QPR Winner   I give this award to wines that demonstrate an excellent quality to price ratio. They are sometimes more expensive than the wines featured in my Best Buys section (which is cut off at $15), so while every Best Buy is also a QPR Winner,  not every QPR winner is an official Best Buy.  QPR winners are simply wines that are great values for a relatively  reasonable price. 

Alsace       Bordeaux         Burgundy:    Red   and  White   Calif./USA: Red   and  White    Dessert/Sparkling   Germany   Rhone    Italy

Alsace (except dessert/sparkling)
1994 Gewurztraminer "Bergheim" Vendange Tardive (Marcel Deiss)
This is a beautiful and fragrant gewurz, if somewhat restrained in the context of the vintage and the VT status. The balance and liveliness remind me somewhat more of a Loire Chenin Blanc. The nose, though, is gewurz, and the leaner aspects of the wine let the spice come out.  The wine has reasonable viscosity and sweetness, but is better as an aperitif than a dessert wine. Nicely balanced, but could use a touch more intensity.  Fully open and expansive.  90 points.

1994 Muscat "Goldert" (Zind-Humbrecht)
This vineyard inevitably produces the longest-lived, most eccentric Muscats in Alsace. After some consideration, I've decided I don't really like this style quite as much, being harder, more tinged with minerals and less flamboyant. To me, the whole point of muscat is flamboyance. If you don't get sensational bouquet, pure hedonistic appeal, why bother? The other side of the coin is that this vineyard usually produces bigger and more ageworthy Muscats than most would think possible. In the long run, I have decided I don't much care. No how matter how you slice it, it just isn't a grape that will return much dividend on the investment made to give it power and depth. It will never really seem deep and powerful. So go for the gusto. All that said, this is still, allowing for personal preferences, a wonderful Muscat, year in, year out.  It is as ready as it is ever going to be, and the fruit has thinned some since my last taste. It has some trademark scent and some hard edged mineral notes. Elegant, but thinning.  Very nice, but in need of drinking. 90 points.

1996 Pinot Gris "Clos Jebsal"(Zind-Humbrecht)
A bit of tingles starts this off, and don't mean from the anticipation of drinking it. There is maybe a touch of fizz, but it blows off very fast.  The wine then develops more beautifully with air than pinot gris has a right to do, taking on weight, power and viscosity. This is a bit off dry, but not as flamboyant as some these days.  I did find a bit of what seemed like diesel oil on the palate, and didn't especially appreciate that nuance. However, everything else was so gorgeous that it is hard to fault the wine for much. Others may like the flavor profile better. 92 points.

Bordeaux (except dessert/sparkling)
1966 Chateau Margaux
Call it an aging grande dame. The spring in the step is gone. The wrinkles are too obvious, and she's a little tired. But grace, charm and class provide some redeeming value. Despite the fact that it would have been better drunk perhaps ten years back, this bottle shook off the bottle slumber and the initial disappointment and delivered something that reminded you of what Margaux can be. The bouquet was seductive, redolent of violets, and nicer than Bordeaux has a right to be. The body was light but elegant, and the texture was velvety. The oxidized traces around the edges continued to annoy me, but I enjoyed the Burgundian aspects of this wine. 87 points.

The following horizontal tasting of 1970 Bordeaux was done blind, in flights, with 1970 Mondavi, 1968 Inglenook and 1970 BV Reserve as ringers.

1970 Chateau Beychevelle
Thin on the nose, this wine showed me more on the palate than I expected. Ripe, bright tannins dominated the first impressions, and then the wine showed some chocolate, and a merlot character. It opened nicely, eventually showing pristine and elegant fruit. It was a bit thin, and needs drinking, but for the moment, it is a Burgundy drinker’s Bordeaux, pure and elegant, with nice flavors. Its charm rescues a wine that is thinning a bit too much. 89 points. 

1970 Chateau Ducru Beaucaillou
One of the nicest, deeper 70's in this blind, peer group event, the Ducru has excellent weight and lushness, some red berry flavors on the lingering finish, and a touch of game at the end. There is also a hint of oxidation here and there, but for the most part, this wine gives the impression of lushness and depth. I loved the velvety texture and mouthfeel on this wine. It is a beautiful Ducru. 92 points. 

1970 Chateau Leoville Las Cases
Pristine and elegant, this wine showed nicely at first, with hints of cherries surrounded by some tannin. It had a powerful demeanor, but not necessarily a charming one. It faded with air and became a bit flat and uninteresting after awhile, thus losing some points, but if you drink fast, it can be better than its reputation, if it too one-dimensional. 86 points. 

1970 Chateau Talbot 
Some charcoal and brett on the back end only gives a nuance to a wine that seems bright and lively. This wine is showing its age, but has some good points. The acid is a bit high, but the with some air, the fruit becomes smooth and a little oily, enough to coat your mouth pleasingly. The unusually sweet strawberry flavor is a sign of advancing oxidation. At the moment, it is rather attractive, though, and despite its flaws, I enjoyed its style more than the clunky Las Cases. Drink fast. 85 points.

1970 Chateau Cos d’Estournel
Well balanced and elegant, this wine just seemed a brick short. The weight was OK. The overall impression was nice. It lacked a bit on the finish, and it was hard to discern any real flavor. It definitely suffered by being served right after the monumental 1970 BV Reserve, reviewed below. 88 points. 

1970 Chateau La Mission Haut Brion
Nuanced with charcoal and tar, this wine is big and penetrating, powerful and deep. It flattened out a bit too quickly with air and lost some flavor, at which point I did not like it as much, but in prime time it had plenty of stuffing and a nice finish. Burly, well made Bordeaux, with a touch of the rustic. 91 points.

1970 Chateau Margaux
A powerful, sweet, black cherry nose follows through onto the palate, which is chock full of gorgeous fruit flavor. The body is a bit thin, but at least can be called elegant and charming. The finish was excellent. With air, the wine did fade and began to show its age a little too quickly, but it was delightful and exuberant while it was fully alive. What attracted me most to this wine didn’t last very long, or the score would have been very high. Fading fast is a risk with older wines, but it was so charming while fully “on” that I do not have the heart to take away many points. Drink up. 91 points.

1970 Chateau Petrus
Some oak, some mint, and great weight and concentration meld together to created a distinctive, complex wine with a voluptuous, ripe and rich mouth feel. I loved the way it first showed. I loved the way it developed. It was sexy and deep, exotic and sensual. And believe it or not, I have had better bottles of this. 95 points.

1970 Chateau Trotanoy
For about ten minutes, this was a stunning wine. Rich and thick, with a lingering finish, it seemed multilayered and concentrated. But then the volatile acidity started to assert itself. The wine quickly became pruney with air, and it lost all ability to please. 80 points. 

1970 Chateau Latour
They poured the wine blind, and people looked up and kvelled. The bouquet is spectacularly powerful, the body rich, thick and voluptuous. The wine reeks of cassis and currant, and ripe cherries. There is some oxidation around the edge, but the wine held effortlessly and expanded. I liked this a little better the last time I had it, about five years back, but it is still spectacular Bordeaux. 96 points. 

1970 Chateau Lynch Bages
Black fruits predominate, and the best feature on this wine is the way they linger on the beautiful finish. The fruit is sweet and pure, lovely and elegant. Charming, but not particularly deep. 90 points.

1970 Chateau Pichon Lalande
Surprisingly big, and surprisingly bretty, this was a Pichon that was distinctive, weighty, and big and thick. I’ve had a lot of 1970 PL, and haven’t always liked them. This was a well stored bottle, to say the least, that showed a new level of concentration and freshness. 93 points. 

1970 Chateau Mouton Rothschild
 I have about ten notes on this wine, and never once have scored it above 87 points. Usually, it struggles to get to 85 points. Yet, I had to give this more. Elegant, yet penetrating, the wine seems a bit too light, yet there is not a hint of hollowness in the mid-palate. It gained some weight in the glass and then developed beautifully. I looked for a little more flavor and didn’t find it,  and for more weight, but this is certainly the best this wine has ever shown me. Only the relative lack of depth stops it from being a big winner.  89 points.

1989 Chateau Pichon Baron
This superlative wine, coupled with the 1990, is a back-to-back tour de force for Pichon Baron. Big and thick, the wine nonetheless seems succulent and lush, not awkward or monolithic. It is bursting with ripe, sweet, cassis fruit, and has subtle, underlying tannins. The texture is pure velvet, and very appealing. The concentration level is remarkable. Prior to this 1989, it was a long, long time--certainly not in my memory--that Pichon Baron produced a wine of this quality. This and the 1990 are also  poster boys for New Style, accessible and lush, winemaking. Bring on some more.  95 points.

1982 Chateau Calon Segur
This wine is past prime, but it still has something to offer. Although you can taste the oxidation and the fruit has lost its succulence, the wine still remains surprisingly lush, a trademark of the vintage. Around the edges, you can taste some burnt meat nuances, but it never becomes too intrusive. Air does nothing to improve the wine, but it doesn't fall apart either. Pleasant, good weight and texture, but underwhelming. 85 points.

1981 Chateau Lafite Rothschild
This is past prime, too, but its style is very different than the Calon. Elegant and focused, penetrating and pristine, this Lafite opens after about ten minutes of air, and the sweet, pure fruit is wonderful. It has a mouth coating, long finish, too. Its problem is that it faded fairly fast. Decanted for about twenty minutes, and then held in the glass, it was interesting for about forty-five minutes and then began to decline. The fruit lost flavor and oxidized. The "high" was pretty high, gorgeously perfumed, and utterly charming, though.  87 points.

1986 Chateau Cos d'Estournel
This bottle is a bit further along than the last one I had from a different cellar, but it is fine wine anyway. Burly and rustic, the wine is deep and weighty.  The fruit gradually opens and there is red berry flavor to go with the weight. With air, the balance keeps getting more attractive. It never comes close to fading.  The wine isn't the most charming or pleasurable you'll ever do, but there is nothing in particular it forgets to do. I enjoyed its depth and intensity. 90 points.

1983 Chateau Mouton Rothschild
I've liked this wine from the first taste I had in the 1985, and it always seemed like classic Pauillac to me. No, it is not the biggest, deepest or most powerful, but it was always charming and flavorful, and surprisingly persistent on the finish. It is aging gracefully, and is completely ready. The first impressions are of bottle must and tar, but the wine rouses itself, shakes off the hint of decay, and keeps expanding ever after. The fruit has thinned some, but the texture is unbelievably gentle and elegant, fruit wrapped in velvet. With air, the wine keeps getting juicier and more flavorful.  Soft, gentle, sensual. 90 points.

1993 Chateau L'Angelus
Sharp and angular, this wine has nice blackberry flavors when it opens, but it always seems short on depth, and hollow in the middle. One taster called it "coarse," a good summary. Bright, with a high acid profile, the wine just seems to lack the fruit to provide depth and intensity.   It dries out on the finish, too.  One dimensional, though not without some good points. 86 points.

Burgundy (red) (except dessert/sparkling)
1978 Chambertin "Clos de Beze" (Drouhin-Laroze)
This opened tired and a bit oxidized, and there seemed little of interest left in the wine. True to its pinot heritage, it fooled everyone, and staged a comeback with some air, blowing off the years of slumber in the bottle and developing into a fairly nice wine. The fruit was a still a bit faded, but there was some vibrancy, and the wine came into balance. This would have been a beautiful wine in, oh, 1995. It is still worthwhile, but a long way from great. 87 points.

1993 Nuits St. Georges "Hauts Poirets" (Jayer-Gilles)
This wine seemed unable to do much right. Now, I liked the weight. The fruit was well concentrated.  The texture was right. So far, so good? Then the problems started. First, the wine seemed a bit acidified. Sometimes they just seem compelled to do that in Burgundy. The acid was surrounded by funky odors and gamey fruit. There were moments when I was sort of liking it, but ultimately I couldn't get past its many problems. 84 points.

1985 Clos Vougeot (Mongeard-Mugneret)
Opened in pretty fast company, this wine was rather controversial. I liked it. True, there was some game and animal, but not too much for my taste. Also true, it was one of the first wines in the flight to fade. Well,  1985s do that. While it was in prime time, I enjoyed its lush texture and open fruit, nuanced with strawberry and rhubarb. The body seemed substantial and thick. When the fruit started to fade, the texture and depth were not enough to hold my interest, but it was fun while it lasted. 88 points.

1990 Echezeaux (Domaine de la Romaneé Conti)
This beauty opened tight as a drum, and then gradually evolved into a stunning wine. This is Burgundy made for the long haul, deep, concentrated, with a lot of supporting tannins. It took awhile to integrate and open, but when it did the fruit kept developing persistent, lingering raspberry nuances.  It became more and more attractive. And then I had none left. Sigh.  This wine is still improving and cellaring will be rewarded. 94+ points.  

1990 Chambertin (J. Drouhin)
Comparing this to the DRC Echezeaux is instructive. It is the difference between someone making a legend, and someone making a very good wine. The Drouhin is charming and elegant. With air, it becomes silky, acquiring a sensual texture that I rather liked a lot. The wine is bright and lively, and the raspberry nuanced fruit never faded. That's the good news. But there is bad news.  The wine is not very deep. In this vintage from this cru, it could have had power and depth to go with its other elements. It coulda been a contender. Instead, while it is not quite a pretender, it is a brick or two short of being really top notch. And when it began to fade, it quickly went out of balance, becoming too acidic.  Manipulated?  89 points. 

1988 Bonnes Mares "Vielles Vignes" (Roumier)
Roumier has discontinued this special bottling, which was acquired from the Domaine in France on release.  It is a wine that demands superlatives, but it is not quite earth shattering. First, take the silky texture of the Chambertin/Drouhin, above. But now add depth. Add supporting tannins. Add concentration. Add a lingering, beautiful finish. With air, the intense, still tightly wound wine grows, expands and develops. The one thing it doesn't quite do is deliver massive amounts of flavor. That tends to go with the territory in 1988, where the tannins were severe and sometimes dominate.  Still, quibbles aside, this is a complex Burg that can hold for years more. It has that extra layer or two of depth that peels away and defines it as something a cut above.  Of course, it was made in such small quantities that few people will have more than a bottle, if that.  It might merit a higher score in the future, but I have none left and never expect to see any ever again......So, this is my best and only estimate.  93 points.

1989 Bonnes Mares (Roumier)
This opened a bit disjointed, with acid and tannin fighting the fruit. It integrated well with air. The texture smoothed out and the fruit emerged and took over, showing broadly defined, strawberry flavors.  The finish was suitably long. I never quite got the pizazz factor I wanted, but it is certainly top level Burgundy.  91 points.

1991 Bonnes Mares (Roumier)
This is a pleasing enough wine that shows some depth and power, but it did not seem really exceptional to me in any other  respect. And tasted with Roumier's 89 and 88 ("Vielles Vignes") Bonnes Mares, it certainly suffered in comparison. The wine has plenty of tannin, but I can't say I found a lot of flavorful fruit, although it seems a bit spicy. The weight is good, but there is neither the complexity nor the flavor you would hope to get.  On the whole, if you open this, and I think you should,  give it some air, hope for the best. I'm not sure that it has the balance to be held successfully for very long. It is just a touch too clunky and monolithic. It's not really what I look for in Burgundy.  88 points. 

1995 Bonnes Mares (Roumier)
This last of the Roumier Bonnes Mares in this grouping is another beautiful wine. Deep and concentrated, big and powerful, this wine is a bit disjointed and tough to evaluate now. It seems to have all the components, especially deep fruit supported by appropriate tannins,  in place to evolve into a stunning wine. What it needs is about five more years of cellaring. Maybe more like ten.  When it opens, it should be something special. 92-94 points.

1988 Clos de La Roche (Dujac)
I just haven't been a big fan of this wine, which I've had several times now. It never seems interesting, just clunky. There is never much flavor, and too many tannins. It just seems boring. This bottle is not even as good as I usually get, and it seems a bit tired, too. Whether that's a natural evolution, or the bottle, I can't say. 85 points.

1988 Bonnes Mares (Dujac)
Like the '95 Clos de la Roche, below, this wine shows a fragrant, sensual bouquet that is worth the price almost by itself. The bouquet is better and more developed here. The wine is all pleasure, elegance and fragrance. Seductive, fun, very attractive. Some complained that this was a bit shy on depth, but while it lacked the power and depth of the Roumiers, I didn't find it in any way to be thin or simple.  92 points.

1995 Clos de La Roche (Dujac)
Sweet and fragrant, this wine is medium bodied and elegant, rather than deep and powerful. With air, it kept getting sweeter. It lacked the power and depth of the Roumier 1995 Bonnes Mares above, to make one comparison,  but at the same time, it was more open and fragrant, more sexy and seductive.  The Roumier  may well surpass it in time (and then it may not...),  but this is a beauty that is a pleasure to drink, although it is not at peak by any means. The bouquet alone is worth the price.  In some respects, this is what Burgundy is all about.  It will be interesting to see how it develops.  92-94 points.

1996 Clos de la Roche (Dujac)
Big, acidic, disjointed, powerful. This wine seems clunky and hard to drink or approach, let alone evaluate at the moment.  It was a night-and-day comparison with the Dujac Clos de la Roche 1995, above. Let's just say, judgment reserved. Maybe this wine needed to settle down.

The Burgs above were tasted together in a single event.

1995 Morey St. Denis "Cuvée des Grives" (Ponsot)
This controversial wine is about as bad as advertised. One can only be shocked by this clunker from Ponsot. The wine is dominated by acid, some hint of fruit flavor pokes through, and then there is nothing. There seems to be some volatile acidity. But mostly the wine is just a haze of acid.  It is very unpleasant to drink. The color is light and the wine looks and tastes watery.  What happened here?  Scary stuff. 73 points. 

1995 Morey St. Denis "Les Chaffots" (H.  Lignier)
This gorgeous wine seems atypical. This is a page taken from the flamboyant and sexy school of Burgundy. Spicy and lively, it has intense, sweet, up front raspberry fruit, and beautiful, powerful red berry nose. The fruit seems abnormally sweet and ripe, but it comes in a medium-weight body that makes it lively rather than a big fruit bomb. This wine goes for the gusto. Sexy stuff. 93 points.

1964 Beaujolais-Villages (Bluizard)
I can only say that this wine stunned a lot of people. Served blind, no one disliked it. Some thought rather highly of it. If I had not known what it was, I would have guessed something like 1971 Volnay 1er cru.  It reminded me a bit of a 1959 grand cru Burg I had recently, too.  It did not seem to have any carbonic maceration vinification and I would not be shocked to find that it was not pure gamay. It was smooth and velvety, with persistent strawberry flavors. It held well while it was up. The bright, lively fruit lingered, and the finish was suprisingly good for this type of wine. Oh, and the depth was good, too. You could find a lot of brand new Beaujolais that is lighter than this. I know, I know. You'll think I've lost it, but I had witnesses. 85 points.

1993 Savigny-les-Beaunes Reserve "Cuvée Unique Les Serpentières" (Maurice Ecard)
This North Berkeley Wine Company special bottling does some good things, but falls short. It opened rather disjointed, with acid, some nice raspberry fruit and some tannins fighting for prominence. It improved and integrated some with air, but never quite became excellent. It showed some thinness in the mid-palate after some air, and there was always a little too much acid for my taste. It did have a nice bouquet. Pleasant, but routine Burgundy. 86 points.  

Burgundy (white) (except dessert/sparkling)
1994 Pouilly-Fuissé "Tradition" (Valette)
This was bizarre and eccentric, but I liked it. Honeyed and chock full of botrytis, it showed a medium body and some lychee nut nuances. Fun. Odd. How well you like its oddities will determine your own rating.  Just don't open it as a white Burg. 87 points.

1995 Chassagne-Montrachet "Vide Bourse" (F.& L. Pillot)
This premier cru from a fairly obscure vineyard was what one might call an oenologically correct wine. It carefully avoids making a statement in any respect, I guess to make sure no one is annoyed at any component of the wine.  Modest weight, length, fruit. It is pure and pristine, but unexciting at every level--depth, intensity, finish. It faded quickly in the glass. You will never object to drinking this, as it is made to avoid offending, but you won't ever get excited about it either. 87 points.

1989 Corton-Charlemagne (Bonneau de Martray)
Soft and buttery, this wine lacks a little of the fatness I like in Corton, but had flavor to spare and lot of charm. The finish was pleasing, the fruit bright and sprightly. Pretty wine. 90 points. 

1990 & 1992 Corton-Charlemagne (Louis Latour)
Clear nod to the 1992. Both wines show remarkably good balance now, but the 1992 has a level of depth and richness, that the 1990 lacks. The 1992's finish is superb, too.  Taken alone, the 1990 is a very nice wine, but it seems to lack intensity and weight next to the 1992. The 90 is by no means a bad wine, having some elegance and charm. It thins a bit too fast with air though. No contest. For the 1990:  89 points.  For the 1992: 92 points.

1991 Chassagne-Montrachet "Les Ruchottes" (Ramonet)
Some people made great whites in 1991, but I can't say it is a vintage that I find memorable. This seems fairly typical. Nice wine all around, everything in good place, fruit well marked with lees, but a touch too thin, a touch too boring. A bit too short. Enjoyable. Not great. 89 points.

1991 Meursault-Charmes (Comtes Lafon)
A serious achievement in this vintage, this wine shows all the Lafon trademarks--well defined, well focused, intense and penetrating, with a great, lingering,  leesy finish. The only problem with this wine, compared to better vintages, is that it lacks a touch of depth. Predictably, with air, the wine improved for awhile, but faded faster than great Lafon normally does. This is a very fine white Burg, but Lafon has created very high expectations, too.  Drunk next to a 1995 Kistler "Cathleen" Chardonnay, the group found that the Kistler actually developed more and longer, and was slightly preferred as the evening wore on. Yeah, that's right. California chardonnay. Deal with it. This Lafon is very  fine in this vintage and an achievement in the context of the vintage, but not stupendous Lafon. 90 points.

California/USA (red) (except dessert/sparkling)
The California pinots below were tasted together in a single event.
1996 Pinot Noir Reserve "Quail Hill Vineyard" (Lynmar) 
Sprightly, with a nice touch of raspberry fruit, this wine shows reasonably well but is nothing special. It might profit from another year of cellaring. Then again, it might not. I suspect the balance between the acid and fruit won't get much better, as the fruit lacks some depth and intensity.  As the overly high levels of acid moderate with age, I doubt that the fruit left will be very interesting. This is a wine that has its good points, mostly in the nice hits of  fruit flavor, but I don't like its balance. 85 points.

1997 Pinot Noir "Hirsch Vineyard" (Siduri)
This, and the next three wines, were all tasted together in a single flight representing some of the best pinot noir California can make, from one of its very finest vineyards.  The Siduri was the loser in the group, which is no crime, because the company was real fast. This was bright, a little too acidic, a bit too young and a bit short. There was some flavorful, varietally true raspberry fruit on the back end. I didn't think the balance was quite as out of whack as with the Lynmar, above, but I did think that this wine showed too much acid, another victim, perhaps, of the insistent some winemakers have for upping the acid in pinot noir because pinot noir is "supposed" to have good acid levels. If the wine has the fruit to come into balance, a couple of years of cellaring may turn it into something more pleasing. It's got a shot. 87-89 points.

1995 Pinot Noir "Hirsch Vineyard" (Williams-Selyem)
They say that Williams-Selyem hardly exists any more. If so, call this a blast from the past. It is super pinot noir, and the new world doesn't do much better. The color is very dark, and the wine opens very tight, very tannic for a WS. Yet the bouquet gives some hints of things to come as it sits in the glass. After awhile, the texture turns smooth as the tannins integrate, and the fruit pops out. With every passing moment it changed into something different, and the fruit became sweeter and juicier, redolent of  ripe red berries. My mouth is watering a bit thinking about it, and I can only regret that I didn't get to drink this whole bottle myself and sit with it through the night. It came around, but never fully developed.  Depending on its development, it could be a legend. It is certainly a star.  Hold two years or so, then see where it's at.  I predict this will hold well until about 2007.  93-96 points.

1995 Pinot Noir "Hirsch Vineyard" (Kistler)
If any wine in this flight of "Hirsch Vineyard" pinot noir could keep up with the WS, it was the Kistler. Or, maybe it was the other way around, with the WS trying to keep up with the Kistler. The Kistler is sprightly, and seems to have a bit more of a blackberry nuance. It shares with the WS unusual amounts of tannin for California pinot noir, and it is very intense. With air, the tannins began to integrate into the wine, which is deep and concentrated, a bit thicker than the WS, I think. But I was never able to give this enough air, and for as long as it sat, it never fully opened or became as sweet as the WS. The Kistler is a bit more muscular than the WS, the WS a bit more flamboyant and sweeter (as is its house style), but those are differences of degree. Both have a lot of fruit, a lot of concentration, a lot of flavor and a lot of tannin. How these show when the tannins resolve a bit better--and at Age Five New World pinot detractors might note that these wines are nowhere near peak---will determine which wine pulls ahead. I give a slight nod to the Kistler, but either way... Tour de force. WS has a track record of aging well. I think the Kistler will, too, but holding wines from vineyards that they just started producing from not too long back is always chancy. Still, I'd  say that this, like the WS, will age gracefully and well, and I'd hold this two more years before trying again. Of course, the quantities are so small, most people won't have much chance to experiment.  93-96 points.

1997 Pinot Noir "Hirsch Vineyard" (Flowers)
During the course of a long evening, we matched many Flowers wines to Kistlers, as they share vineyard sources (Camp Meeting Ridge, Hirsch). It seemed to me that the Flowers wines always bore a lot of similarity to Kistlers, and were always just a step behind. In their own right, very fine.  The Kistler just seems to have a touch more of everything. This wine is slightly more focused than the Kistler,  but not as deep, not as powerful,  and not as tight, despite being younger. Pretty and pleasing, very fine in its own right. If you drink it on its own (but wait a couple of years, because it really needs to settle down), you'll be mightily pleased. It was a distant third in this flight, though. 90-91 points.

1995 Pinot Noir "Cuvée Catherine" (Kistler)
Well, if you think it's been fun so far in this tasting of rare California pinots, Kistler ups the ante again. This wine is fully a match for the Kistler Hirsch and WS Hirsch, above. Of the three, this probably has the most tannins. Hey, whatever happened to simple New World pinot? Yet for all of its tannin levels, it is amazingly seductive and sweet. At this time, the fruit is more open than either of the Hirsch Vineyard superstars from WS and Kistler. I think the WS in particular will develop this level of sweetness. Right now, this is the most seductive wine of the three, tannins or no. I'm watching and waiting on this, too, and can only rate it the same way. We'll sort it all out in a few years. Or, maybe we'll just have three head-to-head legends. 93-96 points.

1996 Pinot Noir "Camp Meeting Ridge" (Kistler)
This medium bodied pinot is all sweetness and light. After the big tannic boys above, this wine is dominated by very sweet, sexy fruit, with a hit of acid. Fragrant, sensual, and the finish lingers sweetly on your tongue. A beautiful wine that makes you think of only how to get more. Nuanced with black cherries, and very voluptuous.  It may not have the upside of the Kistler "Catherine" or "Hirsch,"  but the Catherine isn't this enjoyable at the moment, either, and if the Hirsch and Catherine eventually wind up just being this, it will be still a very, very good thing. 93 points.

1995 Pinot Noir "Camp Meeting Ridge Moon Select" (Flowers)
This was another good example of Flowers making a very similar wine to the Kistler, but just a bit scaled back in important ways. It is a very fine wine, with perhaps a coffee nuance here or there, but not unlike the Kistler CMR. A vote for terroir? But the Kistler just seems to be a bit more fragrant, more concentrated, sweeter, well, you get the idea. Still, this is also a super pinot, beautifully balanced. 91 points.

1981 Cabernet "Eisele Vineyard" (Joseph Phelps)
This wine has not yet gotten so old that you can smell some decay and oxidation (as with the 1966 Margaux reviewed above). It is more pristine. But the fruit flavor has faded, and while it rounds out in the glass pleasingly and holds, it never delivers much of anything interesting. It just seems rather flat and tedious. It's there. It's old. You don't want to make fun of it. But it is relatively uninteresting. 85 points.

1995 Zinfandel "Aida" (Turley)
Yeah, all right, it's big and strong. But this wine has a surprising elegance. There is a certain Burgundian nuance to it, perhaps in the fragrant bouquet, and the ripe, flavorful fruit that seems chock full of framboises. Of course, this is a darned sight thicker than pinot noir. The wine holds effortlessly throughout the evening, and never really seems to stop improving. I tend to like Moore and Hayne better than any other Turleys, but this is a fine Aida, drinking beautifully, but in no danger of fading. 92 points.

The following three old Californian wines were ringers in a 1970 Bordeaux retrospective, reviewed above. All tasted blind.

1970 Cabernet Reserve (Beaulieu)
Served blind with a lot of very fine 1970 Bordeaux, reviewed above,  this wine was generally identified as a little different, if only because its fruit was so fresh, but was universally acclaimed. If someone had said that this was a 1984, no one would have been surprised, except this wine has more fruit than modern BV ever dreamed of. By the end of a tasting which included Latour and Petrus, many people thought this was the wine of the evening. I am pondering it myself, but it is certainly a reasonable pick. Its fruit was lusher, richer, deeper, fresher, and more flavorful. It has held better. The bouquet is stunning, projecting waves of sweet
chambord and vanilla fragrance, some of which is no doubt toasty, but well integrated oak, which follows through on the pristine, youthful palate. This much voluptuousness from a wine of this age is simply amazing. 97 points.

1970 Cabernet (Robert Mondavi)
Some oxidation around the edges could not destroy the balance on this wine, which is holding decently. Still, there is not much charm to it. It is a bit too stolid, too flavorless, and unexciting, granting its good weight and mouthfeel. It is a wine in the twilight of life. 84 points.

1968 Cabernet Estate Bottled (Inglenook)
Had this not been in the same flight as the 1970 BV, above,  that awed everyone, it probably would have received even more praise. Certainly, old California wine doesn’t age much more gracefully. The portents were good, a perfect cork, and a great fill, impeccable cellaring. It was once owned by a family member of the former Inglenook owners.  It opened nutty and intense, deep and concentrated, putting to shame wines like the Cos and La Mission in terms of depth. The fruit was rich and chocolately, and the wine never gave up in the glass, but kept improving. It  didn't lack for much, and had it not been outclassed by the more flavorful BV Reserve (thought the Inglenook might actually be a bit deeper, by just a bit), people would still be talking about it.  91 points.

1996 Mataro (Ridge)
Served blind, this reminded me of a minor, southwestern French wine. It was tangy and bright, with cherries wrapped around a high acid profile.  There was just a hint of bacon fat on the back end. It rounded out a bit with air, but the wine was just too light and thin to be of much interest, although I liked the cherry finish very much. 85 points.

1997 Cigare Volant (Bonny Doon)
Tight and tannic on first taste, this wine developed nicely and became dominated by sweet fruit. There is a certain bubblegum finish to it that made me wonder if it got some carbonic maceration vinification. Brambly, with a touch of mint, the fruit was unusually sweet and spicey.  I thought this might be something like a Lirac or a Cotes du Rhone. Instead, it is a very appealing, if not particularly deep, and a little eccentric, Cigare Volant. 87 points.

The wines of Madrigal Vineyards, new folks in Napa:

1997 Cabernet (Madrigal Vineyards)
Madrigal is a new winery (since 1995) with vineyards between Calistoga and St. Helena.  There are only 325 cases of this cabernet, most of which comes from Peterson Vineyard.  There is 10% Merlot and 5 % cab franc mixed in.  In short, it's a brute. The two big Madrigals, this cab and the Merlot, both showed a tendency to be a little severe, with some astringent tannins and a lot of punch. This cab, list price $30, plays against some modern winemaking trends. It tastes more like old Chateau Montelena than, say, Bryant Family or Colgin. On opening, it was unapproachable, the tannins simply being too astringent. It's big and brawny, too, over 14% alcohol.   A lot of air in the glass moderated the tannins, and finally some fruit popped up. And it was very good fruit at that, varietally true, marked by cassis and nuanced with red berries. The wine went through several phases and held pretty well over a long evening. It never developed much charm, and at the end of the night, when the tannins were finally in control, although the texture became softer, the fruit became a bit flatter, too.  The fruit seems just to need a bit more depth and better texture.  It's hard to predict perfectly how a young wine, so obviously unready, from a new winery, with no record whatsoever, will develop, but I'd say this wine errs too much on the side of austerity and tannic power,  and needs a bit more lushness and depth to be in better balance. For all of that, there is good fruit here, and old style fanciers of California cab will find a lot here to like. Depending on development, 87-89 points.

1997 Merlot (Madrigal Vineyards)
The Madrigal Merlot, 400 cases made, 14.3% alcohol,  suggested retail of $24, blends in 17% cab franc and just a smidgen of cab sauvigon (1%--why bother?).  It, too, is mostly from Peterson Vineyard. I found it stylistically very similar to the cabernet, with some harsh tannins. But true to its varietal name, this Merlot is a bit lusher than the cab, and the tannins blew off a bit quicker. There is a nicer nose on this than the sterner cab.  Still, while it developed more quickly, it wasn't exactly a charming, laid back Merlot.  But whereas the stern style can be a little more severe with cabernet, which seems to revel in tannins, it sometimes helps the Merlot. A little backbone helps, and unlike a lot of California wines, it seems like something other than grapey fruit bomb.  Still, I think it would help backing off the tannins a bit. Or, perhaps another way of saying it is that the fruit could use more lushness.  The cab held better through the evening, but this showed respectably all night long, too. 88 points.

1997 Petite Sirah (Madrigal Vineyards)
The 950 case petite sirah production (suggested retail $25) is the easiest to evaluate. Lush, with well integrated oak, this wine has a considerable hit of tannins, too. But it is counterbalanced by more obviously sensual texture and some bright acidity. The nose, tinged with blueberry and anise, is attractive and evolves nicely with air. The wine doesn't really seem to be 14.6% alcohol--but it is, seemingly balanced and in sync.  Very nice. 89 points.

1993 Zinfandel "Wood Road" (Ravenswood)
Restrained, and marked most by nuances of American oak on opening, this zin evolved nicely with some air, picked up some weight and became very elegant and well balanced. I doubt elegant was what Ravenswood was going for, but...here we are.  Still, the wine is showing a bit of thinness in the mid-palate. It hardly seemed like remarkable zin. Pleasant, fading a bit. Drink up.  87 points.

1974 Cabernet "Estate Bottled" (Sterling)
It seems as if, in the last month or so, I have stumbled across one remarkable old California wine after another.  This wine was superlative, and served next to a '83 Mouton, it did not suffer in the least by the comparison. There is a hint of eucalyptus up front and on the finish, but in between the wine is balanced perfectly. The fruit is rich, pristine and ripe. The texture is sensual and lush. With air, just a touch of power comes through, but the overall impression is robust charm. Held well for hours. Delicious. Superlative. 93 points.

1974 Cabernet (Burgess)
Pruney and consumed with volatile acidity, this wine has seen better days. For all of that, it seemed to have good depth and concentration; the fruit had just turned. Whether it is just this bottle or not, I can't say. '74 Burgess doesn't fall into my lap often. But the bottle looked well stored, and I think this wine is questionable at this point. 65 points.

1978 Cabernet "Knights Valley" (Beringer)
And yet another old Californian weighs in. This time, the result is different than the Burgess. Keeping in mind that this is merely the Knights Valley bottling, this is an amazing showing. The first notes are of mint and eucalyptus, no doubt from American oak, but that integrates quickly and perfectly.  The texture retains some velvet, the wine shows great balance, and the fruit is remarkably fresh and pristine. For all of that, it held perfectly even after decanting all night long, and that was a four-hour dinner night, too. Wonderful. 91 points.

1991 Dominus
I haven't had a bottle of this in about two years now, and it is amazing how the wine has changed. It has rounded into perfect form, and the dominant characteristic now seems like, well, Pauillac. If this had been served blind, I think I would have had to call it Mouton. Instead, Mouton it is not, French it does not deign to be. Dominus it is. Classic cassis flavors, notes of lead pencil, and perfect balance make this a traditionalist's wine. Yet, it does not lack for flavor or depth. It is not the monster it was in its youth, when I rated it somewhat more highly,  and I might wish for a touch more of the lushness it once had, but one thing it still is....is beautiful. 93 points.

1992 "Monte Bello" (Ridge)
Inky black and highly tannic on opening, this wine's tannins quickly blew off. The texture is lush and velvety, and the fruit is bright and deep. With just a little air, it came into perfect balance and displayed a lingering, bright finish. As Monte Bello goes, I don't think this is the deepest or the best, but it is pretty fine drinking. Approachable now.  91 points. 

1991 Cabernet (Chateau Montelena)
This wine opens hard, austere and charmless. I frankly don't know if I could have properly evaluated it in a tasting with just a 90 second taste and nothing more. But this wasn't a tasting. It was four-hour dinner. With every passing moment, the air changed the angular, sharp, bright, hard-edged wine into something approachable. And then into something delicious. The mid-palate kept getting juicier and the flavor made my mouth water.  At the very end, it turned a bit severe again.  But this is a multi-layered wine that needs long cellaring and is not ready to drink. It will be fun to watch and will likely will be one of the longest lived California 1991s. It is still a little tough to evaluate, but you know it's something special.  93-95 points.

1997 Zinfandel "Louisa & Guiseppe" (Martinelli)
This modestly priced (but hard to get) zin from Martinelli bears little resemblance to the big boys. This is lush and juicy, bursting with easily accessible blackbery fruit. It is soft and very approachable. Yet it never seems watery or thin. It is simply sensual, luscious and sweet from start to finish. 92 points.

1995 Zinfandel "Black Sears" (Turley)
This has never been my fave Turley vineyard, and this particular bottle seems to show a touch of fading. Oh, there's plenty of flavor still. There are nice black cherry nuances on the finish and the bouquet, which is more fragrant than most zins can manage. The wine lacks that Turley viscosity and solidness in the mid-palate though.  It needed a bit more intensity.  I think the fruit has thinned a touch since release. Still, pretty nice. 88 points.

1996 & 1997 Merlot (Pahlmeyer)
I reviewed the 1996 Merlot about six months back, and though it was terrific then.  The wine has benefited from the extra cellaring and the components have knit together beautifully. Served blind, it struck me as a dead ringer for Bordeaux. Elegant and balanced, with a nice intense mid-palate, this is a wine that just does everything right. Yep. It's Californian. It's Merlot. But it's not really Californian merlot, in the pejorative sense.  92 points.  The 1997 shows nice chocolate cherry flavors and some roundness, but it is too tight and hard to evaluate well. It stayed rather closed and unforgiving all evening long, although it did gradually develop. I think this will be a very nice wine; it certainly has the stuffing and the flavor.  Give it two years more of cellaring before trying it again. I don't think it will equal the 1996, but let's see.   90-92 points.

1997 Zinfandel "Moore Vineyard" (Turley)
Robust, bursting with fruit, tight and tannic, this big, powerful zin personifies the house style. The caramel nuances on the finish that Turley sometimes delivers are just nuances, but welcome.  This is a zin that needs a couple of years of cellaring to round into form. Another exceptional Moore from Turley.  93-95  points.

[Return to Top]

California /USA (white) (except dessert/sparkling)
1995 Chardonnay "Cuvée Cathleen" (Kistler)
Another beautiful wine from Kistler. Intense and tight on opening, this wine explodes in the glass and develops elegance, charm, and sexy, sweet fruit. The balance is beautiful, the fruit delicious. Bright, gorgeous, all sweetness and light. Never stops improving.  At age five,  there is no sign that this wine has even hit peak, but it sure is wonderful to drink now. This wine, by the way, has evolved beautifully since release, and is still improving.  95 points.

1997 Chardonnay (Pahlmeyer)
This poor guy had the unfortunate fate of being opened next to a Comtes Lafon and some awesome Kistler. It's creamy and bright, solid and velvety. It opened nicely. But it was sadly outclassed. Nice stuff, but not as flavorful or as interesting as some of the big boys. However, it may do better with some age.  89+ points.

1996 Arneis (Ponzi)
This came in a 500 ml bottle. I don't know why. And why, by the way, does an American winemaker want to make wine from a varietal that doesn't get most Italians too excited?  I don't know either, but Ponzi knows something we don't. It is gorgeous and drinking perfectly now. On first taste, there is mostly acid. With a little air, everything else the wine has piles on with a vengeance, and it has a lot.  Smokey, with a rich, thick, mouth coating finish, this Arneis is amazingly deep and concentrated, too. It has a pretty smoke and lees nose, and powerful lees flavors on the finish. The acidity is perfect and offers some welcome brightness. Beautiful wine all around. 93 points.

Dessert / Sparkling Wines
1988 Sauternes (Lafaurie Peyraguey)
A lot of 88s have seemed frozen in time to me, but this one is on the move. The fruit has opened, and it kept developing with air. The sweetness was marked by nice botrytis touches and the body and weight were substantial and concentrated.  A very fine Sauternes, with a great finish. 93 points.

1992 Riesling Eiswein "Kinheimer Rosenberg" (Jakoby-Mathy)
A heavy hit of lemony acidity starts this wine off, and the fruit, to me, never quite came into balance. Yet, the finish was spectacular, mouth-coating and endless. This wine might benefit from another year or two of cellaring. In the meanwhile, it takes no prisoners in its assault on your taste buds. You have to be a bit acid tolerant at the moment, but the end result is worth it. 90+ points.

1976 Chateau Yquem
Sweet, fresh and pure, this wine is spicy and bright, rather than rich and deep. As a powerhouse, it falls well short. But it is hard to believe it is actually a quarter of a century old, it was so pristine and pure. Ultimately charming, and very good, not spectacular. Still, delightful to drink. 90 points. 

1970 Port (Fonseca)
 I have had this wine several times over the years, and every time leaves me in awe. This wine is still a monumental port, in prime time. In fact, it seems to have picked up weight over the last few years. Pure, youthful, sweet and flamboyant, the wine lacked nothing. Deep, powerful and concentrated. It seems like a port for the ages. I hate to give out perfect ratings. But I frankly can’t think of anything I want more from a port, and thus hand out only my second perfect rating. 100 points.

1989 Pinot Gris Quintessence Selection des Grains Nobles (Marcel Deiss)
It is to this wine’s credit that it manage to be opened after the Fonseca and people still paid attention. There is not much botrytis, but the balance is beautiful, bright acidity melds gorgeously with rich, slightly syrupy fruit. It seems elegant and airy, and it is hard to believe it broke the 13% alcohol barrier. 92 points. 

1988 Sauternes (Chateau Climens)
I've been saying like a broken record until recently that the 1988 Sauternes seemed very tight, hardly budging or maturing at all. A Lafaurie recently showed to the contrary. And now this. The Lafaurie, by the way, was a beautiful wine. The Climens is in another league. Opening gorgeously now, and just arriving at its peak plateau of drinkability, this shows sexy spices, lots of botrytis, and a trademark creme caramel finish. The viscosity and acidity balance each other out beautifully, and the tannins provide some backbone, too. Nuanced with oranges and peaches. Amazingly sexy and complex. It is also simply delicious. 95 points.

Port "Tawny" (KWV)
Big South African producer KWV makes some great dessert wines. This ain't one of the. It is a generic, non-vintage tawny style port. But it is dreadfully thin, a bit hot, and lacking in most areas. However, the good news is that it is at least characteristic of a tawny--and sells for just $6.99.  If you're need to economize, you might be satisfied. I also have to say, though, that something as fine as Yalumba Clocktower from Australia can often be found for an extra $2. Splurge. Have something really good. 79 points.

1986 Sauternes (Chateau Coutet)
Airy and elegant, this Coutet is heavily marked with botrytis and easy to drink. A deep, lingering powerhouse it isn't. The wine seems to have thinned considerably since the last taste, and the fruit is just in balance with the botrytis and other components. Holding it a long while more could be an error if this bottle is typical.  89 points.

1990 Vin Santo (Isole e Olena)
Thick and rich, this distinctive dessert wine is a little different. It has some familiar syrupy aspects for fanciers of very rich late harvest wines. However, while sweet, the profile is less obvious and candied than nuanced and flavorful.  Redolent of toffee, finishing with burnt caramel, this wine provides a medley of flavors that don't quit.  92 points.

1988 Sauternes (Chateau Coutet)
Fragrant and appealing, this Coutet is fully open. Nicely marked by botrytis, the wine is at a perfect stage for drinking. Every single grape that went into it seems fresh and alive, and demanding to be drunk now. Good depth, perfect balance.  Popping the cork is a real good idea on this; it is in no danger whatsoever of fading, but it sure is sensual and perfect at the moment.  92 points.

1993 Late Leap "Baiser Magique" (Frog's Leap)
Expectations, expectations. Well, I guess you could say that it depends on how you look at this. Some people liked it. I guess if you like old Kabinett, I could see your point. But it really lacked a lot of class of fine old Kabinett. And it wasn't supposed to be so light and dry. The fruit was thinning and watery, and as dessert wine, you had to say it lacked viscosity. Indeed, as Kabinett it lacked depth and concentration, too. On the whole, why bother?  78 points.

1994 Monbazillac "Gradière" (Chateau Tirecul)
I always am surprised how well the regular bottling from Tirecul shows. This is a beauty. Gently charming, rich and ripe, the wine lacks the pure power some Sauternes deliver, but shows more viscosity and lushness than the big boys often have. Marked with orange rind flavoring, this also has a long, appealing finish. Nicely balanced.  It will never be drinking better, so drink up.   91 points.

[Return to Top]

Germany (except dessert/sparkling)
1989 Riesling Auslese "Wehlener Sonnenuhr" (Kerpen)
Pretty, bright and sweet on the finish, this beautiful riesling seems airy and elegant, yet it lingers. Your tongue come alive from the acidity, which supports but never overwhelms the fruit. Aromatic, like a spring breeze. 90 points.

1990 Riesling Auslese "Graacher Dompropst" (Willi Schaefer)
I loved the oily, mouthcoating texture of this wine. On the mid-palate, it is gentle and laid back. But on the finish, it latches on to your tongue and won't let go. That's partly, though not entirely, because there is a heckuva kick of acidity on the back end. But the acidity is nicely counterbalanced by fruit and the wine ends up nicely appealing. Despite its aggressive side, it has some charm and elegance, too.  90 points.

[Return to Top]

Italy (except dessert/sparkling)

The following served blind at a peer group tasting:
1997 Dolcetto (G. Conterno) 
Oddly disjointed, this wine seems a bit thin in the mid-palate. It alternates a layer of fruit with a bit of hollowness. It has its moments, and some pleasing fruit, but it is routine Dolcetto. 85 points.

1997 Dolcetto "Vigna del Mandolo" (Elvio Cogno)
A smooth, sensual texture precedes a wine that is solid in the middle and lush around the edges.  The full fruit flavor that some of the other wines in this tasting displayed never quite shone through, but the wine was fun to "touch" as much to taste. Great mouthfeel, could use a little more flavor.  88 points.

1997 Dolcetto "Azella--Bricco del'Oriolo" (L. Scavino) QPR Winner 
A pretty, sweet grapey bouquet starts off this pleasing wine well. It finishes very sweet, and provides more than acceptable depth for a Dolcetto. Pure pleasure, straight ahead grapey characteristics. Lots of fun. 90 points.

1997 Dolcetto "Vigneto del Fiasc" (P. Scavino) QPR Winner 
More powerful than Dolcetto has a right to be, this gorgeous wine does it all. Raspberry scented and nuanced, thick and big, this wine displays a lot of concentration and a touch of acid on the finish.  A stunning achievement in Dolcetto. Flashy, flamboyant, but lots of depth. A couple of hours later it was still going strong.  In my relative scoring system (comparing, for instance,  Dolcettos, not all wines in the world),  that gets it  95 points.

1997 Dolcetto di Dogliani (Gillardi)
This is, perhaps, more typical than the P. Scavino. Just good Dolcetto, nothing sensational. Bright and lively, medium bodied, airy and elegant, it opens nicely with a little air and was easy to drink. A bit of a middle of the road wine, it has more than a few good points. 88 points. 

1997 Dolcetto (Manzone)
This wine tastes a bit dull and woody, and was astringent on the finish to boot. The flavor profile made me wonder if this was subtly corked, but it was hard to identify definite TCA. We had no backup bottles to test.  As it stood, 80 points.

1997 Dolcetto d'Alba (Aldo Conterno) QPR Winner 
Complex, exotic, and simply exceptional. The nose gives hints of raspberries and blueberries in turn. There is some acid in the back end, and the wine opens tightly wound and focused. The sweet red berry fruit evolves and integrates, and the wine provides a medley of flavors and aromas. Good depth, very sexy, tons of flavorful fruit. 94 points.

1997 Dolcetto "Lazzarito" (Vietti) QPR Winner 
A Dolcetto just can't deliver much more than this, I think. It has a level of concentration and depth that belies the varietal name on the label. It retained its weight and pristine flavors for hours. It was spicy and lush, complex and powerful, with a super, mouth coating finish, and tons of flavor. It was not quite as flamboyant and fragrant as the P. Scavino, above, but it was deeper and more intense.  Wonderful.  Stunning. What else can I say? Perhaps the best Dolcetto I've ever had.   97 points.

1997 Dolcetto d'Alba (M. Marengo) QPR Winner 
Stern and brooding on first pour, this seems to provide a flavor profile very much unlike Dolcetto, and in particular, very much unlike a lot of the flavorful, fruity wines in this tasting. The sternness did blow off fairly quickly with air, and the red berry nuanced fruit burbled up. This became a wine I enjoyed a lot. 90 points.

1997 Dolcetto (Domenico Clerico) QPR Winner 
Pure pleasure. Flamboyant, sweet, and laced with up-front raspberry fruit, this grapey Dolcetto sends out waves of fruit flavor, which follows a grapey, lush, sweet and powerful bouquet. This may not have quite the depth of the Vietti, or even the P. Scavino, but it is amazingly sexy and hedonistic. 95 points.

1997 Dolcetto d'Alba (Seghesio) QPR Winner 
An expressive nose is followed by a medium bodied wine of nice depth and a bit of a tannic hit. This is a harder, less convivial style of Dolcetto. It ultimately seems more structured and serious than a lot of them. 90 points.

1997 Dolcetto d'Alba (B. Giacosa)
Decent weight, decent finish, decent everything. But nothing grabs you. The fruit is good. Not exceptional. The nose is OK. Not really powerful. The finish is nice. But a long way from the best. Middle of the road winemaking. 87 points.

1997 Dolcetto (Moccagatta) QPR Winner 
Stolid and tight, with red berry nuances on the finish, this wine seems a bit hard, and it never quite opened or blossomed. A little too clunky, but certainly the fruit is good and there's a lot here to like. 89 points.

1997 Dolcetto d'Alba (Sandrone) QPR Winner 
This wine seemed more like merlot. Smooth and chocolately, with an oily mouthfeel, it delivered a hit of acid on the finish. This wine was dominated by its fruit profile, though. It was a little different, a little eccentric. And very good, by the way. 90 points.

1997 Barbera "Ornati" (Parusso) QPR Winner 
This is a simply gorgeous Barbera. It needed a little time to open, but when it did, it blossomed fully. There was a touch of acid on the finish, but in between, the wine was sexy and exotic, and a pleasure to drink. 92 points.

Rhone/South/Southwest France (except dessert/sparkling)
1988 Chateauneuf du Pape "Monpertuis" (Paul Jeune)
Elegant, and attractive, this wine shows a nice medley of flavors, some tar, some charcoal, a hint of game, a bit of strawberry. The fruit opens a bit and expands with some air. The wine is far too light, though, and tastes a bit thin and hollow in the mid-palate. It has its good points, and is a worthwhile drink, but nothing more. 86 points.

1995 Chateauneuf du Pape "Selection Reflets" (Clos du Mont Olivet)
This wine picks up where the Paul Jeune, above, leaves off. The texture is everything I want in a wine, lush and velvety, ripe and attractive. The wine is exotic and appealing, with some herbal notes. The depth and concentration levels are excellent. There are sauvage hints on the finish that balance out the red berry fruit nicely. The fruit is sweet and melds beautifully into the texture. It needed just ten minutes in the glass to open up, and is approachable now. Very nice. 90 points.