Reviewer's Review: Artic Wolf

This is the main discussion section. Grab yer cups! All hands on deck!
Locked

How do you rate the Artic Wolf (five is best)?

5
0
No votes
4
0
No votes
3
1
17%
2
5
83%
1
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 6

User avatar
Capn Jimbo
Rum Evangelisti and Compleat Idiot
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:53 pm
Location: Paradise: Fort Lauderdale of course...
Contact:

Reviewer's Review: Artic Wolf

Post by Capn Jimbo »

Artic Wolf: The Bitter Truth
Alaskan Malamute: Strong willed, stubborn, friendly disposition, active, needs to be exercised, sweetly affectionate. They strive for attention. They use their intelligence to establish relationships with people. Wonderful companion, people oriented, best buddy dog, highly intelligent but very stubborn, reward system weakens the stubbornness. Likes to be the center of attention. Even tempered animal, has character, a loyal gentle people loving dog.
Actually not a bad description of the Frozen One.

Let me begin with this. I know the Artic Wolf almost better than my own mother (with whom I also engaged in a seemingly endless and useless dialogue). To be kind, a very persistent fellow. We've exchanged numerous emails over such subjects as the adulteration and mislabeling of rum, rum regulation and lack of enforcement, taste descriptors and the reviews that result from these. I provided tons of citations and support; he provided his personal opinions.

I have found him to be an extremely pleasant but a stunningly stubborn and careful chap who has a great deal to learn about rum. And who managed to disagree with me on almost everything. Just like Mom. Like her, his knowledge is 1000 miles wide but no deeper than a sheet of paper. Onion skin, to be exact. Here's what I found:

1. By his own admission he is very inexperienced in rum, yet before he really tasted many (or any of them) designed his very own "Dykstra Method" for evaluation! Are you kiddin me!? He is unwilling to believe that the distillers cheat, and refuses to accept any of the voluminous evidence to the contrary. Such evidence includes the Preacher, Paulipbartender, published interviews with 1 Barrel and Ron del Barilito, published advertisements by several rum distillers, commentary by the impeccable Richard Seale and more. He didn't even believe me!

2. He rejected the widely accepted definitions and regulations of "rum" as used in the US, the UK and the ACS (Association of Caribbean States), all of which agree on the notion that product "rum" is a pure spirit distilled solely from sugar cane juice, syrup or molasses, and which may contain only trace amounts of E150a spirit coloring caramel. Their regulations also agree that additives for "natural" flavoring, including sugar, must be so admitted and labeled as product "flavored rum" (or "imitation rum") and identify the primary flavoring. He disagrees and believes that a product labeled "rum" may properly contain adulterants and flavorings without identifying them!

Silly man. I think he's been drinking too much Canadian Whisky (which does permit unlabeled flavorings, even wine).

3. He accepts free product from distillers and distributors who line up for softball reviews, and has toyed with the commercial promotion of rum (via a failed "Talk Like a Pirate" rumfest). In a very short period of time and using his "Dykstra Method" and as of this writing, he has "reviewed" 72 rums, 21 Canadian whiskys, 22 Scotch whiskys, 7 American and miscellaneous whiskys, 3 tequilas, 3 gins - whew - and has even developed a bunch of stand alone recipes: 22 for rum and 27 for whiskey! This is roughly 180 reviews and concocted mixed drinks, and doesn't even count the recipes he imagined for each of his spirit reviews - for yet another 130 or so entries. It's higher now.

And recently we were treated to his very own, I say so, Wolf Awards - not by style but by region (which, along with the Badassitor, he didn't get quite right either). I'd estimate about 400 reviews, recipeand articles - just on his own site(!) - in little more than a year.!! Holy wolfshit Batman! This guy publishes reviews like Wham-O made Hula Hoops. And still claims that his real work is selling Rocket Richard and Mickey Mantle baseball cards (his spirits website is just a fun hobby he claims).

And all from a newbie. A real reviewing animal! And what a crock! But there's more...

4. Don't forget his frequent, self-promoting daily posts all over the net, but particularly at the Shillery. Oh - and he even had time and money to fly to Miami to make his appearance as an "XP" judge (marketing slang for "expert") at Burr's Miami Rum Renaissance bash. If this guy isn't angling to become yet another promoter, I'll even drink one of the highly altered "Z" rums. That's "Z" for "zoo", the last place I actually saw a real artic wolf.

To summarize:

An admittedly inexperienced rum drinker who has proven the Infinite Monkey Theorem, and thus excreted a massive pile of alleged "reviews" and recipes (using the "Dkystra Method" of course). Which of course begs analysis from moi. For comparison's sake lets first recall the distribution analysis of BTI's 200+ rum reviews.

Image

Notice anything? Sure you have. The BTI analysis forms a gorgeous, reliable and reassuring bell curve, the kind scientists and researchers like to see. This is called a normal distribution and it applies to all manner of ordinary activities or studies. Note that there are very few reviews at either extreme, and not many more one level in. Completely normal. And now how 'bout the Frozen One's fifty-five rum reviews distribution?

Image

Whoa Nelly! Whoa, whoa, WHOA hoss!! What's wrong here?

Yup, it's pretty obvious - what in tundra's sake happened to the left side of the bell? It just ain't there, as though a ravenous predator took a big bite out of it! In the world of research analysis this is called an abnormal distribution. The kind that can indicate fatal design or bias error. It seems that the Frozen One favors the top categories in typical Shillery, "it's all good" fashion. No wonder he gets free product.

Oh yeah, I know. I can hear him howling now "...but I pick better rums in the first place".

Sorry Charley, that's simply not the way normal distributions work. Pick better rums, pick crappy rums - they'll all still fall into a normal distribution because they're tasted by the same, hopefully competent and unbiased taster under reliable conditions. Some will always score higher, and some lower - ergo a "normal distribution". It's like throwing darts - it matters not where you aim at the target - you'll get a normal distribution around your aiming point. Unless of course, if you're biased.

Is that simplistic enough? "Aaaaooooo..." howls the Wolf. Sure it is. It gets worse...

5. Despite his generally glowing, softball reviews the Frozen One seems to have a real thing for - of all things - "bitterness"! I'm not kidding. What first caught my attention was one of his fewer lower rated reviews for - are you sitting down - Mount Gay Extra Old, which he described as suffering from a "wave of bitterness"!? C'mon chappie. Needless to say, this is a finding not shared by any of the real reviewers I know of, including both Sue Sea and me. I noted a couple more unexpected "bitter" findings and in a spirit of helpfulness wrote the Frozen One to suggest that he might rethink his descriptor, lest he be considered a fool in the courtyard of public derision. Naturally, I was ignored. But it gets worse...

I recently performed a complete analysis of his reviews and found that of his 55 reviews for dark rums (many of which you'd know and love) he finds unpleasant "bitterness" in 28 of them! More than half!! "Aaaaooooo..."!!! And even found it necessary to describe four or five of his non-bitter rums as "not bitter". Let me guess. When his wife serves dinner and asks him how he enjoyed it, does he say "...well, it wasn't bitter!"?

Frankly I thought he was fruitcake nuts.

But then I located some fascinating research that confirmed that there are actually a small minority of people who experience one of the phenols as "bitter". This unusual finding would be exacerbated by the even fewer people who are also "supertasters" - those few who are so sensitive that even many favorable aromas and tastes may be too intense for them, and for whom unpleasant sensations are really magnified so as to be perceived as actually "vile".

Like when your son plays Led Zeppelin at full volume when you have a migraine. Thankfully, the great majority of people are free of this curse.

Next thing you know, I ran across the Wolf complaining about a well known whisky over at the Count's wonderful website, where he agonized that he found it "bitter", and wondered whether he'd gotten a bad bottle.

When I politely raised the possibility of his membership in the chosen few who suffer from bittermouth, he whipped out his tap dancing shoes and admitted that (a) he might be, (b) exclaimed how this made his reviews even more valuable to his fellow bitter finders (to hell with the great majority of normal tasters), and (c) exclaimed:

"Now I do not know if I am susceptible to that particular palate quirk, but I do know that I have always tasted things others cannot. Take that pre-cut bagged lettuce that is all the rage, To me it tastes vile."

Vile lettuce? Hmmm... sounds like a bitter-mouth, "supertaster" to me. That tastes things that others cannot. Vile things. Bitter things. Some reviewer, eh? But let's get to the bottom line, shall we?

Score (10 is best): 3 bones (I try to be kind to animals).


***

More rum reviewer's reviews:
1. Beverage Tasting Institute, for a real bell curve. The gold standard.
2. Arctic Wolf, biased, bitter reviews. I'm serious!
3. RnD Rum Reviews, biased, favoring sweet, smooth and expensive. Rum with Koolaid.
Last edited by Capn Jimbo on Fri Apr 15, 2011 10:28 pm, edited 5 times in total.
User avatar
Capn Jimbo
Rum Evangelisti and Compleat Idiot
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:53 pm
Location: Paradise: Fort Lauderdale of course...
Contact:

Can we still be friends?

Post by Capn Jimbo »

Can we still be friends?

I know what some of you are saying. Methinks the Compleat Idiot of Rum doth protesteth too much. Actually it's not enough! Now while it is true that I've singled out this particular website, it is for good reason:

1. This website has enjoyed incredible growth, from nothing to an estimated 400 or so reviews, articles and recipes in little more than a year. That my fellow idiots, is amazing. This doesn't even count his travels to act as a judge at a faux competition, his efforts to promote a failed "Talk Like a Pirate" rumfest, and his nonstop participation at other rum and whisky websites.

I need a breath.... Ok, to continue:

2. This huge body of work was accomplished by a guy who claimed to be inexperienced at the outset, and is alleged to be a simple labor of love by this self described hobbyist, working in his spare time. That too is amazing!

3. Unlike any other rum reviewer, he actually created his own named method, the "Dykstra Method" - before he began, and concluded by creating his own "Awards", again based on his own invented criterion. Further, that like a "supertaster" possessing what is known as "bitter mouth" (based on a phenol affecting a minority of people) - he has reported "bitterness" in well over half the rums he has reviewed!

Even more amazing, and here then is the point:

The perfect storm of mediocrity in the world of rogue rum seems to have occured: the invasion of the spiced and flavored category (based on heavily altered cheap rums), the continuing presence of unlabeled additives in product "rum", the volcanic eruption of the quasi-commercial Frozen One and his bitter-based reviews, and most recently the release of the world's first porn star rum.

All are symptoms of decline, that must all be noted and examined in the public square if we are to stop and reverse this horrible trend. It's either that - or start drinking single malts...
Last edited by Capn Jimbo on Fri Apr 15, 2011 10:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
DEF
Cabin Boy
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 12:24 pm
Location: Columbus/New Port Richey

Post by DEF »

Watching a daytime tv program (yea I know) recently, I found out there are three types of tasters. Non tasters, tasters and super tasters. The difference is how you perceive bitterness. Super tasters are extremely sensitive to bitterness. 50% of the population are tasters while non taster and super tasters are evenly split at 25%.

I may be a super taster because I am extremely sensitive to bitter. This may explain why I don't like certain rums that are considered excellent rums by many. Appleton rums put me off and Wray & Nephew overproof tastes like a mouthful of iron shavings to me.

I see your point about Chip's methods and practices but the bottom line for me is his affinity for bitter. He also has an aversion to coconut. Barbancourt 5 Star is one of my favorites, but Chip really slammed it in his review.

DEF


*******
Capn's Log: DEF is right, though different studies differ somewhat in the actual percentages of "supertasters". But there's yet another factor which I call "bitter mouth". There is a particular phenol (chemical component of distillation) that is perceived as bitter by a small number of tasters. This is apart from the ultra-sensitive "supertasters".

When you combine the two factors - "supertaster" and "bittermouth" - in the same taster you have a real problem. Not only are supertasters often overly sensitive, but add phenol bitterness to the mix, and look out Nelly! AW frequently reports bitterness, but doesn't see the issue. As for reviewers, I do.
User avatar
Capn Jimbo
Rum Evangelisti and Compleat Idiot
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:53 pm
Location: Paradise: Fort Lauderdale of course...
Contact:

An admission...

Post by Capn Jimbo »

An admission...


Take it from me, the Frozen One is really, really stubborn and quite proud. Admissions of error are rare, and seemingly takes a touch or three of the whip to extract.

But after a year of trying - finally - I got it!
The Great Regurgitator: "I am glad that you found more enjoyment from the whisky than I did. The harshness/bitterness obviously affected my palate much more than yours. It is something I have noticed before, that I seem to have a sensitivity to bitterness which is more pronounced perhaps than other persons.

In the case of the Bruichladdich 16 I found I had to mix it in cocktails to find enjoyment..."
This in response to a reader who rejected Wolfboy's usual findings of harsh bitterness. This whisky has received lovely ratings from both Michael Jackson and Dave Broom, and needless to say, neither found anything resembling bitterness in this find Islay offering.


Bottom line:

Can you really trust a reviewer whose palate is so sensive and bitter finding? I think not. You know what's even worse? I brought his bitter palate to his attention over a year ago, and urged him to please, please reconsider this descriptor, less he lose the respect and credibility of his audience.

He refuses, he'd rather call a fine sipping whisky a "mixer", and the bitter findings just keep on flowing...
User avatar
Capn Jimbo
Rum Evangelisti and Compleat Idiot
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:53 pm
Location: Paradise: Fort Lauderdale of course...
Contact:

Update!

Post by Capn Jimbo »

Update: bitter is as bitter does...


It's been quite some time before the Wolfboy's review, and his amazing finding of "bitter" in more than half the rums he tasted in that report. So what's happened since then?


Wolfboy finally admits his bittermouth...

1. Wolfie finally admitted his sensitivity to bitterness, and

2. He may have changed his vocabulary. To what? Read on...


Wolfboy smells/tastes "tannins"

Although I still notice bitter findings in his reviews, they do seem to be less. What I seem to find growing though is a use of the descriptor "tannin", which the Frozen One frequently reports as an sort of woody, spicy and sometimes bitter aroma and taste.

"Tannins" may have replaced "bitter", but that is a hoot! Why you ask?


"Tannins" have no taste or smell

Simple. Tannins are well known in the world of tasting wines, whisky, beers and other spirits and guess what? They have no aroma or taste whatsoever. Tannins provide nothing more or less than an extreme puckering mouthfeel, period. No aroma, no taste.

Consider a cup of very strong, very dark tea. Or perhaps vinegar or a strong lime or lemon. What do all these have in common? The tannins will make you pucker up, a sensation usually felt on the roof of the mouth, sides of the tongue and cheeks. It is hairy, rough extreme feel - but absolutely not an aroma or flavor.


Wolfboy stands alone...

The Frozen One stands pretty much alone in claiming and reporting what for him is a distinctive aroma or flavor that simply doesn't exist for anyone else. But if nothing else, however ignorant and misguided, it is inventive...
NCyankee
Admiral
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 1:52 am

Oh geez check this out

Post by NCyankee »

is he actually drinking a creamy mixed drink out of a Glencairn single malt glass?

http://therumhowlerblog.wordpress.com/2 ... the-cover/


*******
Capn's Log: Yes Yank he is, he is.
JaRiMi
Admiral
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 11:14 am

Post by JaRiMi »

One has to love also the unique ranking list created by the site owner..

In the bottle

In the glass

In the mouth

In the throat

The afterburn

Suggested cocktail

--------

My word, whatever has happened to the simple and much used

Nose/Bouquet

Palate

Finish

-------

When I looked at the list created by the site owner for the first time, I think I misunderstood completely for example the entry "The afterburn" for quite something else than the intended..!! :shock:

I think he is missing "On the lips", "On the tongue", "in the esophagus", "in the stomach", "exiting from the ..."..!

:twisted:
Locked