My “Ardmore 23, 1997s bottled by the SMWS” week got off to a good start yesterday with cask 66.198. That one was matured for 21 years in a bourbon  cask and then for two years in a French oak barrique. Today I have a review of cask 66.199. This one was also matured for 21 years in a bourbon cask and then spent two years in a heavy-toast, medium-char hogshead. Were they just running out of ideas at that point? Or was there a bigwig at the SMWS screaming, “Not enough vanilla!!!” after tasting the 21 yo spirit? I guess we’ll never know. Oh yes, they named this one “Cricket in the Caribbean”.

Ardmore 23, 1997 (50.6%; SMWS 66.199; 2nd-fill HTMC hogshead finish; from a bottle split)

Nose: A mix of lemon, vanilla and mineral peat. Sweeter on the second sniff (more vanilla, plus some cream) and the lemon edges towards citronella; some white pepper and other more indistinct oak spice emerges.  With time the citrus trumps the vanilla. A drop or two of water and there’s first a floral burst and then the citrus gets a bit musky with hints of makrut lime.

Palate: Leads with the peat here and it’s a very Ardmore mix of austere notes: wet wool, machine oil, bitter lime peel. A big bite at 50.6%; oily texture. Sweeter here too on subsequent sips (vanilla), even as the lime expands. With water there’s some white pepper and it melds nicely with the lime, the sweet notes and the soot, which pops out earlier now.

Finish: Long. The smoke expands here and it’s more ashy and sooty. Wet stones as well. With time, the lime lingers as well. More peppery here too with water.

Comments: Not a million miles from 66.198; yes, there’s more vanilla here and that added sweetness holds it back, in my view. Water does bring out more complexity on the nose but it’s relatively straightforward on the palate. I’d be happy if I had a bottle (at a reasonable price) but this isn’t anything very special.

Rating: 86 points.