Friday, May 2, 2014

In Which I Help Pick Your Next Bottle of Booker's


A few weeks ago, I participated in a tasting panel to select the next batch of Booker's Bourbon. This is the third Booker's panel of which I have been a part.

The backstory is that Booker Noe would choose the whiskey for Booker's with help from an informal panel of friends, assembled around his kitchen table. We do it over the phone. It's Booker's son, Fred Noe, and three or four writers. Usually some Beam PR folks are on the line too.

We are sent three samples to taste. Fred explains the provenance of each (distillation date, warehouse, warehouse location, barrel proof, that sort of thing). We taste, discuss, and ultimately vote on which of the three should be the next Booker's.

Booker's was the first bourbon to use the term 'small batch.' Beam never explained what the term meant unless asked. Many people assume it means small from beginning to end, starting with a unique recipe and a small fermentation and distillation. The producers are happy with that misinterpretation, but it's not that and never has been. 'Batch' means bottling batch, the contents of one bottling run, which in turn means the contents of one tank into which some number of barrels have been dumped.

Just as the whiskey from each barrel is unique, so is each combination of barrels, and it is that combination that allows a batch to be tweaked to better match the brand's profile.

In the case of Booker's, a batch is 360 barrels and lasts about three months at retail. Although Beam Suntory (we might as well get used to it) has rackhouses at various locations in Kentucky, the whiskey for Booker's always comes from Clermont, usually from the older, seven to nine story, rack-style houses.

Since they're only sending us three samples, all three are pre-determined by Fred and his panel at the distillery to be suitable for the Booker's profile, yet one of the most revealing parts of the experience is how different they can be. This is why single barrel bottlings are interesting too. I've participated in private barrel selections at several distilleries and had the same experience. Even within a brand profile there is a lot of variation. So, yes, it is possible that the bottle of Old Whatever you bought last week tastes a little different from the one you bought two years ago.

Matching a brand's profile is how whiskey-makers ensure consistency from batch to batch and no taster for that purpose works better than a human one. The large producers typically have a rotating panel of tasters, maybe 30 to 40 people. They are employees who normally work in some other part of the operation. They receive special training and every few weeks they participate in a tasting.

It's a little different from what we did, as we were given three choices and asked to pick the one we liked best. Tasters at the producer are usually given a glass of the standard and two candidates, and asked to pick the candidate that best matches the standard. Or they may be given three or four candidates and asked to rate each one's similarity to the standard on a four-point scale.

Every company does this for every brand they sell, but it's fair to assume they use more care with their best-selling and highest-priced products than they do with their cats and dogs. Still, it's reassuring that humans still do this job better than any known machine.

Booker's puts the batch number on the label. The batch I helped select will be Batch No. 2014-4.

34 comments:

Anonymous said...

So what happens to the other two? Are they simply put into the next "non-roundtable batch"?

Chuck Cowdery said...

Probably.

Unknown said...

Can you tell us proof and age on that selection?

Chuck Cowdery said...

Proof is 130.5, which was highest of the three. I don't recall the age.

Anonymous said...

So they have 3 holding tankfuls of 360 barrels, 1 gets chosen and the other two just sit for 3 more months, maybe longer if they aren't chosen in the next roundtable?

Chuck Cowdery said...

They don't dump all 360 barrels for the samples. The samples are made from samples drawn from barrels representing one or several batches of barrels with the same specifications.

mbroo5880i said...

Can you tell us who the other participants were? I can understand if you can't, due to confidentiality or other reasons. Just curious.

Chuck Cowdery said...

I could if I remembered. Bad reporter, didn't take notes.

Oscar said...

Makes me want to go out and get a bottle of Booker's.
I haven't had one in years.

Funky Tape said...

So how does this 2014-4 compare to the 2013-6 and 2013-7? Loved the 2013-6 and still look for it on the shelves.

danz said...

This seems very smart on the part of Beam. They have me looking for Booker's now. If they release this like the 2013-6 batch, they may issue a press release with the participants' names in a couple of months: http://www.beamsuntory.com/news/press-releases/bookers-bourbon-introduces-its-first-roundtable-batch-of-2013

Anonymous said...

Help needed. I bought a bottle with batch No. 2013-7. I have spent hours searching and can' t determine if this is a roundtable batch. Does anybody know? Thanks so much.

Chuck Cowdery said...

I know that 2013-6 was Roundtable, so I'm going to guess that 2013-7 was not.

Keri said...

Thanks Chuck, now I know I can open and enjoy!

Anonymous said...

Chuck, Help Please!

I have a bottle of Bookers right now. I have been searching for a batch number similar to 2014-4 or 2013-6, whatever it is! But... I am finding numbers like C06-K-8. I just made that number up fyi, but it is a number like that.

I would love to go to my local store and or shop around and look out for 2014-04, but I can't find numbers like that on the bottle. Help! Is there some code I need to know? Am I just missing it on the bottle? Please help as I would love to locate and purchase one of those bottles!

Thanks,

John

Chuck Cowdery said...

You've uncovered a problem of which I was not aware. I don't have an answer for you but I've made some inquiries and will let you know. Watch this space.

Chuck Cowdery said...

The Beam folks got back to me very quickly with an answer. The marketing folks are trying to get manufacturing to use the easy-to-read "2014-4" numbering system. In the meantime, the most recent batch I helped select is labeled Batch No. C07-B-7. It's probably not in stores just yet, but watch for it.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Chuck! Love the Blog!!

Anonymous said...

Hm. I think, the Beams changed the numbering system of the Booker's batches from examples like C-B-16-79 or B-K-28-84 (in which C stands for Clermont and B for Boston juice and 79 or 84 stand for the year of distilling) to numbers like B94-E-13 (Boston, distilled 1994) or C01-A-18 (for 2001 Clermont whiskey). All these batch numbers showed the distillery and the year of distillation. The now used batch numbers like 2013-6 and so on give us only the year of bottling (the label still gives us an age statement like 7 years 8 months).

Anonymous said...

Hi Chuck,
I just got two bottles of Batch No. C07-B-7. It is 7 years, 2 months old and 130.8 proof (this is the same proof as the Booker's 25th.
I am really looking forward to trying it but have not opened it yet. Since you said you help select this recent Batch, can you tell your tasting thoughts of it?
Thanks!

Chuck Cowdery said...

Very clean, good caramel-vanilla, surprisingly easy to sip at full proof.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the tasting thoughts ob the Batch No. C07-B-7.
Would you consider this batch to be more special than other recent batches?
I have already bought two bottles of this batch and I have an opportunity to buy more. Would you do it?
Thanks!

Chuck Cowdery said...

I try not to get hung up on something I've had. I'm more interested in what's next.

Anonymous said...

I realize I am very late on the conversation but are non-roundtable batches actually created? Are the 360 barrels known to be dumped to make a batch, or are samples drawn, notes made then determined which might go together. From there, make three sample batches and give them a week to marry in the bottle. Possibly all three batches contain the same 200 barrels which are going to make it no matter what, and the other 160 barrels are the variables? These are just made up numbers, but trying to get an idea across. I don't know how it is done on this scale. Wouldn't all small batch releases be done with a round table, but a partially rotating group of participants? It seems good PR to have writers and public figures on board.
I tried to participate on a micro scale in 2010-11 but it was an overwhelming initiation. Taste a sample of barrel proof, make notes, try another, make notes. Pallet fried, drink black coffee, carbonated water eat chocolate, repeat. Mainly I was volunteering in exchange for education. Most work was moving barrels to draw samples. After the week it took to determine a "batch", then returning what remained of samples (15ml to 45ml remaining) to respective barrels. If I had to bust my back to move half dozen barrels needed to be moved to get the sample back to one on the bottom of the stack - well, it wasn't only Angels that were taking a share.

Chuck Cowdery said...

The internal panels operate the same as the external ones, although the external ones may be simplified.

Candidate batches are made by drawing samples from candidate barrels. No barrels are dumped to make a candidate batch. Barrels are dumped only after one of the candidates has been chosen.

I hope this is helpful.

Funky Tape said...

Just saw a C2014-5 on the shelf. Plenty of 2013-7 et al over the summer but no 2014-4. (cue Twilight Zone music)

Chuck Cowdery said...

I guess it's just that popular.

Anonymous said...

I just saw C2014-5 and C07-B-7 on the shelf. Are either of those roundtable batches? Thanks in advance!

NightGallery said...

I am somewhat confused. The
Beam press release states that the Bookers roundtable for 2014 has been selected and is 7 years 2 months 14 days at 127.7 proof and is designated 2014-6. How can that be when Chuck has said it is 7 years 2 months old and 130.8 proof, just like the Booker's 25th, which was released the same year. Are C07-B-7 and 2014-4 one and the same, and are they really roundtable picks, or is 2014-6 the real roundtable pick per Beam Suntory?

By the way, having tasted both, I prefer the C07-B-7 to the 2014-6.

Best,
Bill Berube

Chuck Cowdery said...

If I've said something that's contrary to what Beam has said, Beam is probably right. As for the stated age, Booker's is always a mixture of whiskeys from several different production dates. The age on the label is the age of the youngest one. The proof, on the other hand, is the final proof of that bottling batch, not the proof of the production date that gave the product its age statement. It's confusing, I know. As I said, whatever Beam has put out is probably correct.

Unknown said...

Hi. I just picked up a bottle of C91-L-20. Could you help me figure out how old this is / reading the code?

Chuck Cowdery said...

I never could figure the codes out but it's six to seven years old.

Anonymous said...

If I have a bottle that is a C91-L-20 is it still drinkable? If so would I be better to keep it as a collectors item?

Chuck Cowdery said...

Should be just fine to drink.