omhper (19670) - Tyresö, SWEDEN - JAN 16, 2003
3.1 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 12/20
Bottled. 2001 version sampled in October 2001.
Pours red-brown and thick.
Super malty with syrupy sweetness. Will by all likeliness gain by 10-25 years of aging.
bierkoning (10386) - La Tropica, NETHERLANDS - JAN 15, 2003
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
Raisinny, peppery aroma. Very sweet flavor with raiisns, cherry, porto and lots of alcohol. Syrupy and strong. No head at all, but a good lacing. Warms the body, should be far more complex after a few years cellaring.
Crit (3359) - Surrey, British Columbia, CANADA - JAN 13, 2003
2.5 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
Deep reddish brown.Malt and molasses nose. Rather syrupy malt flavor with harsh alcohol heat. Can’t say I really enjoyed this.
motelpogo (6706) - Plzen, CZECH REPUBLIC - JAN 13, 2003
3.8 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 15/20
i tried to cellar this but it only lasted 2 months. a 2000 bottle, at least it survived until 2003 to make it a year older. scotch aroma with some chocolate rum and raisins. a first hit of raw onion flavour that goes straight to the gut and then some golden syrup and christmas. i expected that a bottle this young might be a bit nasty but it wasn´t and though it was sweet it wasn´t offensively so. i will have to get another bottle and get someone to hide it
rtmikeh (7) - Dover, Pennsylvania, USA - JAN 12, 2003 does not count
3.4 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
I had the ’95, ’96, 97, ’98 and ’99 versions. All had a nice dark color and a nice aroma but that’s about where it ended. The ’96 version I thought had very nice flavor that stayed well in the palate, however, the rest all reminded me of cough syrup. A taste that brought up childhood memories that I didn’t care to remember. I would try the ’96 again but not sure if I would try any of the others. Can’t say that I would try the 2000-02 either..... of course I would, it’s beer.
johans (36) - Copenhagen, DENMARK - JAN 12, 2003
3.7 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
UPDATED: APR 16, 2008 With very little carbination and no head it doesn"t look very attractive.
The strength is great though, almost overwhelming and it almost burns. But I liked it. Just drink it like port wine, slowly.
Be careful, ot it will knock you on your a**
bob32256 (171) - Jacksonville, Florida, USA - JAN 11, 2003
3.9 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 15/20
2001 bottling. Nice rich aroma. Dark vanilla color. Deep, pleasantly sweet flavor, almost like a sherry.
apoptosis (1317) - Denver, Colorado, USA - JAN 8, 2003
4.3 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 9/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 18/20
Very robust, sweet roasted, malty flavor. Incredibly complex and quite impressive. Caramel, maple, molasses and other delightful winter warmers.
notalush (4914) - Denver, Colorado, USA - JAN 8, 2003
4 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 16/20
UPDATED: OCT 12, 2008 [my goodness how tastes change - this is still a quality beer, but it’s ever so sweet - only god as a digestive] Bottled in 2001. Whoa! This beer rocks! It tastes like a toned down version of WWS, but not toned down in flavor, just in alcohol content. The appearance is deep ruby red, looking very much like a great barley wine instead of a double bock. The flavor is roasty, malty and sweet, all in extreme amounts. Very over the top flavor with a suprisingly smooth finish. A great dessert beer. I have no idea why the overall rating is so low. This most certainly deserves to be in the top 50. Outstanding!
beerslayer (753) - New Jersey, USA - JAN 3, 2003
3.6 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 15/20
UPDATED: AUG 14, 2004 2002 I am sure I'll be rerating this one. This beer has to sit a while it is way to young to drink now I just couldn't wait. The flavor is way to sweet.
2003 Surprise to me that this one is not as sweet and more drinkable then last years.