length
There were also cloves, cinnamon, maple syrup and straw.

Per the comments the whiskey was full of "raw wood, typical of young whiskey", while also having a "lovely uniqueness". It was easy to drink, while also having consistency issues. There were a number of references to its weakness, while one taster compared it to Jim Beam White Label with more age.

SAMPLE C - 64 points, 3.05 avg
This bourbon had the fewest descriptors in all the categories. A lot of oak, though.

Oak tagged 6 notes in the nose. Other notes included:
3 mentions each of Vanilla, Corn products and Quietness
2 mentions each of Citrus, Coconut and Alcohol
Also nut brittle, caramel, candy corn and lemon Pine Sol.

Oak again led the palate with 9 mentions. Sweetness had 5 mentions. Solvent/feints/polish received three. Also:
2 mentions each for Thin, Dry, Simple, Young, Bitter and Caramel
It was thick, tingly, tannic, mineral, floral and grassy.

Three tasters thought the finish was short. Three mentioned oak, and two thought it was dry. It was also watery, bitter and tannic. There was also vanilla, clove and brown sugar.

Comments were limited as well. Tasters though it was "rounded", "not complex but drinkable" and it reminded one taster of Orphan Barrel Barterhouse. There was enough enthusiasm to garner it some good scores, but not a lot of vivid descriptions.


SAMPLE D - 54 points, 2.57 avg
As mentioned above, this one really split the group.

In the nose notes, oak led again with five references. Then:
3 mentions each for Mint and Nuts
2 mentions each for Vegetal, Toasted, Butterscotch and Barn
It was also "weird" and "earthy", with corn, rye, tobacco, lavender, hay, thai curry, indoor pool, Moroccan hair oil and old-books-unopened-for-decades notes.

Leading notes in the palate were:
5 mentions: Oak
4 mentions: Bitter
3 mentions each for Dry and Sweet
2 mentions each for Honey and Heat
The other notes were spread out, like: red wine, maple, grassy, stone fruit, Juicy Fruit gum, biscuits, black tea, yeast, cola, spearmint and a cigar ashtray cleaned with Windex.

Finish notes were concise:
4 mentions: Oak
3 mentions: Short
2 mentions each for Dry, Sweet and Char
Other notes included: fresh cigar wrapper, amaretto, licorice and spice cabinet.

Comments ranged everywhere from "very good" to "horrible". It was the "most complicated" but also "eww poopoo must be NAS" ← Nominee for tasting note of the decade.


SAMPLE E - 64 points, 3.05 avg
A few tasters said they were getting weary by this point, but there were still plenty of notes for this bourbon.

With references to lumber yards and wood chips, oak/wood led the way again with 5 mentions for the nose.
3 mentions for Vanilla
2 mentions each for Honey and Sweetness
Also coconut, tobacco, caramel corn, mint, old leather chair, toffee, corn oil & husks, old grass clippings and pine needles.

NINE different tasters commented on the palate's sweetness. Also:
3 mentions each for Vanilla, Oak and Sugars
2 mentions each for Baking spices, Nuts, Flowers and Heat
Also rye, mint, caramel, wax, smoky, graham crackers, Honey Nut Cheerios and berry pie.

For the finish the notes included:
3 mentions of Oak
2 mentions each for Drying, Short and Sweet
Others included beeswax candy, vanilla, cocoa, lemon juice and heat.

Per further comments, this sweetie needed time to open up, was well-rounded like a Japanese whisky, yet was typical of Heaven Hill bourbon. It was balanced and elegant, with a silky mouthfeel.

THE GUESSES

The drinkers had the option to guess which sample was which Elijah Craig. It was sort of a dare. But as 15 of the tasters made guesses of one or more of the ECs, this lark wound up resulting in something fascinating...

SAMPLE A

10 out of 15 guesses were correct.

All 15 guesses got the age statement correct.

SAMPLE B

7 out of 14 guesses were correct

All 14 guesses got the age statement correct.

SAMPLE C

4 out of 13 guesses were correct

7 out of 13 guesses got the age statement correct.

SAMPLE D

4 out of 14 guesses were correct.

11 out of 14 guesses got the age statement correct.

SAMPLE E

4 out of 13 guesses were correct

8 out of 13 guesses got the age statement correct.

Firstly, look at the results from Samples A & B again. Drink that in.

Secondly, 42% of all guesses were correct. 80% of the guesses at least nailed the age statement.

While there were a handful of big bourbon geeks in the group, the vast majority were not. In fact some of us don't even like bourbon that much. Yet, our senses can sort out the difference between a 12yo and an NAS, to the point of perfection in Samples A & B.

THE REVEAL!

Let me not tarry further.

🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁

SAMPLE A was the Pre-Fire 12 year old, bottled ca. 2001

SAMPLE B was the current NAS Small Batch

SAMPLE C was the old NAS Small Batch

SAMPLE D was the 12 year old with the age statement on the back label

SAMPLE E was the 12 year old with the age statement on the front label

RESULTS REVISITED

First Place

Pre-Fire 12 year old, bottled ca. 2001 with 81 points

10 out of 15 guesses were correct.

All 15 guesses got the age statement correct.

Second Place (tie!)

Front label 12 year old with 64 points

4 out of 13 guesses were correct

8 out of 13 guesses got the age statement correct.

Second Place (tie!)

Old NAS Small Batch with 64 points

4 out of 13 guesses were correct

7 out of 13 guesses got the age statement correct.

Fourth Place

Back label 12 year old with 54 points

4 out of 14 guesses were correct.

11 out of 14 guesses got the age statement correct.

Fifth Place

Current NAS Small Batch with 52 points

7 out of 14 guesses were correct

All 14 guesses got the age statement correct.

While we shouldn't be totally shocked that the oldest and newest Elijah Craigs landed first and last, while also generating very accurate guesses, it's still fascinating that this really played out, almost to an extreme level.

There was also a distinct preference of the old no-age-statement Small Batch over the new one. Meanwhile the old NAS thumped the very 12 year old (back label) it replaced, even though the tasters seemed to know the lower scoring whiskey was a 12yo.

I was surprised the front label 12yo — the bottling that brought many of us to Elijah Craig in the first place — didn't fare that well. It seemed to be a considerable step down from the pre-fire 12, per the group scores.

Speaking of the pre-fire 12, its color was the darkest of the group, with a deep red tint to it. Several tasters also noted its character was different than the other four, which set it apart, which may have led to some correct guesses.

These are all generalizations to some point, since every taster had his or her own relationship with each EC. For instance, there were a few people who didn't like the pre-fire 12 even though they knew/guessed what it was.

I keep coming back to the remarkable guesswork: 42% correct, 80% correct age statement. It even breaks down evenly between the types:

12 year olds - 42.9% correct. 81.0% correct age statement

NASes - 40.7% correct. 77.8% correct age statement

The drinkers knew what they're tasting, even when they're not experts. Our instincts were correct. Even though the 12 year old whiskey doesn't always win out, we seem to know when it's in our glass.

QUESTIONS? COMMENTS?

If you haven't gotten enough of this Elijah Craig onslaught, you will be utterly pleased to know that I will be posting my tasting notes from my blind tasting throughout next week.

More importantly, please use the comment section if you have thoughts or inquiries about this taste off. Thank you to all the participants and all the readers!