Memories

[Mike]

This is a long post that is mostly speculative so many of you will not find it worth your time. You may stop reading NOW if you wish.

Memories are faulty, not to be relied on as absolute. But, what is one to do? Memories give us leave to reconstruct the past, something that I believe is vital to our well-being. Remember the beautiful girl you were sure was eyeing you in a restaurant.......... she was probably checking the clock behind you to make sure she left in time for her date........ but there is no one to call you on that memory, so don't give it up. Your memory of that incident is safe with me.

I got to thinking about the worst bourbon I have ever had. Which is not to say that it is the worst bourbon I have ever had, mind you, but rather the worst bourbon I remember having. Tasting, as we have noted on BE at least weekly since day one, is subjective, but that is only part of the story. It is almost never purely subjective (which does not make it objective), because we bring hidden prejudices and less than obvious agendas to our tasting (maybe that DOES make it even more subjective, or does it make it social). Separating those out so that we are dealing with pure taste alone is next to impossible, because tasting is not just a physical exercise, but a mental one as well. Our expectations upon tasting a bourbon can be overcome, but not easily.

My presumption is that tasting more bourbons over a longer period of time (think in terms of years) is the best way to 'even' things out as far as your palate goes. At some point it is not looking to be surprised, but to simply enjoy, as well as to categorize (am I alone in that?).

As to the worst bourbon I have ever had in my memory, that would be Basil Hayden. It is probably not the worst bourbon I have ever had. It is, after all, pretty much watered down Old Grand Dad, one of my favored bourbons. I have not had Basil Hayden in years, and if I ever see it again in 50 ml bottles I will try it. But such is the potency of my preformed bias agin it, I would never pay the asking price for it.

But lo! Now, in the presence of this illustrious company, I will perform an experiment which involves myself against my memory self. I will take 40 ml of 100 proof Old Grand Dad and 10 mil of water to approximate Basil Hayden'a 80 proof bourbon (I am not sure, but I think BH might be slightly older that OGD, say by a year or two at most).

Aha! Me lads and lassies, I can think of no worse bourbon than this one, yet I know there must be one. Either my prejudice is so strong that myself cannot overcome my memory self, or there really is something about diluting OGD that severely inhibits its taste. At 80 proof OGD dies an early death in the back part of the mouth. It is as if the last 1/4 of the mouth is ignored, but not the throat. The finish leaves me with the impression that I am tasting with almost half of my mouth disengaged.

Subjective conclusion: Some bourbons are not suited to dilution as well as others. I like 80 proof Four Roses, and 86 proof Evan Williams Single Barrel. I cannot recall having tasted 80 proof Wild Turkey (which I probably have), or the 81 proof Wild Turkey and if I do so, it will be out of curiosity, not because I think it will be good. By the way, the reason I have so many bourbon in my bourbon cabinet is, I think, mostly out of curiosity. But believe it or not, I go to most of them within a reasonable amount of time.......... I become curious again, and, it is an exercise in palate sharpening.

[393foureyedfox]

i like OGD 114, but dont like OGD BIB. watering it down to 100 proof ruins it, to me at least. others on here love both varieties. i have no intention of ever trying BH or 80/86 OGD, just for that reason. if someone handed me one, sure, ill try it. but im not paying to have an experiment i know i wont enjoy. so, ill just take a 114OGD and leave the rest on the shelf for you guys.