Head-to-Head Booker's: 25th Anniversary vs Batch 2013-6

I was passing through Kentucky when Jim Beam released the Booker’s 25th Anniversary bourbon. Unfortunately it was a Sunday in February and nothing was open. Not even the distillery. I knew that if I wanted to taste this, I would have very few chances. 

That night at the hotel bar in Louisville (Louisville being one of the few places I travel to that the hotel bar is worth stopping at) I saw a bottle of the 25th on the shelf. I ordered it, paid my $35 and decided that, while it was tasty, it wasn’t that much better than the Booker’s I had on my shelf. I counted myself lucky and mentally moved on for the night.

I had plenty of time to think about that bourbon on the drive home the next day. It started snowing in Champaign, Illinois and ended about Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin. White-out, white-knuckle conditions. We didn’t go over 25 miles per hour the entire time and even that may have been too fast at times. By the time we got back to Minneapolis, it was late. The normal 13 hour drive had ballooned into a 17 hour one. And all I wanted was a bourbon. I grabbed the Booker’s I had at home and tried to unwind from the trip.

It was good. Was it better than the 25th Anniversary? I tried to tell myself it was. I tried really hard to convince myself. And it was easy since it had seemed I’d missed my shot at getting the 25th.

After a couple days though, I decided that I couldn’t let this pass without at least trying to get it. I sent an email to a guy I know who works at a local liquor store chain. In the past, he’d gotten me a lot of bottles that I had requested, including a bottle of the Four Roses Limited Small Batch 2012 (though he wasn’t able to get the 2013 for me). I figured the worst that could happen was he wouldn’t be able to.

He placed the order with the distributor. The distributor didn’t have any, but placed the order and got his hands on a case. But then, the order was intercepted by management. It seems that the chain has a standing rule that anything that might be even a little special go to their main store to be included in a “lottery” event. My guy called, stated his case (and my case), and got one bottle reluctantly released to me. 

I felt pretty happy to get my hands on a bottle of the Booker’s 25th Anniversary bourbon. It was a bit expensive at $100 but I remembered it being worth it. And finally I’d get a chance to see if I was fooling myself when I thought I liked the regular release better.

Booker’s Bourbon

Purchase Info: $47, Burnsville, MN 

Details: Batch# 2013-6, 62.95% ABV, aged 7 years, 6 months

Nose: Starts sweet with a strong alcohol burn. After it settles down a bit, it transitions into something very much akin to green spinach leaves. Then oak. Lots of it. And under it all was a maple sweetness that made my mouth water in anticipation.

Mouth: Thick, almost syrupy mouthfeel. Rich vanilla, sweet brown sugar, ginger spice, fresh-cut oak and maple syrup.

Finish: Mouth drying. Sweet fading to bitterness with much less warmth than I would have expected at almost 126 proof. Very drinkable. Dangerously so.

Booker’s 25th Anniversary Bourbon

Purchase Info: $104, Richfield, MN 

Details: Batch# 2014-1, 65.4% ABV, aged 10 years, 3 months

Nose: Maple and brown sugar. There is an underlying waxiness. Just a hint of citrus.

Mouth: Not as thick as the previous, but warm and still sweet. Cinnamon and cloves. Vanilla. This is a nicely balanced bourbon.

Finish: Warm finish. Sweet fading to bitterness. Warmth lasts a long time.

love.gif

Thoughts: These are both excellent bourbons. The 2013-6 is wonderfully sweet. The 25th Anniversary has a lovely warmth and amazing balance. Both of these bourbons hit all the notes I look for in a bourbon. Sweet, spicy with a nice hit of oak, but not too much of any of them. If you can get your hands on a taste of the 25th Anniversary, do it. If you can't, don’t feel too bad. Every bottle I've had of the regular release was worth the price I paid for it. I highly recommend both of these.

James E. Pepper 1776 Straight Rye Whiskey

Last November, when I was in Kentucky, I was looking for something I couldn’t get at home. I stood in the whiskey aisle of Liquor Barn trying to find something that was both normally unavailable to me and affordable. I looked for a while. A long while. My wife was in a hurry to get to the hotel. I wasn’t making her happy with my dawdling.

It didn’t take too much longer for me to finally grab something that I’d heard of, but hadn't had. That something was James E. Pepper 1776 Rye. I’d remembered that I’d heard something about it. Problem was, that I didn’t remember what I’d heard. I thought I remembered something positive. At the very least, I seemed to remember that I hadn’t heard anything bad. 

It turns out I had heard the good things about the 15 year version of the James E. Pepper line. And this was not that. In fact, after I got home, I realized that it claimed to have 95% Rye. So…MGPi. But I tend to like that flavor profile. And it was 100 proof and under $30 so I wasn’t too upset with the pickup.

James E. Pepper 1776 Straight Rye Whiskey

Purchase info: ~$28, Liquor Barn, Louisville, KY

Nose: Pine forest and mint. Hints of cherry fruitiness, citrus and tobacco.

Mouth: Thick and oily. Mint. Soap. More cherry hints. Lots of pine and pickle juice.

Finish: More pickle. Warmth that lasts. Mint that lasts even longer.

like.gif

Thoughts: I thought the nose was the most interesting part of this one. It’s very nice. I Iiked the whiskey neat, my wife didn’t. Though I will admit, it is a bit one-note. But it made a good Sazerac (which is my go to rye cocktail). In the end, this is basically a higher proof version of Bulleit Rye. It’s a bit sweeter. The flavors are a little bit muddier. If you like that flavor profile and this is sold near you, pick it up (if you don’t like that flavor profile, I’d advise you to skip it). It's a pleasant enough whiskey, but what I really like about it is that the bottler isn’t charging an arm and a leg for something they didn’t produce. MGPi juice gets a poor reputation, not because it is bad, but because people keep trying to pass it off as their own “craft” and charging small producer prices for it. In this case, it’s about the same price as the most widely distributed MGPi (Bulleit) and it’s a higher proof. So that’s a win.

The disappointment and redemption of Fleischmann's Straight Rye

It’s mid-March 2013 and I’m about to embark on one of the most disappointing, and yet ultimately most interesting, hunts of my life: the hunt for Fleischmann’s Straight Rye. 

I discovered that Fleischmann’s Straight Rye existed, coincidentally, by finding out that it had been replaced. As Sazerac is wont to do, a statement that hinted at an age had been removed and replaced with a bit of nonsense in the same typeface. Straight Rye Whiskey had turned to Mash Rye Whiskey. 

A label change would not normally be enough to send me searching for a whiskey. But in the article, Chuck mentioned that it was the only rye made at the Barton distillery and that it is distributed only in Northern Wisconsin. Well, that’s home. And for the next few months every time I went back home, I checked the liquor stores to see if I could find it. And in October 2013, I finally did. 

Now, Fleischmann’s, whatever the spirit, is a bottom-shelf product. There is a vodka, gin, rum, brandy and blended whiskey to go along with that rye. But it’s an old name and was born from the same company that birthed the yeast that most baker’s are familiar with. That company was born in 1868. And along with being the first to introduce yeast sold in it’s modern form, they also were distillers. Wikipedia claims that they were America’s first commercial producer of gin but it’s Wikipedia, so take that with a grain of salt.

All that is to say that I really shouldn’t have expected a lot of this product. But, yet, I kind of did. I’d read good reviews of it. The forums at StraightBourbon.com had entire threads dedicated to singing its praises. It couldn’t be terrible, could it?

It couldn’t. It was not terrible. It was close to terrible, but not terrible. It was bad enough that I didn’t want to infuse it or cook with it for fear the flavor would come through. It made the only manhattan that I’ve ever dumped out. But it was better than say, Rebel Yell. So it sat on my shelf. For months. I tried giving it away as a curiosity sample, but felt bad doing it and more often than not cautioned the recipient to not drink it. What could I do? There is no way I can throw away a whiskey, yet it was taking up valuable space on the shelf. 

And so it sat. My excitement in a successful hunt turned to disappointment. At least until I traveled to Virginia and visited the A. Smith Bowman distillery (another Sazerac location). As a souvenir, my wife bought a bag of barrel char that she could stick in a container and smell every once in a while. They said if you dumped a tablespoon of whiskey in there every so often, it would retain the smell it came with. Now there was a use for that Fleischmann’s, but 1.75 liters would take a long time to disappear a tablespoon at a time. But it inspired me to try something. Aging bourbon in a second barrel is big right now. It could be another bourbon, a cognac, sherry or even rum barrel. I didn’t have a barrel, but I did have barrel char. And I had a lot of whiskey that I didn’t know what to do with. Hmmm…

I devised an experiment. I set up four mason jars and put a quarter cup of barrel char into each one. I then took added a cup of Fleischmann’s Rye, tightened the lid and put it into a closet, shaking it every day. I strained the first through a series of coffee filters after a week. The next was strained at two weeks, the third at a month and the final at 2 months. I also poured a four ounce sample to use as a control. The results were as follows:

Fleischmann’s Straight Rye Whiskey

Purchasing info: ~$12 for a 1.75L, Northern Lakes Cabin Stop, Hayward, WI (October 2013)

Nose: Silage/grain with hints of mint and cherry

Mouth: Thin, lightly sweet, hints of mint that feel medicinal.

Finish: Gentle with a faint charcoal aftertaste

Thoughts: This was an inexpensive curiosity. I can’t imagine using this for everyday drinking/mixing/cooking. Now that it seems to have been replaced by Mash Rye Whiskey, I doubt anyone other than the Straight Bourbon forum inhabitants will miss it.

Barrel Char Finishing Experiment 

Nose

  • Even after a week’s infusion, this doesn’t nose like the same whiskey. It’s sweeter, showing much more caramel. 
  • Not much difference between week one and two.
  • By one month, the silage from the control sample is gone and the cherries are back, but now they are chocolate covered. 
  • At two months, the cherries are not only chocolate covered, but dark chocolate covered and joined by rich caramel and char.

Mouth

  • A week made a lot of difference in the mouthfeel. It’s thicker and much sweeter. The bourbon influence is clear.
  • At two weeks, the silage flavors are gone. There is more cherry presence with hints of chocolate. Think of the liquid that runs out of the Christmas candy. It’s kinda cherry and kinda chocolate, but not quite either.
  • One month: Dark, rich and thick in the mouth. Cherry notes very pronounced with black pepper spice.
  • At two months this is like drinking a candy bar: toffee, coconut, nougat, chocolate. And of course that ever present cherry.

Finish

  • Week one: getting better
  • Week two: no real change
  • One month: The finish still has hints of the original medicinal mintiness but there is much more warmth and it lasts a lot longer
  • Two months: lingering spice and sweetness in the finish. After a bit the mint returns.

Thoughts

After a week or so, you start to notice that there is something interesting going on. It’s not there yet, but you know there is something. At about one month, it’s actually gotten to something I would drink on it’s own. the dichotomy between the thick, rich, spicy sweet mouth and the minty finish is very interesting. At two months, the flavors are even more complex, but they are starting to become muddied. If I were forced to chose one of these to bring to market, I’d go with the one month. 

I thought that this purchase was a bust. If this experiment hadn’t yielded something drinkable, I would have dumped it out and not thought about it again. But it turned out to be one of the most interesting redemption stories I’d ever witnessed. In fact, it was good enough that I poured the control and the one and two week infusions together and am reinfusing it. I’m starting at three weeks, but may let it go for another if it isn’t ready yet. I’m now actually quite excited about my bourbon-char finished rye whiskey.

A Review of Four Roses Limited Edition Small Batch 2013 Release

It’s no secret that I love Four Roses. And this, my friends, is getting to be a problem. Everyone loves Four Roses now. They love it so much that you can barely buy one of their limited releases anymore. This year, my normal source for the Limited Small Batch release pulled it off the shelves and into a lottery. A lottery that had a suspicious number of couples winning for the number of people at the drawing. Not coincidentally, a lottery in a store that is no longer one of my top visits when looking for good bourbon.

Other than that, I never saw it in Minnesota. In fact, never saw it on a shelf. Period. Popularity is a bitch for those of us who’ve loved it all along. But I’m not one of those hipsters who loved something until it got cool and then moved along. Because Four Roses really is that good. And luckily I have friends. Friends who are willing to pick me up a bottle where they live and get it to me. Friends that I now owe a drink to the next time we are in the same state. 

Once I got my bottle of Four Roses Limited Small Batch 125th Anniversary Edition, I rationed it. I rationed it for the last few months. And now it’s finally down to one more pour. So. What did I think of it?

Four Roses Limited Edition Small Batch 2013 Release

Purchasing Info: $99, unnamed Las Vegas store.

Particulars: 51.6% ABV, Recipe: OBSV 18 year + OBSK 13 year + OESK 13 year

Nose: Black Tea with honey. Cedar. After a bit it gives up some baking spices and a hint of citrus.

Mouth: Thick, spicy and sweet with clove, maple and hints of pear.

Finish: Warm and sweet leaving a bright tingly sensation on the tongue and cheeks.

like.gif

Thoughts: First off, I really, really like this bourbon. I’ve heard people describe it as the best bourbon they’ve ever had, but that’s probably pushing it a bit. I’ll go ahead and say that, for me, it’s not even the best Four Roses I’ve had. I would rank both the 2012 Limited Small Batch and the the 2009 Mariage higher (which were basically equally good in my book). 2013 was a bit too thick and sweet and the flavors a bit more muddied when compared to the 2012. But that’s splitting hairs. I can see why this was chosen to be the American Whiskey of the Year last year, it’s an amazing whiskey. It’s just not the best ever.

I am already looking forward to 2014’s version. I hear that the barrels that went into making both it and the 2012 have been exhausted so I’m excited to see if they try something new and venture away from the OBSV/OBSK/OESK formula they’ve used the past couple years. I’m really kinda hoping for something with the OESF. Or maybe something with a Q yeast. Something that’ll throw people for a loop. But we’ll see.

Bourbon Review: Jefferson's Presidential Select, 18 year old

Roughly a year ago, I was walking through one of my usual liquor stores. I was on a beer run. And, as I always do, instead of walking straight back toward the beer coolers I turned left and went to look at the bourbon. 

There is a tiny little shelf near the ceiling that holds four or five of the more expensive North American whiskies they have on hand. And I look up there every time I visit. I have to, it’s where I found (and passed on) various van Winkles back in 2011. It’s where I found out about the yumminess that was the 2009 Four Roses Mariage (still my favorite of the ones I’ve had). 

On this particular visit, I hadn’t planned to buy a hundred dollar bourbon. I hadn’t really even planned to look. I was stopping in for a six-pack of beer. My wife was with me. More at issue, my mother-in-law was with me. Randomly dropping a hundred bucks on something to put in my closet would get a raised eyebrow and a shrug from my wife, but it would get shock, confusion, questions about my sanity and wonder that her daughter ever let me out of the house unsupervised from my mother-in-law.

So, of course I looked. And up there, was one bottle of a bourbon that I knew was no longer being distributed. The writers were cautioning that if you saw it, and wanted it, to grab it because that was it. There would be no more. 

Well, crap. It was one I hadn’t tried yet and one I’d been meaning to. There was nothing for it. I had better grab it. And so I came into possession of a bottle of Jefferson’s Presidential Select 18 year old (Batch 14, bottle 1811). My wife, predictably raised her eyebrow and shrugged. As a lifelong drinker of Old Style beer, my mother-in-law was shocked that anyone would pay that much for any booze. And kept on being shocked for a while. 

So was it worth it? Sure, my mother-in-law is a funny lady and I’d pay a decent amount to set her off sometimes. But what about the bourbon?

Jefferson’s Presidential Select, 18 year old

Purchase Info: $99, Blue Max, Burnsville, MN (May 2013)

Nose: Sweet baked apples with brown sugar. Earthy, like freshly dug soil. 

Mouth: Nice syrupy mouthfeel. Warm on the first sip. Baking spices and sweetness at first, but transitions to a dry tannic woodiness.

Finish: Swallows gentle but develops a heat in your chest that lasts for minutes. Drys the mouth.

meh.gif

Thoughts: I find this to be too woody. To me, it was aged too long. It’s too dry. I described it in a tweet shortly after opening it that it was like drinking woody honey. My opinion hasn’t changed. That said, my wife really likes it. Which doesn’t surprise me in the least. I’m not normally a fan of extra-aged whiskey. The bourbons I like best tend to be in the 10 year range. Whereas her favorite bourbon was 18 years old before it was discontinued in favor of 20, 21 and 22 year old varieties. So if you also like bourbon with a bit of wood on it, give this a shot if you happen across one of the few remaining bottles. I’m glad I did even if, for me, it was just meh.

Bottom Shelf Bourbon Brackets: The Championship Rounds

It’s here, Championship Monday. We’ve made it through the opening rounds and tonight we find out who graduates to the Fancy Shelf. 

At the beginning of this tournament, if you had asked me if I would have found a gem in the field, I would have guessed yes. I mean, that was kind of the point of the exercise. But, I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised that out of the entire field, there was only one bourbon that I wouldn’t want to drink again. Some were certainly mediocre, but only one was downright bad. Heck, many of them I’d be happy with neat, or with an icecube or two. 

In the interest of not being influenced by my memories of the product from the opening rounds, I did the next two rounds using my typical double-blind format where I poured into glasses 1 and 2 and my wife moved them to spots A and B. I knew what bourbon was which number and my wife knew which number coresponded to which letter, but neither of us knew which bourbon coresponded to which letter. These were not formal tasting notes, just impressions to let us decide which one we liked better.

Round 2: Down to Four

Division 1: Old Charter 8 year vs Ezra Brooks

Nose A: Trends more vegetal or medicinal/chemical

Nose B: Caramel covered fruit

Mouth A: spicier and warmer, but still more vegetal

Mouth B: gentle, sweet and floral

Finish A: Nice, but unremarkable

Finish B: Perfumy and slightly offputting

Thoughts: A’s vegetalness made it less enjoyable head to head. Whereas B’s gentleness made it feel more watery in comparison. That said, I enjoyed both of these on their own during the past two weeks. 

Winner: B, but only just. The main thing it was missing was kick so it’s no surprise that B was the lower proof Old Charter 8 year old.

Division 2: Old Crow Reserve vs JW Dant Bottled in Bond

Nose A: A slightly medicinal Juicyfruit gum

Nose B: Fruitier, but with hints of cinnamon. Also more caramel sweetness

Mouth A: lots of caramel here

Mouth B: sharp, medicinal

Finish A: hot, but in a good way

Finish B: warm bitterness

Thoughts: B has a much nicer nose. More complex and it makes me anticipate a tasty dram. The problem is that once it get’s in the mouth it falls apart. It goes sharp and medicinal when compared with A. Classic overpromise, underdeliver. 

Winner: A wins this hands down. Honestly, it wasn’t even close after the nose. I was surprised Old Crow Reserve didn’t put up more of a fight after all the people I talk to that are enjoying it, but the clear winner is JW Dant Bottled in Bond.

Fancy Shelf Championship

Old Charter 8 year vs JW Dant Bottled in Bond

Nose A: Typical bourbonness, caramel sweetness with some spice

Nose B: A bit more burn. Almost chocolate chip cookie.

Mouth A: very sweet with just a hint of sharpness

Mouth B: Warm and not very sweet, kinda sharp

Finish A: gentle and sweet

Finish B: wow! great finish. Nice warmth that lasts.

Thoughts: This was a very close one. My wife and I both enjoyed each of these a lot. In fact, it was so close that we each picked a different winner. I chose B on the strength of it’s finish. My wife chose A. 

Winner: That said, it’s my blog so the Fancy Shelf Champion is: B, JW Dant Bottled in Bond.

It’s crazy to me that three of the top four are bourbons that I would be perfectly happy pouring for myself neat or with a bit of ice. Two weeks ago, my wife drove to New Orleans to visit a friend, I liked the Old Charter 8 year enough to have her grab me a handle of it on her way back since they don’t sell it in Minnesota. I do wish it had a little more proof and so I hope to check out the NAS Charter 101 next time I travel to a state it’s sold in. Ezra Brooks is nice for those days I want a little spicy kick, but don’t feel like having anything special. Card-playing bourbon I like to call that. Dant Bonded isn’t quite as good as it’s higher priced brother Evan Williams Bonded, but it’s almost there and it’s well under $20 per liter here in MN where EW is a little over that at my normal shop. Old Crow got a lucky draw in the first round. I’d put off deciding how I felt about it, but can say now that it’s mediocre at best. I’ll use it for mixing or cooking and be pleased with the purchase.

Old Crow Reserve vs. Rebel Yell, Round 1, Bottom Shelf Bourbon Brackets

Round 1d of the Bottom Shelf Bourbon Brackets features a couple of old names that have fallen on a few hard times. The number 2 seed of division 2: Old Crow Reserve is facing off against number 3 seed: Rebel Yell. 

Old Crow Reserve. I’ve been curious about Old Crow ever since I went back home to the backwoods of Wisconsin and saw it was the only bourbon in the bar. I’d have gone beer, but this particular dance hall had three kinds of Miller on tap and the keg of Old Style that the groom’s family had purchased for the guests to drink. Not only did I not want any of those, but I wasn’t quite sure when the last time the lines were cleaned since this particular place is mostly used for weddings. So I went with the Old Crow. I ordered it neat, because I didn’t really trust the cocktail skills of the bartender. She didn’t now what neat meant so I was probably correct there. But, I didn’t hate it. In fact I liked it better than the Beam White I found later in the evening by wandering across the street to a liquor store that was sadly lacking in 50mL minis that I could sneak back in.

The only thing I’d heard about Rebel Yell was the statement “I hear the Reserve isn’t bad.” I’d hear that statement every time I mentioned that I’d slated it for inclusion in this tournament. No one knew anything else. And it seemed no one had tasted either the Reserve or the regular release. So, I read the bottle and by reading the label I learned that it is a wheater and that it is: “Unique. Commanding. Unforgettable.” After a bit of internet searching, I learned this is an old brand once produced by Pappy Van Winkle himself. The forum posters claim that if you find old bottles of it, it’s kinda one-note, but not bad. These days it’s a sold by Luxco out of St. Louis. No one mentions what it’s like now.

Old Crow Reserve

Purchase Info: Haskell’s Wine & Spirits, Burnsville, MN $16.99 for a 1L

Stated Age: Four years

ABV: 43%

Produced by: Jim Beam

Nose: Rubbing alcohol right at first. But that dissipates: fresh sawn lumber. Dry with just a hint of caramel, mint and orange peel.

Mouth: Maple syrup and black pepper. Hints of vegetal and soapy flavors.

Finish: Some heat. Spiced honey. Transitions to bitterness. 

Thoughts: Not one I feel like I’d grab first. If I was in a bar that had it, I’d pick it over Beam White and not feel too bad about the selection. But I might ask for it on the rocks.  

Rebel Yell

Purchase Info: Blue Max, Burnsville, MN $11.78 for a 750 mL

Stated Age: NAS 

ABV: 40%

Sourced/Sold by: Luxco

Nose: Dried Corn, Orange Peel, Caramel 

Mouth: Watery mouthfeel. Dried corn. Hints of vinegar. Unpleasant.

Finish: Decent but not overpowering burn. Grain and a nice bitterness.

Thoughts: I have no idea what I will do with this bottle, but I certainly won’t be drinking it. The finish is nice, but the taste and nose are not pleasant at all. My wife has been bugging me to give her bourbon to use in a homemade bug repellant recipe. This might be fine for that. 

Winner: Old Crow Reserve doesn’t win this one quite as much as Rebel Yell loses it. To say it was a favorable matchup is being nice. Rebel Yell might give Town Branch a run for the title of worst bourbon I’ve tasted. It lives up to the “Unique” and the “Unforgettable” that the label promised. But not in a good way. So by process of elimination Old Crow Reserve wins. We’ll see how it does in the next round before I say if I like it or not.

UPDATE: So, after fourteen hundred and some odd days, I finally got around to trying Rebel Yell again. Here are my updated thoughts: Rebel Yell: Revisited.

BourbonGuy.com accepts no advertising. It is solely supported by the sale of the hand-made products I sell at the BourbonGuy Gifts Etsy store. If you'd like to support BourbonGuy.com, visit BourbonGuyGifts.com. Thanks!

JW Dant Bottled in Bond vs. Ancient Age, Bottom Shelf Bourbon Brackets, Round 1

Round 1c of the Bottom Shelf Bourbon Brackets features Division 2, Number 1 seed JW Dant Bottled in Bond versus Number 4 seed Ancient Age. 

JW Dant Bottled in Bond. A bourbon that I’d looked past quite a bit. It’s not available at my usual store and it’s kind of tucked off to the side at my…well…other usual store. I knew ahead of time that it was Heaven Hill since I had seen some Dant labels on one of the tours I took there. I knew it was 100 proof and at least four years old because it’s bonded. Other than that though, I didn’t know much about this one before trying it. It is the highest proof bourbon in the competition and, as such, is the number 1 seed in Division 2.

Ancient Age is the one bourbon in the competition that I’ve had previously. I used to keep a bottle in the house as an “I don’t want to think about it” bourbon. It was the first bourbon to show me that cheap does not equal bad. It’s also one that I’d give to people who were interested in bourbon, but who were not aficionados. Not because they wouldn’t notice, but because most often they liked it better. It’s gentle and sweet. Being the youngest bourbon in the competition with a stated age of 3 years, it was the last selected and is the number four seed of Division 2.

JW Dant Bottled in Bond

Purchase Info: Blue Max, Burnsville, MN $14.99 for a 1L

Stated Age: NAS

ABV: 50%

Produced by: Heaven Hill

Nose: Very complex. This started off very vegetal. After is settles a bit: dark, ripe plums and cinnamon. After a further 20-30 minutes it transitioned again to a perfumy sweetness.

Mouth: Spicy, right on the tongue tip followed by brown sugar sweetness and a very slight vegetal sharpness. 

Finish: Sweet with only a slight burn. Transitions to a mouth-drying bitterness that makes you want another sip. Occasionally you’ll be visited by a floral perfuminess.

Thoughts: In the ranks of Heaven Hill Bottled in Bond bourbons that I’ve reviewed, this ranks  between the Evan Williams and the Old Heaven Hill. Much better than the Old Heaven Hill and slightly worse than the Evan Williams. 

Ancient Age

Purchase Info: Haskell’s Wine & Spirits, Burnsville, MN $11.99 for a 1L

Stated Age: 36 months 

ABV: 40%

Produced by: Buffalo Trace

Nose: Heavy dose of silage at first. Buried under it are cherry, mint and honey. 

Mouth: Thin and sweet with silage/grain flavors dominating.

Finish: Gentle cinnamon candy transitioning to a citrus pith style bitterness.

Thoughts: This is not complicated. This is thin. This is certainly not one you want if you are going to have another within a timeframe where you can compare them. But in spite of all of that, I tend to like the cinnamon sweetness and the gentleness of the finish. Which is unusual since I normally prefer a strong finish. If you do not like a gentle bourbon, this won't be for you.

Winner: There is no surprise here. JW Dant, the higher seed, moves ahead. Ancient Age is an ok “only bourbon of the night,” but it can’t handle being compared to anything. JW Dant Bottled in Bond might be one I could see having on the shelf as a decent, everyday bourbon. I look forward to seeing how it does in the next round.