Gary’s Blog

“Bad” is highly subjective, and can mean many things. If you mean does it become unsafe to drink, I’d say that if it is stored properly (room temperature, out of direct sunlight) and in a glass bottle with a decent enclosure – than probably not. If you mean does it taste like crap if you leave a couple pours in a bottle for many years . . . well . . . let’s find out!

There are a lot of different thoughts on this. Conventional wisdom is that oxidation will certainly change the flavor of whiskey over time. I’ve heard multiple reports that the end result isn’t good – while also hearing folks talk about a bottle “opening up over time” and improving. In both scenarios – folks report some change, which isn’t a surprise as oxidation is one of the forces altering a whiskey’s character as it ages in the barrel (and if you’ve been fortunate to sip some fine, really old Scotch; there’s something magical about what time does to the spirit!)  But – how much influence is from oxidation over time – who knows.

One challenge is if you have a bottle that’s pretty low, and it sat for several years that way, likely you don’t have one that is full to compare it to. Sure, if it is available you could go and buy one, but while the consistency in whiskey is laudable, if you’re pulling a bottle today – who is to say if it is the same as one bottled many years ago.

This seems like a question ripe to be answered with an experiment, which means not only having some whiskey spend time in partially full containers (a lot of time), but having a control sample to compare to.  Thankfully, time (hopefully!) is something I have, so why not!

What I’m looking to uncover is:

1. Does a whiskey materially/substantially change if left for years in a bottle that is . . .
   • 60% full?
   • 30% full?
   • 10% full?
2. IF it does change, does that change vary in the above scenarios?
3. IF it does change, how has it changed? (is it more woody, less sweet, more astringent, etc)

Taste is individually subjective and highly variable.  Hell, in most reviews where multiple apostles provided their take, they were different.  The key to this experiment is having enough whiskey at these varying levels to get multiple opinions on each. A 10% full bottle is just under 2.5 oz (75 mL), so taking one such bottle – you wouldn’t have much of a sample to get multiple tasting impressions. And by multiple tasting impressions – I’m talking about the impressions of multiple TASTERS. Any one opinion is just that, but wouldn’t it be interesting to see if there is any consensus on the effect over time?

To have enough volume of whiskey that aged for some period of time with only 10% left means . . . yeah, a lot of bottles. And a lot of bottles means selecting something that I can buy in bulk all at once without having to sell an organ. Thinking about that prior to a trip to Kentucky this spring, the selection seemed obvious: Heaven Hill 6 Year Bottled-In-Bond. This is a delicious bourbon at a respectable age and proof, and all for only $13 a bottle (my only complaint is that I can’t get this in Atlanta!)

Here’s the setup:
I bought 10 bottles all from the same store at the same time (so as close to the same “batch” as I could reasonably get). Those have been split into four different groupings:
Group A: Control. This bottle will sit in the same box with the rest, but will remain unopened until the end.
Group B: 60% Full. This bottle will be opened, and I’ll pour out 2 oz a week until there is roughly 450 ml left in the bottle.
Group C: 30% Full. Two bottles (C1 & C2) will be opened, and I’ll pour out 2 oz a week until there is roughly 225 mL left in each bottle. Why two bottles? This provides 450 mL of whiskey that has sat in a 30% full bottle for the allotted period of time (which is roughly 15 oz).
Group D: 10% Full. Six bottles (D1 – D6) will be opened, and I’ll pour out 2 oz a week until there is only 75 mL left in each bottle. Six bottles with 75 mL will provide 450 mL of whiskey that sat in a 10% full bottle.

Just a quick note – when I say “pour out”, I’m not “throwing away” any bourbon (no whiskey will be harmed in this experiment!) All of the excess that is poured out is being decanted into other empty bottles. That’s leaving me with a lot of HH 6yr BIB, but I’m confident that I’ll think of something to do with it.

All of these bottles will be stored in a box in my (finished) basement, out of any direct sunlight. Once they hit their target fill levels, I won’t open them again for . . . I’m not sure? 2 years seems like long enough, but we’ll see what is going on in 2 years. I’m open to comments/thoughts/suggestions on the timing (or other facets of the experiment). When the experiment does “end”, I’ll decant the two Group C bottles into 1, and the six Group D bottles into 1, so I’ll have 4 bottles – the control, and 3 bottles with about 450 mL left.

After decanting, I’ll gather some whiskey friends to help with the measurement step. I’d conduct a blind-tasting, asking each participant to complete an ‘assessment form’. This will be tricky, and I don’t have it nailed down yet (thankfully have a couple of years to figure it out!) I want to have quantitative measurements of each sample on different aspects. For example – maybe a 10 point scale across things like “Oaky”, “Caramel”, “Vanilla”, “General Sweetness”, “Bitterness”, etc. Whether one person picks a 7 and another picks a 4 on the same sample/aspect isn’t necessarily important. The key is if there seems to be any consensus on what changes (is anything increasing or decreasing in terms of taste, mouthfeel, etc).

I want to avoid “better” or “worse” since that is highly subjective to each person’s preference (although will allow open comments on each sample from each participant). If the sweeter notes are less pronounced, it might be that it seems more oaky over time – which some may like and others may dislike. And it may be that the difference is perceived quite differently across the board.

If you have suggestions, please feel free to share in the comments. And remember to check back in a few years 🙂

Cheers!
Gary

When thinking about private selections, it left me pondering about how much they’ve changed in recent years. 8 years ago, these private selections were less frequent to come upon (not including stores with a long history of them), but today there are pretty readily available. While I’m excited to see more of those selections, I’m also afraid that the odds of getting a great barrel may be decreasing. Several years back, if you went to a distillery for a private selection, they’d roll out maybe 7-10 barrels for you to try – and if you didn’t find something special enough to buy the whole barrel – you could walk away without buying anything (or so I’ve heard; I haven’t personally experienced a complete sh!t show among that many barrels where my group has walked away). Today, more and more distilleries are providing far more limited choices – like three barrels – and some are requiring an up-front commitment to buy one of those three before you sample any of them! That bothers me, as I think it significantly reduces the chance for finding that unique barrel, and increases the odds of private selections being mediocre.

The first private barrel selection I was fortunate enough to participate in was at Buffalo Trace in 2013. They rolled out 9 barrels of bourbon, which were destined to be bottled as Elmer T Lee. They had all been distilled and barreled on the same day (9 years prior to our pick) – and were all from the same rick in the rickhouse. A few members of our barrel-picking team were disappointed with the lack of variability, and voiced that with the barrel manager Beau. For me, I was just thrilled to be trying barrel proof Elmer T Lee! Of those 9 barrels, the team (which was 20+ people!) was split between two barrels, that everyone thought were really special. There was also a consensus that at least 2 of those barrels shouldn’t even be considered for Elmer T Lee, and that they should consider blending those into Ancient Age or something else. The other 5 were good, but not especially great. I walked away with a greater appreciation for the consistency we get as consumers when it comes to whiskey, as well as just how much each individual barrel influences the whiskey. When 9 barrels as similar as they could possibly be had that much variation, I wondered how in the world they maintain the same flavor profile in a standard label.

When I think back to that first selection, I wonder “What if they’d rolled out the two dud barrels and one that was just average?” Or “What if they rolled out one dud and two that were average?” In either scenario, we’d have picked what we thought was the best (and thought it was amazing!); but in a blind tasting with a standard label Elmer may have found it wasn’t really special.

To be clear – I’m not suggesting that they would intentionally push sub-par barrels out to a group that is now locked in. First – the folks I’ve met in the bourbon industry have all been straight shooters, and the effort needed to coordinate a deception like that seems too far-fetched to me. Second – if a store is willing to buy an entire barrel (which isn’t an insignificant up-front investment), they want that store to be happy with the selection, to be able to move the bottles timeline, and ultimately – to buy more in the future!

What I am suggesting is that with limited options, the role of the picker is somewhat reduced – and the odds don’t favor finding that truly special barrel. This doesn’t necessarily make me avoid private selections, but I do plan to pay attention to see if there is a downward trend – while hoping that isn’t the case.

Cheers!
Gary

I’m a pretty laid back guy, and don’t let the little stuff bother me. Usually. But I need to vent on this one.

This weekend, I attended a wedding where the venue had made several mistakes leading up to the big day. I was told in advance that they were looking to make up for some of these by throwing in “premium bar service” at no extra charge. The venue (which I won’t name here) was very nice, upscale, on a marina – so when someone says “premium bar service” I figured “Ok, so not Evan Williams/Jim Beam/Jack Daniels, but maybe Knob Creek, or Four Roses Single Barrel, and some 10 yr single malts”. I wasn’t thinking limited edition, or 18 yr single malt. After the ceremony, I approach the bar – confused as I only see (in terms of whiskey) Jim, Jack, and Johnnie. There is NOTHING wrong with any of these whiskies – and had I not heard “premium bar service” prior, I wouldn’t have given it a second thought – but sharing this piece for context. I was disappointed immediately (and thinking “This is why you ALWAYS bring a flask” – which I had brought on the trip, but opted to not fill/bring after hearing “premium bar service”).

I take a deep breath, committed to enjoying the rest of the evening, and order a Jack neat. “I’m sorry – that’s against policy sir. Would you like that over ice?”

I stare blankly trying to understand what was just said to me. It makes no sense, so I assume he must not have understood me. “I’m sorry – I’d just like some Jack Daniels, neat – no ice please” I state, trying to articulate the words carefully. “I’m sorry sir, I can’t do that. Our policy doesn’t allow us to pour shots.”

I blink a few times, wondering where the disconnect is. I smile, and try to explain that I’m not wanting a “shot” – I’d just like some Jack Daniels without any ice in a rocks glass. I explain that at 80 proof, I don’t really want it watered down with ice. And again – not asking for a shot – this is Tennessee sipping whiskey, which I intend to sip. I try to put the man at ease that I’m not going to be just throwing these back and wearing my tie on my head before dinner. No dice – they just can’t do it.

There were two bars, and I notice my dad leaving the other bar (after having heard the same feedback from the bartender), with a Jack and two small ice cubes. He said he asked her for Jack with two cubes. Not ideal, but workable. I ask if I can get a Jack with the smallest ice cube she has. She gives me a smile and says “Certainly sir!” and plucks out a quarter-sized sliver of ice, and pours 2 oz of Jack over it.

I get the “no shots” policy at a wedding. But I have some news for folks who have such policies:

1. Ice isn’t an antidote to alcohol. 2 oz of Jack Daniels has the same amount of alcohol whether served neat or over a few cubes. Exact same. I promise – look it up.
2. When watered down, alcohol doesn’t taste as much like alcohol – which seems like this would lead to drinking more – not less.
3. What you’re trying to curb is irresponsible behavior. Altering how someone is enjoying their spirits isn’t that effective. Setting expectations and cutting off those who are acting irresponsible is.

Personally, I take offense that the enjoyment of whiskey neat is considered “bad behavior” or is likened to a bunch of kids lining up shots and getting hammered (news flash – they use Fireball or vodka for that sorta thing). Especially when I saw folks getting loaded on the craft beers they had, or huge glasses of wine. The thought that forcing me to have one or more ice cubes in my glass would somehow be a force for good is ignorant. Although it has reinforced the primary lesson I’ll take away from this: Always bring the flask – regardless of what they tell you will be available.

Cheers!
Gary

No, not always.  But yes, sometimes.  Rather, what they can be, and I stress CAN be, is different. A private selection has the potential to be better (or worse) than the standard label. It depends what those who selected it like – as well as what they had to choose from.

If you’ve never experienced a particular brand or label, I’d recommend going with the standard label – as that will best represent what you can expect from that label. The goal of a distillery or producer is to achieve consistency in that flavor profile so the consumer keeps coming back if they like it, and their expectations are met with each purchase. Does that mean that mean that every bottle of Old Forester will taste like every other one? Nope – especially if you’re looking back over an extensive period of time where there are changes in the distillery itself, the proof coming off the still, the proof going into the barrel, etc. But it does mean that you’re likely in the short run to have a more consistent experience with the label. When changes are made, these guys and gals know what they’re doing (usually) – and work to make the impact of those changes a gradual journey such that it isn’t a rude awakening from one bottle to the next.

If you’re familiar with a label and like it, a private selection is a bit like a scratch-off that is very likely to at least pay for itself. What I mean by that is in my experience, those private selections that I enjoyed markedly less than the standard label were in the minority (less than 20%). The majority I thought were pretty close to the standard label, and not materially different – so not special, but if you didn’t pay a premium – you wound up even. But some of the best whiskey I’ve tried were from private single barrel selections. When I get one of these, where a $25 bottle tastes better than a $50 bottle to my palate, I’ll want to buy an extra bottle (or three). In fact, I’ve started carrying a collapsible cup in my car so if I am out on the road and I purchase a private selection single barrel at a solid price point – if time/circumstance permits, I’ll open it right there in the parking lot and take a sip. If it blows me away – I’ll go back and grab another.

In the rare case when I pick up a private selection that I don’t care for, I’ll make a mental note and likely avoid buying private selections from that establishment. They don’t always have the same people doing the picking, but I figure why chance it. The inverse is also true – if I get a stellar pick from a store, I’ll try to come back and look for other picks. It isn’t a guarantee of striking gold in the future, as a lot depends upon what they’re offered to select from. But it gives me hope that whomever is doing their picking has a similar taste profile to mine.

Early on in my whiskey journey, I avoided private selections like the plague. I had tried one that I absolutely loved, and was crestfallen to learn it was sold a year earlier and there was no chance of scoring a bottle of it. “What’s the point in trying something I can’t go out and buy?” I thought. Today – I don’t go out of my way to find private selections, but if I’m already familiar with a label and like it, I’ll give a private selection a shot.

At the end of the day, buying a private selection over a standard label comes down to what you’re looking for. If consistency and having your expectations from a past experience met are key – you’re likely better off with the standard. If you’re open to possibly being disappointed, but also the possibility of finding a gem – give the private selection try.

Cheers!
Gary

Today is “World Whisky Day“, and as a whisky blogger, I suppose I should be playing the role of educator and cheerleader; encouraging everyone to embrace, participate, and celebrate this latest holiday that’s been around since 2012. I’m not sure that I’m on board with all of that, but first – let’s cover what it is.

Per their web-site (yes, they have a web-site), the paraphrased/gist is:

World Whisky Day invites everyone to try a dram and celebrate the water of life. All you need is a bottle of whisky to share with your friends. World Whisky day celebrates all types of whisky/whiskey and encourages everyone to enjoy whisky responsibly.

As I read that,  my initial thought was “Isn’t that . . . well, every day?” Or at least every day where you have the opportunity? As a whiskey enthusiast, it isn’t like if a friend asks “Want to come over and share a bottle” on May 18th I would look at my calendar and reply “But this isn’t World Whisky Day – can we wait until tomorrow?” If I ever say that (outside of dripping with sarcasm), I hope that friend would stop by, justly slap me across the face with a white (or any available) glove and proclaim that I have injured their sensibilities.

Ok – so whiskey enthusiasts don’t need this holiday; we celebrate the water of life at every given opportunity (and I know some of us go out of our way to create such opportunities!) If this isn’t for us, who is it for? Is this to raise awareness with those non-whiskey enthusiasts?

While not scientific, I did a straw poll around my office – folks that I hadn’t ever talked to about whiskey – to see how many of them were familiar with World Whisky Day. This is where I was hoping to report “Not a single damn one” – but full transparency – one person (just one) had heard of it. I was surprised, but asked them how they heard about it, and if they had plans to celebrate it. They explained that they recalled seeing a tweet on it, but didn’t know when it was (this poll was taken yesterday – the day before) or what it was. They tried to act like they wanted to know more about it – but I think this was just to be polite since they may know of my fondness/obsession for whiskey.

I think what bugs me about this is that not a week goes by without there being some newly declared “holiday” or “special day” that we’re all supposed to pay attention to. For example – did you know that today also “National Devil’s Food Cake Day” and “National Learn to Swim Day”? And yesterday was “National Pizza Party Day”? If there was something else I love almost as much as whiskey – it’d be pizza . . . and apparently I failed in spectacular fashion to respect National Pizza Party Day.

My point is simply this: Life is short. Every day you have a chance to share whiskey with friends, do just that. Share it, enjoy it, and each other’s company. Celebrate those moments and memories, because they’re fleeting – and one day those opportunities may not present themselves.

Now excuse me while I engage in hypocrisy of the highest order by attending a “World Whisky Day” party with some friends, which will have whisky from all over the world.

Cheers!
Gary