Batch 3 So this has gotten some pretty big hype from at least a couple of youtube, simi known people. Not people I really trust, but they got me interested enough to grab one for 80 bucks. Nose - I get none of the cherry without REALLY looking for a way to say it. What I do get is heavy heavy oak. Cinnamon. Alcohol. And while yeah it's clearly bourbon, this is very much on the oak and spice forward side with extremely little good aged bourbon notes. Not looking good. Taste - the taste is really complex and we should start there. It's spicy, rich, full of flavors, and yeah heavy oak in everyway you can imagine. But what's lacking....age. It's all superficial oak and more oak on what is likely a pretty spicy bourbon base. Actually reminds me a bit of some 7 year bourbon that fourgate is working with lately, more details to come btw! But while that bourbon is really pretty decent, I'm glad fourgate finishes it and I'm glad so far I'm not aware of just a double wood use of it. I don't think a spicy bourbon needs to be double oaked. Umm spice, oak, almonds perhaps,touch of vanilla barely there, no caramel, some weird leather note. I'm torn because it's big and bold and full of flavors. I just don't enjoy any of it. i also don't dislike it and I'm rather at least engaged by the flavors and spices and how bold it is. As always 2 is average. 5 is a unicorn that shouldn't be possible! This is a 1.0. It's not great but it's not a disaster either. It's below the average whisky I'd want to drink or would want made. I know it's 2023 and our standard have to keep dropping to keep up with demand, but sorry. 10 years ago this wouldn't sell for a good reason. Today at 80, it's not the worst thing out there, but I'd recommend a bar pour. There's enough flavor an power to justify a buy for a very select few. But maybe batch 1 or 2 was way better? I still don' get the cherry some mention. And I love cherry.