| Don't like ads? | No ads |
Today’s blind Advent bottle is a special one because it was the bottle I submitted to the group. Did I know that before I wrote my tasting notes and made my guess? No! Did I correctly guess my bottle? Also no! But so far this year we haven’t had anyone correctly guess their bottle which is uncommon from year’s past.
The night I first opened this bottle, I shared it with 5 friends to get their take before I split it up into sample bottles. The feedback from my friends wasn’t great, but it also wasn’t bad. It was a perfectly acceptable bottle and most everyone agreed they liked the nose the best. But the reason why I went on to submit it (and keep in mind, I have never had this bottle before that night as well) was because I was on a mission to provide an Advent bottle that I knew few in the group would have tried before. I’ll get to why I picked this one in particular in a minute.
First, let’s get a taste (pun intended) for what the group was picking out in terms of profile notes:
If I can draw your eye to just one thing in the list above, it’s the bottom left corn “Catch-All Notes” section. There you’ll see notes that are more often associated with Scotch (and possibly rum, too). Actually, one participant (Scott) even said it tasted like a Scotch to him. And if you look over to the “Fruit Tasting Notes” section on the bottom right, you’ll see that people were also finding Sherry notes a-plenty in this bottle. For the record, I used brand new glass sample bottles!
What most people correctly picked up on is that the bottle I submitted was a dusty. I know I only marked 4 participants identifying a “dusty” note on the nose, but well over half of the group called out it was a dusty (basically any bottle produced from the early 1990s or earlier). Here were their guesses:
As to why all of these strange off-notes were being picked up by almost everyone in the group, I’m betting it was runaway oxidation. The bottle I chose had a plastic screw cap that allowed remarkably little evaporation over the 35 years since it was filled. I assume all the fresh oxygen that entered the headspace after the first 5 ounces was poured started to aggressively impact the liquid. The result turned a simple fruit, leather and caramel profile into one with weird – almost malt whiskey adjacent – flavors and scents. I guess the only way to stop that would have been to pour my sample bottles on the same day that I opened this bottle – and to fill them as full as I could.
Getting back on track, I’m humble enough to point out that I was one of three participants to not pick up on the fact that December 15th’s bottle was a dusty. I guess in my mind, the overwhelming amount of Sherry and malt notes were blocking my mind to the possibility it could by anything else. Discounting the two participants who still haven’t submitted their notes and guesses for the 15th of December, there were a lot of blanks on the board from people who couldn’t identify what they were tasting. This has been rare for this year’s Advent.
So what bottle did I submit?
December 15th Reveal
This is a bottle of Colonel Lee Bottled in Bond Straight Kentucky Whiskey distilled and bottled by Barton Distillery. It’s from 1990 and was likely very inexpensive back then. But the fact it is a BiB carries a lot more value which is why the secondary price was $400.
This bottle proved divisive in the group with some outright claiming to dislike what they were tasting. This is a segue into a point I (and a few other Slacker members) have been pointing out for a few years now. It rests on the idea that a blind tasting event like this – where there is a minimum bottle value of $250 – is hampered by the fact that nobody will give a score below a certain level. The reasons why are varied. Some participants don’t want to be rude and trash a bottle they know somebody else paid for with their hard-earned money. Some don’t want to be wrong about their guess and then realize they awarded a low score to a bottle they have previously said they love. That reason also has the implications that the person’s palate isn’t as refined as they want everyone to perceive them as having. Finally, there’s the possibility that giving a poor score will result in some sort of retribution by other members who will also begin to apply a heavy hand to bottles they don’t particularly like. If that were to happen, then the Advent rating system will make $250-$2500 bottles appear like they’re no better or worse than your standard bottle you can find on a shelf. In a nutshell, it would be chaos.
So what is the solution to all of this? Some of us have recommended that we include a couple bottles each year that are around the $30-50 mark to keep scores honest. But would that really keep the Advent honest? Or would it show us that a bottle valued at 10x the price isn’t worth it? Even worse, would it show that the rating scale we use is flawed? These are deep questions that this review can’t possibly begin to solve.
Now that your brain is leaking out of your ears, let’s see the final tallies of what everyone thought about my bottle. Sadly, as of the 11th day of the Advent, its rating is third from the bottom. And depending on how Jamie and Jake score my bottle when they get around to it, mine might fall second from the bottom! Ultimately, I don’t mind because for a few of the guys, they were happy to try something they have never tried before – a bottle of dusty Barton.
As a final note, the whole reason why I selected this bottle in the first place is because dusty collections seem to focus too much on Wild Turkey bottles. And if it’s not Wild Turkey, there are huge followings that love the taste of National Distillers (Old Crow, Old Taylor and Old Grand-Dad), Bernheim, Old Forester and even Beam (because of its price). I find dusty Barton to be one of those brands – much like Old Prentice/Four Roses – that hasn’t changed too terribly much over the decades. Hidden beneath the weird fruited layers still resides some of the same notes that you’d find in modern Barton. But you’ll never know that until you try some for yourself.
History of Colonel Lee
Of course, I need to tell you some of the history behind the brand, so here we go:
While I can’t find the exact year that Colonel Lee first was released, I did find a rather curious fact that in the 1970’s, there was a version of Colonel Lee that was filled with Light Whiskey and *also* carried the “Bottled-in-Bond” designation. Strange! I have never seen a BiB Light Whiskey before.
The Colonel Lee brand is typically associated as being a Straight Kentucky Bourbon Whiskey produced by Barton Distillery. It has been offered in at least three different varieties of proof (80, 86 and 100) over the years. In fact, an 80 proof version may continue to be sold in certain areas of the United States to this day (even though I thought I read it was discontinued in the mid-2000’s). There was even an export version that I’ve found primarily went to Europe and was often seen in a completely different glass bottle with a square base.
Colonel Lee isn’t associated with any sort of historical figure. My understanding is that it was a generic name designed to conjure up the image of the American South and – vis-a vis – the South’s history with whiskey. It carried an 8 year age statement before losing it right around the time my bottle was released (1990). Barton is a known user of chill filtration (and don’t be fooled, most of the bourbon industry also does this) and this bottle is probably no different.