Sierra Nevada Bigfoot

2003 Vintage, sampled 2004-10-02:

Minimal lacing, even less head formation. Just a few bubbles forming little islands (rafts?) on top of the reddish-ruddy body. Complex aroma -- kinda fruity, very malty, but with an overall underlying layer of hops in the mix, through-and-through. And the flavor profile? Much of the same -- lucious layering of big-ass malt, with the hops never too far behind the curve. Have noticed that the hops have already taken a bit of a backseat to the malt (compared to a fresh sample), but that in and of itself is not a bad thing, IMHO. Gives this beer a certian warming "roundness" that I think it lacks when it comes fresh from the brewery each and every year. And, in my thinking, if this beer is so tasty after a single year of aging, what sort of wonderful things can we look forward to over the next few years? I relish the thought of finding out....! ;^)
//TB

==================

2003 Vintage, sampled 2007-08-17:

Four years in the cellar, would this be a Homerun, or a Strikeout? Meh..., how about calling this a Ground-Rule Double?

Okay, enough baseball'isms for the time being. I know folks have had stellar results with the `Foot after 5-10+ years. And maybe my "cellar" leads something to be desired. But really? I expected a lot more from this one, to be honest.

Some musky oxidation in the mix with this one. Nothing undrinkable -- no moldy wet cardboard vibe -- but this seems to be one of the biggest aspects of this beer right out of the gates (for better or worse).

Getting past that, this beer has really dried out..., making this seem both thinner and more hoppy. The roughly 60/40 hop-to-malt ratio of the Bigfoot fresh now strikes me along the lines of roughly 80/20. All IMO, of course -- but I can't help but think this has really thinned out considerably.

It's not all doom-and-gloom with this beer. It's still damn tasty in the middle and the finish. No thoughts of dumping this down the drain, that's for sure. Nicely smooth and warming in the backend, too.

But I really had much bigger hopes for this one. Glad I cracked it open now, since otherwise, letting this one go much longer in the cellar might really send this beer South....

Drink `em if you got `em....
//TB

==================

2005 Vintage, sampled 2007-02-02:

For those of you that don't receive the BeerAdvocate Magazine, Issue #2 features a review of the 2005 Bigfoot by The Bros, "From [Their] Cellar". Here's their review:

Well, it has been said by wiser folks than I that "Opinions are like assholes -- everybody has a shitty one". But in this case, I think The Bros didn't "smoke a cig" with this one, but sparked up a full-on crack-pipe!

Sorry. I'm not finding any sort of oxidation with this beer what-so-ever. Ditto for any ashy/cigarette aspects. And ditto for seemingly having done a shot before/during/after this beer. Did they drink this during one of the many jammed-packed well-past-Fire-Marshall-approved-limits evenings at Bukowski's Tavern?

Either way, I think this beer still has plenty of cellaring life in it. Considering that I don't normally think Bigfoot to be all that drinkable under two years old, this beer is only now hitting it's Prime Time. A very nice warming malt bill --nicely "rounded" in flavor -- that highlights both the malt bill and the still significant hop load.

Not sure what The Bros were drinking -- but this beer is fair better than a freakin' D+ IMO....!
Cheers,
//TB

==================

2008 Vintage, 2008-02-27:

I grabbed a single of this during my latest work trip to Norfolk. Didn't get a chance to drink it there, so I stuffed it into my patented "Indestructible Beer Bottle Transport Device" (also known as one of my two steel-toe boots!), and had this in my checked luggage on the way back to San Diego. Does it make any sense that for a beer I can get quite easily here in San Diego..., I instead end up with a beer that has been shipped cross country, and back again? No, I guess not! :)

Anyway, long story-short: this year's version rocks.

"Approachable" may seem like a very weird way of discussing a ballsy American Barleywine -- but it's true with this year's Bigfoot. Many a' previous years' releases seemed like they needed at least a year or three to get some some semblance of approachability and poundability. But this one seems to me to be ready to go to from first pry of the non-twist-off cap (sorry Loren, I don't have any qualms with pry-off vs. twist-off)..., all the way to very end, when you're looking at the now-empty pint glass in sadness....

I always buy a sixer of each year's release of the Bigfoot. But the 2008? Make two sixers, thank you very much!
//TB