Tastes

Two new releases from Beam Suntory on the Overholt line in one year? Yes, please. I picked up the 10 Year Cask Strength first but haven't opened it yet since $100 whiskies tend to be special occasion whiskies for me (meaning football season with my dad). This one, the Monongahela Mash, I got last Friday and had been meaning to pick up for a while. Had to snatch up the 10 Year CS quick because I missed out on the 11 Year from a few years back. Kept meaning to get to it, but never found myself picking it up and then, it was gone. Vanished from the shelves. I've always liked Overholt as a budget rye. There are a lot of good budget ryes out there, a few I would say are better than Overholt Bonded, but Overholt Bonded can hold its own straight or in cocktails as an enjoyable sip that won't break the bank. Initial reviews I've read of the A. Overholt Monongahela Mash have noted that it tastes good, but Breaking Bourbon quibbled with the price vs. age. A 4-year rye, they claim, shouldn't cost $40. But then, if you think of all the NAS scotches these days going for over $100, dropping $40 on a known quantity doesn't seem so bad. Now whether it's better than other ryes in its price range is a matter for debate. Overall, the end product is solid. Because the mashbill is 80% rye, 20% malted barley, you get a nice mix of sweet and spicy all around, and the nose, if I'm not mistaken, is reminiscent of another great budget rye, the standard Sazerac, in that the nose has a good mix of cherry cola aromas with vanilla and rye spice. The palate brings the spice forward with a little bit of heat and pepper and clove, but maintains the fruity edge of cherry in the background. It's not amazingly complex, but the flavors mix well on the palate, the finish is moderate in length, not particularly long, but not coming in too short either. Sort of a goldilocks finish in being just right. Overall, Breaking Bourbon might be right about the price point. While it's not going to break the bank, it's similar enough to Sazerac in my opinion that at $10 cheaper, I'd likely reach for another bottle of that before I drop the money on this again, but I certainly wouldn't tell you to avoid it if your curiosity is piqued and you're in the mood for something new. I don't have an open bottle of Sazerac with me right now so I can't compare them side-by-side though that might be interesting given how this reminds me of that. Also, I don't know how far this goes with the rest of you, but I love the look of the bottle, and it sits nicely displayed on the shelf. The brown tint gives it an old-timey medicinal feel from the good ol' days when doctors prescribed whiskey as a cure-all. Sure, the other Overholt bottles have the same tint, but this one has the angular shape and that picture of the balding mustachioed Overholt on the neck label as if to say, this has stature, look at this respectable old man gussied up like your grandpa. Don't you trust him? Well, at this point, I do. I like Overholt. I'll probably keep trying their new releases the more they emerge. Given I'm only the third reviewer here, I hesitate to bring down its 4-star aggregate rating by giving it a 3.5 (that usually starts to imply to people's minds that this is a subpar whisky when it's far from it), but this really is a solid 3.5 in my book when weighing all the factors including price. So, if you're into rye, try it. If you like your ryes with some sweetness mixed in, try it. If you're into bourbon, you might still like this one, though there's enough spice on the palate that it might put the candy-drinking bourbon drinkers off. That's okay. You can't please everyone all the time. Can't wait to get to the 10 Year CS myself though. Oh, the anticipation!

Compass Box isn't a brand they carry in the FW&GS in my state, but I can get it when I go to Jersey. Last Sunday, my wife suggested an impromptu trip to the OC boardwalk to eat pizza, curly fries, and ice cream and shop the stores with the kids, but my real treat is stopping at Circle Liquors on the way out of town to pick up bottles I can't get at home. This go-around I nabbed the New Riff Sour Mash Single Malt 7 Year (FW&GS sells New Riff, but only the BiB Rye and Bourbon and Single Barrels of each), which I haven't cracked yet, and this one, Compass Box's Glasgow Blend. I've only had the Peat Monster previously, which I enjoyed but don't consider a re-purchase because for its price I can get Ardbeg 10 or Laphroaig 10, which are both superior. My whisky budget was kind of tapped out for this month by the time I hit Circle Liquors or I might have picked up Compass Box's Artist's Blend, which is a similar price to this at $34.99, and I'm kind of wondering why I didn't. After all, at $34.99, I'm going to dabble with anything peated and while I'm scoring this a 3.25 overall. I can't call it a letdown. It's not the most amazingly complex whisky you'll encounter, but the price tag should have clued you in on that. Blended scotches can be really good, just ask anyone who has tasted Johnnie Walker Green, and this one, for its price, has quite a nice nose. It's listed as being finished in Oloroso Sherry Casks, but there's only a slight trace of sherried sweetness in the aroma. Mostly it's cured meats, bacon fat, sea salt. I'm not sure what they used for the component parts but it's got a character between Ardbeg and Talisker leaning more toward Talisker. And the nose is really the high point here, so enjoy it if you're pouring yourself a dram. The flavor is nice, warm, gentle. There's peat, but there's also vanilla, sea salt, and butterscotch (which I believe is where my brain goes when something tastes like "toffee pudding" which is how I guess what I'm tasting is described on the bottle) though of course, here, when I say butterscotch, I don't mean the hard candies your grandma handed out but the icing on the Krimpet bearing that name from TastyKake. If that sounds good, it is, but the mouthfeel is a little watery at 86% abv. And oh, I just found the fact sheet while I was writing this, it's on the site at Compass Box, and the peated mixture comes from Laphraoig and Clynelish, so I was WAY off. Oh well, I'll admit it here. Still, it's flavor profile is pretty enjoyable. Where this tasting falls off is the finish which is so short as to be next door to nonexistent. Oh well, what do you expect from a $34.99 bottle of blended scotch? It's solid for what it is, and if you expect that headed in, you won't be let down. Overall, I'm not sure I'd buy this one again, but I'll enjoy the botttle, and I am likely, given the quality here, to give the Artist's Blend a go when I'm back in Ocean City.

Glenglassaugh Sandend just won Whisky Advocate's Whisky of the Year by reproducing Bruichladdich's formula for the Classic Laddie and charging us all $10 more for it. In some places $20. Buy the Classic Laddie instead. Don't believe the hype

The temptation is great seeing an 18 Year single malt scotch for $99.99, and I missed my chance initially. They had a bunch of these available in the online only section of our local stores and sold out. Then, a few months later, it was back, briefly, as “limited availability” which means less than 10 bottles. Had to pull the trigger at that point. Who knows but next time I see this it’ll be $130 or $140. Prices don’t go down, do they? Anyway, Jura. All I really know of Jura is the 10 year, which to me is one of the great bargains in single malt scotch. It won’t rock your world, but for about $40 you get an age statement scotch, which while it is, indeed still only 80 proof, tastes of honey, vanilla, and pears. What it lacks in complexity, it makes up for in drinkability. As for the 18, that was what I was expecting: not that it would rock my world necessarily on the scale of complexity, but that it would taste pretty damn good. The nose is distinctive for how darkly fruity it is: this is plums and black cherries with maybe a hit of black licorice riding its tail. There’s a tartness here that’s just next door to funky as though the fruit is overripe in a luscious way, just next door to going bad but hasn’t crossed the line quite yet. It’s the kind of fruit aroma which, coming from an orchard, causes wasps and big old fat bees to hover over the dark skin that’s almost falling off the fruit, sucking up the juices. On the palate, it’s got an oily viscousness that, along with the dark fruits, has this almost hoagie oil type of flavoring, there’s something about the back end, as it moves into the finish that reminds me of when you get a bit of orange peel in a sip of sangria but overall it comes off quite smooth, with a bit of peppery tartness that isn’t overly long, but allows the fruit flavors to linger on the tongue with just the right touch. Overall, this is solid and a pretty good bargain. I haven’t had many 18 Year Single Malts because they don’t sell smaller bottle samples anywhere around me, and most of them are beyond my reach in terms of pricing unless its bonus time, and oftentimes, I prefer to get 2-3 bottles between $70-100 rather than say, one bottle for $160. I’m tempted to pull the trigger on Highland Park 18 and there’s an Aberfeldy 18 finished in Cabernet Casks for $119 that looks to me like quite a bargain that I might pull the trigger on next month. But as my entry point into 18 Year Single Malts, this one serves its purpose and I expect to enjoy this bottle straight through. But of course, when people say there are peaty flavors here and smoke, I don’t know what they’re talking about. There’s no peat to be had here. And no smoke to speak of. Doesn’t detract from the bottle, but fair warning. Don’t go in thinking you’re getting Talisker.

Nothing like watching people lose their minds because last trimester we got a 13 year ECBP and this time around it’s 10 Years 9 Months. Do you see me clutching my pearls over here? How dare they! I’ve never seen people so polarized over something that matters so very little. I just read a review that started out panning this: this tastes nothing like the ECBP I know! It’s abrasive! It’s too oaky, too leathery, too gamy. *****, please. Maybe I can scoff at you because then never got our regions shipment of C923 in. So I had to make do with tasting A123 and B523 but had to skip over what was supposedly the be-all end-all ECBP, the one to define generations and give instant orgasms upon sipping. But I have to admit….this tastes a lot like…ECBP. Except, okay, I’m going to admit, it’s actually maybe not quite as good as those other two barrels I mentioned being able to get my hands on. Doesn’t pack quite the same robustness of flavor or complexity. I’ll throw you a bone there. Maybe this isn’t the 4.5 star or 4.25 stars I gave those two. Maybe this is just a 4 star or even a (gasp!) 3.75 ECBP. Again, I’m clutching my pearls. How dare they give us a very good bourbon instead of the excellent bourbon I’ve come to expect as my right? Let’s hold their feet to the fire! Everybody got their pitchforks ready? We got spice and oak on the nose here. Not a whole lot of sweetness, and usually you do get some vanilla and caramel on the nose with ECBP, so yes, it’s lacking in that respect. The mouthfeel is good through and the caramel comes through there as well as the cinnamon from the nose carrying over, though a lot of the fruit you get is also missing with the usual ECBP. So yes, it’s lacking in that respect, if this is what you’re looking for. The finish is nice and spicy and long and decent, so it’s not lacking there and pretty well adheres to the ECBP formula expectations. I’d say the main problem for most people is that this is more on the savory and less on the sweet side of bourbon, and a lot of people need their bourbon sweet enough to ruin their teeth. That might be where the divisiveness comes through on this. Me, I like savory. So while I’ll acknowledge this might not be quite as good as previous releases, I still don’t regret buying it. It’s just not one where, as with A123, I’m going to pick up a second bottle to store for posterity/future sipping. But that’s not a bad thing. It’s rare a whisky is so good that I’ll do that. This is a more than respectable outing at $75 that you really can’t go wrong with. Lament if you will that it’s not C923, but C923 is gone. This is what you have not, and soon this will be gone too. Perhaps B524 will be better? Perhaps worse? Let’s hope it doesn’t slip too much further down the quality latter because while I’m not actually clutching my pearls, I will eventually stop buying if the roundness, robustness and complexity disappear. I’m just not ready to go into panic mode yet. Then again, for as much as I like it, I've never been an ECBP believer, hanger on, proselytizer either. It's always decent value for money no matter how you square it, so I buy it, but it's never rocked my world. PS. It's hilarious that a website built for reviewing spirits that require one to be above 21 year to consume/purchase should feel the need to censor the word b*#ch. But there you go. Clutch your pearls, you old ladies. Profanity is a no-no!

I remember tasting the standard Knob Creek 100 Proof Rye without the age statement maybe about five years ago. I think back then it was a $30 whisky and I remember it being pretty good. It was right about the time I was getting more heavily into trying varied whiskies but I was still working with a budget so we weren’t talking anything too crazy, but it was actually my dad’s bottle and we were watching the Eagles play football, which is when we tend to drink together. So, it’s tough to make a comparison whether the quality is all that much higher with a 7 Year age statement put back on the bottle. Don’t get me wrong: I’m not complaining. It’s about $40 now, and given the five year’s between then and now and the addition of the age statement I’m not complaining about a $10 hike. This is still punching above its weight in price range and it’s still above average to quite good. I have to be honest, I’m reviewing this at the end of the bottle. This is my last pour and I want to drink it, but I realize that I’m also reviewing it having just shot two squirts of Flonase into each nostril to try to remedy a bout of tinnitus I’ve been suffering. Not sure what’s causing it and the Flonase might be a long shot but it worked for a buddy of mine and I suffer from allergies anyway, so it’s not a total loss even if it doesn’t cure the tinnitus. Too much information? Okay, I’ll get back to the whisky. Rye fan here: I’ve declared that in previous reviews. I like rye better than bourbon. Don’t get me wrong, bourbon’s good, but I prefer savory to sweet, a salty snack rather than an ultra-sweet dessert, and as ryes go, this is on the spicier, savory side. The aroma is a spice rack aroma: cinnamon, nutmeg, brown sugar, cardamom with hints of caramel and vanilla. If there’s fruit here it’s being masked by the Flonase. But I’m kidding. I’ve had this plenty of times and I don’t turn to it because it’s fruity. You don’t go to Knob for fruit. Even the bourbon is mostly an oaky, leathery, nutty, vanilla profile. On the palate the spice continues but more of the caramel comes through. It’s got a great mouthfeel and a moderate finish with a nice bit of spice hitting the back of the tongue that’s quite pleasant in its bite rather than astringent. The only thing I can say against this is that the Single Barrel Ryes of Knob at 115 proof are far superior but they’re $30 more expensive and well worth every penny. I really like what Knob offers in all its iterations whether it’s the standard 9 Year Bourbon, this rye, the single barrels or the 12 year Bourbon. I’ve snapped them all up, and as long as the quality holds will continue to do so. My wife was asking for cocktails tonight and she was looking for rye cocktails, so I made her a Rye Algonquin and this other recipe from our cocktail book called Mr. B. She asked if I had any rye open that was good for mixing, and this would have served the purpose wonderfully, but I only had one pour left and wanted to review it, so I mixed with my New Riff Malted Rye 6 Year, and she was over the moon about the quality of the rye in her cocktails. I told her it was a special occasion, that I was using my good sipping rye for her, and why? Because I love her. But believe me, when I’m in the store next and I need to get a mixing rye, it’s going to be the old 1.75 L bottle of Knob 7 Year. Can’t go mixing with my New Riff all the time. It wouldn’t be fair to the Riff.

I stumbled upon this bottle by accident. Which is not to say I was unaware that this collab between Leopold and Dickel existed. I’d seen reviews, glanced at them. Had some interest in the whisky for what it was, but wasn’t going to buy it because…well, they don’t sell it around me, and even if they did, the SRP was between $110-$120, which I understand is considered a decent rate for a limited edition/special release, but a bit too rich for my blood. The most I ever spent on a bottle was $110 for Lagavulin Distiller’s Edition, and I’m a peat fan and an Islay fan, so that would make sense, especially because this was when it still carried a 16 year age statement. I like Dickel Rye. The 90 proof standard edition goes for about $30 now. Leopold seems to make specialty whiskies that go for boutique prices so I’m assuming the bulk of the value here comes from that. They’re using a process that I’ll admit I haven’t much looked into but that’s not used much for rye anymore, and I guess that adds to the allure. Now for how I stumbled upon this (I almost type “came upon this” but I can’t type “came upon” without snickering, so “stumbled upon” is the better alternative): I was reading a review on the latest Chattanooga experimental release on Breaking Bourbon and thought it sounded good. But they don’t sell Chattanooga in my state, so I decided to look at the liquor stores around my buddy who lives in Chicago. Sometimes if there’s something special I want out his way, he’ll pick it up for me and get it to me and I just Venmo him the cash. Well, Binny’s didn’t have the Chattanooga I was looking for, but I decided to browse, and woah, this Dickel/Leopold collab had been marked down from $120 to $55. How many among you in my situation wouldn’t have picked up your phone and texted your friend, “Hey, are you anywhere in the vicinity of a Binny’s right now?” Well, he was passing one as he received my message and he picked up a bottle for himself and a bottle for me. We do this from time to time: though separated by half a country, we will pick up the same bottle, have a FaceTime call to shoot the shit, sip our respective bottles, and compare notes. Our agreement was this: this is very good whisky. The nose is rich with earthy aromas of pine and mint with notes of cinnamon red hots and buttered toffee and banana bread, and if you let it sit notes of sugary hubba bubba bubble gum also arrive on the back end. Super complex and inviting. It’s got what I call Yankee Candle nose in that I wish they could capture it and sell it as a candle because I’d buy it and burn it daily just to have that scent wafting through my workspace. In other words, that’s the highest compliment I can pay a nose, a Yankee Candle nose for me is a 5-star nose. Doesn’t get much better than this if you don’t have peat smoke in the glass. The bubble gum flavor carries into the palate along with notes of cherry and a hint of the mint and cinnamon spice. The palate is quite good, though it doesn’t quite live up to the fireworks display that is the nose. The finish is resonant and waxy with a peppery bite that is probably the least impressive part of the dram, but still maintains a respectable quality. Overall, I don’t think this is worth the SRP and wouldn’t feel as good about having purchased it if I had paid full price. At the clearance price point I found it at, it’s a steal, and I’d say a reasonable $70 whisky tops. I get that you’re going to hype something like this where it’s two distilleries working together on something unique, and I suppose there’s a surcharge for that, but what’s in the glass simply doesn’t live up to what they’re charging. If you can find it with a deep price cut, pick it up. Otherwise, I’d say that as pleasant a sip as this is, it’s a pass, and I have to dock it probably half a star simply because of its cost.

I'm reviewing this here because I couldn't upload a new entry despite trying several times. Mine is a 9 year, this one say 6, but other than that, this is a generic entry as Arran Private Cask, so it will have to suffice. I don't know about you, but I'll let you in on a secret: I'm a little less interested in the reviews of niche whiskies here. Private casks you can only get in one spot that you can't get anywhere else. This is one of those. Don't get me wrong, I'm interested in drinking it. These whiskies feel a little more special than your garden variety mass produced bottlings. The reason I'm not interested in reading such reviews is that even if you love it, generally, I can't get my hands on it. You feel me? My buddy sent this one to me for Christmas. I sent him a bottle of Old Elk Port Cask Finish; he sent me this. This is one of his favorite scotches. It's an Arran 9 Year, Private Cask bottled exclusively for Liquor Warehouse in Chi-town. And it's damn good. It's aged, it's barrel strength, and the only problem is that on the bottle, it states, "This peated bourbon barrel single cask, and I'm like, honestly, I think you're fucking with me. There's absolutely no peat here. My buddy even admitted, don't expect peat. And I was like ok, I've already tasted it and I know that, and it confounded my expectations because I like it. In fact, it's very good, but don't fuck with me by putting peat on the bottle and having no smoke involved, you feel me? Otherwise, delectable. The nose is very grassy, it's like you're driving into a blossming field of heather laced with honey. Slight edge of mint, slight edge of citrus. Vanilla, of course. Very spring to summertime type of whisky. Very refreshing, very down on the farm. Honestly, I had a bottle of Speyburn Companion Cask open, which is a single barrel variation on the 10, from what I could tell, and this feels like a heightened version of that. The palate here is a dry white scotch. That's the only way I can put it. It tastes like the equivalent of a very dry white wine. The grassiness continues. It's spicy with baking spices, cardamom, nutmeg. This is an unusual whisky for me, I don't often go in for things like this. But it is delicious, don't get me wrong. Aside from the grassy notes, the vanilla is prominent, and on the finish, it becomes peppery with a white light peppery note that lingers a long time. Altogether an excellent whisky, and I've thanked my friend for sending it along. Our next tasting together, as we buy similar bottles and taste them over FaceTime, will be the Dickel and Leopold Rye Collaboration, and I'm looking forward to it. There's still a quarter bottle left in this Arran so I'm looking forward to that too. The only other Arran I've had has been the Robert Burns, and that was a fantastic budget scotch. I apologize if this isn't of much interest except to those living in Chicago or who have buddies living in Chicago, but there it is. That's where we are. A red check in the upper right hand corner with a good score only really means, nah nah nah nah nah, you can't get this. Or in the famous words of Eddie Murphy: "I've got some ice cream, and you can't have none, cause you on welfare!" Only, you know, except for the welfare part.

I didn't check before I started typing, but I believe this is my 150th review. Of those reviews, two have been for Japanese whiskies, and that's not because Japanese whiskies are bad or put me off. I can describe my aversion to Japanese whisky with three letters. VFM. It's rarely there. The two I had reviewed have been Nikka from the Barrel which has jumped from $65 to the $75 in the time I've had my focus on it, not bad VFM, but just, there are other things I prefer at the $75 range, and Suntory Toki, which is the budget Japanese whisky and is decent but I don't really go for it when I'm buying budget. Japanese whiskies also remind me a lot of Irish whiskies in that they're light bodied, delicate, most often floral and honeyed. That's not necessarily a bad thing but it's not a main draw for me. I like barrel proof full bodied stuff. I like Islay Scotches. I like cask strength bourbons. I like spicy rye-y ryes. With this, of course, I couldn't resist. The same ol' story: it went on clearance and a $78 10 year brandy barrel finished whisky became a $37.50 whisky. And at that price, I bought four bottles. I hadn't even tasted it yet, but right away, I was almost entirely certain that at that price, I wouldn't mind having four bottles in stock. That night I poured a double Ohishi Brandy Cask 10 Year, and you know what, it's light bodied, floral and fruity and honeyed, and absolutely delightful. Sometimes price matters. Actually, most of the time price factors into enjoyment. And I'm sure the fact it feels like I stole this whisky factors into my enjoyment of it. I also don't know if this is bias creeping in, but the nose itself has a certain savory funk that has a saline umami edge to it, and I'm thinking, do I get that because it's Japanese and I'm expecting it, or is it really there? But I think it's really there, and the brandy aroma is reminiscent in a way of a sweet balsamic reduction with a little pungency but also a sort of heavy fig jam bottom of the jar scraping it off kind of feel. This is definitely unique among whiskies and even unique among my experience with Japanese whisky. And no, I'm not biased, I keep nosing it and there's a slight whiff of soy sauce present in the nose counterbalancing the fruitiness nicely. On the palate the brandy finish hits first followed by pear and green apple. The brandy gives it this golden syrupy type flavor like honey on top of a freshly peeled pear. It's also hard, with this being made of rice, not to feel like there's a sake parallel. You can taste the fact that this is distilled of rice as its grain. And it's quite pleasant. The finish is long medium to medium long and lingers nicely with a coating of ginger on the tongue. Ultimately, I'm not sure how satisfied I would be with this at $78 but for what I got it at, it is really a steal. The recent clearance sale in my state put everything at 50% off and included this, Knob 12, and Glenmorangie X. I got one bottle of the Glenmorangie, three of the Knob (luckily) before it sold out, and four of this. Oddly enough, this isn't flying off the shelves, but I think that's because of people's predilection toward bourbon over Japanese. Honestly, I might go back and get a few more of these while they're there. It's not going to rock your world, but it's a nice change of pace, and it's certainly high quality juice.

Because I write long reviews, I feel like I start off a good many where I don't think I have a lot to say with the words, "This will be my shortest review ever." I feel like I want to start this one off that way, but we'll see. Glenmorangie X. A few things come to mind. Jason X was the Friday the 13th movie where they moved the setting to space and tried to switch it up because they'd run out of idea. Should have sucked, and it kind of does suck, only it's also kind of fun. It's better than a lot of 10th entries in a series deserve to be. But saying that, how many series get to X? Of course, this could have been the hip rebranding of the Glenmorangie 10. Glenmorangie X! Is that why they reversed the order and put X Glenmorangie on the bottle? Because they could get sued if they called it Glenmorangie X? It hasn't stopped the distiller listing from putting it that way, but on the bottle, it does say, X by Glenmorangie. "Made for Mixing." It even comes with a rubber banded to the bottle flip book of simple-minded mixing recipes. Like Scotch and tonic? Did we really need you to provide that as a recipe? So I guess this review isn't so short. Sue me! I see I'm not in the minority here when I read other reviews: why buy this at $36 when the 10 goes for $40, but of course, the 10 now goes for $45, but it also goes on sale for $40, so you just wait and you get it for the old SRP. But wait, this is for mixing and marketed as an entry level dram for those who don't go in for scotch? OK, but like, why not Monkey Shoulder? It's been a while since I've had Monkey Shoulder, but the profiles are similar in that they lean toward citrus and cream. So while I appreciate what they're trying to do, the only way I was going to buy this was the way I did: it went on clearance for 50% off, and I got it for $18.50. At $18.50, this is a steal. If Glenmorangie could find a way to sell this for $20, it would fly off the shelves! Why? Well, it's simple but it's tasty. The nose is oranges mashed with marshmallows. The palate is alcoholic creamsicle. The finish is a slightly astringent but nevertheless short lived graham cracker goodness. At 80 proof, it's thin with not much of a mouthfeel, but if it were $20, that wouldn't matter much. At $36, I can't help but feeling there are better ways to spend your money. At $20, this would punch at its weight. I haven't tried it in a mixed drink yet, like most of you, I judge the dram on its own merits, and are we missing the point? Well, when you mix mixing and single malt, you're crossing our wires. This was always a gamble. Did it pay off? I don't think so at SRP. This is a clearance whisky, through and through.