Rating: 18/23 I'm pretty pissed that Google Sheets just deleted all of my tasting notes for this, so I'm going to do my best to recreate them. I'm skeptical of red wine finishes in general and I don't really think of The Prisoner as a quality brand (this collaboration is no Green Spot Chateau Montelena), but I have some vague recollection of people having good things to say about this particular dram. While I don't remember what those good things were or why people said them, I'm always interested in trying something new, so I'm looking forward to giving this a shot! N: Dry and spicy with red fruits. I get that terroir from the red wine coming out as a kind of dusty earthiness. That transitions nicely into the cask and then that Dickel vitamin scent. There's some limestone as well. There's some nice spiciness coming out of the barrel and also a hint of black licorice. The terroir isn't super lush and funky, so it works well with the barrel and the Dickel vitamin profile. I'm presuming that this is a cabernet sauvignon finish because of the mix of fruit, barrel, and earth, but it could be a blend. I'm not convinced that a red wine finish like this is generally good for bourbons, but it does work quite well with the Dickel profile. A bit of sweet caramel shows up eventually, but there isn't a ton of it. I'm getting a bit of creosote too, which I appreciate because it's been a wile since I tried a bourbon with some nice creosote. It reminds me a little of Joseph Magnus, which is always a good thing. P: Surprisingly fruity and sweet right off the bat. I get a bunch of red fruit before barrel spice (clove, ginger, black pepper, maybe some cinnamon) and then barrel and then vitamins come out. Going further through this, the palate thins out, which is what I expect from a dram with a red wine finish, though it isn't what I hope for. I do get a bit of vanilla in here as well at points. Some black licorice. It's a good palate, though it emphasizes the fruit more than I expected and I'm not sure I like that. It's also on the thin side, unfortunately. There's also a bit more sweetness from the wine than I'd like and it's giving me a little bit of PX sherry vibe. The balance is still quite good and there's some solid complexity. This somehow just barely holds itself together. Oh, there is some creosote after all! Also, a little bit of something slightly vegetal, but it's just a bit rich, not overly funky. F: Dry, tannic red fruit mixes with more of a sweet and tart layer of red fruit that's restrained. Dickel vitamins and some dry wood. - Conclusion - Pulling out some stuff side by side, this lacks the tannic bitterness of George Dickel 15 Single Barrel (15/23). I would definitely choose this. George Dickel Bottled In Bond (2005, 13 years) (16/23) has some more light caramel sweetness mixed with some peanut shells and vanilla. And I guess peanut shells. It's certainly more of a standard bourbon profile. This is more out there and approaches being a cocktail in style, but it's in the very nicely executed cocktail range. Between the two, I'd take this. It's a bit gimmicky, but there really is some nice execution here. Resilient 15 (Barrel #124) (18/23) ups the ante in terms of Dickel maturity, complexity, and balance. This has more of a fight on its hands here. This wins in terms of complexity but its balance doesn't really hold out. I think that this is better than Bardstown Goodwood Walnut Brown Ale (17/23), but it struggles to surpass the Resilient. There is a ton going on here though and the biggest complaint that I have with it is that it's kind of weird. I could be convinced that this is on par with the Resilient and I might even be able to be convinced that it's competitive with 1792 Full Proof (19/23). This is certainly not below a 17. The complexity and balance here are very nice, even though it doesn't abide by the normal rules of bourbon flavors. Wild Turkey Rare Breed 116.8 (18-19/23) definitely displays more alcohol, much like the 1792, though both are substantially higher proof than this. There are bold bourbon flavors to the Wild Turkey, though they aren't necessarily better than what this has. Russell's Reserve Single Barrel Barrel Proof (18/23) has more of the subdued character that is needed for a comparison with this (though it is also 10% higher proof than this is). The Russell's has some nice maturity and balance, though its depth and complexity could use some work. This seems a bit light and ... like a cocktail in comparison, but there's still a lot of good flavors going on here. Old Forester 1920 (18/23) is also tasty and hedonistic with some character to it as it shows off the spices and the barrel. This seems decently competitive with the Old Forester. For a final comparison (which I don't expect to impact the rating here), Joseph Magnus (21/23) is far more leathery with far more creosote, spice, tannin, and wood. But with far less fruit. Joseph Magus is much better than this in my book, but it's not like this isn't also a great dram. After all of this tasting, I'm going with an 18 for this. It seems solidly in that range, even though it's hard to really rate something with so much of a cocktail character to it. I would definitely take this over Bardstown Goodwood Walnut Brown Ale and I hope to find more experiments with Dickel and red wine in the future! Bardstown did a great job of finishing here. Thank you @pkingmartin for sharing this with me!