Larceny Barrel Proof Bourbon Batch A122

"What we talk about when we talk about batch variation" (Yeah, I did it, I threw down the Raymond Carver reference.) I've had Larceny Barrel Proof prior to this. I even have a review of this buried on my feed. It was batch B521 I think (being honest, can't really be bothered to look it up right now). It was good and priced in that sweet zone where, even as it was getting jacked up elsewhere, it's still $49.99 in my state. So of course, I bought another bottle. And that bottle was C921. I still have it. Haven't opened it yet. I also have three bottles of this one, batch A122. Why, you might ask, do I have three bottles of this one batch. Well, the funny thing is, in my state, Larceny Barrel Proof is an online only purchase. And you can't specify which batch you want. I ordered a bottle in May of 2022, and got my first bottle of A122. I didn't know at that point whether it would be A122 or B522, but I didn't much mind. When I ordered again in July, I expected I'd get B522, since time had passed and they'd sold out of the previous iteration and gotten more in stock, but when it arrived, it was again A122. Then, when I ordered Blue Spot, I needed an additional bottle for free shipping, and since it was September, I assumed this time, I'd get either B522 or C922, but again, it was a bottle of A122. I have to be honest that I don't mind all that much. I'm not going to go so crazy as to say batch variation isn't real. Because obviously it is. But what I am going to say is that it's likely you can only tell the real objective difference between batches if you're tasting them next to each other. You might remember a previous batch as remarkable, and maybe it was. Or maybe it just hit you at a time when you were in the mood for the particular whisky you were getting and when you tasted the next batch, even though they were similar, you didn't like it as much. Maybe you weren't tasting it with the same crowd. Maybe the experience in which you sampled it just wasn't the same. Now, proofs will vary, and distillers may change the ages of whiskies based on stock. But I'm not sure how much that's the case here. Because to me, my present experience of A122 is not really that far removed from my experience of B521. On the nose I'm getting what I'm now thinking are the standard Larceny BP aromas: oak, leather, cherry, caramel and vanilla. On the palate more of the same with a nice spicy finish. It's bold and rich and really good. Now that I think of it, I should probably pop the bottle of C921 open and taste them against each other to see jus how different they are. But I keep hearing from different review sites I read how, you know, "Oh, A122 is better than A121" or "C922 really nails it and is better than both previous releases this year," but those reviews never mention if they're actually tasting these side-by-side or going from memory. For that matter, I have two bottles of two different iterations of Maker's Mark CS I could taste it against to see how they fare when compared. And that would make for a fun, and very intoxicating evening, but I'm also not sure how much I care. Maybe this review is me hitting a wall in that I'm not sure it matters to compare whiskies of the same iteration released three months apart. This one is very good. And the last one was very good. And if there's a difference between very good and very good, I'm having trouble seeing it. Send me a notification when it starts to suck and I should stop buying. Until then, this is good value for money at $49.99. I hear they've raised it to $59.99 and I'd still buy it at that. Let's hope they don't start feeling themselves and overestimating their own worth like the Lux Row lineup. At this point, I'm done with Rebel and Ezra basically because they've priced me out. The quality isn't good enough to justify where they've taken their SRPs (though it's possible I'll make an exception for the 7 year Barrel Proof Old Ezra Rye given I just both the 8 Year Sagamore BP Rye for $80). But that's a rant for another post. This is my second barrel proof tasting for today, so I should best sign off before I get sloppy (I prefer this to the Seagrass, but that could be because this is more cost effective and also a little more in the realm of the expected). Now it's time for some chili over grits. Goes well with bourbon, trust me. (Oh, and I have the soundtrack to The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly playing in the background. So it can't be too bad an evening, can it?)

Nose is bold and spicy with cinnamon, clove, allspice, and nutmeg. There’s also some apple, pear, smoke, and peanut. Ethanol is disturbingly persistent. Mouthfeel is nuttier and less spicy than the nose would indicate. Notes of peanut brittle, cashew, vanilla, caramel flan, red apple, and dry oak. Very bright. Tastes a little young, with everything being slightly rough around the edges. Finish bring a ton of black pepper along with pleasant oak, barrel char, red hots candy, and clove. Mouthfeel is full bodied and nicely oily. Having reviewed a lot of these, I would say this release is very “on brand” for this whiskey, that being nutty and spicy. I think a little more age on these releases would work wonders; imagine what a 12-13 yr old Larceny BP would yield? Sadly, the world may never know. At 79.99, the value is solid, and I’ll probably keep buying them at the price point.

Pretty un-impressed. Tastes hot, young, and mono-tone. Sure, it's sweet, it's a wheater. Yes, lots of bread and caramel, but really lacking a wood backbone. I don't understand the hype here or why it is allocated like ECBP. ECBP is infinitely better. To be fair, I don't like regular small batch Larceny, so maybe it is a profile problem. But to me it is short and sharp. At this price point, Rare Breed is every bit as good. And for a cask strength wheater, Maker's Mark Cask Strength is cheaper and not allocated. Won't pick up again, except to use as trade capital.

An interesting nose of brown sugar, caramel, toffee and most intriguingly, fresh cut cedarwood. Imagine the scent of a sugary candy sampler served on a cedar platter. The initial taste again pushes sweet, but also has a woody dryness with notes of dark chocolate, preserved cherry, praline, and young cigar tobacco. Overall, it is medium bodied with a rich dessert-like quality. The finish is long, with a smooth and gradual fadeout. Of the various Barrel Proof releases that the Larceny program has done over the past few years, this one ranks in our top three.

Excellent pour, especially considering the price. If you can get this at MSRP, I think it's a must grab. I already stated on a prior review that it probably honestly doesn't matter which batch, as I believe they're all likely to be good, but I can now vouch for this particular batch. Deeply sweet, caramels and butterscotch and vanilla cream, something reminiscent of dried fruits like prunes or raisins maybe, slightly drying oak on the back end, hot but that's to be expected at this proof point, just delightful.

Aroma - Leather and berries. Slight hint of tea leaves and baking spices. Lots of vanilla and oak coming through. Slight hint of chocolate. Taste - chocolate covered peanuts, alcohol soaked dark fruits, hint of baking spices (nutmeg and cinnamon). Comparing A122 to C922 nose… the nose on C922 has more nutty and tons more cinnamon. C922 it more bold on the nose. A122 has more oak and vanilla. Comparing A122 to C922 taste - A122 tons more chocolate. But slightly lacks in other flavor profiles.