SF Crusader: Four Roses Limited Edition Small Batch 2015
I was in Kentucky earlier this year with a group of outstanding people, and had the good fortune to sample a small pour of the 2015 Four Roses Limited Edition Small Batch. While I admittedly was not the soberest I've ever been, I knew as soon as I raised the glass to my nose that I was holding something special. Coming off of the back-to-back highs of 2012's unbelievable Limited Edition Small Batch and 2013's 125th Anniversary Edition, both of which are among the best whiskies ever produced, people weren't quite as enthused about last year's (I found it pretty tasty but a definite step down from the year before), and were holding their breath to see what this year's release would bring.Once I had tasted it, I resolved to track down a few bottles even if it meant paying secondary-market pricing on some of them since I knew I wanted to have this around for a long time. These were going to be snapped up quick regardless of how it tasted, and once people realized just how good it was, they were going to be very hard to get ahold of.
To some degree, writing reviews like this are a little silly past a few basics: is the whiskey bad, good, or outstanding? Is it worth the price of admission? Is it something that you should try at a bar, or is it worth hunting down a bottle for yourself? Beyond that, writing about a whiskey's experience is, to paraphrase Martin Mull, a bit like dancing about architecture. You can elaborate on the flavors and aromas you detect, but once you exhaust the standard repertoire of commonly-found whiskey flavors things quickly escalate into absurdity. Not only are flavor notes like "Fresh-sprayed Silly String on an hour-old apricot-mango-basil (dried basil, of course) cobbler served on a Ford F-150 tire driven coated in Mojave desert dust" thoroughly absurd, but even simpler ones like specific fruits often have very different meanings for the reviewer and the reader, if they even exist at all as reference points for the reader.To answer the fundamentals: this whiskey is outstanding. It is absolutely worth the retail price, and to me also worth a good deal more than that. And if you find a bottle of it, don't pass it up.With that out of the way, let's start dancing about architecture.On the nose there is a lick of cherry (I swear I never detected cherry this much before I started writing reviews but now that it's in my head I'm noticing that a lot of my favorite bourbons have it), or if not exactly cherry then another staining red fruit. There's a lovely baking spice aroma that fills the glass as well, and after sitting in the glass a little, some butterscotch too.The palate screams across the tongue, with a slight saltwater tannicity that barely reigns in exuberant vanilla and cinnamon spice, with a kick that drives it all home. As it rises up from the tongue back out through the nose a small flash of mint appears, along with some delicious fresh-baked dough. The finish is fantastic, with black pepper moving around the mouth like a glittering firework on the Fourth of July.Jim Rutledge knocked it out of the park with this one. Now that he's retired, Brent Elliott has some mighty big shoes to fill around this time next year, and though I look forward to trying what he puts together (and the true test will be in 8-10 years, when bourbon that he distilled will be the majority of the stock at Four Roses), this drink is in honor of Jim.Score: 4.25/5