Blind Faith?
This is not an article about the 1969 rock-n-roll super group, Blind Faith. Although a band featuring Eric Clapton, Steve Winwood and Ginger Baker would be a fun topic. I’ll leave that for another forum and another day, however.
This is, in fact, an article about blind tastings. In this article I’ll touch on a few benefits, pitfalls and trends in blind tastings. We’ll see if we are more of a true believer in blind tastings at the end of the article than we are here at the beginning.
Blind Tasting is Truth
Because a properly planned and executed blind tasting will remove bias and prejudice, I like to say “blind tasting is truth”. In a blind tasting it is just you and an unknown whiskey in a glass. You cannot show preference to what you like, what you think you like or what you think you’re supposed to like. You can’t turn your nose up at a Bourbon because it is “too young” or “not from Kentucky” or “doesn’t have a horsey on the top”.
In some cases, a blind tasting is done with just a single whiskey. The goal then is typically to get an unbiased opinion on what is being tasted. These single blind tastings don’t allow the taster to be affected by preconceived ideas about a whiskey based on mash bill, distillery, etc. which could shade their tasting notes and judgments.
Other times, we’ll do side-by-side blind tastings. These type tastings are usually less about tasting notes (though that can certainly be a part) and are more about comparison and ranking the contents of each glass. This can yield some surprising results.
In some blind tastings I’ve lead, an Old Weller Antique rated higher than 15 year old Pappy Van Winkle. I’ve seen a 27-month old rye from Stumpy’s Spirits (a fantastic craft distiller outside St. Louis) be selected over a private selection of a 10 year Whistle Pig.
Blind tastings can be a whiskey version of “stump the band”. Meaning, can the taster guess what is in their glass? While this can be a fun element to add to a tasting, the end result is almost always a lot more wrong answers than correct ones.
So, when it comes to blind tastings we can, theoretically, eliminate bias and prejudice and get down to the truth of what a taster actually likes (or doesn’t like). However, why just “theoretically”?
Not-So-Blind Tastings
What happens when you are in a blind tasting and you can positively identify the whiskey in your glass? Well, if you are playing “stump the band”, then…congratulations, you win. If you happen to be participating in a blind tasting with a friend or a Bourbon group, then you have eliminated some lack of bias. This may distort the tasting results, but, in the big picture, there isn’t much consequence to it. And if you do enough of these it is bound to happen, especially if, for example, you’re a big Old Forester fan and someone uses a 1920 in a tasting.
However, what if there is some consequence to guessing a whiskey in a blind tasting? What if the purpose of the blind tasting is to determine an award and the judge/taster realizes what he or she is tasting? At that point potential bias and prejudice has been introduced to the process. Are the results then tainted?
As an example, Fred Minnick, prominent Bourbon media guy, was doing a blind tasting to award a “whiskey of the year” in the finished whiskey category. At some point near the end of the four-sample tasting, Minnick comments “I know what this is”. He never said what he thought it was or if more than one Bourbon in the group had been identified, but at that point is it just a blind tasting in name only? Did identifying even one of the four alter the result? Nobody knows except Fred. By the way…the “I know what this is” Bourbon won the blind tasting category.
I reached out to experienced spirits competition judge Tony Menechella about this. I asked Tony if he had ever been judging and realized he figured out what he was tasting and, if so, what did he do about it. Tony’s response: “I have never had that happen yet where I knew exactly what the spirit was in a blind competition. If it ever does happen, and you have to be positive, I will recuse myself because it is no longer a blind to me. I will not even take part in any discussion of the spirit”. Of course, Tony is working within a panel of judges and not tasting on his own like Minnick.
In large format blind tastings, such as the San Francisco Spirits Competition, there are panels in place for the tastings. These competitions do not rely on one individual. If a panelist does need to recuse themselves from one spirit, the overall competition is not seriously impacted. In cases where awards are being distributed by a single taster, to recuse is not an option. It would provide transparency, however, to say which sample was identified prior to revealing the results. The competition might lose some of the theatrics a blind tasting can bring, but it does help the tasting maintain transparency, authenticity and independence.
Can You See the Value?
An interesting concept in blind tasting that has emerged due to lockdowns and social distancing is the virtual blind tasting. Local liquor stores and even our own ABV Network have sponsored virtual blind events. The taster pays a fee and receives (by store pick up or mail) coded sample bottles. The event is then broadcast via Zoom or Skype and the participants are walked through the tastings by a host. These are a fun and useful substitute for when in-person blind tastings are not possible.
photo credit: eavesblind.com
This concept has been taken to a larger scale by Marianne Eaves, former distiller at Castle & Key. She has started a subscription service called Eaves Blind. The one-year subscription has two levels: The Apprentice and The Aficionado. The Apprentice comes with a quarterly shipment of two-100ml samples of whiskey (from an unknown origin), two black glencairn glasses and education materials. The Aficionado brings the same benefits as The Apprentice plus an extra two-50ml samples per quarter and a video tasting with Barnes. After tax and shipping, The Apprentice costs $405 and The Aficionado costs $670.
While I think the approach Eaves is taking here is intriguing, I, personally, struggle to see the value in this service. The Apprentice level, for example gets the subscriber 800ml of whiskey during the year. That’s slightly more than the standard 750ml bottle. For rough comparison, is a bottle of unknown whiskey worth $400? Education materials are also included, but what does that entail? How do you assign a value to that? It’s easy to be swept into the hype and FOMO of something like this, but should we do a little math and weigh the value?
While I may have a blind spot for the value in Eaves Blind, many people have seen the light. According to the service’s website, both subscription levels are sold out for 2021.
I am a big fan of blind tastings.They can be used for ratings, rankings, reviews, education and experimentation.Most of all they can be used for fun.They don’t have to be pricey or include expensive pours. Using three shelfers from your local store or four bottles from the front of your cabinet can make for an interesting and fun evening for you and a few friends.
