Laphroaig 10 Year Cask Strength (Batch 16)

My prior assessment might need adjustment. Last week, my critique of Larceny Barrel Proof C922 involved dismissing the significance of batch variation. I wasn't denying its existence but suggesting that for Elijah Craig Barrel Proof or Larceny Barrel Proof, its impact is overstated. Batch to batch, the flavor profiles are similar enough that while one batch might be preferred, the difference isn't so dramatic as to warrant avoiding certain batches or going to extreme lengths to acquire others. In short, it exists, but in my view, it's overemphasized. To a degree, my stance on those two bourbons hasn't completely changed. My initial experience with Laphroaig 10 Year Cask Strength, batch 015, was last year. I might have convinced myself I enjoyed it more than I actually did. To be candid, it was somewhat disappointing, but my affection for Laphroaig led me to inflate my enjoyment. Dilution helped. An ice cube assisted, but on its own, the aroma evoked ozone, a lightning strike, and burnt electronics, reminiscent of a childhood train set short-circuiting at Christmas. The taste, at times, was excessively charred, almost ashy. Moments during consumption brought to mind licking the bottom of an ashtray at a bar late at night. The finish was lengthy, but when the scent is a lightning strike and the taste is a stale cigar, would you desire to extend it? It was, admittedly, intriguing. I've never encountered ozone on the nose or such intense char on the palate. Since water and ice could salvage it, I managed to get through it. It was... an event. However, what I desired from Laphroaig 10 Year Cask Strength was the essence of Laphroaig amplified! Now, regarding this year's Cask Strength, Batch 016. At least, I believe it's this year's. Last year's batch was bottled on December 21st, but didn't reach my area until December 22nd. Batch 016 is marked as bottled on December 22nd, but my region received it on December 23rd. So, I'm assuming they are currently bottling Batch 017, which should arrive here next December. See how adept I am at recognizing patterns? Regardless, Batch 016 brought considerable relief. I was concerned that all Laphroaig Cask Strength batches would resemble 015 and that I simply hadn't developed the palate for it yet. It's like the initial experience with an Islay whisky, which can be overwhelmingly... well, Islay. But that's not the situation here at all. Batch 016 delivers what I was hoping for: it's the beloved Laphroaig 10 amplified! The aroma presents the delightful (for those who appreciate Islay) combination of Laphroaig's characteristic iodine, sea salt, peat, and vanilla – a wonderful scent that, while somewhat subdued in the 10 Year at 86 proof, truly shines here. The more you inhale, the more the vanilla transforms into a caramel, resembling milk chocolate caramel more than dark chocolate. The palate mirrors this, with pronounced sea salt, white pepper, a hint of medicinal notes, and, at the start of the finish, a subtle touch of char (I'm not saying I dislike char; it's just that when it's the sole component, one longs for more complexity, and certainly not the taste of a stale cigar, right?). When my local liquor store released this, I visited that evening. It was a Sunday, and I hoped it wasn't sold out. The website indicated 6 bottles in stock, but the Laphroaig section on the shelves was empty of Cask Strength. Alas, had they sold out? I inquired with a staff member, who revealed they were in the back, still in the case, having just arrived the previous day and not yet shelved. "How many do you want?" the person asked. "Just the one," I replied. I was thinking of last year's experience. I didn't want to end up with two bottles if the quality was similar. It turns out batch variation can be quite significant. I'm not accustomed to this with bourbons that have three annual releases, where I haven't had to wait long between bottles. Here, it's very real. And perhaps I shouldn't have said I'd take two. But then again, I also have this year's Cairdeas to try soon. So, it's not as though I'm lacking Laphroaig. Plus, I just finished a bottle of Lore. My budget is constrained. But this particular bottling has me curious about their offerings in December 2024. I hope it leans more towards Batch 016 than Batch 015. However, I'm prepared for the possibility of something entirely different from both. On a positive note, the price hasn't increased since last year, which I genuinely appreciate given the recent rise in whisky costs.

Review #074 Type: single malt scotch Proof: 58.5% Details: 10 years old, matured in former bourbon barrels, from batch 16, bottled December 2022 Tasted after: Laphroaig 10 Year Appearance (no score): Auburn hue. Swirling shows a thin line that clings to the glass, with slow-forming legs. Nose: 18/20 Lemon zest and grilled pineapple are mixed with smooth vanilla, black tea, and a little coconut. After a few minutes of resting and smelling, the familiar scent of adhesive bandages and iodine appears, but it's subtle, as is the peat smoke. Palate: 34/40 Spicy oak tannins and ashes are prominent, along with puffs of peat smoke, honey, lemon drops, licorice, burnt caramel, and sea salt. Finish: 35/40 A nice long finish, where this whisky truly excels! Some adhesive bandages and old rubber tires start it off with a moderate lingering peat smoke, then it briefly shifts to a sweeter profile with honey and a tropical note, possibly grilled mango? Slowly, it becomes spicier and more bitter with oak tannins and black tea, fading to ashes, dried seaweed, and sea salt. With Water: A few drops of water brought out some very pleasant milk chocolate on the palate, which also seemed to lessen some of the spicy notes and smooth it out a bit. Interestingly, this also slightly intensified the finish. Total: 87/100 Final thoughts: Sitting down with this bottle after a couple of sips of the standard 10 year was certainly an enjoyable rollercoaster. This one is much more citrus-forward and sweeter, but less medicinal. It's a great whisky, but I personally love the distinct medicinal, industrial, and maritime characteristics that make the 10 year so unique, so I was let down by the lack of those in this bottle. Nevertheless, it's a uniquely different and exceptional bottle on its own! Price: $74 Would recommend: yes Would buy: yes Scoring Legend: 96-100: The perfect dram, absolutely exceptional, nectar of the gods, I will savor this bottle and make it last, 5 stars. 90-95: Near perfect, there is something truly special about this whisky, 4.75 stars. 85-89: Very good to amazing, almost the complete product, 4.5 stars. 80-84: Quite good, very enjoyable to drink, but doesn’t wow me, 4.25 stars. 75-79: Good, enjoyable but ultimately flawed, unlikely to purchase again, 4 stars. 70-74: A solid dram, but wouldn't go out of my way to get it, 3.75 stars. 55-69: Drinkable, 3.5-2.75 stars. Below 55: Suitable for cooking or direct contribution to the kitchen sink drain, 2.5 stars or less.

Very similar to the standard 10 but intensified. It definitely drinks its proof. A little water smooths it out. Interestingly, after revisiting the standard 10 following this one, the standard 10 seems very subdued. It has some flavor but lacks impact.