pkingmartin
Woodford Reserve Double Oaked
Bourbon — Kentucky, USA
Reviewed
March 12, 2021 (edited March 26, 2021)
The nose starts with Hershey’s milk chocolate syrup leading to fruits of caramelized bananas, maraschino cherry sitting on top of vanilla ice cream with toasted marshmallow, walnuts, and light leather with a light ethanol bite. On the taste, the mouthfeel is light and starts with notes of caramelized bananas, vanilla wafers, maraschino cherry, walnuts, light barrel spices and espresso before a light ethanol burn finishing short with notes of cherry, toasted walnuts, banana bread, leather, barrel spices and espresso.
I think this is pretty good for the money. I wish they bottled it at a higher proof, but I feel that way about almost every bourbon bottled under 100 proof. This one is an easy sipper for people that aren’t ready for cask strength as I found I made it through a quarter of the bottle in just a week.
60.0
USD
per
Bottle
Create Account
or
Sign in
to comment on this review
Right. So standard release it is then. I had a 375 of this a while back, and I find a bottle of this makes a good gift because it’s tasty and easy to drink. Thanks for the input.
@WhiskeyLonghorn the store pick that I have is awful. I have yet to review it because it is so all over the place.
@WhiskeyLonghorn I’ve sampled a few and also found them to vary wildly (shocker!- probably in the Merriam-Webster entry for store picks). I think for WRDO, “the average” Pick i’d stumble across would probably rate below the standard release to me because these are so intensely flavored by the finishing method, and a pretty tight band of flavors (intensity rather than subtlety and complexity in my eyes) that a pick will highlight one or two notes at the cost of the overall balance, and to me that balance is very important to whiskeys like these.... so that one note had better be your note! If my rating for the standard is 3.5, I’ve tried picks that would land at 2.5 and 4.0, for reference.
Has anyone here tried a Double Oaked store pick? I hear they run the gamut from awful to amazing...
Amazed to see such a rousing discussion over a bourbon that has been reviewed nearly 6000 times, great comments. At a friends house last night this was the offering and it was quite enjoyable. I have but one small issue with it. I find the finish to be inconsistent and out of balance as I get heavy raw oak sawdust in the mix.
@Bourbon_Obsessed_Lexington I agree with your assessment that they’re both delicious. I actually dont mind the lower proof. Funnily enough, I agree with your notes but for the opposite whiskies. I found the Double Oakes to be richer and more coating on the palate and I found the 1910 to be a tad thin and disappointing. BUT they are both tasty and worth the $40-50 one pays for them.
@DigitalArc @Ctrexman I always find double oaked to be a knockout on the nose (absolute confection) but flat on the palate with no real finish. 1910 has a less inviting nose but a bigger, char heavy marshmallow palate and at least a medium, unsurprising finish. Oddly, 1910 is closer to the WR double-double oaked in that they both side step the rich milk chocolate profile. Disclaimer, they’re all delicious!
@Ctrexman I'd say this one is like a Valentine's chocolate cake plus a couple of glasses of pinot noir. The OF1910 is like the chocolate cake topped with a chianti wine glaze and then accompanied by a cup of coffee. Very similar ABV percentages for both, though.
I liked this stuff a lot......wonder how it compares to OF1910 which ive yet to have
Yep, this is definitely dessert whiskey. I agree that it would be improved if they bottled at a higher proof or with more age. I think I’ll always compare this new oak finished bourbon style to Balmorhea moving forward, and it’s hard to compete with that. But at a third of the price, this is pretty solid.
Drinking this right now, damn good