BourbonEnthusiast.com

I've read with great interest the comments on these two releases of 2003...

I'd be more interested in the release that is "complex", "dramatic", etc. as opposed to "balanced", "refined", etc...

But I definitely prefer a superb refined bourbon more than an over-nuanced "big" whiskey....

For those of you who have tasted both AND LIKE BOTH, which of these two would you most highly recommend ???

Well, Mike, since neither is readily available anymore, it probably doesn't matter. If you DO have access to both expressions, you've pretty much already answered your own question, as a quick look at the tasting notes will show how others rate the complexity, balance, and so forth.

HOWEVER, there are also two groups of drinkers who, given the opportunity to obtain them, would much prefer BOTH of these bourbons. They would be:

(1) Those who can't tell the difference, and

(2) Those who find that difference to be what they most enjoy about either.

If you're among the first group (and from your question I'd guess you're not), then you'd probably be just as happy with regular Old Forester (a fine bourbon in its own right) as with either.

If you're among the second (which would include me), neither would be worth more than regular Old Forester on its own, but the combination (along with Chris Morris' hang-tag notes on the distillery conditions that made them so different) make the pair a very pleasureable treat.

Personally, I prefer the Spring version. Refinement is okay, but Drama is more fun. And my idea of "balance" is "equal parts of extremes", rather than "middle-of-the-road", so I'd call either of them "balanced". But that's just me. Your mileage will probably vary.

ima agrees with John in that I prefer the Spring bottling over the Fall. They are really quite simular as you might expect, but I have never done a direct semi-blind comparison. If you have the chance to buy the pair, I wouldn't hesitate to do so as they are both excellent in their own right.

ima

For me, Spring by a long shot.