Bottom-Shelf Bourbon Brackets 2017

March 14, 2017 Eric Burke

As it is March, it is probably time for brackets of one sort or another. And even though my beloved Minnesota Gophers are looking like they will actually make an appearance in a basketball tournament this year...I still don't really care. I mean, I'm happy to hear they are doing well, but it isn't going to ruin my day should they not beat a random team that I've barely heard of.

No, once again it is time to get our fill of competitive bracketing by finding inexpensive bourbons and pitting them against each other head-to-head to see if there is one that stands head and shoulders above the rest. To see if I can satisfy my inherent Midwestern frugalness and find an overlooked diamond in the rough.

I say this every year, but once again I really didn't think that I was going to be able to fill out an eight bourbon bracket this year. I really wasn't sure that there would be enough bourbon on shelves that met my stringent requirements to make the tournament. What are those very stringent requirements you ask? Well, let me tell you.

It must be straight bourbon and it must be labeled as such. Too many brands are getting rid of this very basic statement of quality and I refuse to reward that.
It has to sell for two cents per milliliter or less. Now, this might seem like a weird arbitrary number, but it just works out to $15 per 750, $20 per liter or (in true bottom shelf fashion) $35 for a 1.75 L handle.
Unless it was a previous year's winner, it must have never been in the tournament before.

After the bottles were purchased here are the guidelines I used to seed them.

Previous Winners. There are no previous winners this year. In previous years I've allowed the top seed to go to the winners of the previous two year's contests. This year the winner of the 2015 contest has had the price increase such that it no longer qualifies (Naughty naughty Fighting Cock, raising your price) and the winner of the 2016 contest is currently out of stock due to internet hoarding (WTF internet? Hoarding Very Old Barton 86 proof???). As such, this is the first contest since the first where we have an entirely new batch of contestants.

Stated (or assumed age). Straight bourbon has to be at least two years old. But unless it is under four years old you don’t have to put an age on it. So if someone does it’s either a good thing or a bad thing. I like to reward good things and punish bad things.

Proof. Higher proof often equals better flavor. Not always, but it can be a good rule of thumb.

Minimize corporate cousins. I figured I could introduce a little more difference into each initial pairing if they didn’t come off the same still, or at the very least wasn’t sold by the same company. Since four of these are from Jim Beam, it's a guideline used for breaking seeding ties and not a hard rule. It is overridden by the above guidelines.

So who are the contestants? Well, as mentioned above, there are no previous winners available to defend their titles this year. I've chosen Heaven Hill Bottled-in-Bond because it meets all the requirements and happened to be in the house. As an age stated six-year-old it gets the first number one seed. The second number one seed goes to Wild Turkey 101 which sells at my local store for $29.99 for a handle and is the highest proof of the non-age-stated selections. After that 100 proof Jim Beam Bonded and 90 proof Jim Beam Devil's Cut fill the number two seeds. Number three seeds are 86 proof Jim Beam Black and Jim Beam Double Oak. The bracket is rounded out with a pair of 80 proof three-year-olds, Cabin Still from Heaven Hill and Kentucky Tavern from Sazerac.

It should be an interesting year. Prices have fallen on more than a couple of "big names" such that if you buy in quantities of a liter or more, they fall into the required price range.

BourbonGuy.com accepts no advertising. It is solely supported by the sale of the hand-made products I sell at the BourbonGuy Gifts Etsy store. If you'd like to support BourbonGuy.com, visit BourbonGuyGifts.com. Thanks!

Bottom-Shelf Bourbon Brackets 2016: Championship Rounds

March 31, 2016 Eric Burke

The Championship rounds: Buckhorn, Very Old Barton 86 proof, Evan Williams 1783 and JW Dant

Here we are: the Championship rounds! We’ve made it through the opening rounds and tonight we find out which of our Bottom Shelf Challengers will graduate to the Fancy Shelf.

Once again, I am struck by just how good the competition has been. Most years we’ve had a clunker or two that made it in. This year, I liked every bottle that made it into the competition. I blame this on the fact that we were just able to find better bourbons in the price range this year.

In fact, I’d say that the story of the year was certainly the “Total Wine effect.” Total Wine sells their national brands at as close to cost as they can get away with while marking up their store brands with a higher margin. This has had the effect of driving up the selection and driving down the price at many of their local competitors. Prices have been driven down to the point where many of the bourbons I included this year, wouldn’t have qualified last year.

Normally I have to scramble to find eight items to include. This year, I didn’t have that problem. The increase in local competition has made it such that I actually had plenty of choices and was able to be a little choosier about what I included (leading to that lack of clunkers mentioned above). By way of example, three of the four of the finalists either used to be sold at a higher price or weren’t in the market at all before Total Wine came in.

Yep. The Total Wine Effect is in full swing. And right now spirits consumers are winning in the Minneapolis/St. Paul market. To this point, unlike the many dire predictions from before Total Wine showed up, there have been few liquor store closings that I have noticed. If anything I find more reasons to spend money at more liquor stores than I did before. I now shop at seven-eight regularly instead of the three-four I visited in years past.

So here we go. The Championship Rounds. These were tasted blind again. And remember as with previous years, these were not formal tasting notes, just impressions to let us decide which one we liked better.

Round 2: Down to Four

Division 1: #4 seed Buckhorn vs #2 seed Evan Williams 1783

Thoughts: Bourbon A has a slightly richer nose and gets the nod there. A is sweeter on the mouth while B is more grain forward by comparison. Toss in a relatively and enjoyable finish on both and seems that A is fitting our palates better.

Winner: So which is which? Very much to our surprise, Bourbon B was Evan Williams 1783 while Total Wine house brand Buckhorn was Bourbon A. Buckhorn moves on.

Division 2: #1 seed JW Dant Bottled in Bond vs #2 seed Very Old Barton (86 proof)

Thoughts: Both of these have nice sweet noses. If forced to choose a favorite, I’d say A for being slightly sweeter. In the mouth A is slightly more grain forward while B has slightly more depth to it. These are both tasty and are well matched to on another. In the end Bourbon B gets the nod by a hair.

Winner: So which is which? Once again to our surprise Bourbon A was previous winner JW Dant Bottled in Bond and Bourbon B was lower proof VOB 86 proof. Very Old Barton 86 proof moves on.

Fancy Shelf Championship

Buckhorn vs Very Old Barton 86 proof

This is the first time we haven’t had at least one Heaven Hill product in the Championship round. Instead we have a couple Sazerac products competing. Buckhorn is the Total Wine Exclusive made by Sazerac under the Clear Spring Distillery name and Very Old Barton is made at Sazerac’s Barton 1792 distillery. In a break from every other year, both of these beat out higher proof competition to make it to this point. Which is a testament to the quality of the bourbon that Sazerac/Barton/Buffalo Trace is putting out even at lower proofs.

Thoughts: The nose on Bourbon A is fruitier and a little sweeter while Bourbon B brings a little more cinnamon red hots to the party. The mouth follows the nose with A being fruitier and B being spicier with a little more oak presence. This is close but in the end I gotta give it to Bourbon B, but just barely.

Winner: So which was which? Bourbon A was Buckhorn and our winner Bourbon B was Very Old Barton 86 proof.

Bottom-Shelf Bourbon Brackets 2016, Round 1: Very Old Barton 86 vs. Jim Beam White

March 29, 2016 Eric Burke

Very Old Barton 86 proof vs Jim Beam white label

Round 1d of the 2016 Bottom Shelf Bourbon Brackets features Number 2 seed Very Old Barton 86 proof versus Number 3 seed Jim Beam White.

Very Old Barton is a product of the Sazerac company produced out of the Barton 1792 Distillery in Bardstown, KY. Depending on where you live, Very Old Barton is sold in one of four proof levels: 80, 86, 90 and 100. I've had all four and have enjoyed them all. I ran across the 86 proof at a really good price this year as the "Total Wine effect" brought it into the realm of this competition.

Jim Beam white label is one of the most popular bourbons in existence. It's in almost every bar on the planet. Of course this does not mean it is actually good. I've run into very few people that count Jim Beam white as their favorite bourbon. Jim Beam produces some very good bourbon, but this expression normally gets buried in coke or slammed as a cheap shot.

These were tasted blind in the following order. My thoughts on each are from before the reveal.

Jim Beam White Label

Purchase Info: $12.99 for a 750 mL bottle at Total Wine, Burnsville, MN

Details: 40% ABV, No age statement

Produced by: Jim Beam

Nose: Light on the nose, delicate. Dusty wood, mint leaves and corn bread.

Mouth: Thin and a bit watery. Vanilla, bitter oak and cooked cereal.

Finish: This has a burn that comes back up for a visit but otherwise doesn't have much of a finish to speak of. There are fleeting bitter oak tannins but they fade quickly.

Thoughts: “Thin, watery and a tad bitter. Not really a fan.”

Very Old Barton 86 proof

Purchase Info: $14.99 for a 1L bottle at Ace Spirits, Hopkins, MN.

Details: 43% ABV, No Age Statement

Produced by: Sazerac/Barton 1792 Distillery

Nose: Sweet with a hint of fruit. Mint caramel and bubble gum.

Mouth: Sweet and warm. Vanilla, caramel, some oak and grain flavors.

Finish: Warm and of medium length. Lingering spices and cinnamon red hots.

Thoughts: “Sweet and tasty. though nothing to write home about. This would be nice while playing cards.”

Who wins?

After the reveal it was no surprise that Very Old Barton won this one handily. It not only had more flavor, but they are flavors that I actually like. I'm on record as not being a fan of the flavors that show up in low-proof Beam products. And it held true in this case. Very Old Barton won almost by default. I'm curious to see how it does against real competition.

Bottom-Shelf Bourbon Brackets 2016, Round 1: Evan Williams 1783 vs. Wild Turkey

March 24, 2016 Eric Burke

Round 1c of the 2016 Bottom Shelf Bourbon Brackets features Number 2 seed Evan Williams 1783 versus Number 3 seed Wild Turkey.

Evan Williams 1783 is a product of Heaven Hill Brands. Heaven Hill tells us that it is a small batch version of Evan Williams made from only 80 barrels in a batch and that it is “extra aged.” Of course there is no hint as to what that actually means, but we can assume they are claiming a woodier profile with a few more of the complexities of flavor that get smoothed out by blending a larger batch of barrels together into Evan Williams Black. It is bottled at 86 proof.

Wild Turkey until recently was known as Wild Turkey 81 proof. It might be a fairly smart rebrand since it before the rebrand they were essentially saying “Wild Turkey Weaker Edition.” Not a sentiment that most companies would like for their products. Of course it also positions Wild Turkey 101 as the line extension…meaning it may not be the main priority moving forward? Speculation on my part, of course. I’d never had Wild Turkey 81 and I tend to be a Wild Turkey fanboy so I’m thankful for the “Total Wine Effect” for bringing this into the price range.

These were tasted blind in the following order. My thoughts on each are from before the reveal.

Evan Williams 1873

Purchase Info: $19.99 for a 1 L bottle at MGM Wine and Spirits, Burnsville, MN

Details: 43% ABV, No age statement

Produced by: Heaven Hill Brands

Nose: Alcohol hits you initially. After it dissipates I get grain, mint, vanilla, oak and a hint of ripe fruit.

Mouth: Hot, spicy and sweet on entry. Sweet grains, caramel and cloves.

Finish: Gentle burn that last a nice while. Lingering fruit, cloves and sweetness.

Thoughts: “Good solid bourbon that hits all the “bourbon” notes I want it to.”

Wild Turkey

Purchase Info: $12.99 for a 750 mL bottle at Total Wine, Burnsville, MN*

Details: 40.5% ABV, No Age Statement

Produced by: Wild Turkey

Nose: Dusty oak like the inside of a rick house. Cotton candy sweetness. A hint of fruit.

Mouth: Gentle and drying. Sweet apple, citrus, white sugar and a hint of mint.

Finish: Short, gentle finish. Lingering citrus, apple and baking spices.

Thoughts: “While there is nothing wrong with this, it’s just a bit too gentle for what I’m looking for in a bourbon.”

Who wins?

Like all of them so far, this is a close one. The Evan Williams 1783 gives you a better overall experience. The flavors of the Wild Turkey would be better if there was a little more heat. Honestly I’m shocked. I wouldn’t have expected anything with the Wild Turkey name on it to be so gentle. That said, I’m kinda glad I now know I can pick up a bottle of the Evan Williams 1783 for less than $20. Thanks again Total Wine Effect!

Bottom-Shelf Bourbon Brackets 2016, Round 1: JW Dant Bottled in Bond vs. Blue State

March 22, 2016 Eric Burke

Round 1b of the 2016 Bottom Shelf Bourbon Brackets features Number 1 seed, and winner from two year ago, JW Dant Bottled in Bond versus Number 4 seed Blue State.

JW Dant Bottled in Bond is a product of Heaven Hill Brands. It was initially chosen as a part of our initial competition where it eked out a split decision victory over Sazerac’s Old Charter (8 year old). Last year it was back to defend it’s crown and lost in the second round to corporate cousin Evan Williams Bottled in Bond. Unless it wins, this year is the last time it will compete since I’m cutting off previous year winners at two years so we aren’t overrun by them in the future.

Blue State was released by Heaven Hill in 2012 (along with identical product Red State) as a gimmick to play off that year’s Presidential elections. Even though it is once again a Presidential year, I’m guessing it is no longer an active brand since they’ve pulled down the website listed on the back of the bottle and didn’t even bother to redirect it anywhere. I found it along with it’s alternate hidden on the bottom shelf of a local retailer and decided to pick it up since I’d never bothered to originally.

These were tasted blind in the following order. My thoughts on each are from before the reveal.

Blue State

Purchase Info: $14.99 for a 750 mL bottle at Ace Spirits, Hopkins, MN

Details: 40% ABV, No age statement

Produced by: Heaven Hill Brands

Nose: Strong oak presence, cola, black tea and fleeting hints of brown sugar.

Mouth: Cinnamon candies, mint sugar sweetness and some oak.

Finish: Cola, black tea and baking spices anchor a warm finish of decent length.

Thoughts: “I like this a lot. I’m excited to find out which it is.”

JW Dant

Purchase Info: $14.99 for a 1 L bottle at Total Wine, Burnsville, MN*

Details: 50% ABV, No Age Statement

Produced by: Heaven Hill Brands

Nose: Butterscotch, cinnamon candies and oak.

Mouth: Spicy. Butterscotch, vanilla and baking spices.

Finish: Oaky tannins transition to sweet, baking spices that hang around a while.

Thoughts: “This is a sweet one, but has enough oak to balance the sweetness and keep it from overpowering.”

Who wins?

This is a close one. Closer than any 1-4 matchup we’ve had to this point. I like the complex nose of Blue State better. I like the sweet and spicy nature of the mouth of the Dant. So it comes down to the finish and whether I like the yummy flavors of Blue State or the spicy heat of Dant better. Man this is a tough one. After stepping away for a little while and coming back to them we had to give the nod to the JW Dant. The heat was too good to pass by. That said, even though it was a "gimmick" bourbon, I ran back to Ace the next day and picked up two more bottles as this will make a great inexpensive “every-day” bourbon while supplies last.

Bottom-Shelf Bourbon Brackets 2016, Round 1: Fighting Cock vs. Buckhorn

March 17, 2016 Eric Burke

Round 1a of the 2016 Bottom Shelf Bourbon Brackets features Number 1 seed, and last year’s winner Fighting Cock versus Number 4 seed Buckhorn.

Fighting Cock is a product of Heaven Hill Brands. It was initially chosen as a part of last year’s competition where it eked out a narrow victory over Heaven Hill’s Evan Williams Bottled in Bond. Of course when it competed last year, it had an age statement of 6 years old. This year, when it comes back to defend it’s crown against new competition, it is sporting no age statement. Can it become a two time winner even with that handicap?

Buckhorn is a Total Wine exclusive.* It is sold to them by the Clear Spring Distilling company, an assumed name that Sazerac uses to make house brands. It is 80 proof and carries no age statement so it is at least 4 years of age. I was leery about including it in the competition since you’ll need to be near a Total Wine to get one, but I’m going assume that if you substitute another NAS house brand made by Sazerac under the Clear Spring name, you might get fairly similar results.

These were tasted blind in the following order. My thoughts on each are from before the reveal.

Fighting Cock

Purchase Info: $14.99 for a 750 mL bottle at Total Wine, Burnsville, MN

Details: 51.5% ABV, No age statement

Produced by: Heaven Hill Brands

Nose: Bubble gum, mint, cooked cereal

Mouth: Hot and grainy. Hints of caramel and a touch of oak underneath.

Finish: Hot and grainy with a lingering dried corn bitterness

Pre-Reveal Thoughts: “If this is the fighting Cock, it took a huge dip when it went NAS last year.”

Buckhorn

Purchase Info: $12.99 for a 750 mL bottle at Ace Spirits, Hopkins, MN*

Details: 40% ABV, No Age Statement

Produced by: Clear Spring Distilling Company (Sazerac)

Nose: Herbal. Brown sugar, mint and oak.

Mouth: it basically follows the nose. Herbal, brown sugar, mint and delicate oak notes.

Finish: Middling finish with a bit of heat but not much length. Lingering herbal notes.

Pre-Reveal Thoughts: “Nothing offensive on this one, I’d take a glass if offered.”

Who wins?

The finish on Fighting Cock is better heat wise but falls way short on flavor. I’m not a fan of really grain forward finishes. In the mouth it’s the same. Fighting Cock is hot but Buckhorn is more flavorful in the ways I like my whiskey. If Buckhorn had some of Fighting Cock’s heat, this contest would be a no brainer. As it is, I’m leaning Buckhorn but could understand why others with different tastes would go the other way. But I’m the judge so it looks like we’ve just had the first upset in the history of the Bottom-Shelf Bourbon Brackets because 4 seed Buckhorn just knocked off last year’s champ.

Well a non-age stated version of last year's champ. Apparently after removing the age from the product, Heaven Hill was hoping that the high proof would cover the degradation of the aged flavors. They were wrong. Last year I advised not to add water to it as it minimized the oak and the heat and left you with just grain flavors. Now you can get that without adding water. It's too bad. This used to be a hidden gem as little as a year ago.

*Not so exclusive. By a quirk of Minnesota law, liquor stores are prohibited from carrying exclusive products. This means many local stores buy the exclusives and then undercut Total Wine’s price. Which is nice since these products tend to have the highest markup at Total Wine. Everyone wins…well except the massive megaretailer. As an example, I bought this one at Ace Spirits.

Bottom-Shelf Bourbon Brackets 2016: The Brackets

March 15, 2016 Eric Burke

Bottom Shelf Bourbon Brackets 2016 bracket

Its that time of year again. The time of year when in the spirit of the season, America pretends to enjoy college basketball. The time when intraoffice gambling on the backs of unpaid athletes is not only condoned, but practically expected. The time when paper or online brackets are filled, mostly with guesses because what normal person really knows what the hell a Gonzaga is anyway.

I’m not immune to the lure. But instead of trying to figure out whether a Holy Cross can beat a Southern University, I’d rather spend my time figuring out if I like Evan Williams 1783 or Wild Turkey 81 proof better. Because honestly I really don’t like basketball. Plus I work out of my home so I have no coworkers with whom to pretend that I care whether an FGCU wins or not.

Because I am a frugal person, this annual competition started out as a way to find new inexpensive bourbons with which to drown my sorrows as I waited for winter to end. But with both winters and inexpensive bourbons that I haven’t tried are becoming increasingly rare, I actually was worried that I wasn’t going to be able to find enough bourbons to qualify this year.

But there is good news frugal fans of bourbon! Minnesota is smack dab in the middle of the Total Wine effect. Items that didn’t qualify in years past are now priced within reach due to the increased price competition and items that were intended to be store exclusives are now being stocked on store shelves across the Metro. Prices are dropping and selection is rising. And this makes this year’s brackets a little more interesting than normal.

As it has been a year since we did this last, let’s go over the guidelines for selection:

I'm defining Bottom-Shelf as under $20 per liter or $15 per 750 mL bottle.
It must be Straight Bourbon
It must be available in Minnesota
I am hoping to try new things so when possible, I looked for things I hadn’t reviewed before.

After the bottles were purchased here are the guidelines I used to seed them.

Previous Winners. JW Dant Bottled in Bond won two years ago and Fighting Cock won last year year so they get an automatic #1 seed.
Stated (or assumed age). Straight bourbon has to be at least two years old. But unless it is under four years old you don’t have to put an age on it. So if someone does it’s either a good thing or a bad thing. I like to reward good things and punish bad things.
Proof. Higher proof often equals better flavor. Not always, but it can be a good rule of thumb.
Minimize corporate cousins. I figured I could introduce a little more difference into each initial pairing if they didn’t come off the same still, or at the very least wasn’t sold by the same company. Since four of these are from Heaven Hill and two are originally from Sazerac, it's a guideline, not a hard rule, and is overridden by the above guidelines.

So who are the contestants? Well, as mentioned above, Fighting Cock and JW Dant are our return winners so they get the number one seeds in each division. There were no age stated bottles this year so that one has been set aside, though I did knock Very Old Barton down a notch for their misleading “6.” So the next two highest proof bottles are Evan Williams 1783 and Very Old Barton 6 are both 86 proof and they become the number 2 seeds. After that the newly renamed Wild Turkey bourbon is 81 proof so it becomes our first 3 seed. The last three were dropped in what I thought might be an order to provide the most interesting match ups with Jim Beam White becoming the last 3 three seed going against Barton while Buckhorn (a Total Wine “exclusive” from Buffalo Trace) and Heaven Hill’s Blue State picking up the slack as 4 seeds.

Due to the Total Wine effect, this was an interesting year. Stay tuned.

Bottom Shelf Bourbon Brackets 2015: The Championship Rounds

April 2, 2015 Eric Burke

They’re here, the Championship rounds. We’ve made it through the opening rounds and tonight we find out who graduates to the Fancy Shelf.

Once again, I am struck by just how good the competition has been. There were plenty of matchups where I actually liked both of the bourbons involved. Obviously one more than the other, but still. There was only one I would absolutely rule out ever buying again and that is the Old Crow. I doubt that I’ll get the OGD 80 again just because its higher proof brothers are still inexpensive and much better. Benchmark, I’d grab this for a cheap everyday whisky on occasion. It’s pleasant enough. And Henry McKenna was a pretty good card-playing bourbon.

Of course now that we are down to four, it is interesting to note that all four are from Heaven Hill and that three of the four are 100 proof or greater. I’d say this means that when it comes to putting out bourbons that both taste good and are good values, Heaven Hill knows what they are doing. It’s interesting to note that they also won last year’s competition.

So here we go. These were tasted blind again. And remember as with last year, these were not formal tasting notes, just impressions to let us decide which one we liked better.

Round 2: Down to Four

Division 1: Fighting Cock vs Evan Williams (Black)

Nose A: Fruity and sweet

Nose B: More vegetal, but otherwise similar

Mouth A: Sweet and spicy with a hint of fruit

Mouth B: Sweet with baking spices but with a vegetal undercurrent

Finish A: Warm and long. nice and spicy

Finish B: Hints of baking spices and oak

Thoughts: A is a much nicer bourbon. It has hints of fruit that really tie it together. B was showing a bit too vegetal in comparison.

Winner: A wins this one hands down. It is Fighting Cock. It really is amazing to me that what I interpreted as oak in Evan Williams last round is showing as vegetal today. That says more about me than the bourbon, but it is still interesting.

Division 2: JW Dant Bottled in Bond vs Evan Williams Bottled in Bond

Nose A: Caramel, hint of spice, slightly fruitier

Nose B: Caramel, hint of spice, slightly drier

Mouth A: Sweet, baking spices, oak

Mouth B: Drier than A, but otherwise very similar.

Finish A: Spicy, baking spices

Finish B: Slightly more oak, but otherwise similar

Thoughts: When you consider that these are both the same distillate, more than likely aged to about the same amount of time and bottled at the same strength, it isn’t too surprising to find out that they are very, very similar.

Winner: Today, the winner is Evan Williams Bottled in Bond. Tomorrow it might be the Dant, it is that close. These will both be on my shelf again. When it comes to buying, I will probably just go with which one the store I’m at carries and which is cheaper if it has both.

Fancy Shelf Championship

Evan Williams Bottled in Bond vs Fighting Cock

Nose A: Fruity and sweet with hints of oak

Nose B: Exactly the same. I can’t tell the difference.

Mouth A: Spicy, sweet and hot.

Mouth B: Spicy, sweet, hot with a little tannic bitterness.

Finish A: Spicy and sweet

Finish B: Spicy and sweet with some lingering oak.

Thoughts: Once again, there is no surprise that these are very similar. Same juice put into the barrel. One aged for an assumed 4+ years, the other for a stated 6 years. One 100 proof, one 103. Very, very similar. And which is better, that will depend on who you ask. Like a touch more wood? Go with B. Like a touch less? Go with A.

Winner: That said, I enjoyed having just a touch more oak so the Fancy Shelf Champion is: B, Fighting Cock.

Blog

Round 2: Down to Four

Fancy Shelf Championship

Jim Beam White Label

Very Old Barton 86 proof

Who wins?

Evan Williams 1873

Wild Turkey

Who wins?

Blue State

JW Dant

Who wins?

Fighting Cock

Buckhorn

Who wins?

Round 2: Down to Four

Fancy Shelf Championship