Johnnie Walker Green Label 15 Year

Previously, I evaluated six whiskies with scores of 97 or 96 points. For this round, I'm using the 95-point mark, of which I have three (I thought I had four, but it turns out I'd already finished one). This current selection includes two bourbons and one blended malt. This raises an interesting question: how do identical high scores compare across different types of spirits? ELIJAH CRAIG BARREL PROOF B520 This has a clear mahogany hue, the deepest of the three. The aroma is rich and inviting, presenting classic bourbon scents of brown sugar, coconut, vanilla, oak, and chocolate-covered cherries, with a touch of vegetal cilantro and cool spearmint. Despite the 127.2 proof, there's no alcohol sting on the nose. The palate is effusive and coats the entire mouth with nice viscosity. The high proof is noticeable on the finish, but it's lighter than expected and very well-integrated. The finish is long, with hints of char, vanilla, and candied marasca cherries. In short: ECBP B520 is excellent. Current releases can be found for $80-90 if you're lucky. This bourbon stands up to any other ECBP. Would I purchase it again? Absolutely. I believe ECBP is generally one of the best value bourbons available. I try to buy every release and have many from the past six years. Score: 4.5 (previously 4.75 on 6/25/22). 127.2 proof. 12-year age statement. RUSSELL’S RESERVE SINGLE BARREL BOURBON This has a deep copper amber color. The nose offers coconut, reminiscent of a Mounds bar, then moves to apples, some caramel, sawdust, pumpkin pie, vanilla, and a cooling mint note. The palate is wonderful, with elements of leather and pipe tobacco. There's some oaky char with vanilla and a pleasant rye spice on the finish. The alcohol is balanced, giving an effect somewhere between a "Kentucky Hug" and a "Bardstown Kiss," even though it doesn't feel 17 proof points lower than the ECBP B520. Russell’s Reserve Single Barrel typically costs around $65. Would I buy it again? Yes. I always keep this bourbon on hand and consider it an even better value than the ECBP. Score: 4.25 (unchanged from 6/21/22). 110 proof. No Age Statement. JOHNNIE WALKER GREEN LABEL 15 YEAR This is the lightest in color, with a golden amber hue. The fruity nose has notes of apples, gentle smoky peat, yeast rolls, and a hint of orange zest. The palate has a light mouthfeel, but the flavors are noticeable. The finish starts with some white pepper, then the yeast rolls reappear, followed by a gentle smoke that lingers the longest of the three. I initially bought this whisky based on recommendations but didn't care for it much at first, and it sat for a while. However, the more I try it, the more I enjoy it. I'd love to taste this at cask strength, and while I haven't seen that offered, some special editions online are around $3,000, which is not feasible. JW15 can be purchased for about $65 when available. Would I buy it again? Yes. Score: 4.25. 43% ABV. 15-year age statement. Coloring added. ON RATINGS (BOILERPLATE) What defines a rating? To some extent, goodness, beauty, or merit is subjective. While no scoring system is flawless, many can be improved. For instance, the official scores use a 0-100 scale, while user scores are limited to five increments, and though the community score can be more precise when averaged, it doesn't align with the official score. Furthermore, what's the reasoning behind each system? Many 0-100 scales are inflated, typically ranging from 60 to 100, while users tend to utilize the full range of the separate rating system. How are rankings determined? There are various methods, such as weighting nose, palate, and finish equally, or including value. While this might seem restrictive, it's better than a completely unstructured approach. The advantage of some structure is that it allows for more consistent comparisons. CONCLUSION I expected the ECBP B520 to be superior due to its proof and intensity. However, the Russell’s Reserve held its own, and even the Johnnie Walker 15 performed exceptionally well, especially at a much lower proof. I was genuinely surprised. Each spirit excels in its own category. The ECBP B520 is high-proof with intense flavors; the Russell’s Reserve is a higher-proof single barrel, known for variation but consistent richness; and the JW15 is a blended Scotch. I'm still amazed at how well the JW15 performed against the others, truly exceeding expectations. All three offer excellent value. I rated the ECBP B520 slightly higher, by a quarter point, due to its fuller, richer experience and integration despite the high proof. However, it's not definitively the "winner"; each is a worthy example of its style. In a previous review, I noted little reason to choose a particular Bowmore 18 over other options. This is a key differentiator that, along with the "Would I buy it again" question, should be considered. For all three of these whiskies, I could answer affirmatively depending on my mood. All are very good and distinct. All spirits were tasted neat in a Glencairn glass. (N.B.: This entire review is repeated for each whisky tasted to provide context and allow for comparison; the reviews are presented in the same order as the whiskies are listed at the top.)

BLENDED SCOTCH WHISKY SHOWDOWN Pig’s Nose Dewar’s White Label Johnnie Walker Green Label I'm continuing to go through the whiskies in my collection that I haven't reviewed yet. While this group might seem odd—the Dewar’s and Pig’s Nose are budget options, while the Johnnie Walker 15 is premium—they are the only blended scotch whiskies I own. Furthermore, the Dewar’s and Pig’s Nose are technically Blended Scotch Whisky, meaning they contain both malt and grain whiskies. The Green Label is a Blended Malt Whisky, composed solely of single-malt whiskies. I haven't had any of these in years. Based on what I remember, I expect the scores to be in increasing order as I taste them alphabetically. Let's see. Dewar’s White Label The color is a clear light yellow. The aroma is very subtle, offering faint notes of pear, saltiness, and hay. The palate has a surprising richness, with a sweet honey flavor that shifts to a mild white pepper and a hint of vanilla on the moderately long finish. I've never bought Dewar’s White Label. I remember this bottle was an opened 'gift' from a party some years back and has stayed at its current 20% level since then. After tasting it, though, I must say I'm surprised: it doesn't really have any inherent flaws. Instead, its positive qualities are just light, which is less of a positive than a negative. I didn't pour my unfairly biased swill down the drain, dear reader; my first of three Glencairn glasses now sits on my desk, empty. Still, Dewar’s White Label shouldn't be seen as an 'entry-level' whisky for beginners (Oban 14, though pricier, is fantastic for both novices and experts). This is a whisky meant to be inexpensive scotch for restaurants and gatherings, and for that I might be grateful someday if I end up in a situation with no other choice. The economics are clear: 40% ABV is the minimum for a whisky designation, and supposedly the unknown blending components are bought cheaply by Bacardi, its owner, and diluted as well. Dewar’s White Label is easily found for around $25. Would I purchase it (for the first time)? No. But that doesn't mean I'd reject it at my son’s fraternity party during Parent’s Weekend. Actually, I would enjoy it. 3.0 out of 5. 40% ABV. No Age Statement. Pig’s Nose The color is slightly darker than the Dewar’s; a light yellow. The nose has sweet honey, with added apples, hay, salt, and just a tiny bit of peat. The mouthfeel is a little less thick than the Dewar’s, but still has some body. The palate shows more honeyed sweetness. Very little spice, and a short finish. Still, Pig’s Nose comes across as more substantial than the Dewar’s: think simple, but at a higher volume. Where does the name come from? From the packaging: “It is said that our scotch is as soft and as smooth as a pig’s nose.” To continue the alliteration: not only soft and smooth, but also quite un-pig-like in its sweetness (which isn't bad). Perhaps the marketing team couldn't come up with a fitting, concise description. Pig’s Nose is widely available for about $30. Would I buy it again? No, for the same reason I assessed the Dewar’s. No masking the truth for this pig, but the pork still tastes pretty good. 3.0 out of 5. 40% ABV. 5-Year age statement. Johnnie Walker Green Label The color is deeper than the Pig’s Nose; a light yellow. Nose, palate, finish: everything about the Green Label is better than the previous two entries. The nose gives off honey, salt, stewed-apple oatmeal, cured deli ham, a gardenia floral note, and the faintest hint of smoke. The lightly rich palate bursts with the same flavors, with added intensity (“bursts” is not an exaggeration here). There's some white-pepper spice, and a long finish with the sweet, salty, and smoky taste of bacon jam. As a blended malt whisky, Green Label is a mix of Talisker, Linkwood, Cragganmore, and Caol Ila (there might be others). After hearing several online whisky friends praise Johnnie Walker Green Label, I decided to get a bottle (this was a few years ago). It wasn't easy to find one quickly. When I first tasted it some time ago, I couldn't understand the excitement. I am now correcting that deficiency. JW Green Label costs about $60 today, which is close to what I paid for it some time ago. Would I buy it again? Yes. This is a complex whisky with a 15-year age statement (older components might be present), and significant value considering these features. I would love to experience it at a higher proof; the aromas and flavor profile could certainly handle it. 4.25 out of 5. 43% ABV. 15-Year age statement. Separately: a reviewer rates this whisky at 95, and I agree—sort of. Green Label is very good. But it's also problematic that the "Tasting Notes" by that reviewer and others are on some kind of a 0-100 scale, while actual users have a 0-5 scale in quarter-point increments. This is simply bad design: I do know a thing or two about user experience, and I'm saying this from the perspective of someone who started (and sold) a consumer software company. The scales should be the same for both experts and users. There are other ways to improve basic functionality as well, and I've emailed these suggestions to the platform with little success. Off my soapbox—for now. Note: All spirits tasted neat in a Glencairn glass.

This is the JW I've been looking forward to most. I've heard many great things about this release. I truly hope it lives up to the hype. I might be mistaken, but I think this is the only standard JW that is entirely malt, with no grain. It's aged at least fifteen years in European or American oak, with Talisker, Cragganmore, Linkwood, and Caol Ila forming its base; the lineage is solid. The marketing is clever here: 'recommended serving, enjoy 30 ml poured into a chilled glass.'...Got it. Nose: Rich, thick, and viscous. Abundant dark chocolate, coffee, excellent wood character, a humidor scent (perhaps?), biscuity oak, and subtle wood smoke. There's also the faintest touch of soft peat woven throughout, easily overlooked. Palate: Medium-full body with an oily, coating texture. The malt is bright, carrying notes of coffee and chocolate, along with toffee, nutty creaminess, a briny maritime zest, and a hint of minty freshness. The flavors are bold but balanced, with nothing overpowering. Regarding the peat: it's gentle, with a very light medicinal undertone and a slightly damp campfire ashiness. Finish: Long. Pleasant warmth with a light honey-cereal sweetness, mellow oakiness, and maybe a whisper of floral notes. Wow, I certainly didn't see that coming. My JW experience so far has been mediocre at best and bafflingly average at worst. This, however, completely changed my perspective. I don't believe anything in its profile is groundbreaking, but it has achieved a superb balance among all its elements. The transition from nose to palate to finish is seamless in both texture and flavor delivery. The lack of grain spirit is now evident. While other JWs haven't been a negative experience due to their grain component, the JWG demonstrates that grain spirit can hold things back. This JWG has been allowed to truly shine. JWG takes some familiar components and crafts something uniquely excellent through skilled artistry. [Shown here with a green mineral for its green label. This mineral is a type of feldspar known as amazonite, which is a perthite variety containing lead and water impurities. Perthite itself is a feldspar type that is actually an intergrowth of potassium-rich microcline and sodium-rich albite. Thus, a single mineral specimen but four distinct mineral names are involved. An excellent complement to the four malt character of JW Green label]. Johnnie Walker running scores Red: 2.0 Black 12: 2.5 Black Islay Origins: 3.5 Double Black: 3.25 Gold: 3.5 Green 15: 4.25

The nose has a malty scent, semi-sweet with a touch of earthiness. I detect a hint of sea air, honeyed barley, some dried apple chips, grassy vetiver, a bit of vanilla bean, charred cedar wood with an elusive note of peat, a dash of allspice, and even a little sandalwood incense. It's sweet on the palate initially, like light barley syrup, almost caramel, then gives way to pink peppercorns, a little cayenne, some oak, a drop of iodine, and a bitter citrus tang like Seville orange. More peat is present on the palate as well, a cool, ashy peat with a wet mineral note reminiscent of a moss-covered stone wall. The body isn't bad, but it's definitely on the thin side. There are few, if any, legs visible in the glass as the whisky descends without leaving tears, like a line graph, forming small droplet chains. The finish is mild, dry, and long with oiled cedar wood, and a little black tea overpowering any lingering sweetness from the malt, along with faint white raisins, possibly even peaches, balanced by just a bit of brine. Nose: 9 Taste: 9 Body: 6 Finish: 8

Nose: Initially, it's all ripe apple, perhaps with a touch of maple. As it sits, these aromas fade, replaced by angel food cake and a vegetal note. It's not peaty, but I suspect that's the source of the vegetal character. Palate: Sautéed celery, white cake frosting, earthy, sweet menthol. Finish: White pepper, a faint hint of juicy fruit gum. It becomes a little sweeter with water. The maple scent returns to the nose as it rests in the glass. It's not nearly as smoky as I recall, nor as good. It's not bad at all, but the quality seems to have declined. I actually find the Double Black to be superior in complexity and flavor intensity (even though it's a blend versus this blended malt). After about five minutes, a faint aftertaste of cigarette ash developed on the back of my palate... but the smoke in this is very subdued otherwise.

My cat passed away recently after 15 years. To honor her memory, I decided to open the JW Green 15 that I had been saving for a special occasion. I am tasting this alongside my open bottles of Glenlivet 15 and Bowmore 15 for comparison. Nose: Gentle peat, caramel, and the scent of the sea. The Talisker character is noticeable but mellowed by the other malts. Palate: Salty, dry, and a little fiery. The smoke emerges with significant oak and spice. I didn't immediately enjoy it, but it possesses complexity. Finish: Long, warm, and spicy, with fresh apple as the dominant lingering flavor. This is by far the most impressive aspect of the dram.