California/USA  (except dessert/sparkling)
2001 Cabernet Sauvignon "Peterson Family Vineyard" (Switchback Ridge)
Yikes! This is a Sumo wrestler wine, massive, powerful, oozing just about everything, from fruit to oak. It takes no prisoners, gives no quarter, and asks none. Many will swoon, some will be aghast. Classic Cal Cab it is not. And yet, tasting it the second day, the core of fruit did seem to dominate and it was pretty tasty.  Personally, I think this wine could have benefited from a little restraint, but there is still so much to like here, it's hard to be too churlish. Judgment reserved until such time as I see how this reacts to some cellaring. It does need some degree of civilization. NB: I had a second bottle of this that showed a bit more poorly a few weeks later, seeming harsh on the finish, with all that trademark Foley oak treatment. It did start to come around with air. But stick this is the cellar and hope the pieces integrate well. 90+ points.

1999 Chardonnay "Cuvée Cathleen" (Kistler)
Great focus, great depth, and wonderful, intense leesy notes announce a wine that demands to be noticed and appreciated. For all of its depth and flavor, it is round and simply delicious, the parts are well on their way to integrating well, and the balance is superb. There is a hint of butterscotch, but only a hint. The oak is well integrated, too. A beautiful new world chardonnay that lingers in the mouth and evolves in the glass. 95 points.

2002 Pinot Noir "Keefer Ranch" (Failla)
I liked this not at all on opening, as it seemed rather thin, simple and tart. But it's a young, young wine and you have to give them time, right?  It evolved constantly and well for the next 45 minutes that I could spend with it, and ultimately I was liking it a lot. It showed more and more flavor, better balance, and picked up weight, as well. There is a certain earthy note to this, and a certain cranberry note, but the longer it sat, the more it all came together. Very nice, with potential for more improvement still. Do not drink this for at least three years in my opinion; then, we'll re-evaluate. 90 points.

2002 Pinot Noir "Savoy Vineyard" (Radio-Coteau)
This opens intense, and precise, but perhaps a bit hot.  I loved its cherry notes and flavor, and it picked up a little weight with air. The flavor kept popping up and there was a lot of it, giving some clues that this wine will be extremely charming in a year or two, I think. I don't think there is anything profound going on here, but it will be delectable. 89 points.

1994 Dominus
This old favorite is drinking beautifully and in my view is ready. I do not think it will decline in the near future, but I don't think it will improve more, either.  This opened with that sensual, velvety texture that this wine has acquired (after a very hard, rather tannic youth). But it seemed curiously hollow. Then, it woke up, and was everything you wanted in Cal Cab. Lively, but soft and very ripe tannins popped out, adding just a little life to the wine. It picked up some weight, and added some earthy notes for character and distinctiveness. All the way, it had that sexy, sensual texture and great, classic flavor notes. Lovely. 95 points.

1999 Cabernet Sauvignon "Georges de Latour Reserve" (Beaulieu)
Not a bad wine---but rather remarkably undistinguished for its price tag and pedigree. How the mighty have fallen. This opened a bit tart, and never quite eliminated that element. It showed some nice, classic cab flavors, very well integrated and inconspicuous oak, and some nice balance. It lacks depth, and the finish was ordinary. There was little to distinguish this from a mid-level cab or Bordeaux...and isn't that a shame. A whole bottle was opened and after everyone had a sip, no one went back to it. I found it hard to believe this was so insipid, and took the bottle home. The next day, it showed even thinner, and while the tartness had integrated a bit, it seemed more ordinary than ever. You expect more from this wine. Or, at least we used to expect more. 87 points.

1994 Cabernet Sauvignon "Rutherford Hill Reserve" (Flora Springs)
Some called this "high toned," but I just thought it was tart and too lacking in fruit to match its acidic profile. It showed pleasant, if slightly odd, simple cherry notes, but it was hard to get past the tart finish, or the lack of balance, with the acid overwhelming the fruit. Very disappointing. 86 points.

2002 Pinot Noir (Adelsheim) QPR Winner
This multi-vineyard blend is lovely and delectable, with tasty cherry flavors, and a bright, easy feel. It seems to drink rather well now, and is soft and appealing.  It is reasonably priced, and will probably hit most shelves around $20-$22. Inexpensive and delectable pinot is hard to find. Drink young...loses some points for being a "do it now" type of wine, but don't let that distract you from how much fun it will be young.  87-88 points.

2001 Pinot Noir "Elizabeth's Reserve" (Adelsheim)
A four-vineyard blend, selling for roughly $30 or so a bottle. It seems soft and sensual, although only three years old, but it has a certain distinctiveness to it that the "regular" pinot, above, does not. Elegant and sexy. 88-90 points. 

2000 "Cain Five"
Pleasing and tasty, but like a lot of 2000s, lacking something in the mid-palate, a bit too light. The tannins are ripe, and there are savory cherry notes on the wine. If only the mid-palate were not quite so hollow.... 86-88 points.

2002 Pinot Noir "Cohn Vineyard" (Kosta Browne)
Round around the edges, but with excellent grip, this pinot displays bright fruit and supple, ripe tannins. The flavor is totally muted at the moment and the wine seems rather dumb, making it hard to evaluate in the time I had with it, but it seems to have nice promise, decent depth and structure.  Pricing in the mid-$40s most likely. 88-90 points. 

2002 Pinot Noir "Sonoma Coast" (Kosta Browne)
Priced in the upper $20s, this is real pretty. Bursting with flavor, it shows raspberries and then cherries, is very ripe, very sexy and has lots of personality. This is not your staid, refined pinot.  It has personality to spare, but not much complexity. It will drink better young than mature. The winery describes this as having blueberry notes, which I didn't get, although that is perhaps a nod to the wine's ripeness. I doubt most pinot drinkers want a lot of blueberry in the wine, though, so fortunately I didn't find much if at all. ;)  87-89 points. 

2002 Pinot Noir "Kanzler Vineyard" (Kosta Browne)
This is a BIG mouthful, rightly described by the winery as their densest wine. Priced in the mid-$40s, this is a real good deal for those who like their pinots to show some cojones. The wine adds to its depth with some brightness and supple tannins. As with the Cohn, above, the flavors are muted at the moment and the wine is a bit dumb, but it looks like it will show extremely well in a couple of years. 89-91 points.

2001 Cabernet Sauvignon "Signature" (Darioush)
This pricey cab, around $60 or so, is famous for its imposing bottles. The juice never seems to be as pretty as the packaging. This is a pleasant mid-level cab that might be of interest for about half the price. It has an earthy and pungent nose, some dusty tannins in the mid-palate, decent fruit. It is agreeable and pleasing, but undistinguished. I expect a bit more in this price range. 87-89 points.

2000 Cabernet Sauvignon "Estate" (Signorello)
In this difficult vintage that saw a lot of pleasant but hollow cabs at hilariously high prices, this is actually relatively successful. From the nice, aggressive attack, to the classic cab notes, this shows intensity, grip and typicity. The big question with 2000s, of course, is usually depth, and again, relatively speaking, this does very well. A very nice off-vintage performance. Pricing around $40 or so makes this a reasonable deal in California. 88-90 points.

1995 Cabernet Sauvignon "Special Selection" (Caymus)

Decanted, although not for all that long, this still showed very aggressively. I loved the pure cab flavors. The wine seemed very bright, though, a bit sharp and linear, with the oak very well integrated and not smoothing it out very much.  This need more time, obviously, but based on how it showed, I was a little concerned with whether the fruit would balance with the structure. At this point in its development, you would think it would be a little better integrated. Check back in a few years. 89-92 points.

1994 Cabernet Franc (Horton)
Light, with fading fruit, this shows simple, somewhat candied cherry flavors. As it airs, it seems to be cracking up a bit, and there seemed to be a hit of volatile acidity and pruney fruit as well.  This has little to recommend it at this point. 75 points

2002 Cabernet/Chambourcin (Chaddsford)
This wine is a blend of cabernet franc, cab sauvignon and chambourcin. It is bright and flavorful, and has a nice, pungent nose of raspberry fruit, which follows through onto the palate. There's no depth here at all, and the wine is rather hollow in the mid-palate, although its lively brightness keeps it from being wholly without redeeming values. Lotsa flavor, no depth. 83 points.

2002 Cabernet Franc "Flying Fox" (Veritas)
Well! This was confusing. An entire table full of pretty experienced wine people had TWO bottles of this served blind from two different cellars. One cellar--which is generally kept colder--had the wine show soft, a bit dull, very mature. I was thinking it was maybe a 10 year old Chinon, or a minor right bank Bordeaux. It seemed a bit watery and so-so, but pleasant, and some people rather liked its gentle, mature demeanor. I'd give that bottle 83 points at best. The second identical bottle, from a different cellar, showed much fresher, and more like the Chaddsford, above. Very bright, simple, not much depth, sweet fruit. There were also touches of bubblegum and game, and it seemed light and simple, crying out to be drunk now. Maybe 81 points. How could these two identical bottles show so differently? The assumption would have to be that the first bottle was stored warmer and was farther along--but it came from the guy who had the COLDER cellar. Oh, well. Not exciting in either presentation.

2002 Cabernet Franc (Lang & Reed)
Fairly full bodied, and burly, this wine's tannins nonetheless smooth out quickly. It has some decent body and concentration, and at times is very nice, showing lots of fruit flavor and a round, full mouthfeel. There is also a hint of bubblegum--some odd note on the finish, but if it made you cock your head, it didn't ruin the presentation. 88 points.

1998 Cabernet Franc (Behrens & Hitchcock)
Green and laced with olives, a bit vegetal at times, this shows insufficient depth, and just seems bright and simple. It is overly aggressive for the fruit, and its off flavors are not very appealing. This is a wine that I suspect always had balance issues---you couldn't drink it young because it was too aggressive and disjointed, but when you wait for those things to go away, there's not enough depth of fruit left. 84 points.

1999 Cabernet Franc "Pritchard Hill" (Chappellet)
Bright and smooth at the same time, this wine has a silky feel that is very appealing. There are hints of licorice around the edges, but it is well integrated. Tannins pop out quickly, and smooth out just as fast. As it airs more, the fruit thins a bit and it seems, if anything, a little too bright. Still, there were moments when I liked this a lot, but noting that its current price tag is around $60, you may not want to go running out to get it. 89 points.

2001 Meritage (Wolf Family)
This is mostly cab franc (82%, with the rest cab sauvignon). It has its moments, but ultimately I thought it left me unconvinced. It has nice grip and flavor, with that touch of green. Just a touch, though. The wine is a bit rustic, and lacks lushness, and seems to have a bitter chocolate flavor at times on the finish. It's still young--another year of cellaring or two might help. 87 points.

1995 Red Wine (Viader)
Inky black, the wine's acidity gives it a silky feel, when you didn't expect one. It ends a bit too bright for me, but has nice depth and flavor, and is otherwise well put together. I hope this is in balance and will benefit from a little more aging, but I'm not quite sure about that and just might have some concerns about cellaring it a good while longer. 88 points.

1997 Red Wine (Viader)
Sweet fruit is supported by more focused than anticipated. The wine's strawberry notes are very appealing, and it has nice liveliness to it as well. This has aged nicely and is drinking pretty well right now. 91 points.

1997 Cabernet Franc "Howell Mountain Third Century" (Beringer)
Soft, innocuous and light, this wine comes with some famous names on the label, but doesn't deliver much of interest. It seems to lack just about everything--finish, structure, depth. Disappointing. 85 points.

1995, 1996, 1998 and 2000 Cabernet Franc (Pride)
This group presents a nice mini-vertical that shows Pride making some fine cabernet franc--which is not something a lot of folks can say in California. 1995: Very nice, showing some mature notes, some tar, some tobacco for complexity. This also shows some dusty tannins, but it ultimately becomes rather elegant and improves dramatically with aeration--a fine sign. There's a touch of olive, too, but only a touch. Well done. 91 points. 1996: Bright and lively, this opens with an excellent and intense attack and closes with a gripping finish. This burly cab franc is still young and very vigorous, and shows a bit tight. It unfolds beautifully with air, and I loved the mouthfeel of this full-bodied wine, that seemed to roll around your palate and caress the tongue. 93 points. 1998: There's a touch of mint and a haze of mouth-drying tannins, and at first this was hard to drink. It seemed like too many 1998s--structure overwhelming fruit. I was pleased at its improvement with air, and began to like it well enough. As it opened, though, the fruit faded a bit, and you might say that, despite the tannic opening, you might want to drink this sooner rather than later, because the fruit may not be there when the tannins fully moderate. 89 points. 2000: In this lineup, this was the big surprise, a beautiful wine in a difficult vintage. Sweet fruit abounds, and is tasty and luscious, and there is decent depth here. Not surprisingly--as with a lot of 2000s--when it gets a lot of air, the fruit moderates in its impression of depth rather quickly and you realize there is not as much underneath as you thought. In fact, you begin to think it is a bit hollow. Drink this on the younger side, despite its intense opening. Drink today, and it gets 90 points just for glorious flavors, but I predict it will slip as time wears on. A fairer score would be more like 87 taking into account its flaws--but that doesn't explain how much fun it is today.

2001 "White Coat" (Turley)
Earthy and oaky, this full bodied wine projects a lot of everything--fruit, flavor, wood, and a nice finish. These White Coats have been somewhat controversial, but I'm rather liking them a lot. If you don't mind a little oak, there's a lot here to like. 91 points.

2000 "White Coat" (Turley)
Speaking of controversial White Coats, this is probably the most eccentric of the group that I have had (00, 01, 02). It was always prematurely amber, and had a botrytis feel to it. Served blind now, a few years after release, I'm pleased to say it hasn't cracked up, but the combo of oak and botrytis made me think it was a dry Sauternes. There were lots of leesy notes, too, and a nice finish. This will be a bit eccentric for many, but if you can ignore that, there's a lot here to like, and it has developed nicely in the cellar when I thought it might fall off. 91 points.

1999 Syrah "Eisele Vineyard" (Araujo)
This seems to lack some of the layers other vintages have shown, and seems rather brighter, too. It opens bright and moderately tannic, with some caramel on the end. It seems a bit thinner than expected. Some air does it a lot of good, allowing some integration of components, and allowing it to pick up a bit of weight, and show more like syrah. Still, I am not quite as enthused by this as some other Araujos I have had.  88 points.

2001 "Ode to Picasso" (Behrens & Hitchcock)
This is a big, opulent mouthful, rather heavy on the oak, and with a touch of heat on the finish. The good news: as it sits, it delivers a lot of flavor, and something shines through besides the oak.  It slowly opens and becomes interesting. The tannins pop out, too. Still, there was something about this--maybe the quality of the oak--that made me less than enthusiastic about this wine. Let's just say Picasso is a little off center. Maybe this will come together in the cellar and present a more harmonious picture. 89+ points.

2000 "Le Desir" (Verité)
This is the winery's St. Emilion imitator, and it does a pretty good job. Like too many 2000s, there is not exactly a lot of depth in the mid-palate, and that is often disturbing. Still, there is liveliness, good, earthy right bank style flavors, and sweet fruit. There is perhaps a touch of green on the finish. I would drink this now and in the near future--it drinks extremely well now, but I'm not looking for it to go anywhere but down. 88 points.

2000 Lytton Estate "Late Harvest" (Ridge)
I have had late harvest Ridges before and loved their opulence and richness--Nervo is an example. But this wine (93% zinfandel) goes several steps further. The label reveals only 1.8% residual sugar, but it seems far more than that. The wine is actually off dry! It is, of course, very ripe, and the oak gives it a round, smooth demeanor. Despite its eccentric nature--this was pretty close to port without the big tannins--this was a lot of fun to drink for awhile. Aeration didn't help it though, as the heat on the wine showed through while the fruit thinned. 87 points.

1997 Zinfandel (Moss Creek)
Browning around the edges, this is beautifully balanced and drinks well anyway. It is very ripe, showing lots of chocolate and caramel, but it has frequent bursts of strawberry fruit. Call it chocolate covered strawberries. There is some brightness around the edges.  It may be a bit odd, but it tasted good and drank pretty well. 87 points.

1991 Zinfandel "Belloni" (Ravenswood)
Served blind, this wine had a lot of people confused as it showed that chambord and kirsch note that I most often tend to find in Australian wines. It seemed a bit old at times---a bit sour on the finish, a bit of bottle stink on the nose. As it opened, it seemed to project mostly candied fruit, heading to strawberry and chambord, but the brightness was a problem. The acidity on the wine was clearly outliving the fruit. After some aeration, the wine began to show flat out tart and became rather unappealing. Over the hill, I think, and I didn't much like the candied aspect before it cracked. 79 points.

1999 Zinfandel (Saddleback)
This is a full throttle zin, around 15% alcohol, big, rich, ripe and burly. It is deep in color, and bursts with flavor, yet finishes smooth and balanced. Relatively speaking. It threw a big sediment, by the way. This just was fun to drink every minute. 90 points.

2000 Zinfandel "Dusi Ranch" (Ridge)
For every moment this sits, despite Ridge's reputation for making some of the most ageworthy zins in California, this gets more boring, and more hollow. It's a wine with a substantial oak overlay, and not enough supporting fruit and depth. Pleasant enough, in a bland, inoffensive way, although with a certain odd flavor nuance, this wine does little to further Ridge's reputation for zinfandel. 85 points.

Pleiades V "Old Vines" (Sean Thackrey)
This is a bit dull at first, showing mostly a heavy anise nose, and some oak treatment. I feared the fruit had faded too much. It shook off the bottle slumber, though, and soon people were commenting on its great ripeness. It seemed rather lively, too, smooth and round, and the fruit was far fresher than it first appeared. If the fruit has thinned since its youth, it is still vibrant and tasty. This "kitchen sink" blend that has everything from Zin to Rhone varietals, has held very well for a wine that cost $13.99 on release. 88 points.

[Return to Top]  

Dessert / Sparkling wines
2001 Monbazillac "Réserve du Chateau" (Chateau Vari)
I saw this only on Day 2 after it was opened, but for a young wine from a fine vintage, what a mess!  It shows rather admirable depth, but the problem here is volatile acidity. Not just a little. Not just a bouquet. It tastes like the wine was mixed with a vat of lanolin. Thoroughly offputting, impossible to drink. I'm told it drank decently on Day 1, but this dramatic turnaround to the point of being undrinkable does not bode well for this wine's future development. 78 points.

2001 Sauternes (Chateau Coutet)
An unctuous middle joins with a bright and lively core to make a scrumptious wine. Precise and penetrating, yet loaded with fruit, rich and concentrated, this combines fruit and structure in a particularly appealing fashion that's hard to argue with. Nice vanilla aromas up front, too. This should have a nice long life and be simply delicious for most of it. 93 points.

1990 Rieslaner Beerenauslese "Mussbacher Eselshaut" (Muller-Catoir)
Soft and gentle, with apricots on the nose and peach on the palate, this wine is pleasing--and mature. Actually, I'd say it is a bit overly mature, showing some oxidized notes. Tasty and enjoyable, I think this has seen better days, is in decline, and needs to be drunk. 87 points.

1998 Gruner Veltliner Beerenauslese (Brundlmayer)
Viscous, ripe and juicy, this bursts with flavor, nuanced by apricots. It has superb depth and concentration, a lovely, lingering finish, and yes, more and more flavor every second. The finish is lively and sunny, too. 93 points.

2003 Pinot Noir "Deglacé" (Adelsheim)
Lovely and sweet, sexy and ethereal, this wine is a pleasure to drink. As this style of faux-eiswein goes, it is rather light and delicate and will not present that thick, syrupy note that many know and love. It is not a complete wimp though and there is a mid-palate here to go with the flavors.  Runs roughly $25 or so per half.

2002 Cabernet Franc Ice Wine (Inniskillin)
Incredibly, and rather sickly sweet, this does some things very well, and others not well at all. It is a cherry Kool-Aid, candied feel and flavor to it that I found rather unappealing. Just when I was ready to write it off as a caricature of wine, though, I had to notice its depth and the way it took over your palate and coated it with fruit. The problem is that the fruit was way too sweet without ample, perceptible, balancing acidity. Plus, it had that very candied taste, seeming almost like artificial soda pop. Deep and thick is fine, and you can even live without the acidity on some types of wine, but add that candied flavor, and you have some problems.  Just too much too handle. 85 points.

1991 Muskateller Eiswein "Durkheimer Hochbenn" (Muller-Catoir)
Offbeat in flavor, this seems spicy and minty, touch of menthol,  possessed of odd nuances. Some said "quince."  I thought "allspice."  It was hard to accept that this was 100% Muskateller, but perhaps age has brought it to this place. One thing everyone agreed on--delicious. An unctuous mid-palate is supported by all those spicy notes. The wine gets significantly drier with air. Its time has come--delightful to drink now, but it might be better drunk in the near future. 92 points.

1989 Sauternes (Raymond-Lafon)
Heavy botrytis notes started this off, and it was hard to find the fruit. Some thought it even faded. I disagreed, and took home a quarter of a bottle, and the next day it was actually better, fuller, riper and well integrated. This has great flavor, that creme brulée aftertaste, and luscious fruit. 94 points. 

NV Champagne Blancs de Blanc "Cuvée des Caudalies" (DeSousa et fils)
This wine, from grand cru vines, is sunny and lovely. Those looking for the powerhouse, austere, slightly oxidized big brutes need to look elsewhere. This is friendly and charming, a sloppy puppy. There's some toast and a fine finish, and the wine is very lively--but flavor, and an easygoing demeanor dominate it. This is certainly dry, but there is no austerity to it. Delectable. 90 points.

1997 Riesling Beerenauslese "Geisenheimer Rothenberg" (Schumann-Nagler)
This projects mostly pear laced with occasional interesting nuances like mango. It's not terribly sweet, unctuous or deep, but sprightly, and charming, with its eccentric little flavor hits. Not exactly your typical BA, but well worth a try. 88 points.

NV Zinfandel Port (Rombauer)
Well, this won't remind anyone of Port. It's red and has lots of alcohol. But it has little tannin or intensity, and the flavor profile is all its own. That said, the wine is a pleasure to drink. The fruit is gloriously sweet and seems to be freshly crushed--you want to drool as you drink it. There's some focus, not a lot of concentration or thickness. It becomes more and more flavorful with air. This is a guilty pleasure--but pure pleasure. 90 points. 

1999 Port (Quinta do Vesuvio)
This port, certainly this year, goes for sweet, rich and opulent. It is utterly hedonistic, throwing off waves of flavor as its ripe, rich fruit expands. It's very sweet--no austerity here!--and simply delectable. There's a fragrant nose here, too. For those who like intense ports (like Dow) or more mature, integrated ports--this will not necessarily be your thing. There's pure flavor here, though, and the wine is just delicious. Pricing around the mid-$40s.  Not your father's style of Port, perhaps. But a lot of fun.  90-92 points.

[Return to Top]  

Germany (except dessert/sparkling)
1971 Riesling Auslese "Urziger Wurzgarten" (Christoffel-Berres)
Sleepy, sleepy riesling we have here. On opening, it seemed flat, simple and dull, a wine that had seen better days. But it was just a little sleepy and needed to shake off its long rest. When it finally opened, it was beautiful, showing surprising richness and depth, some lingering acidity and sweetness, and great flavor. It showed livelier and seemed just beautiful. With even longer aeration, some cracks finally began to show. Some two and a half hours later it was no longer improving, and in fact retreating. But this was a very nice performance for a wine of its age, and a producer that is not as well known as the superstars. 90 points.

2001 Muskateller Kabinett "Durkheimer Steinberg" (Darting)  QPR Winner
This is a simple little wine, delicate and fragrant, easy and gentle. It is mildly off dry and is a great sipping wine--just don't expect much depth, finish or complexity. About $11.  85 points.

2003 Riesling Spatlese (Wegeler)
Sweet and simple, this unusual wine is a blend of the two famous Graacher vineyards, Himmelreich and Domprobst. There's not much structure, depth or finish, though, and this surely doesn't make a statement for that fine pedigree. 84 points.

2001 Riesling Spatlese "Wachenheimer Belz" (J.L. Wolf) QPR Winner
Pleasant, if unexceptional, this dry riesling is light and precise, showing a bit too simple. For an uncomplicated drink, it is nicely balanced and easy to handle. But not much else. 86 points.

1998 Riesling Spatlese "Koberner Weisenberg" (von Schleinitz)
Easy and soft on the attack, this is gripping on the finish, and this needed that liveliness. This seems ready to drink, and while it shows few tertiary notes, it has softened considerably, and becomes ever more calm with aeration and warmth. Pleasurable, but not compelling. 88 points.

1993 Riesling Kabinett "Brauneberger-Juffer" (Willi Haag)
The late, lamented Haag produced a stupendous Kabinett here that has aged beautifully. I've had Auslesen that seem to have less concentration and stuffing than this at age 11. This is amazingly powerful and gripping, bright, aggressive and stuffed. Kabinett? Surely you jest. The persistence keeps your mouth engaged with every sip. The bronze, burnished feel the wine has is all that reveals its mature notes and tertiary nuances.  It finally mellows with air and warmth, but it took awhile. A stunning performance for an 11 year old Kab--which can't possibly be just a Kab legally. 92 points. 

1989 Riesling Auslese "Abtsberg" (Maximin Grunhaus)
Remarkable, and beautiful. Ripe, opulent and deep, this is just off dry now, in a friendly way. It shows perfect harmony between acid and fruit--there's plenty of acid to get your attention, but not so much that you feel like puckering. It has a fabulous finish, and still seems fresh and youthful. There is hardly a hint of tertiary characteristics. Elegant, pristine and singing beautifully. 95 points.

[Return to Top]  

Italy (except dessert/sparkling)
2003 Falanghina (Feudi di San Gregorio) QPR Winner
This Campanian wine is inexpensive and a nice value. It shows a touch of grass on the nose (but this isn't sauvignon blanc level grassiness...).  It has decent depth, but no one will call it more than medium bodied. As it ages it will likely thin more. Young and lively, this is a pleasing QPR wine that you can have for $10.  86 points.

1999 Brunello di Montalcino (Altesino)
I liked this more the more I tasted it. Underwhelming at first, seemingly without enough depth, the flavors and ripe, fresh fruit burst through and left you with a delectable finish, that lingered and that could be savored. It picked up some weight, too. A very hedonistic Brunello, running around $60 a bottle. 91-93 points. 

2000 Rosso del Salento "Notapanaro" IGT (Taurino) QPR Winner
This is a blend, but mostly Negroamaro (85%) and the rest Malvasia Nera. It should be priced at roughly $15 a bottle or so. The wine is a bit odd in some respects, but some will like the oddities. It has an odd nose with licorice notes, perhaps from oak treatment, although there is no American oak used, and some coffee bean. It is precise and focused, and sometimes makes me think it could have used a little more fatness and roundness. It was aged in the bottle for three years before release--which is a long time for an inexpensive wine. Something about this, perhaps it eccentricities, made me dislike it a bit, but it certainly had its virtues. 85-87 points. 

1999 La Poja IGT (Allegrini)

The price of this is Valpolicella of corvina veronese is getting to be alarming. This release seems like it will hit over $80 a bottle, assuming the figures I saw that clearly indicated "six bottle case" were accurate. The flagship Amarone may be considerably cheaper. Still, I've always liked this wine, although the varietal may be an acquired taste for some, imparting some very different flavors. This is an excellent version of the wine. Intense on the attack, round and velvety on the mid-palate, as I've come to expect, this exudes so much sex appeal and pure flavor that I forgot about the price tag for awhile.  92-94 points.

1998 Barbaresco "Bric Turot" (Prunotto)
This wine is fruit forward and led on by the delicious flavors it projects. There is good depth and it is a winner all the way, but don't write this off as a fruit bomb. Significant tannins are lurking underneath, and decanting or time will bring them out. This should drink better and be more integrated around 2008. About $60 a bottle. 90-92 points.

1997 Barbaresco "Bric Turot" (Prunotto)
It's hard to say whether I liked this '97 or the '98 above. This '97 is sexier, with riper fruit, and a certain sensual roundness to it that I appreciated. Not that the '98 is angular, or unripe or lacks sex appeal. Quite the contrary. Still, the combination of power and voluptuousness here appealed to me a lot. Others may prefer the '98. About $60 a bottle.  90-92 points.

1999 Barolo (Prunotto)
This is a blend from various vineyards, but don't let that stop you. It's not like this is cheap junk, and in fact you'll pay a little over $50 a bottle, not bad but not bottom of the line wine either. Forget your terroir fascination and just enjoy. This flavorful wine has beautiful balance, tannin on the finish, and integrates fruit and structure admirably. It's burly, but relatively approachable, but watch it close down soon. Decanting a short while might actually make it more aggressive at the moment. 90-92 points. 

1996 Barolo "Cannubi" (Prunotto)
Earthy, bricking in color around the edges, this had a certain elegance that I liked, but it seemed curiously mature for a Barolo this young. The trade representative indicated that it was a good bottle, so it is what it is, restrained, a touch austere, with almonds and earthy fruit. 88-90 points.

1998 Barolo "Bussia" (Prunotto)
A superb wine that I tremendously enjoyed, this shows good depth, great power, great fruit and great structure. It has all the ingredients to be a star. It grips your palate and doesn't let go--but note that this is closing down. Check back in a decade or so.... 93-95 points.

1999 Barolo "Bussia" (Prunotto)
On the heels of super 1998, comes a 1999 that is in the same league. Perhaps because of the extra year of age--and perhaps not--the 1998 is less attractive to drink at the moment, showing gripping power. This '99 is a friendly puppy, though, relatively speaking at the moment. It has great depth of fruit, and enough power to balance it. This is a sensual, round wine. 92-94 points. 

2002 Costera IGT (Argiolas) QPR Winner 
This inexpensive blend is made from a variety of obscure varietals including 90% Cannonau. This is often one of my favorite QPR wines, around $13 a bottle. I have had other vintages I've liked better, but this shows a lot of sweet fruit, and bursts with flavor--literally bursting with flavor. Sweet, a bit simple, but a lot of fun for the money. 86-88 points.

2002 Korem IGT (Argiolas)
This wine, around $40-ish, is a upper level effort by this property that shows some eccentricities, but I ultimately liked it. It is made from the same blend as the Costera, Cannonau, Bovale Sardo and Carignano, although not in the same proportions. It is nicely focused, and very black in color. The the black cherry and blackberry notes come in with precision, and there's a nice finish. The flavors are almost excessive at times, certainly a bit flamboyant, but some age should calm it down and lead to integration.  90-92 points.

1999 Turriga IGT (Argiolas)
This wine, 85% Cannonau, and 15% from other varietals including Malvasia Nero, Carignano, and Bovale Sardo, comes from a single vineyard and is priced around $50. If the Korem is just slightly eccentric, this is more than a little offbeat in terms of flavor. The tannins are also harder and the wine is all around less appealing than the Korem, and not worth the extra bucks. It does have a vibrant demeanor that was appealing. 87-89 points. 

2003 Vitiano Rosso IGT (Falesco) QPR Winner
This is often a great QPR wine, and so, too, this year, running around $10 and under. It is a blend of merlot, cabernet sauvignon and sangiovese, in more or less equal proportions. It is fairly light and simple, but pleasing and tasty, with a certain liveliness from the very soft tannins and acidity on the back end.   A very nice value---86-88 points.

2001 Montiano IGT (Falesco)
This 100% Merlot is just is so....appealing. All non-French Merlot should take a lesson. It has an excellent, velvety mouthfeel, but also grip and tannin. It has depth and structure, and nice flavor. Best yet, it seems to project all of these things effortlessly, making it a pleasure to sip. Very nice, a serious winner. Around $50 a bottle. 92-94 points.

2001 Cabernet Marciliano IGT (Falesco)
This is a blend of cabs, 70% cab sauvignon and the rest cab franc, and runs a bit over $60 a bottle, which ain't cheap. This has a great mouthfeel, fruit that coats the mouth sensually. It is soft and elegant, with just enough lively tannin to wake it up. It seems to lack length, though, and I kept looking for some distinction without finding enough. It was a pleasure to drink and I think you're hard pressed to dislike this, but I rather preferred the Montiano. 89-91 points.

2001 Nero d'Avola "Don Antonio IGT" (Morgante)
In most years, this is my favorite Sicilian wine. This is another winner vintage. Spicy, with perfect balance, this seems sensual and elegant, while projecting big hits of flavor and a velvety demeanor. Tasted without the opportunity to give this much air, I would have to say the wine seems a bit lighter than in other recent vintages, but I think this will pick up weight nicely with air and cellaring. It runs just under $30 a bottle, a fine deal. 89-91 points.

2001 Rosso IGT  "Campoleone" (Lamborghini)
This pricey IGT, an equal blend of Merlot and Sangiovese, is a super wine. Round and ripe, with a spicy attack, this caresses your mouth and delivers persistent flavor on a lingering finish. This may not be the most profound wine you'll ever have, but it will be one of the ones you have trouble keeping your hands off of. Retail will likely be around $70 a bottle.  91-93 points.

2002 Montevetrano IGT
This blend of 60% Cabernet Sauvignon, 30% Merlot and the rest Aglianico, shows lots of good things. Namely, is sensually soft and utterly delicious. At this young stage of its life, though, I did not get much else there--it seemed a bit shy of depth, and a little too soft, actually. I loved every sip I had, but I wonder where this wine is going...it is certainly possible to be fooled by young wines in a hurried tasting.  With the price at over $80 a bottle, most likely, I would like to taste this again before making any buying decisions. At the moment, this is the best I can estimate, and the upper end looks like a stretch. 88-90 points.

1992 Valpolicella Classico Superiore (Quintarelli)
A beautiful rhubarb-y nose leads this off. The wine is gentle, and medium bodied. It is firm and focused, though, and as it airs, it shows a happy, lively demeanor. It becomes penetrating on the finish, too. This is drinking beautifully now, and has a certain pinot noir elegance to it, but for that rhubarb-y note.  Served blind and surrounded by pinot noir, a lot of folks thought it might be new world pinot.....92 points.

2003 Rosso di Notri IGT (Tua Rita)
This is a new red from famed Tuscan producer Tua Rita, known particularly for the pricey Redigaffi Merlot, but this one is meant to be affordable. It's 70% sangiovese, and 15% each cab sauvignon and merlot. It will probably retail in the low $20s. It is bursting with flavor, and very fruit forward. The structure takes a back seat to purity of fruit and the constant bursts of flavor. This is soft and very delicious, and approachable young. It seemed to go down well right now, although who knows--a little cellaring might see some closing up. Still, this will always be a wine to drink on the younger side. Delectable, if a bit simple. 88-90 points.

2002 Perlato del Bosco IGT (Tua Rita)
They say this is 100% sangiovese, but I was told it has a dollop of syrah in it. This is spicy, with ripe, lively tannins, and a bright, zesty feel. There's a hint of earth underneath. It is not a particularly deep or powerful wine, but a bit more distinctive than the Rosso di Notri, above, with some of the same characteristics. The apparent lack of depth may keep it from meriting a higher score, but this is a nice effort in a very difficult Tuscan vintage. This will run close to $40 a bottle. 88-90 points.

2002 Guisto di Notri IGT (Tua Rita)
This pricey wine (around $80 a bottle) is 65% cab sauvignon, 30% merlot and the rest cabernet franc. This is mouthfilling and surprisingly rich for the vintage, with loads of beautiful fruit that coats your mouth and catches your attention. It's lovely, if a bit soft, and a remarkable wine for this vintage. I suspect it will wind up in the lower end of my range, but if you're not price sensitive, this is a wine you'll like. 91-93 points.

1998 Barbaresco "Gallina" (Giacosa)
What was surprising about this relatively young wine was how soft and elegant it was. It was easygoing, and its texture was sensual. It was more "harmony" and less "zing" than you might expect from this wine, with its tannins well integrated and rather ripe. I enjoyed what I had today, but the wine can obviously hold a long while. Very fine, but at a current release price of around $100 a bottle, many may think twice.  89-91 points.

1999 Barolo (Giacosa)
This basic Barolo from Giacosa is tasty and approachable, but again you have to wonder at the pricing, around $90 a bottle, I suspect. There's a lovely chocolate note from the ripe fruit up front, and it is delectable in many respects. But what you don't see is anything particularly profound. It gets harder to divorce the wine from the price under these circumstances...certainly, I'd be more enthusiastic if it were $50, as the wine itself is delightful, soft and sexy. 89-91 points.

1999 Barolo "Falletto" (Giacosa)
At this point, Giacosa prices jump again, and this is likely to run well over $125 a bottle, probably closer to $150 in some places. The quality climbs here, too.  It has beautiful fruit, with raspberry notes, and a velvety texture, smooth and round.  It is rich and ripe, soft and easy, with tannins present but lurking underneath at the moment. This is wine whose demeanor will change quickly with air and cellaring. I would've liked to have seen more intensity, though, and I hope what I suspect is so: i.e., long aeration and/or cellaring will bring out the structure that is not so apparent here at this time.  91-93 points.

2002 Rosso Nero d'Avola (Tasca d'Almerita) QPR Winner  
This rosso in the past had some Perricone in it--2002 marks the first 100% nero d'avola production of this wine. There are tasty plums on the palate, and it has a sexy, laidback demeanor, with a smooth texture and on the end, some focused fruit. Very pleasing, and an exceptional deal at around $13.50 a bottle. Drink young!  87-89 points.

2001 Nero d'Avola "Cygnus" IGT  (Tasca d'Almerita) QPR Winner  
This blend of nero (75%) and cab sauvignon gets a little new oak for ten months, that is hardly noticeable. Priced in the mid-20s, it is an excellent value, too. It shows excellent depth, fine intensity, and a beautiful, lingering finish. It is round, deep and powerful, with a heady rush of blackberries and black cherries to your palate. Lovely. Drinks decently now, but you can hold this easily a few years. Still, I'd drink it on the younger side--its best feature is its fresh, succulent fruit, and I admit it is hardly a profound wine. But it tastes SO good....you gotta give it some points for that.  90-92 points.

2001 Rosso del Conte (Tasca d'Almerita)
This is 90% nero d'avola and 10% perricone, getting 50% new oak for one year. The price almost doubles here, to the low $40s, perhaps, but I'm not sure I like this any better than the Cygnus, above. The difference is in gravity of demeanor. This is far better focused than the Cygnus, but while it shows great flavor, too, it is not as lush or rich in demeanor, and seems better structured, a bit more brooding and deep. In the long haul, this is the better wine. In the short run (and perhaps overall) the Cygnus may deliver as much or more for you. I admit that this is the more complex, "serious" wine. But that's not always the ultimate answer.  90-92 points.

1999 I Sodi di San Niccolo' IGT (Castellere)
This Tuscan is a blend of sangioveto (85%) and 15% malvasia nera. Considering the varietal blend, it is a fairly pricey $60 or so a bottle--yet it succeeds in most things.  It is a BIG wine, earthy and mouthfilling, with a tight, tannin finish. It is in fact showing a bit too tight to justify drinking at the moment. It is badly in need of a few years. Hard to evaluate at this time, but my estimate would be 90-92 points.

2001 Barbera "Ciabot du Ré" (Fratello Revello)
The joke is on us---served blind in a flight of zins, people thought this was a rather restrained zin, showing briars and brambles. Which means it was a rich and cocoa-laced Barbera.  It was in fact very nice, with good balance, and a smooth, reticent air to it. It drinks easy, but maintains some lively notes and lots of flavor. Well done. 89 points.

1999 Syrah "Casa Via" (Fontodi)
Tasty and spicy, this has nice body, and becomes more like syrah as it airs, with a hint of game, instead of the initial fruity aspect it projected. It finished a bit odd, though, something with a hint of rubber or band-aid. In between, it evolved nicely, and was smooth and inviting. 87 points.

1998 Pergole Torte (Montevertine)
This opens ripe and weighty, but curiously dull. It seems linear and focused--like a laser beam surrounding and hiding the fruit. It has a long, long finish though, and as it loosens up, you can finally taste some really ripe fruit. This wine has closed in other words--but sure has a nice life ahead of it. Vibrant, and potentially exciting, when the fruit opens, this is a lot of fun. 92 points.

1999 "Alleanza" (Castello di Gabbiano)
There's a touch of mint on opening, but it fades gradually. Afterwards, this Super Tuscan, a blend of sangiovese, cabernet and merlot, shows nice and bright. It opens a bit tight and dull, though, and it takes some air for the fruit to develop flavor. When it does, it has lots, in fact, and becomes round and sweet, and delectable. Fun to drink. 90 points.