You want proof?

[Mike]

Me and Barleycorn decided to sip a bit of bourbon of a summer afternoon and we were trying to come up with what we thought might be an interesting challenge. So he thought we should try Basil Hayden at 80 proof against its same recipe 100 proof Old GrandDad BIB sibling; and 90 proof Russell's Reserve against its no longer made same recipe 101 proof Russell's Reserve.

I confess (and Barleycorn does too) that we go into this with a bias against Basil and against RR 90. A bias does not mean that one is wrong, just there is a predisposition toward or against something.

Basil's has a nice fruty, but mild nose that teases more than promises. The extra 10 percent alcohol in OGD seems to carry more of the fruity and spicy rye aromas and gives OGD creditability.

For this old bourbon lover, Basil's seems to be quite watery and thin, a characteristic that I cannot abide in bourbon. OGD is richer, fuller, thicker, spicier, and just much more tasty.

RR 90 has a decent nose and, to some tastes, is robust enough. It has some good flavors but they are not sustained for very long and are not deep. RR 101 is richer, spicier, and the creamy mouthfeel and the bite lasts measurably longer than with the RR 90.

Therefore, it is my considered and defended opinion that OGD is a better bourbon by far than Basil Hayden and that RR 101 WAS a better bourbon than the current RR 90.

The watering down of two excellent bourbons to offer two lesser bourbons, is, was, and will forever be, a mistake. Unfortunately one of these bourbons has been discontinued in favor of its poorer quality replacement.

It is our opinion that proof makes a difference. I believe it is justified and has been properly defended. Please feel free to dispute it.

[BourbonDrinker]

Hear hear! I concur regarding the Russell's Reserve 90 & 101. I liked the Russell's 90 a lot, until I tried the 101... After that the 90 seemed like a mere shadow of the Russell's Reserve 101 bourbon whiskey.