T1B

I confess to not having anything close to a sophisticated palate when it comes to whiskey, but I do enjoy bourbon on occasion. Ran across this article that made me think of you in a completely heterosexual way. I didn't read the whole article because, well, I didn't want to, but I did cut to the chase. Just wondering if you've tried William LaRue Weller and Barrell Bourbon 15-yr-old. Maybe you've already reviewed them and I just missed it because, like the article, I don't read all your whiskey posts. Curious if you agree with their assessments in the article.

Smackie Chan wrote:Ran across this article that made me think of you in a completely heterosexual way.

This^^^^^^^^

When you defend yourself, before the ellegations start flying....well, lets just say it doesn't look good.

The fact that such allegations flying in will happen as sure as the sun will rise in the morning, because, well because THE FUKKING EARTH, A SPHERE, SPINS ON IT'S FUKKING AXIS, YOU FUKKING DOLT....

Uhhhhhh, pardon me, I got a little off track there.

So, what were we talking about again?

Racist

Softball Bat wrote:

No shit

He makes fun of my messenger bag.

Hey Goobs...

A buddy of mine just got me one of these.....

https://www.caskers.com/wathen-s-single ... gIxSPD_BwE

Any thoughts on it?

Haven't cracked it open yet. Have zero experience with Kentucky Bourbon, but, looks like I will have some.

Smackie Chan wrote:I confess to not having anything close to a sophisticated palate when it comes to whiskey, but I do enjoy bourbon on occasion. Ran across this article that made me think of you in a completely heterosexual way. I didn't read the whole article because, well, I didn't want to, but I did cut to the chase. Just wondering if you've tried William LaRue Weller and Barrell Bourbon 15-yr-old. Maybe you've already reviewed them and I just missed it because, like the article, I don't read all your whiskey posts. Curious if you agree with their assessments in the article.

I've never heard of Barrell Bourbon 15-yr-old. Might not be available in Wisconsin. As far as I'm concerned, William LaRue Weller is about as good as it gets. I'd be shocked if you could get a bottle other than on the secondary market. I've never owned a bottle. It showed up in one of our local cocktail parlors a couple weeks ago. $28 for a 2 oz pour. That stuff is just so good.

I respect that this guy did a blind taste test to get his results, but keep in mind that not everybody's pallette will be the same. But I have tasted a number of his top 15 and they are all good whiskeys.

If you want to get really good bang for the buck, Eagle Rare and Henry Mckenna are good places to start. I can get Eagle Rare for arounf $30, and that's a 10-year-old Buffalo Trace 90 proof bourbon. Best whiskey buy on the planet. The McKenna is also 10 years old bottled at 100 proof and available for around $35.

What I am really into lately are single barrel store selections. Certain distilleries offer this program. Most commercial bourbons are blends of a handful of barrels that a master blender selects to provide a consistent flavor profile. Typically, one of those barrels would stand out somewhat from the others. The distiller allows the customer (liquor store or bar) to sample several barrels. This can be done onsite at the distillery, or the distillery will ship out the samples. The customer selects the barrel they want and the distiller bottles that barrel with their standard labelling but adds a small sticker that says "Hand-selected by McTuber's Disco Haven".

If you start snooping around your local liquor stores, asking if they do any single barrel store selections, you may stumble onto something. There's at least 3 different places in my area doing Buffalo Trace. Regular BT is very good at $25. The single barrels are better at about $28. My aforementioned local coctail parlor currently has Knob Creek (both the Bourbon and the Rye at 120 proof) available for around $50, and they are exceptional. This place also has a license to sell full bottles and I am getting one of each. You might be able to contact the distilleries and ask if they know places in your area that are participating in their single barrel store selection programs.

smacky, you will not be disappointed with the Wathen's, but I hope your buddy didn't pay that price. Wathen's should be available at $35-38.

So, not being an experienced drunk....not with Bourbon anyway, I did what one does these days to figure out how to do something, youtube.

It seems the correct way is "neat".

The somewhat less correct way is on the rocks.

Retarded people ruin it with coke.

I presume you, while retarded, do seem to have some savant like quality regarding distilled spirits, and take it neat. Am I right?

I tried it that way. I won't pretend that I thought it was good tasting, but it was damn smoooove and the 10-15 minutes of upper GI tract warmth that follows is kinda nice.

I also tried the touch of water thing and didn't like it at all. I think I'll work at this "neat" thing for a while.

Whiskey is gross. If it didn’t get you drunk nobody would drink it.

smackaholic wrote:I presume you, while retarded, do seem to have some savant like quality regarding distilled spirits, and take it neat. Am I right?

This is pretty rich coming from you.

There's some science about adding a bit of water or ice. If I'm out and about and wanting to try a new whiskey, I'll order it "neat, like my bedrooom". I'll also ask for a little ice in a separate tub. I'll check out the aroma and then sip a bit. Then I can start adding one ice cube at a time.

For me, it just tends to open up the flavors a bit more. After going through that process, I'll know how much or little water I would want to add to a particular whiskey. I like the bolder flavor you get from cask strength whiskeys. Though these have higher proofs than most whiskeys, I'm actually less likely to add water to these, and I just sip them.

I used to be a bit of an elitist when I first started drinking higher quality bourbon and rye. I thought it only should be drunk neat, or with a very small amount of water. I've learned that using high quality whiskey to make cocktails is a good thing. My quick go to is an old fashioned. A small amount of simple syrup, a dash of orange bitters, 2 oz of whiskey, ice, and a garnish of orange or lemon peel (no pith). You take the peel from the fruit with a potato peeler and should twist the peel over the glass to release some of the oils.

A Sazerac cocktail, properly made, is an absolute revelation.

As far as adding soda pop, one of the old, venerated Kentucky distillers once remarked, "Once you've paid for it, I don't give a damn what you do with it. I know momma used to always drink her Jim Beam with Diet Coke, and I don't believe that daddy ever hit her once."

Kierland wrote:Whiskey is gross. If it didn’t get you drunk nobody would drink it.

You are a shit-for-taste Nancy-boy. Stick with your Cranberry Mimosas and let the men discuss real liquor. BTW, I almost never get drunk on whiskey, or any other kind of alcohol.

Not a fan of adding ice, but to each their own. Ice cools the whiskey muting the flavor profile, like serving a red wine out of the refrigerator. Adding a few drops of room temperature water can open up the bouquet and flavor profile, something I'm more likely to do with cask strength or 100 proof whiskey.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Goober McTuber wrote:

Kierland wrote:Whiskey is gross. If it didn’t get you drunk nobody would drink it.

You are a shit-for-taste Nancy-boy. Stick with your Cranberry Mimosas and let the men discuss real liquor. BTW, I almost never get drunk on whiskey, or any other kind of alcohol.

Nobody likes the taste of whiskey. Not you, not anyone. You drink it to get drunk (catch a buzz) and to try and prove to yourself that you are some kind of manly man. Keep lying to yourself tard.

Kierland wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

Kierland wrote:Whiskey is gross. If it didn’t get you drunk nobody would drink it.

You are a shit-for-taste Nancy-boy. Stick with your Cranberry Mimosas and let the men discuss real liquor. BTW, I almost never get drunk on whiskey, or any other kind of alcohol.

Nobody likes the taste of whiskey. Not you, not anyone. You drink it to get drunk (catch a buzz) and to try and prove to yourself that you are some kind of manly man. Keep lying to yourself tard.

You are full of shit. As per usual. But I suppose you're more of a rum guy.

Nice try tard.

Queerland bumped his widdle head when he fell off the wagon (again).

I honestly love the taste of scotch. Used to drink more bourbon, but it's a bit too sweet for me now. Barrel proof bourbon is a bit better (less sweet), but if I am going to pay that much for a bottle, I prefer the taste of a nice Islay.

A nice scotch, a rib eye with potatoes and an after dinner cigar is pretty close to a perfect night.

Goober McTuber wrote:

I used to be a bit of an elitist

Don't out yourself to the other liberal types on this board. That kind of statement will get your progressive card taken.

Wheated bourbons tend to be sweeter than Rye bourbons. And Rye whiskey tends to have a little sharper taste, with even less sweetness. If you get a chance, try the Knob Creek single barrel Rye (120 proof). I'm guessing you just might like that.

I've seen flavor notes for Scotch describing it as "soapy smoke", "burnt rubber" or "iodine". Or that it tastes like a burning hospital. I can't believe that I don't just love it.

Derron wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

I used to be a bit of an elitist

Don't out yourself to the other liberal types on this board. That kind of statement will get your progressive card taken.

I misspoke. I should have said snob.

Go easy on queer land. It’s the Bartles and James talking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kierland wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

Kierland wrote:Whiskey is gross. If it didn’t get you drunk nobody would drink it.

You are a shit-for-taste Nancy-boy. Stick with your Cranberry Mimosas and let the men discuss real liquor. BTW, I almost never get drunk on whiskey, or any other kind of alcohol.

Nobody likes the taste of whiskey. Not you, not anyone. You drink it to get drunk (catch a buzz) and to try and prove to yourself that you are some kind of manly man. Keep lying to yourself tard.

Absolutely nothing here is correct.

Just because you took a sip of your boyfriend’s whiskey once and almost puked, doesn’t mean you can’t acquire a taste for it with a bit of practice. I think this applies to many things. I am an admitted newbie but am willing to acquire that taste. Illl bet even goobs first sip of hooch didn’t go very well. Of course it was likely prohibition era stuff made in someone’s bath tub.

As for getting hammered, my go to is good vodka with lots of lime, ice and a splash of cranberry juice. Goes down way easier than whiskey.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

smackaholic wrote:Illl bet even goobs first sip of hooch didn’t go very well. Of course it was likely prohibition era stuff made in someone’s bath tub.

Close. I was about 15 years old, living in south central Ohio, around 1967. One of my cousins scored a jar of real down home West Virginia moonshine. Corn squeezins. I remember thinking it was a bit harsh. Probably was. One of my first steps on a raucous journey from childhood to adultery.

Kierland wrote:If it didn’t get you drunk nobody would drink it.

You'd be right if you said, "If it didn’t contain alcohol nobody would drink it," or "If it didn’t provide the capability to get you drunk nobody would drink it." And the reason no one would drink it is because no one would make it. I would venture to say you're close to being right in that few, if any, people truly like the taste the first time they drink it, because it is a taste that is truly acquired, and there'd be no reason to acquire it (and no reason to make whiskey) were it not for the alcohol.

That being said, once the taste is acquired, it's easy to say that it is pleasant tasting and that many millions of people do enjoy the taste. And many (most?) who enjoy the taste don't drink it to get drunk. If you want to make the argument that having a drink or two to unwind, relax, take the edge off, etc. is the same as getting buzzed, you might be able to win that one, although you could just as easily lose because buzzed isn't really defined and varies from person to person. Personally, I can relate to Goobs in that it's been decades since I've gotten drunk on whiskey, although I've drank it many times since then, which means your statement, "If it didn’t get you drunk nobody would drink it," is wrong.

Goober McTuber wrote:Wheated bourbons tend to be sweeter than Rye bourbons. And Rye whiskey tends to have a little sharper taste, with even less sweetness. If you get a chance, try the Knob Creek single barrel Rye (120 proof). I'm guessing you just might like that.

I've seen flavor notes for Scotch describing it as "soapy smoke", "burnt rubber" or "iodine". Or that it tastes like a burning hospital. I can't believe that I don't just love it.

The only Rye that I've had (that I can think of) is Templeton moonshine. Got that from my uncle in Iowa. Obviously not the best way to try a Rye. I'll pick up a bottle over the holiday and try it out.

I tried scotch on an off shoot at a cigar bar. They had a scotch tasting night, no blends. I was surprised that I loved the Islay's as much as I did. My father in law just grabbed me a bottle of MacAllan for my birthday. I'll probably have a glass of that tonight because I don't think I have ever had it before.

I have just this year tried a Scotch that was not half bad.

Nobody would make it if nobody drank it.
Nobody would drink it if it didn’t have alcohol because nobody would take the time to acquire the taste for it.
It tastes like burnt rubber and is harsh according to those in this thread that say they like it.
It, like most alcohol, tastes like crap. Just like most medicine tastes like crap. We cover its taste and lie to ourselves about how good it is because we like the buzz. There is no harm in that. But lying about its “smokey notes” to try and convince sane people that it tastes good is ludicrous.

Just STFU and drink your sloe gin fizz.

Predictable white flag from one of our resident morons.

Kierland wrote:Nobody would make it if nobody drank it.

Very good. Nice to see you understand supply and demand.

Nobody would drink it if it didn’t have alcohol because nobody would take the time to acquire the taste for it.

And you've mastered parroting another poster's take (mine).

It, like most alcohol, tastes like crap.

Until, as is the case with many foods and drink, a taste for it is acquired. Caviar, for instance.

We cover its taste and lie to ourselves about how good it is because we like the buzz.

Some folks cover the taste. Others, after acquiring an appreciation for what was previously considered distasteful, learn to distinguish subtleties, or "notes," that provide the differentiation among various types and blends. This leads to people actually liking the taste of something they previously didn't like. Are you telling me there is nothing you currently enjoy eating or drinking that you at one time didn't? <Insert black cock reference here.>

But lying about its “smokey notes” to try and convince sane people that it tastes good is ludicrous.

Those who review products and share their opinions are simply trying to appeal to like-minded individuals who have acquired similar tastes. That isn't lying. If you haven't acquired the taste and read someone's opinion about the product, then try it yourself and find that it still tastes like crap to you, that doesn't mean the reviewer lied. It simply means that you haven't acquired the taste nor gained an appreciation for nuance and subtlety. And differences in individual taste are not indicators of sanity.

If you have to acquire a taste for it then it must be gross. That is my whole point. Some people like caviar from jump street, some acquire a taste from it (them?) and some never like it. Nobody takes a shot of whiskey and goes “mmmmm” that is tasty. Why? Because it’s gross. Again, nothing wrong with that (in moderation) but saying you like the taste is BS. Maybe you like one more than other because it doesn’t taste like burning tires, but it’s all horrid tasting. Why? Because ethanol is gross and whiskey has a lot of it. Add in burning tires and it’s not any better.

Kierland wrote:If you have to acquire a taste for it then it must be gross. That is my whole point. Some people like caviar from jump street, some acquire a taste from it (them?) and some never like it. Nobody takes a shot of whiskey and goes “mmmmm” that is tasty. Why? Because it’s gross. Again, nothing wrong with that (in moderation) but saying you like the taste is BS. Maybe you like one more than other because it doesn’t taste like burning tires, but it’s all horrid tasting. Why? Because ethanol is gross and whiskey has a lot of it. Add in burning tires and it’s not any better.

I had to acquire a taste for asparagus. Does that make it universally gross?

Are you trying to convince Goobs and others that what they're experiencing taste-wise when they drink whiskey is that their taste buds are really lying to their brains (or vice versa) - that what they're tasting is really gross, but they're lying to themselves that it isn't since the taste had to be acquired? Or are you saying that they really do know it tastes gross, and that they're just lying to others when they say it doesn't?

I meant the universal you not the anecdotal you.

I don’t know who he is lying to and I don’t care. All I know is it is bullshit.

Kierland wrote:All I know is it is bullshit.

All I know is you are projecting your personal taste onto the universe. Because you find something to be gross, everyone must. If they say it isn't, they're lying. And that's simply not true.

Kierland wrote:Predictable white flag from one of our resident morons.

Predictable white flag post from the Board Bitch. You got 2018 tied up solid. No need to continue kicking your own ass on a daily basis.

Smackie Chan wrote:

Kierland wrote:All I know is it is bullshit.

All I know is you are projecting your personal taste onto the universe. Because you find something to be gross, everyone must. If they say it isn't, they're lying. And that's simply not true.

No I’m using the evidence (most of which came from you and goobs) and drawing the only logical conclusion. If it is an acquired taste then at some point you (and everybody else that ever tried it) thought it was gross. If it smells like burnt tires that is not good. If it is described as harsh that is also not good. Personally I find some things gross which are not intrinsically horrible, whiskey is not one of those things.

Derron wrote:Board Bitch. You got 2018 tied up solid.

Derron is 2018 board bitch. No contest. Superstar bitch.

smackaholic wrote:Just STFU and drink your sloe jizz fizz.

FTFY

BSmack wrote:

smackaholic wrote:Just STFU and drink your sloe jizz fizz.

FTFY

The judges would've also accepted sloe gin jizz.

What about a Slow Finn Jizz?