Comments on: Bourbon

By: Ruggles

Ruggles — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 06:48:47 +0000

My hometown is actually where the Wild Turkey distilleries are–right on the Kentucky River. Also in that county you will find the Four Roses Distilleries. If you are ever unfortunate enough to find yourself in Lawrenceburg, Kentucky, be sure to go on their tours. Not too far across the river is where the Woodford Reserve Distilleries are. And finally, about 60 miles SE of Lawrenceburg, and just south of Bardstown, the Bourbon capital of the world and home of the annual Kentucky Bourbon Festival, is the Maker’s Mark distillery near the small town of Loretto. Ah, one of the few advantages of living in central Kentucky.

PL: It’ll be like making the Hajj to Mecca for me. One day it has to happen.

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 09:56:01 +0000

As a regular business traveler to Lexington, KY I must say — make a trip to visit Bourbon County and the Bourbon Trail. The Woodford tour is pretty short but sampling the “Angel’s Share” in the storehouse is a religious experience. That, and you get to sample the entry-proof (110) version. Delightful.
PL: It will undoubtedly be a holy pilgrimage for me.

By: d

Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:45:53 +0000

Hey I know it’s an old post but I thought I needed to also chip in about Woodford – it kicks ass. Woke up at 7 today feeling like a million bucks. Thanks.
PL: It’s the real Jesus Juice.

By: Sneaky Pete

Sneaky Pete — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 21:13:46 +0000

i just poured a maker’s mark. where have you been all my life? some of my friends joke that i might as well put some ice cubes in my bottles and drink it like that.
PL: Welcome to a whole new level of saucing. Once you’ve started drinking bourbon, all other alcohols are in a race for second place.

By: Nikita

Nikita — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:47:54 +0000

I live in Canada and there isn’t a variety of Burbon up here, I decided there must be something good in Turkey from reading a lot of Hunter S. About the same time I started reading your site, and I must say I probably would not have tried it had it not been promoted by some of my favorite authors.
You think Mark Twain was into the stuff?
Anyway great article, love it. Thanks for the en-culturing.
PL: I don’t know if Twain drank it, but I certainly wouldn’t be surprised, considering where he was from and his temperment.

By: Sneaky Pete

Sneaky Pete — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:29:30 +0000

Spot-on about Woodford Reserve, PL. Me, a friend and his wife demolished a bottle between the three of us this weekend. None of us had even the hint of a hangover. Also, you mentioned that Baker’s is “much harder to find” than some of the other small batches. the ABC store i go to in Virginia has 6 bottles of it like all the time. the Booker’s is the one thats harder to find than for me. especially the 7 year old.
PL: Hell, Booker’s is everywhere up here. Baker’s? Not a single bottle to be found. Advantage there is to you. Baker’s is enjoyable in quantity. Booker’s is too damned strong to enjoy more than two or three snifters’ worth.

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:15:40 +0000

While Makers is my personal fave, I respect your experimentation and thought out analysis of bourbons. I’m from Louisville, KY (the home of the Derby and Mint Julep), so I’m unsure where you heard that Blanton’s is the fave for juleps, as I’ve never heard of it before. Though perhaps I’ve seen the bottle hundreds of times and continue to pass it by for the old bottle with the red wax.
However, I don’t know if someone addressed this in the lengthy thread above, but ET (Early Times) is not bourbon. Notice on the bottle, they don’t say the word “bourbon” anywhere. It’s Kentucky whiskey. Which doesn’t mean it’s bourbon. I think ET’s recipe doesn’t involve the proper ratio of corn and wheat etc, but I just wanted to educate others around here. While its taste is in the same field, it’s the same as seeing Jack Daniel’s on a bar’s bourbon list. It’s insulting to true bourbon. Not that JAck is bad, it’s quite tasty. But it’s not bourbon. and neither is ET.
Regarding buzz, perhaps because I almost exclusively drink bourbon now, I can have 5 bourbons (if we’re talking jiggers) and be less buzzed than when I have 3 beers. 7.5 oz of bourbon to 36 oz of beer by proof should really tell me that at 5 whiskeys, I ought to be 3 sheets, but am only very comfortable, but can still walk straight, no lisp, but carry a big grin. So yes, the buzz is in the head of the shit-faced. Cellularly, probably no change, but the brain’s ability to deal with the fuzz is my true measurement, and mine is very used to the buzz of bourbon.
PL: I think I’m actually sharper on bourbon. I’ve written about this elsewhere… It just cuts out a whole lot of white noise I otherwise pick up around me. Part of writing anything requires insight – like you have antennae up in all directions at all times. A bourbon buzz has a focus to it.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 14:35:46 +0000

It seems like you are ahead of the curve with your No. 1 choice Woodford Reserve. Check out this article I just came across:
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=BW&date=20090728&id=10181072
Maybe your article can be part of their marketing plan.
PL: I doubt they’d use me, but thanks for the heads up.

By: Steve

Steve — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:43:22 +0000

You know, I’ve read just about every post that you’ve made, and your recommendations are generally spot on, save this one. I really don’t understand how Woodford outranks Wild Turkey, (or even Jack Daniels for that matter). Then again, I’m not an experienced drinker of bourbon, I just like the stuff.
I also read in the comments where you said that you didn’t have any appreciation for Irish Whiskey, which I found rather odd to say the least. Paddy and Tullamore Dew are probably two of the best whiskeys on store shelves today.
Is there something in the “true” taste of bourbon that I’m missing here?
PL: Hell no. It’s all subjective. You like what you like. This is just a list of what I like. And what I don’t, including Irish whiskey.

By: kakutogi

kakutogi — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 07:26:03 +0000

My friends in Biology tell me there’s no difference in the type of drunk you get from different alcohols. Experience and anecdotes tell me otherwise. Who to believe???
PL: Technically, on the most literal of scientific bases, at a cellular level, they’ve likely got a point. But I have 1,000,000,000,000 booze drinkers over two millenia telling those kids to put the Organic Chem book down and do some field research before they offer a statement so clearly imbecilic.
You get the same buzz from an equivalent amounts of bourbon and beer? Bourbon and champagne? Champagne and red wine? There are a million variables altering the type of drunk one gets from different liquors. Only a college kid enamored with his sudden new found “knowledge” would say something so silly. I remember thinking the same thing about Milton Friedman when I first read him at 19. It all seems so clear, and it isn’t.