Stagg Slayer? (Round 3) GTS '23 vs A Smith Bowman Cask Strength B3
Background
Welcome to year three of a comparison series that I expected to only be fortunate enough to do once! I originally wrote about this because A. Smith Bowman Cask Strength arrived on the scene with a huge splash in a year where George T. Stagg took a hiatus.
Last year, I was curious to see if the Bowman Cask Strength line could continue its success, or would go down as a one-hit wonder. Year two, in my opinion, not only improved on the first iteration, but slightly edged out its fearsome BTAC foe. Well it’s now time for the rubber match! As promised, my A. Smith Bowman lottery bottle is open and ready for review. This year’s A. Smith Bowman Cask Strength clocks in sub-hazmat and a year younger than the past two releases. Let’s see how these two high proof, hard to find behemoths compare.
2023 George T. Stagg (15 Years, 135 Proof)
Nose: Dark chocolate, graham cracker, rich oak… it’s delightfully approachable for its 135 proof. There’s a subtle, classic Stagg cherry but it’s muted compared to the other notes.
Palate: Cherry cola, cocoa, those little barrel shaped root beer candies except this time made with real barrel. The whiskey has a nice viscosity, and there’s a light cinnamon that brings a nice balance of spice.
Finish: Pretty tannic! There’s a bit of that earthy note from last year's release but it’s a little more subtle. Some hints of cherry again yes, but like the nose it’s quite subtle. Cloves and black pepper as well.
Incredible to Perfect (9.5/10)
Overall: I’m not super sure what to write about George T. Stagg that I haven’t already. I’m sure one day I’ll hit a batch I do not love, but today is not that day. It’s almost velvet in texture, there’s that steady drumbeat of oak from the age, but the flavors just pop around it. Lovely stuff. The slightest of shades off perfect because of that little earth note I don’t love, but it’s truly a minor gripe.
A. Smith Bowman Cask Strength: Batch 3 (9 Years, 135.1 Proof)
Nose: Brighter and more fruit forward than the Stagg. A rich berry compote, a drizzle of honey, an array of baking spices and a toasted oak note rounds us out.
Palate: There’s a luscious red fruit note, almost like raspberries. It has an excellent texture, though not quite as luxurious as the George T Stagg. A nice bit of wood, and brown sugar cinnamon pop tarts.
Finish: Medium long in length, a fun berry tartness, black licorice… ah it’s fruity and lush. A nice tannic pull at the sides of the palate and a bit of cinnamon.
Incredible (9/10)
Overall: Not a lot to complain about here either. It’s kind of like the zany younger brother to George T. Stagg’s eldest boy. Vivacious, fruity, still rich and delicious but not quite as polished as George… and that’s OK! I am thrilled to see that at a year younger and a few proof points lower, this line does not miss a beat. There’s still a bit of oak to balance out a “younger” fruitiness, and a bit of baking spices throughout tie everything together.
