mickblueeyes

Not sure what you are indictating Sk. (BTW, I am one of the dissenting vodkaphiles if you check at the beginning of this thread) It seems to me that you are saying that in order for a vodka to be sold in the US and labeled vodka, it must be distilled to 190 proof. I do not believe this to be the case. I am almost certain that there are dozens of vodkas distilled a lower proofs than this. I will do some research and get back with you. Regarding your rum example, I think you are right, to a degree. For the same reason I call every spirit whisky (because they are all uisge), I think you can rightly call any unaged spirit that has been highly rectified "vodka".

Pretty sure the Pilgrims were big fans of drinking. Not sure why you have a chip on your shoulder about that. I buy fireworks whenever I want. And the poster above you exercise's his/her right to buy booze in a less restricted area for selection and price. That seems like capitalism at work. What more could you want?

sk, I am a fan of used barrels, check my profile (scotch fanatic) and bourbon is my second love (184 bottles in my private collection). That said, I am interested to see what the Woodford bottle says. I am betting the TTB would not let it pass as just "Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey". Almost certainly, like the Jim Beam Masterpieces and the Buffalo Trace, it will say "Bourbon Whiskey aged in Sonoma-Cutrer Chardonay Casks". I am thinking adding the qualifier is the only thing that gets it by TTB label approval. I will let you know when it shows up in the shop! I am glad you follow the logic and you may be right that there could be cases won that would disprove the rule. My guess, having unfortunately had the pleasure of dealing with alcohol-related bureaucrats, is that the would argue once you have "climbed" the hierarchal structure to "bourbon", you must strictly adhere to the rules of what makes "bourbon" without switching back and forth. However, to clear this up, I will shoot Ken Weber at Buffalo Trace a message tomorrow to see what the TTB had to say about the Buffalo Trace Experimental Collection. I am sure he will be able to shed some light on the subject.

LOL! I am smoking a cuban cigar and drinking absinthe.

That is sort of what I was trying to hint at. I think the broader your rating system becomes, the more objective it becomes. For instance: good vs. bad. Because of the broadness of the categories, by default, you are going to have much more agreement about what is a good wine or what is a bad wine. Or: Not recommended, recommended, highly recommended, must have, best value. Slightly more specific, but still broad enough that most people, critics included, will agree with you. Once you break into stars and points, I think you become so specific that it is almost totally subjective on the margins.

← Not sure eje. I just lifted the info from their site.

On the Old Potrero, they use uncharred new barrels for the 18th century, which would prevent them from being able to call it "rye" and it may be younger than 2 years, which would prevent it from being called "straight" The "Straight Rye Whiskey" is over 2 years old and aged in charred oak. The "Hoataling's" is aged in used barrels.

One more quick addendum: One of the reasons for the rules that were enacted in 1964 was to prevent the "finishing" of whiskies by adding flavoring agents of any type and standardize the process. This is extremely important when you are creating a product that is internationally known as "American". Suggest to Cognac makers that they should lift the regulations on how they age Cognac or Champagne or Armagnac or Calvados or Single Malt Scotch or Irish Whiskey or any other distinct appellation and I think you would encounter severe resistance. I don't think any bourbon maker would tell you they support lifting the new charred oak regulation. It would open the floodgates to less than par producers who want to attach a good name to their whiskey and not put in the work.

Let me clarify what I am trying to say. Bourbon is a generic term, to some degree. Just to make sure we are starting from the same place, let's recap: The term Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey is a set of four distinct legal terms. "Kentucky" means it is from KY. "Straight" is a qualifier stated by Section 5.22 (b) (1) (iii) which means that it has been aged for more than two years in the "prescribed containers" and conforming to the standards in sections 1(i) or 1(ii) under 5.22 (b). "Bourbon" means 51% corn, charred new oak barrels and not more than 125 barreling proof. "Whiskey" means distilled to no greater than 190 proof, stored in oak and not bottled less than 80 proof. These terms are in inverse order from broadest to most specific. We move from a "class" of spirit, to a style, to an age, to a geography. However, this is what I think will clear this up for us. If you look at the way the code is written, it seems that we should replace the broad term "whiskey" with "whiskey distilled from bourbon mash" as a qualifier for our term, since that is what puts the well known constraint of distillation to no greater than 160 proof on "boubon". If we then have "Kentucky" "Straight" "Bourbon" "Whiskey distilled from Bourbon mash" all under the broad subclass "Whiskey", we have the following possible qualifications in total: From KY Aged for 2 years Minimum 51% corn Barreling proof 125 or less new charred oak barrels distillation to no greater than 190 proof distillation to no greater than 160 proof used oak barrels bottled no less than 80 proof Made in the US Clearly, the above list, taken from the 5 terms that affect "KSBW" have two distinct traits that countermand each other. Specifically, the term "Whiskey" means that it cannot be distilled to greater than 190 proof and the term "Whiskey distilled from bourbon mash" means it cannot be distileld to greater than 160 proof. So, it becomes clear that we must defer to the qualifier "Whiskey distilled from bourbon mash", as it contains the superior trait, making, of course, the logical assumption that Bourbon, being an "appellation" makes deference to the more quality trait. The other traits in conflict are "new charred oak barrels" and "used oak barrels". If we use the same assumption and defer to the higher quality process over the lower quality option, then we must choose "new charred oak barrels". So, I think that evaluation of the 5 terms would lead us to conclude that "Whiskey distilled from bourbon mash" in conformation to the appellation "bourbon" would preclude the use of "used barrels" in deference to the higher standard of "new charred oak."

LOL! Yep! One day I overheard an employee at another local shop inform a customer that the darker a scotch was, the peatier it was. . .I almost lost it in the floor! Between customers, barkeeps, restauranteurs and liquor store employees there is enough to laugh at forever.

Don't get me wrong, I am the king of finding sub-$10 wines! I love me some Argentina and Chile!

The 1, 2, and 3, should be indented under the original 2. Anyhow, I am not looking to argue, but I do enjoy these types of discussion; it is how good information is really hashed out. Anyone can post long lists of information, but debate spurs interesting facets, IMO. Just like when we hashed out that "colorless and odorless" only applied to vodka manufactured in the US so long ago. I doubt either of us would have figured that out had we not gone back and forth on it on that monstrous thread.

Slkinsey: I went to check out the code. If you look at how that page is set up you have: (2) Whiskey (1) Bourbon Whiskey (2) "Whiskey distilled from Bourbon mash" (3) Light Whiskey The paragraph you refrenced is not referring to bourbon, but a different subclass of "class 2" whiskey.

Could you please direct me to the link where you picked up that info? It seem that you are saying that the law states Bourbon can be aged in used barrels? The whiskey world needs to hear about this! The adding of any flavoring agents whatsoever precludes a bourbon from being called "Straight Bourbon Whiskey". Examples: When the Motlows applied to the TTB to get approval for Jack Daniel's, it was not allowed to be called "Bourbon" due to the filtering through sugar maple charcoal. Beam Masterpiece was not allowed to be called Straight Bourbon Whiskey, but instead had to be called "Bourbon aged in Port wine casks". Buffalo Trace Collection states "Bourbon Whiskey. . . Aged in Chardonnay, etc"

LOL! Okay, you win.