George Dickel 13 Year Bottled in Bond Tennessee Whisky (Fall 2005)

WHISKIES I DON’T CARE FOR: ROUND 2 George Dickel Bottled in Bond vs Hudson Baby Bourbon Whiskey (These first two paragraphs are largely boilerplate from my Round 1 review). Lately I’ve been doing several side-by-side tastings. I have plenty of whisk(e)y that I love—probably too much—but I’ve also got some that I don’t care for, so I thought I’d mix it up and try to discern just what I don’t like about them. My mental shelving of them into the “not like” category means that they’ve been in the penalty box for some time; thus it’s instructive to ascertain whether or not they belonged there to begin with. The whiskies I selected for this round were picked randomly; they happened to be two that I recalled not liking. Unlike some of my other showdowns (Islay, BTAC, etc.), this side-by-side tasting has nothing to do with a specific region or type; rather, both of these are simply two that I haven’t drunk much (if any) because I didn’t care for them to begin with. George Dickel Bottled in Bond This bourbon won Whisky Advocate’s Whisk(e)y of the Year in 2019. (A digression: Whisky Advocate is part of Marvin Shanken’s portfolio of lifestyle magazines, which also includes Wine Spectator, Cigar Afficionado, and other industry publications. WA is not about finding “the best”; rather, it’s about marketing, business and “spreading the love around” so that retailers can have something new to push. To be fair, their methodology for the annual Top 20 excludes so-called “hard to find” whiskies. And of course, whisky and whiskey is anything but monolithic, so the comparison isn’t apples to apples. Are there repeat winners, or even repeat top-20 selections? I can’t find any since the list began in 2017. I love Lagavulin; but how is Lagavulin 11 Offerman Edition--not as good as the Lagavulin 16, or the Lagavulin Distiller's edition--the best of that year on any metric? Of course it doesn’t mean that all of their picks are bad: 2020’s #1, Larceny Barrel Proof, is outstanding. 2018’s #1, Nikka Whisky From the Barrel, is fantastic.2017’s #1, Elijah Craig Barrel Proof B517, is great. This isn’t my subjective opinion; it’s empirical statistical analysis. Five years. 100 whiskies. No duplicates. Dickel BiB was #1 in 2019, but hasn’t been able to crack the top 20 since? ECBP B517 was #1 in 2017, but couldn’t again crack the top 20 in the next five years? Off soapbox). As with all whiskies that win WA’s WOTY, this one got scarce for awhile. I found a bottle during the hype and counted myself lucky. Then I tasted it and put it aside. GD BiB has a 13-year-old age statement. Color is a deep, tawny burnt orange. On the nose there is a quite pronounced—and quite odd—note that many have described as “peanut” but I have described as “Flintstone’s chewable vitamins.” I’ve gotten the same note on the only other Dickel I’ve ever had (the regular 8-year-old expression). This time, I am getting more of the peanut aspect, and there is a certain pervasive richness to it. Perhaps this peanut-cum-Flintstone-vitamin thing is just a polarizing thing, like Julia Child and cilantro. Part of me wants to find something positive to say, like concentrated nectar of Snickers, but I just can’t get myself to say it. There’s also a cool spearmint note. The palate is an improvement: it is smooth and rich, with a chocolate-covered-cherries sweetness. The 100 proof shows itself on the back end of the palate, and continues on the finish, with a pleasant (and expected) bit of heat, finishing with lingering vanilla and additional cool spearmint. GD BiB is smooth and rich. So is clam chowder, and I don’t like clams. But if you like peanuts or children’s chewable vitamins in your whisky, you may like it. 2.5 on the Distiller scale. Of course, there are other polarizing whiskies: one that I love is Woodford Reserve Master’s Collection Five-Malt Stouted Mash (reviewed 5/19/22). But whereas the Woodford was a special project with a specific goal that was (objectively) accomplished, the GD BiB is just…odd. One more thing. I’m not a Dickel fan based on my experience with two of their offerings (I’m stubborn though, and would surely at least try another if it was given to me). My position became more entrenched when I realized that this distiller offers a spirit aged in Tabasco barrels. I say “spirit” because it doesn’t qualify as a whiskey (it’s only 70 proof). Can any whisk(e)y connoisseur take that seriously? For more info on Dickel’s marketing master stroke with Tabasco, enjoy whisky.com’s Ben Luening’s comments (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wN5CWRHLrk). Skip to 5:17 for the fireworks. Hudson Baby Bourbon Whiskey Apparently this bourbon is now a relic, having been discontinued sometime in the past few years. It appears that Tuthilltown Distillers, which the label describes as the first New York distiller since Prohibition, has been bought by Scotland’s William Grant & Sons, and the offerings have been revamped. This particular bourbon appears to have been replaced by the “Bright Lights, Big Bourbon” brand. This discontinued bottle is only 375ml, 94 proof, “made with 100% New York corn,” and aged “under 4 years” without saying how long. Had I realized the mashbill, I would’ve included it in my “Corn Whiskey Showdown” (6/29/22). The nose is unmistakably corn and oak. The mouthfeel is nice, with a viscous, syrupy quality, along with corn-syrup sweetness. There is some corn sweetness and a little spiciness on the finish. Essentially a one-man band playing the same note. 1.5 on the Distiller scale.

A brief whiskey review - George Dickel Bottled-in-Bond 2005 13 year old versus 2008 11 year old. Let me start by saying this right up front; I love George Dickel whiskey. Especially this expression. I'd not had any Dickel before trying the first gen BiB and I was an instant fan. There's a reason this took whiskey-of-the-year and for under $40 its a steal. But what happens when one expression is done and another is released? Let's find out... Both are tasted neat, and with a few drops of steam-distilled water, from a glencairn. Plenty of time was allowed for the whiskey to rest before tasting. They are indistinguishable in color and viscosity, showing slight sheeting and thin legs. On the nose the 13 y.o. is a caramel candy bomb with notes of minerality. The 11 hits me as maybe being just a touch more intensely aromatic, but that could be because the is the first pour from a fresh bottle. They are close. Very close. On the palate the 13 delivers on its sweet promise with caramel and cherry notes, barrel char, bitter oak, demarara sugar, and a finish that hints of ginger and clove. It's a classic sweet bourbon taken to a silky, smooth finish by the Lincoln County process of filtering. Lovely. My first impression of the 11 year is that it is slightly more caramel, slightly less cherrry, a bit more oaky, and just a touch drier. I don't think I could tell the difference if I weren't tasting them side-by-side. This may be the better choice for an Old Fashioned or Manhattan cocktail. They are close in character as befits the label. With 3 drops of water (drops) the 11 year old is creamier, a bit less peppery on the finish. In both cases the caramel is pushed forward by the water. These are very, very close. My wife, whose taste buds are not to be dismissed and who often calls my attention to the smallest of details, says the 11 is the better of the two. According to her "it's not close". For me, a blind tasting would be challenging. These are excellent examples of the distiller's art. Nicole Austin, the master distiller at GD Diageo, is a real artist and her touch has pushed these into my regular rotation along with Wild Turkey Rare Breek, Knob Creek, and Old Grand Dad 114. The 13 is gone, but wise money might bunker 1 or 2 for future tastings. The 11 is here and readily available under $40. Definitely a buy recommendation from me! My scale for reviewing starts at 1-star (unacceptable under any circumstances) and proceeds to 5-star (a perfect example of the expression). Most "mass market" whiskies should be on the bell curve at or near 2.5. Good is 3. Anything above a 4 is part of my "curated" collection. Both of these releases sit at a solid 3.75 for me, and lean towards a 4.0 (Rare Breed territory). All I can say is that I don't intend to run out...

I really didn't like the review I posted, because it didn't fit my previous experience with this whisky. But I had to be honest, and I put so much concentration into a review that I wasn't ready to junk what I'd done and try again later. What I decided was to violate my rule, and put this bottle ahead of the rotation the next time I randomized the selection. It's now 0115 on the morning of February 9, and I'm sipping another glass. I'm not going to give any detailed nosing notes, but it does smell good. Tonight there's a waxy note, like an unscented candle, which I like. On the palate I'm getting honey, cinnamon, generalized spices, maybe some citrus... This is more like it. My palate must have been way off with the last glass. The finish is of course giving me serious walnuts, some spice, and a bit of semisweet chocolate. If I were doing a full review I'd move the rating up by at least one level on my personal scale. This stuff is definitely better than it seemed last time. ********** This whisky is, of course, 100 proof, and is 13 years old. A fifth cost me $46.99 at the Kelly Liquors in the Mountain Run shopping center here in Albuquerque. In the glass it's a dark copper color. The mash bill is 84% corn, 8% rye, and 8% barley. NOSE: Right off I got alcohol, but then the notes started coming in. I detected caramel, a general nuttiness, cornbread (which appeared suddenly out of nowhere), a musty and fruity note, sweet smoke, a pleasant odor of cork - not corked whisky, but the actual cork, and finally Spanish peanuts. I don't often get this much on the nose, and I loved this experience. MOUTHFEEL: Smooth. TASTE: Much to my surprise, the only note I got on the palate was oak. FINISH: Medium, with oak and walnuts. SUMMARY: My first glass of this was superb. The second glass was very good. But this glass is all nose, with only one note on the palate and two on the finish. I don't understand it. I've never had a whisky which was so good on the first glass drop so far in quality as it interacted with the air. Tonight it was just so-so. I don't know whether this process of becoming bland is typical of this whisky, or if it's just this bottle, or if I just picked the wrong night to review the stuff, but whatever the reason, I found this disappointing. I hope it's just that my palate's having an off night, because I like Dickel whisky, and at first this was significantly better than anything else I've had from Dickel. RATING: I would like to rate this higher, but I have to be honest, and base my rating on how the whisky was to me when I drank it tonight. I give it an Okay rating, which is #4 on my hick scale (which counts from the bottom up). That's the same as 2.5 stars, 50/100, or 5/10.

George Dickel Bottled in Bond is a Tennessee whiskey distilled in the 2005 fall season. Just like any Tennessee whiskey, it is charcoal filtered and it sure tastes like it. The whiskey is matured for at least 4 years (13 years total) in a federal warehouse under government supervision to ensure its authenticity and bottled at 100 proof/50% ABV. This was whiskey advocates whiskey of the year in 2019, and I am not sure how. Color: Rough Bronze It opens on the nose with notes of all spice, charcoal, oats, and graham crackers. The palate is rather similar with added notes of charred oak, baking spices, and cloves. The finish is short with a toasted oak note.

Dark copper color with Amber hue. A good amount sticks to the glass, but there are lots of legs. Nose is vanilla, coconut and caramel. Honestly, about what I'd expect out of a 13 year old Tennessee whiskey. It's big, sweet and delicious. Plenty of barrel char shows up all the way through, and balances the sweetness that exists throughout. Medium long finish leaving notes of cacao, dark caramel, leather, and perhaps a hint of cherry. This is excellent. I'm glad that I can find it. At $45 a bottle, it can stand with most things available for that price, these days. Honestly, it's a decent substitute for Eagle Rare in the events that I'm unable to find any

This beautiful Tennessee whiskey is a dark amber color with thick semi-watery legs. Oh man, this nose is good - sweet and balanced. There are notes of heavy brown sugar, graham cracker pie crust, banana bread, cinnamon, and overripe peach and apple. The palate has an oily mouthfeel and reminds me of a fruity dessert. There are delicious notes of orange, red apple, plum, dark chocolate, buttery cinnamon toast, and pepper. The finish is medium length with a black peppery taste being left behind. Cheers!