Skip to main content

🥃Blind Tasting Comparison Test: Kirkland Bottled-in-Bond vs. Wolcott Bottled-in-Bond

Image
By

Kirkland Bottled in Bond vs. Wolcott Bottled-in-Bond Bourbon Tasting

Both produced by Sazerac's Barton 1792 distillery, Costco's Kirkland Bottled-in-Bond is a value darling of the wider internet and Total Wine's Wolcott Bottled-in-Bond has placed well at international spirits competitions, though most of its metal finishes were while it was still made at Sazerac's Buffalo Trace distillery. As both are private label bottles contracted distilled by Barton, we are left to ask the question: which one is better?

The Contestants - Kirkland and Wolcott

You can find our full bottle write-ups on both whiskies here:
The broad summary is that the Kirkland bottle is significantly cheaper though both the Costco and Total Wine brands here cost less than the equivalent 1792 Bottled-in-Bond, a hard to find iteration that is only now starting to show up reliably on shelves again. Per the Bottled-in-Bond act, both drams will be 100 proof, aged a minimum of four years, and made in batches of barrels from the same distillation season(Jan-Jun and Jul-Dec). Tasting notes are broadly similar with what seemed to me to be some minor differences in mouthfeel. After conducting an initial side-by-side assessment, I concluded that the two bottles are too similar and that we should first determine whether or not a perceptible difference even exists.

Difference Blind Tasting

If you've peeped our Blind Tasting Guide, the following procedures will be familiar to you already. To prove that the two bottles are meaningfully different from one another, we will utilize a number of different blind tasting methods. For fun, multiple methods will be used, though you could simply build up a decent enough sample size using one technique. Our target will be 20-30 comparative tastings, which is a rough convention for statistical significance.  

two bottles, lots of glasses, and a sticky note for the test

Test 1: Basic Blind Head-to-Head

In this test, a glass of each whiskey is poured and labeled. Taster samples each glass to ground their palate. Labels are not visible to the taster. Glasses are scrambled on a lazy Susan and then one glass is randomly selected for tasting. Taster assigns their best guess as to which whiskey is in the glass. After the guess, the label is revealed and the result marked, correct or incorrect. If the two whiskies are imperceptibly different, the proportion of right and wrong answers should approach 50%.  Four tastings were conducted over three days in this manner.
  • Day 1: Correct, Incorrect, Correct, Correct
  • Day 2: Incorrect, Incorrect, Correct, Correct
  • Day 3: Correct, Incorrect, Correct, Incorrect
Total from 12 trials: 7 Correct, 5 Incorrect, 58.3% Correct

Expected value of 6 correct answered with a standard deviation of √(np(1-p)) which is 1.73 giving us a p-value of .56 which is not statistically significant. This would lead us to conclude that there is no real difference in the tasting experience of the two whiskies. In reality we should do more samples, but the blind head-to-head has some failings from a methodology perspective: the weight of the glasses may change as the number of samples from each glass is not fixed, it is difficult to control for sip size which can impact experience, and it is very easy to lose the grounding of the initial tasting.

I found myself most targeting the mouthfeel and finish sensation rather than the flavor profiles, though as you can see in the results, that approach may have not borne fruit. I did continue to feel like there was some small difference, but let's see how the more robust test patterns hold turn out.

Test 2: Kirkland vs Wolcott Triangle test

Triangle tests make up for most of the failings of the basic blind head-to-head, one of the many reasons that they are the industry standard for comparative tastings in food and beverage. In a paired triangle test, three samples of each whiskey are poured. One sample of each is swapped so that there is an odd-one-out in each group. Groups and sample order within the group are randomized. The taster then selects their best guess as to which is the differently sourced/prepared sample. If there is no difference between the two products, we would assume to taster to be correct only around one-third of the time.

  • Trial One: 2 As - Correct
  • Trial Two: 2 Bs - Incorrect
  • Trial Three: 2Bs - Incorrect
  • Trial Four: 2As - Correct
  • Trial Five: 2As - Correct 
  • Trial Six:  2Bs - Incorrect
Total from 6 trials: 3 Correct, 3 Incorrect, 50% Correct

I continue to be convinced that there is a difference, but it is subtle. There is variation in the amount of heat and nuttiness between the two, but I'm working hard to keep the memory of each flavor on my tongue while spacing things out enough to not obliterate my palate. 


Test 3: Duo Trio Test

Potentially my favorite of the discrimination tests, the duo trio test is a setup by which the taster sips a priming sample and then tastes two randomized samples, guessing which one matches the initial taste.
  • Test 1: Wolcott - Correct
  • Test 2: Kirkland - Correct
  • Test 3: Kirkland - Incorrect
  • Test 4 Wolcott - Correct
Total for four trials: 3 correct, 1 incorrect, 75% Correct

Conclusion

Having done 22 separate trials with different methodologies, I will commit a statistical sin by combining the numbers:

Total across all trials: 13 Correct, 9 incorrect, 59.1% Correct

Since combining tests with different ( p ) values is tricky, I'll make a simplifying (though less rigorous) assumption an "average" null probability weighted by the number of trials:

  • Test 1 and 3 (16 trials) have p = 0.5
  • Test 2 (6 trials) has p = 1/3
Weighted p ={(12 * 0.5) + (6 * 1/3) + (4 *0.5)}/{22} ={6 + 2 + 2}/22 = 10/22 ≈ 0.455

Now, treat all 22 trials as one binomial experiment:
  • n = 22
  • k = 13
  • p = 0.455
  • P(X >= 13) = sum{k=13}^{22} \binom{22}{k} (0.455)^k (0.545)^{22-k}
Calculating exact probabilities is somewhat annoying, so I'll approximate with normal:
  • Mean: 22 * 0.455 = 10.01
  • Variance: 22 * 0.455 * 0.545 = 5.456
  • Std Dev: sqrt{5.456} ≈ 2.336
  • z = {13 - 10.01}/{2.336} ≈ 1.279
  • P-value (one-tailed) ≈ 0.1005
This means that due to our small sample size, we are hovering around rejecting the null hypothesis at a 90% confidence level (saying a difference DOES exist). While I'm shelving this exercise for now, I'll take a 90% confirmation of some difference with my tongue! In my opinion and with minor numerical reinforcement, there is a difference between Wolcott Bottle-in-Bond and Kirkland Bottled-in-Bond.

I prefer Costco's Kirkland for its slightly smoother finish and higher fruit to nut ratio, but the two bottles are very similar. I suspect that your best Total Wine arbitrage is the Wolcott Rickhouse Reserve which is a proxy for the elusive Kirkland Single Barrel and 1792 Full Proof.
Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

🍺 Definitive Light Beer Tier List: Meta-Analysis & Ranking

By
Trends come and go: Craft Beer, Hard Seltzer, Canned Cocktails, and more. In the world of beverage, the currents are constantly shifting, but one drink has an irrevocable grip on America: Light Beer. Good old beer flavored beer may take a hit from new competition, but brands like Miller Lite and Michelob Ultra constantly sit at the top of sales volume lists, even with the fall of Bud Light and rise of Modelo's Flagship.   But which light beer is best? Let's find out. Methodology - Light Beer Ranking Taste preferences vary significantly between consumers, but across a large sample we should be able to get a somewhat representative picture of the populations preferences. For this ranking, we will combine data sourced from multiple beer rating sites with an internal Castle & Cairn house ranking to create an overall beer quality score. The starting population of beer brands will be those that are explicitly branded as "flagship light" or beers with less than 100 calor...
Read more

🎮 Call of Duty Warzone - The Drinking Game

By
Fairly self explanatory per the graphic below. What could be more fun than tossing back a few cold ones with your closest buds while rampaging through one of your favorite video games? Call of Duty Warzone might not have as much nostalgia as it did in the Verdansk days, but it still has some charm. The best part: you'll already be at home when you're done so there's no need to worry about a designated driver! Obligatory plug to know your limits, be legal, and drink responsibly, we don't respawn IRL (yes I know that's a cringe statement - that's the joke).  Call of Duty Warzone Drinking Game Prep To play the game, you'll need the following in addition to an internet connection, gaming device, and Call of Duty: A Party Sipper of your Choice - I recommend something relatively low ABV. We balanced the rules for a player of moderate ability and a sipper of 4-8% alcohol. Light beer is my go-to here since it has enough lovely hydrating water to soak up any shots. ...
Read more

🍺🍷🥃 Beer, Wine, and Spirits Rebate Website Master List

By
If there is anything I love more than a good drink, it's saving money buying that good drink! The rules for providing discounts on alcohol differ substantially between states with some allowing outright discounts or coupons and others entirely disallowing any sort of purchase incentive. Thankfully though, in my native Georgia as well as most states, a simple reimbursement approach is permissible.  Last Updated & Validated 2/4/2026 . Alcohol Rebate Site Master List The following sites are relatively stable for each manufacturer. New offers usually come out every few months. None of these are affiliate links and I provide no assurance as to the process. I have saved so much money using rebates and hope you have similar success. Best practices and general process advice will be presented at the bottom. New sites will be added as I uncover them. Beer Rebates Boston Beer Company Brands  - Angry Orchard, Dogfish head, Hard Mountain Dew, Samuel Adams, Sun Crusher, Truly, and Twis...
Read more

🥃 Review #34: ASW Fiddler Toasted Wheat Cask Strength Bourbon

By
Founded by University of Georgia graduates Jim Chasteen and Charlie Thompson, American Spirit Whiskey Distillery ("ASW") is a craft producer out of Atlanta, GA with the plant registry DSP-GA-20014. As Southern Pot-Still Pioneers, they are one of the few producers to distill in the ancient Scottish Tradition of small, grain-in batches (where grain solids are left in for the remainder of the distillation process) though they also partner with Midwest Grain Products to source distillate for further aging, finishing and blending before bottling as is the case here. This bottle is from the June 2023 batch which is a blend of two principal spirits. ASW's master distiller, Justin Maglitz, is accomplished old-time string music fiddler and he often experiments with various factors between batches. As such, the "Fiddler" brand name fits perfectly. No two batches are truly the same, but all of the ones I've had so far have been to my liking. This bottle shares the same...
Read more

🥃Review #9: Maker's Mark Cask Strength

By
Maker's Mark has been a go-to brand of mine since before I knew what bourbon was. The sweet wheated mainstay of that namesake was the first 1.75L bottle of whiskey I ever bought and so it will always hold a special place on my palate. Maker's does a lot of things right, including their Marker's Mark ambassador program which let's brand fans have their name put on a barrel and to get bottles filled specifically from that barrel. Mine will be mature sometime later this year and I'm excited to go visit it. I'd always heard great things about the cask strength as well, so let's get into it... 🛒 Sourced:   $39.99 at Tower Liquors Buckhead - GA 🧪 Proof:  110, 55%  📚 Background :  Ranging from 108 to 114 proof, Maker's Mark Cask Strength is uncut by the addition of water. Most Maker's batches are barreled at 110 proof with higher angel's share batches notching up a wee bit. They do screen filter the bourbon to remove wood pieces and char, but from th...
Read more