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.  NB: If you are using Netscape, there will sometimes be some formatting issues, mostly regarding the supposed failure to turn off bold lettering. It is not a big deal, but if it bothers you, try Internet Explorer.

Alsace  Argentina  Australia   Bordeaux   Burgundy Red and white 
Calif./USA: Red  and White  Dessert/Sparkling  Germany   England  
Italy    Rhone/South/SW France  South Africa Spain

Alsace  (except dessert/sparkling)
1993 Riesling "Rangen Clos Saint Theobald" (Schoffit)
Thinning and fading, this wine shows little vibrant fruit. It lacks any mid-palate to speak of, and seems especially disappointing as a grand cru and a Rangen. Flat, dull, and short, it at least shows no particular defect.  84 points.

1995 Muscat Vendange Tardive "Goldert" (Zind-Humbrecht)
On opening, this seemed a touch too thin and its fruit flavor was marked by that roasted apricot nuance that often signals a wine that is oxidizing. Surprise, surprise. Fifteen minutes later it was better. It pulled itself off the floor, gained weight, gained intensity, and started drinking beautifully. The oxidative notes faded into the background. The light, off dry demeanor gained some intensity. By the end of the evening it showed some fatigue again and thinned, with the oxidation popping up. On the whole, a fine performance for an older Muscat, but I would suggest drinking NOW.  90 points.

1994 Gewurztraminer "Clos Windsbuhl" (Zind-Humbrecht)
I have reviewed this on numerous occasions since its release, and it has always been stunning. Tonight was particularly "on" and since this bottle came from my cellar, I can say I know exactly where it's been and it was pristine. It opened focused and intense, but that wasn't all there was. The wine developed a solid mid-palate core, tight, deep and structured, not just flamboyant and opulent as it was when youthful. The botrytis notes lent it some distinction. By the time it finished developing, it was amazingly deep and powerful, fragrant and pure, ripe and delicious.  Add a lingering, penetrating finish.  This is gewurz about as good as it gets, one of the legends of its type of its time. It is drinking beautifully now.  97 points.

1992 Tokay Pinot Gris Vendange Tardive "Clos Jebsal" (Zind-Humbrecht)
Sweet and lush, friendly and expansive, this wine showed excellent mid-palate concentration, marked with heavy botrytis notes.   The depth and finish were superb, especially for this vintage. It held perfectly all night long. 92 points.

1998 Riesling "Schlossberg Clos des Capucins" Cuvée Ste. Catherine" (Weinbach)
Off dry, this is not quite as big as some Weinbach's I've had from this vineyard, but it's pretty dense. It sports a nice. long finish, and pure, pristine, sunny fruit. Its combination of elegance and focus were charming and stylish.  This is a wine that will turn ever drier as it ages; the sweetness won't last long. Pretty and persistent. 90 points.

Argentina  (except dessert/sparkling)
1997 Merlot-Malbec "Iscay" (Trapiche)
I think this is simply the best Argentinian wine I've had, not that I would claim to have encyclopedic knowledge of that industry. It is also the debut vintage of this unfiltered wine, nicknamed "Iscay," meaning, "two," for the grape combo, and perhaps also for the team consisting of French oenologist Michel Rolland and the local Argentinian, Angel Mendoza. At $50, it meets the demand of being a prestige wine, but it can't be called a bargain. Influenced a lot by Michel Rolland, this may be from Argentina, but it has a lot of Rolland in it. It opens tight, with a big hit of tannins. But then, it expands and softens quickly. On opening, there is an odd rhubarb-y taste. It gives way to a more standard blackberry nuance. Well structured, powerful and deep, this is built to last, and watching how well it ages will be part of the fun. It didn't quite seem Bordeaux-like, but if I had been guessing, top Cahors or Madiran might have crossed my mind. Burly and brawny, intense and powerful, this shows a lot of promise although there were in fact times when it passed over to clunky, but cellaring may take care of that. At the moment, I think highly of it, and think it will improve considerably. How much? Only time will tell, but this might not show at peak until 2006. 90+ points.

NV Vino Blanco Torrontes "DH" (Domingo Hnos)
I don't know what the grape is on this, but it seemed like cheap muscadelle. It was heavily perfumed, and I rather liked the nose. But the palate was bitter, and what flavors it had I rather disliked. This reminded me of nothing more than an unfortified, dry Thunderbird,  with some notes of cheap fino, I'm sorry to say. Bizarre and eccentric, it does little well, and nothing normal. Inexpensive, at least. But save your pennies and buy something good! 75 points.

1999 Jubilo (Tikal)
Another super premium wine like the Trapiche, above, this is just under $50 too. It's a blend of cab, malbec and merlot. To me, it had more of a Cote Rotie feel to it in texture, but it was an unqualified success. It opened powerful--although it doesn't have anything like the power of the Trapiche--with hints of game. Then, it blossomed quickly and developed beautifully, showing flavor, elegance and focus. By the end of the evening, I thought some of the persistence of flavor had diminished, but the wine drank well all night and pleased everyone. It also came in a rather awesome, big, thick bottle which no doubt contributed to the price tag! 90 points.

Australia  (except dessert/sparkling)
1998 Mourvedre/Grenache (Veritas)
Kinky and exotic, this well-priced wine reminded me of nothing more than some Clarendon Old Vines Grenache at its most flamboyant. This lacks the depth and power of Clarendon, and is medium bodied at best, but all the perverse aspects are sure there. The structure and concentration Clarendon often provides is missing, though. The oddities dominate from start to finish. On opening it tastes like sweet, puréed strawberries. It integrates a bit, but this bizarre flavor profile is what this wine is about. The body is medium in weight and depth, and even has some elegance, but nothing will overcome that very sweet aspect to this wine. It is hard to believe this is Mourvedre--there is nothing varietally true or discernible here at all. For all of these negatives, a lot of people who can get past or even like the flavor profile will no doubt love this showy, flamboyant glass of chambord disguised as wine. Other good news: relatively cheap for Veritas. 85 points.

1998 Fox Creek Grenache/Shiraz QPR Winner
This is a wine I would've called a bit flashy but for the fact that I had it next to the Veritas, above, after which it seemed normal and staid. There are modest, soft tannins that pop out with air, but this is a basic fruit bomb type of wine. It has excellent weight in this price range ($20-ish if you can find it and it isn't marked up), some nice spicy aspects, and the licorice and vanilla mint overlays from a bit too much new American oak. The texture is voluptuous and velvety, and while I would've liked considerably more restraint on the oak, I've seen worse, too. Solid and well priced, this will be a party pleaser. If it had shown more restraint in using new American oak, it could be a huge best buy. As it is, call this score a compromise. Some will think it too high, some will be sure it's too low. Personally, I would hesitate to buy this again, but there's plenty here to recommend it depending on your taste.  88 points.

1999 Riesling (Clos Clare)
Thin and light, with a bit too much acid for the concentration level of the fruit, this wine was pretty, well, boring. Run of the mill in all respects, and rather annoying for its diluted mid-palate. For the good news, the wine was pristine and pure.   82 points.

1996 Shiraz "Black Pepper" (E&E)
This immensely appealing shiraz has quickly become one of my favorites. True to its name, it seem peppery on opening, but with air, it gave way to blackberries scented with vanillin. There are nice round tannins, and structure to go with the fruit.  With every passing minute, the fruit became sweeter. First, peppers...Then, blackberries...End with blueberries dripping from the mid-palate. For all of the fruit, the balance was excellent and the components were well integrated. Oh, for my taste there was a tad too much oak, but by the standards of Shiraz, only by a little. I couldn't worry too much about it. 93 points.

2000 Riesling Eden Valley (Craneford) QPR Winner 
From Australia's Eden Valley, this comes with a screw top and relatively light alcohol (11.5%). It wins plaudits for being varietally true on the nose and palate. It lacks the power and depth to be great wine, but it has some charm, balance and typicity, seeming graceful and aromatic, with a crisp, lemony finish that lingers respectably. There is more than adequate mid-palate concentration for a wine of modest price, and it does not seem watery by any means. It does a pretty nice job of reminding me of a mid-level, well balanced basic, but well made, Alsace riesling. It is a bit steelier than I prefer, but it is also rather young and it developed nicely with air. I liked the way it developed some lushness and the acidity integrated with air. You would have to say that no one would call this as an Aussie riesling blind. Pretty nice, and will probably improve with a year or two of age. It held well on vacu-vin until the next evening. It is impossible to completely evaluate until it has seen some age. 87+ points.

2000 Riesling Old Vines (Leconfield) QPR Winner 
This Coonawarra riesling has the brightness you'd expect, but also some spice, and a pretty pear bouquet. It was actually more accessible than the Craneford, and features some nice fruit with an intense, lemony finish on the end. Well balanced, with all the components integrated, this shows extremely well. It would even be a good compromise wine between those who like softer rieslings and those who like them bone dry, acidic and steely. 88 points.

2000 Semillon (Margan) QPR Winner 
This Hunter Valley semillon defies stereotypes. That is, there is actually some fruit at a youthful age, and the acidity does not remove the enamel from your teeth! In fact, the grassy notes provide a nuanced wine, and underneath there is some juicy fruit. I liked the mouth-coating texture that wine provided as a finish. Personally, there are other white dry wine grapes I prefer, and less acidic styles, but this is a fine example of its type. 90 points.

1998 Pinot Gris (Kings Creek) QPR Winner 
This is from Mornington Peninsula, meaning cool climate, a likely source to imitate a nice Alsatian pinot gris. This modestly priced wine does well for its category, but not much more. It had a nice nose, which, however, didn't follow through to the palate, which was a bit light.  The finish was surprisingly long, but the wine always seemed to lack depth and flavor. You can do better with inexpensive Alsace.  As an airy, elegant summer wine, it goes down well. It is one of those wines whose score does not reflect how much fun it is to drink in the right circumstance and the short term.  For the price, it is charming.  84 points.

[Return to Top]

Bordeaux  (except dessert/sparkling)
1978 Chateau Palmer
I was thoroughly disappointed in this wine, which opened well and then evolved poorly. The oxidative notes ruined whatever pleasure I got from the wine, and it cracked in various places. Those who like older wines will find it not too over-the-hill, although it is hard to deny, at least from this bottle, the problems the wine has. Of course, it is only 20+ years old. It is not as if this were a 1959.  It seemed to me to have too many flaws for middle age, at least from this bottle. 85 points.

1989 Pavie-Decesse
Easygoing, bright, charming and fun to drink, this wine shows little depth, concentration or power, but never falls apart or seems watery either. I liked its focus, and I liked its gentle charm. I was willing to tolerate the touch of mint on the finish.  For the right price, this is nice, straight-ahead Bordeaux. 89 points.

1988 Chateau L'Evangile
Elegant and gentle, charming and fun to drink, this wine came up a tad short on depth, but was rescued by its charm and texture. It also exuded flavor and seemed to be a wine that was fully open and ready. By the end of the evening, I thought a trace of oxidation had seeped in, and I liked it less. I loved the way it began. I was less thrilled with the way it ended.  But it was a wine I thoroughly enjoyed drinking for what it was and at different points of the evening it would have been rated differently. 89 points.

1989 Chateau Léoville Las Cases
A fine vintage and a top estate doing everything it can think of to make the best wine it can in the context of the vintage usually results in this: superlative wine firing on all burners, a testament to what the appellation can achieve.  This wine does it all. It opened beautifully, but never stopped developing, revealing something new and interesting as each layer peeled successively away. The persistence of the fruit followed onto the long finish. And what fruit...so succulent, so ripe. For all of that, the other components of the wine were in perfect balance, bright, charming and well structured.  Everything was perfectly integrated. From this bottle, this wine was drinking exceptionally well. I also loved the round, burnished texture. If this keeps developing, it could be one of the benchmarks for its era and vintage. If it never gets any better (I bet it will), it is still remarkable.  95+ points.

1978 Chateau La Mission Haut Brion
Full and relatively deep, this seemingly mature wine shows itself to be slightly burly, yet elegant, supple and round. With air it developed some trademark tar and tobacco notes, and there were occasional hints of oxidation. On the whole,  it showed remarkable concentration for its age. The texture also seemed coated with velvet, which gave the wine some character besides just being "thick."  There seemed to be some nuances of blackberries here and again, although pure flavor wasn't the wine's strong point. On the whole, this grew on me as it sat, although I never quite became enthusiastic. 90 points.

1979 La Mission Haut Brion
I have fond memories of this wine when it was young, but it didn't follow through completely on this showing. If this is a typical bottle (and bottle variations in older wines are driving me to distraction these days)...time to drink up. Up front, I liked the texture, and the bright, elegant demeanor, with some subtle red berry notes at the end. It seemed rather voluptuous for its age. However, while I liked it up front, and thought it even improved after fifteen minutes, it did not take long before it began to slide. By the middle of the evening it was showing some prunes and a touch of maderized fruit. But I found things to like about it while it held anyway. 85 points.

1975 Chateau Giscours
This estate normally doesn't excite me, but in 1975 many thought that it hit a home run. It shows beautifully here. Still pretty tannic, in accord with the vintage's reputation, this fattened with air, and showed some nice cherry fruit to boot. The tannins integrated nicely, something you can't say about a lot of '75s, and the wine always seemed youthful, balanced and vibrant. On the whole, this dark horse for one of the top wines of the vintage showed beautifully and kept improving with air. 92 points.

1978 Chateau Leoville Las Cases
Very tannic on opening, this shows thick, big fruit, little flavor, and not much besides weight. It seemed stolid, clunky and one dimensional, and was marred by some oxidative notes on the finish. If this is a typical bottle, it is very unimpressive in everything except weight.  84 points.

1989 Chateau Latour
This may not be the most dense and richest Latour ever, and it reminds me perhaps more of fine Grand Puy Lacoste, but it is classical Pauillac and pretty fine. The core of fruit shows sweet cassis. The backbone sports mouth-drying tannins on the finish. In between, there is lead pencil and a hint of tobacco. This wine needs a few more years of cellaring, and it may never be a monumental Latour. But I doubt anyone will regret drinking this prototypical Pauillac.  90 points, might increase slightly depending on development.

Burgundy (red) (except dessert/sparkling) 
1999 Bourgogne Rouge "Mont Avril" (Michel Goubard et Fils) QPR Winner
What a deal! Cheap pinot that tastes like pinot is so hard to find in the USA. Sometimes, it seems almost impossible. This is a revelation. $10 to $12 in my area, probably a touch more elsewhere. Sniff. Smells like pinot. Taste. Tastes like pinot, with a bit of sauvage thrown in. Excellent weight in this price range. Hearty and mouth coating, tinged with pretty cherry flavors.  Loved it. Drinking beautifully now, but I bet it can hold a  year or two just on the depth of fruit alone, although it should be viewed as a short-term wine. There is no tannin to speak of. The finish is dominated ultimately by acid but has its good points. All in all, though, it's been sometime since I had a pinot this cheap and this good.  Buy it fast before storage harms it. 88 points.

1996 Vosne Romanée "Les Suchots" (Domaine de l'Arlot)
This bottle was rather disappointing. I preferred the $12 Goubard above! The wine had a soft, velvety texture that I found appealing, but that was about all that was good about it. The mid-palate seemed short on concentration. The finish seemed a bit vegetal, tinged with green peppers.  It went down easy, but had the concentration level of a bourgogne rouge. This was drunk in England, and the bottle seemed to be in very good shape, but I cannot imagine how such a good producer could churn out a wine from Suchots of so little distinction. 85 points.

1995 Corton-Maréchaudes (Chandon de Briailles)
I didn't like the way this opened--it seemed thin, and a bit hollow, although with some decent flavor. Much to my relief and surprise--since this is a wine I have had before and always liked--it blossomed with air and put on weight, showing some depth and class. I began liking the cherry fruit a lot, and the bright, elegant demeanor made it easy to drink. I still would have liked a bit more depth, and I wonder if this was a less than perfect bottle, or just typical of  how the wine is aging. If the latter, it is aging pretty fast and has slipped a notch or two since I last had it, so drink up.  89 points. 

Burgundy (white) (except dessert/sparkling) 
1998 Pouilly-Fuissé Vielles Vignes (Chateau Fuissé)
This rare Vielles Vignes bottling is simply lovely.  You know it is not Corton or Puligny. The lees influences seem less. The hazelnut notes are muted. You know it is not Big Boy white Burg--for one thing, the oak is very restrained, too.  Yet, and yet...the subtly long finish is tinged with a bit of lemons, a nuance that is submerged by the deep fruit. Steely on opening, it becomes rather opulent for PF with air. It has unusual ripeness and stuffing for the label, and fine structure. Those who like the purist view of chardonnay will go bonkers for this wine and like it even more than I did. 91 points.

1999 Macon-Milly (Comtes Lafon)
This wine is not yet available in the USA, and represents Comtes Lafon's first venture into the Macon. It fooled me. In a sense, I am humiliated that I called this as a steely, bone dry riesling (see the note on the Craneford, above, which it reminded me of in some respects). It opened so tight, I wondered if there was any fruit at all. It seemed all acid and steel. It seemed like riesling. As it aired out, the bouquet started to change. Some people around the table started changing guesses, and started to hit on one of the next obvious choices, Chablis. But no. Up to that point, I disliked this unpleasant, charmless wine a lot. Yet as it sat in the glass for another fifteen minutes and warmed up, it acquired some fruit, some depth and some balance, and it began to grow on me. The taster who brought it claimed that it showed very fruity when he tasted it at the Domaine, and he was surprised at its stern demeanor tonight, too. It became good, not great. It wasn't a revelation. Maybe age will improve it, but.... 88 points. 

California/USA (red) (except dessert/sparkling)
1985 Cabernet "Napa" (Dunn)
From this bottle of unknown provenance at least, this is finally drinking well, and even showing some oxidation. Perhaps so-so storage actually helped it get ready! The fruit opens sweet, but not lush, as a lot of older Dunns show, and the wine tastes of some oxidation around the edges. Medium bodied now, it actually seems rather elegant and almost quaint. Of course, the Napa was never the bruiser that the Howell Mountain was. I wonder if this is a typical bottle. It seems to show like so many older Dunns show--tannins finally softened, but fruit slightly faded and thinned, not having kept up. It drinks well, but no one would guess this was a cult wine in its day. 86 points.

1996 Cabernet Franc "Pegase Circle Reserve" (Clos Pegase)
I was largely unimpressed with this wine, which was way too herbal, had little lushness, and rather restrained flavors. The wine had a fairly nice focus, but this disguised some thinness in the mid-palate. Worst of all, it was bitter and unpleasant on the finish. It did have some good points, at times simulating a Bordeaux. But it came up too short, too often. 85 points.

1991 Cabernet "Howell Mountain" (Dunn)
I don't know if the winemaker admits it, but it seems to me there has clearly been a style change at Dunn in the '90's.  The unbalanced, astringent monstrosities that sometimes resulted from the winemaker's lover of tannin in the 80's are gone. This is what Dunn always should have been. Big and chunky, dense and deep, this has superb mid-palate concentration. For all of that, it is utterly classic cabernet. As it breathes, it acquires typicity, cassis and balance.  The fruit integrates beautifully with its structure. Notes of spice and red berries pop out, too. The only problem with this wine is that we never did have a chance to let it breathe enough to show everything it had.  This is still evolving and will reward further cellaring, but it is certainly approachable. The score might even rise if it develops well and further. 93+ points.

1992 Pinot Noir (Beaux Freres)
My last bottle of this beautiful pinot, the first widely available commercial release from this winery, still shows well. Now, consider, this was made from young vines. My original take on it, considering its exuberant fruit bomb demeanor in its youth, was that it was a short term wine that should be drunk within a couple of years. I was startled when that time elapse and it was not only showing well, but improving. In fact, the winery's own prognostications shortly thereafter began to predict longer life, too. The class of this wine fooled everyone and frankly for it to show this well at this age is rather remarkable. Finally, though,  I would say it has shown some downside. From this bottle, which in fairness was drunk only a few days after being carried across the Atlantic, there was still that gorgeous velvety texture.  The fruit still had flavor, mingling and altering notes of black cherry and strawberry, the latter perhaps a sign of impending demise. It was still fun to drink, and still had lively fruit. Those who like wines on the older side may even prefer this showing. I still liked it a lot, but there are signs that it is time to drink up. If indeed it is starting to slide--and this wine has rallied before--it has at least been a glorious run. From this bottle, a slight drop in score.  90 points. 

1996 Pinot Noir (Beaux Freres)
This pinot was showing rather stolid and solid, and seeming a bit closed until the very end. It threw off a fairly precise black cherry note, and was solidly cast in the mid-palate. At this juncture, it seemed a bit charmless though. It took all evening to develop, and I never was really sure where it was going. I wanted to see some of the pure flavor of the '92, or the elegance of the '93, or the luscious depth of the '94.  In many respects, when it was released, I thought this was the wine that put all the styles together for Beaux Freres, combining depth with some finesse and fruit forward flavor. I am not so sure now, but am still optimistic.  To be fair, it was also drunk a few days after a transatlantic journey, so bottle shock is a possibility. I can also say that it is not unusual for the wines from this winery to evolve and change constantly with cellaring. The depth is there, the fruit is there, and they all seem in balance, but the fruit is muted slightly for hours,  indicating perhaps a wine that has closed or is in shock.  Now, I want to see how the flavor profile develops.  My guess is that it will and if you look up in a few years, this will be firing on all burners. The steady improvement with air all night long was a good sign. I don't think any more that it will ever reach the heights the 1992 reached, though.  I'll be very interested to try this again without bottle shock issues in a year. I suspect that will mean 90-92 points at peak, but it was not completely approachable yet. I'm also thinking that, assuming this works out, and I think it will even though it is developing at a snail's pace, it will be a very long-lived pinot. 90-92 points.

1996 Zinfandel "Moore Earthquake" (Turley)
Surprisingly muted and restrained, this was yet another Turley that defied predictions. Try to evaluate this wine by reading the statistics on the label and you will be fooled every time. It was, again, a wine that was a bit curiously muted and had recently traveled across the ocean. So perhaps there was some issue of bottle shock. Other than that, it was basic Turley, some chocolate, some ripe fruit, good depth, a lot of fun. Turley.  I did think that I have had bottles of this that showed somewhat more exuberantly, though, and I missed the flamboyance. Bottle shock? Perhaps. If so, it survived it pretty well.  90 points.

1995 Pinot Noir Sonoma Coast (Kistler)
I have to say that I liked this a lot. On the one hand, it seemed to be pure elegance. I loved the bouquet. Yet, for all of the effortless presentation of fruit, it had plenty of depth, and it was drinking well. With air, the fine, black cherry fruit popped out and it opened nicely with time. Round, charming, and ultimately ripe. Drinking well. 91 points.

1996 Zinfandel "Grist" (Turley)
This was an interesting wine, as so many Turleys are. On the one hand, there are the stereotypical notes of toffee and ripe, some might say overripe, caramel notes. Yet, this was bright, racy and balanced, and kept improving with air. If anything, I thought it was sometimes a bit too bright, but the integration of the wine's component's proceeded nicely, and it slung intense fruit flavor at me all night. This doesn't quite have the depth or class of Turley's very best, but it's pretty nice. 89 points.

1996 Zinfandel "Black Sears" (Turley)
More solid, seemingly, and lush than the Grist, above, this wasn't quite as bright, and seemed rich rather than racy. I like the hint of blueberries on the nose, and the general mouthfeel, but it never seemed quite as intense or as exciting as the Grist. 88 points.

1998 Zinfandel Howell Mountain (Outpost)
From the winemaker who is responsible for Turley zins, comes this beauty. Opened with the two Turleys above, I thought this was the winner. Big and deep, rich and ripe, it seemed harsh and disjointed on opening. Bursts of acidity competed with puréed blackberry fruit. But with air, this very young wine pulled together. Chocolate nuances popped out on the fruit, and the acidity integrated well, leaving a deep, powerful, rich but very well balanced zin. 91 points. 

1994 Syrah (Swanson)
From one of my favorite American syrah producers, this is superlative syrah once again. The wine has also rounded into form now, and is drinking perfectly. A couple of years ago, the tannins were still in control and the fruit a bit submerged. Suddenly, everything is open, firing on all burners, and releasing waves of flavor. Smooth and velvety, ripe and luscious, this has a lot of Rhone-y characteristics, and seems to be classic syrah. The mid-palate is solid. The finish was excellent. The flavor never quit, and the wine developed all night. Very fine. 92 points.

1997 Sangiovese “Pietre Rossi” (Dalle Valle)
Served blind, I guessed California but not sangiovese. It certainly seemed to lack some typicity, reminding me more of Swanson syrah than Tuscan sangiovese. But in other respects, it was stunning wine, and a lot of Chianti could take some hints from this. Ripe and round, rich and deep, this showed very young and with a lot of  new wood.  It was tightly wound, but opened beautifully, although it could’ve used a touch of restraint on the new oak, which might, however, integrate with some age. Well balanced and concentrated, it was fine new world sangiovese.  91 points.

1997 Petite Sirah “Rattlesnake” (Turley)
The Turley style is here in spades, the very ripe fruit, with a touch of flamboyance, The Turley style is here in spades, the very ripe fruit, with a touch of flamboyance, the hints of decadence. But this is a Turley wine in that it is a well structured wine that pulls together beautifully with air. The depth is superb and the quality of fruit is, too, with lingering, sweet rhubarb notes on the finish. It exudes flavor. It’s packed, and likely to improve.   92-93 points.  

1997 Petite Sirah "Rattlesnake" (Schuetz Oles)
This otherwise superb wine was marred by the use of a little too much American oak. Still, I've seen lots worse, and with some air the oak integrated somewhat into the wine. It was a bit overdone, but not overbearing. Underneath the oak, there was ripe and succulent fruit, and I enjoyed the exuberance and forwardness of the wine a lot.  Back off just a little on the American oak, and it could be special.  90 points. 

1996 Pinot Noir "Kistler Vineyard" (Kistler)
A long time favorite,  this showed beautifully again, and is developing wonderfully. It opens intense in every way--bouquet, finish and mid-palate. The ripe dark cherry fruit exuded flavor for as long as I had some in the glass. The mouth feel was smooth and round. The wine seems to be holding effortlessly, but the tannins are soft and very ripe. This is a hedonistic and exotic wine. 93 points.

1999 Pinot Noir "Sharon's Vineyard" (Loring)
The good thing is that it doesn't cost much, around $20, which is a pittance for decent pinot noir. At this point, it doesn't deliver much besides tightness and a bitter herbal note, either, however. That said, this might just be a bit too young. The wine seems to have decent weight, and good structure. The question is whether it will ever open up and let the fruit deliver some clean, varietally true flavor.  Hard to evaluate now, a projected range is 84-87 points.

1999 Pinot Noir Knight's Valley (Peter Michael) QPR Winner  
For about $25, this Peter Michael wine is an inexpensive (relatively) pinot that seems poised to deliver some bang for the buck. Intense and tannic, this opened with air and proved to me that there was some sweet fruit underneath. The question will be balance for this wine. So far, so good.  Not completely approachable now, it will be interesting to see what happens in about two to three years. If the fruit can keep up with the tannin, it will be quite a bargain. 87-90 points.

1998 Cabernet (Pride)
Varietally true and very accessible, this shows like a classic cab in terms of flavor profile. On opening, though, it was  a bit shy of structure and depth. Air brought out some tannins, but the wine never seemed to fully plug the hole in its mid-palate. It seems a bit light for its cachet. Still, for all that, it was fun to drink, tasty and went down easy. 89 points.

1997 Cabernet "20th Anniversary" (Flora Springs)
Every now and then, I run into a wine that confuses me a lot. Sure, we all have a "slush fund" in evaluating wines for things we consider more important than others. With wines like this, though, it becomes a metaphysical debate. When they do X things SO well, yet seem so lacking in Y things...how do you balance that out?  The good news:  This is exuberant and fruity, yet not over the top in any respect. It chirps with bright, elegant enthusiasm. The wine is sensual and seductive, the bouquet is all violets, the mid-palate sweet and delicious blueberries, the texture pure velvet. Its sensuality reminded me of a mature Chateau Palmer or Chateau Margaux.  The finish is succulent fruit. The bad news: where's the depth? This very famous, very heralded wine should have a bit more oomph to it. With air, it put weight--enough to create a metaphysical debate, but not enough to overwhelm my reservations.  As it stands now, it is very sexy, but shows little structure. How you feel about that will depend on what you want in a wine. I found it hard to worry about supposed flaws and had to ultimately love this for mid-term drinking.  Maybe it will fool everyone and develop even better. 92 points.

1997 Cabernet (Saddleback) 
Powerful and tannic, this wine lacked a little charm at first.  Drunk next to the Flora Springs, above, it showed a bit stolid, but much more packed, and a much better candidate for aging. I couldn't help think that if you added some of the structure here to the sensuality of the Flora Springs, you would have a legendary wine. Still, with air, this opened beautifully, showed great intensity, and ultimately, some fruit flavor too. Built to last, this requires about five years in the cellar I think to show well. I have to think it will come into fine balance. 90-92 points.

1997 Isosceles (Justin) QPR Winner 
This well priced (thirty-ish) Cal meritage is just pure fun. On opening, and served blind, it reminded some folks at the table of shiraz. That was not a bad guess considering how it showed early on.  But as it opened up, it acquired some more varietal typicity, and then just became confusing. Anyway, it tasted good!  From spice and blackberries early on, it dissolved into a pleasing core of sweet strawberry fruit, with some welcome tannin on the finish. Hints of American oak, curse its invention!, were overwhelmed by some raspberry nuances as the wine aired out even more. There is nothing profound here. But it has reasonable depth, purity and intensity of flavor, and is pure fun. 90 points.

1991 Cabernet (Seavey)
The last time I had this wine I was stunned at how good it was. It seemed about as good as anything made in this tremendous California vintage, which at the moment is in the lead for my favorite of all time. This time, expectations were higher. No problem. This bottle, if anything, was better. The nose was a little troubling at first, with a bit of oxidation. But the wine pulled into form quickly. It seemed like long-haul Bordeaux. The core was vibrant, sweet cassis, there were some nuances of game around the edges, and the wine was beautifully structured. Tannins popped out on the finish; this wine can cellar easily I think for some twenty years more, give or take. This is classic cab; this is what it is all about.  95-97 points.

1996 Cabernet (Seavey)
This young wine screams for more cellaring and promises to be a long haul cab. Pure and pristine, the core of fruit is beautiful and laced with cassis. Seavey does that so well......The tannins on the finish need some time to integrate. The wine seems to have a perfect structure to round into form in another five years or so. This has been one of the most ageworthy 96s that has also been in fine balance that I have tasted. 91-93 points.

1991 Isosceles (Justin)
This opens up oddly. Call it shiraz, which is not a good thing for an American cab. It is sweet and flamboyant, wholly atypical, laced with American oak. With air, the wine flattens out, but the oak integrates. The succulent fruit broadens and fades a bit. This is still a cab in very good shape, but I suspect continued cellaring won't improve it and it should be drunk over the next few years for best result. 88 points.

[Return to Top]

California/USA (white) (except dessert/sparkling)
1996 Chardonnay "Mon Plaisir" (Peter Michael) 
Of Peter Michael's luxury wines, this has been the chard I've always liked least. It always seemed to be the most restrained in terms of oak, though. From this bottling, that has changed. Buttery, with a heavy vanilla oak overlay, and some lees notes, this seems heavy, a touch flabby,  and a bit clunky. I have to admit, it also tastes good. Yet, after awhile it does become a bit boring and one-dimensional. Yes, PM makes wines with more oak--but they also have more fruit and ultimately better balance. This has its good points, but it is hard too get too carried away over what could have been better wine. 87 points.

1995 Chardonnay "Kistler Vineyard" (Kistler)
The fruit seemed to be thinning a bit, but the nose was Burgundian and potent, and beneath the oak overlay there was an elegant wine with lots of nutty nuances and lees influences. The wine sports a fine finish to go with a great nose, but I would've liked a little more solidity in the mid-palate. 90 points.

[Return to Top]

Dessert/Sparkling 
1989 Grauburgunder Beerenauslese "Haardter Herrenletten" (Muller-Catoir)
This seemed a bit over the hill, to my regret and surprise. A dark amber color followed through to a roasted apricot palate laced with chards of oxidation. Reasonably viscous, still, the nuances were spoiled a bit for me by the oxidation. For all of that, there was still a lot of solid fruit to admire, and I certainly didn't spit it out. It coulda been more, though. 87 points.

1972 PX Sherry Gran Riserva Dulce de Postre (Toro Albala)
This unusual wine was a new one for me. Oh, the style wasn't new. If you've had PX from top producers, it always seems colored like motor oil, and is almost as viscous. This older, vintage PX, though, has a lot of intensity and focus. I like the burnt caramel and  molasses nuances, and the rush of sweetness on the finish. There was a touch of acidity, too. Exotic and over the top in some ways, balanced and focused in others, I had a lot of fun with this in all respects. 92 points.

NV Old Tawny Port (Trevor Jones)
Pure magic, this is another testament to the wonders of Aussie fortifieds. Richer than most and sweeter than most, this showed syrupy at the outset, intense and thick. It was great. It calmed down a bit with air, but the persistence of its flavors, caramel and nuts, never dimmed. Gorgeous, exotic and flamboyant. 95 points.

1991 Macon "Selection des Grain Cendrès" (Macon-Clessé Quintaine)
Served blind, this fooled me completely. I was sure it was a Sauternes satellite. But no. It was....late harvest chardonnay from Burgundy!!!!!!  The body and the nose seemed a dead ringer for semillion, or maybe the botrytis level just covered everything else up. Other late harvest chards I have had, have been light and delicate. Not this. Sturdy, powerful--it surely had to be Sauternes. Once past the shock, I have to say I wasn't wholly impressed either. The wine should have been a touch sweeter, a bit more graceful. With the sturdiness also came stolidness. It was a bit short.  Still, this was interesting on a lot of counts. Ps.: If you've ever thought, as I have, that it is silly to make a topic heading "Burgundy...except sparkling and dessert" as I do, above, well....aha! 85 points.

1990 Champagne "Cuvée Winston Churchill" (Pol Roger)
Long and deep, powerful and toasty, this prestige bottling lives up to its reputation and delivers.  On opening, it was plenty tight, nuanced with toast, and finished with a bit of acid that stayed on my tongue for some time.  The wine, for all of its concentration, showed great focus and balance. I liked its fruit and its intensity.  That said, it seemed to me to be a step short of some of the other great wines in this vintage.  Just, perhaps,  by an unqualifiable something extra in flavor, richness, distinctiveness, whatever, that some others I've had did slightly better. Still, this is superb champagne. 92 points.

1997 Bonnezeaux (Chateau de Fesles)
Very sweet, and syrupy, this is unbelievably ripe and rich, showing great concentration, and big fruit. There's just enough acid and some botrytis, but neither of those are the story line of this wine. For that, look to the luscious, succulent fruit, the fragrant bouquet and the peach and apricot nuances.  Was that fresh fruit juice dripping down my chin? Monumental and stunning. 95 points.

1998 Quarts de Chaume (Baumard)
This isn't the 1997. It lacks the depth, the power, the viscosity, the finish. But it has its charms. Off dry and lively, it seems cheery and tasty, elegant and focused. I would have liked a bit more oomph, but only a grinch would have disliked this. 88 points.

1986 Sauternes (Doisy-Daene)
Light and inoffensive,  this petit chateau shows nothing of note. The finish is modest, the botrytis is modest, the mid-palate is too thin and there is little sweetness. One person nonetheless thought it was good--if you didn't think of it as a late harvest dessert wine. Hmmmm. In this vintage, I want more. A lot more. 80 points.

1999 Muskateller "Durkheimer Hochbenn"  Eiswein (Kurt Darting)
Sunny and exuberant,  bright but concentrated and intense, this is simply gorgeous. Immensely appealing from the persistent citrus fruit bouquet to the long, peach-nuanced finish, this does about everything right. All the components seem well integrated now, and for my taste this was already drinking very well. It would be hard to see what you would gain by aging it, but I can sure see what you might lose. A pleasure to drink. 94 points.

1992 Port "Quinta da Bomfim" (Dow)
Held in a decanter for a couple of hours, this port showed as very approachable, but rather subdued and closed. I think it had more to show and to give, but I guess a couple of hours of decanting wasn't enough. The weight was good, and the balance was excellent. The question now is whether this will repay some cellaring by opening up and delivering some flavor. 86-88 points.

NV Sparkling Wine (Blue Mountain) QPR Winner  
This British Columbia, Canada sparkler is just $13 US, and at that price is a good deal. There is a little beer and a touch of acid on the finish, but in this price range it shows reasonable depth and some toast, too. Well balanced, elegant, and a good aperitif. 85 points.

[Return to Top]

Germany (except dessert/sparkling)
1999 Riesling Spatlese "Schlossbockelheimer Kufpfergrube" (Donnhoff)
The first sip was elegant and bright, but also a bit thin and hollow. Big mistake. Give this wine a few minutes to react to air, and pow! It seemed to gain weight for the rest of the night. It remained off dry and elegant and bright, but the fruit became more and more forward, and the wine coated your mouth. The finish lingered and was delicious. Seductive and ripe. 90-92 points.

1990 Riesling Auslese "Forster Ungeheuer" (Egon Muller)
Gentle, with nice little hits of sugar on the end, this wine shows acid mostly on the back end. It seemed a bit stolid and dull at times, friendly and charming at others. It is undistinguished in a sense-not racy, not deep, not intense. But the whole was pretty nice, and perhaps greater than the sum of the parts. 87 points.

1992 Riesling Kabinett halbtrocken "Mussbacher Eselshaut" (Muller-Catoir)
It is hard to believe this is Riesling. The label said riesling. It had nothing very "riesling" about it, though. What it smelled like was Loire sauvignon blanc, or, more accurately,  its German wannabe, Scheurebe. Filled with cat pee aromas and grassy notes, the wine caused the table to look up and do a doubletake at the label. It had good weight and a decent finish but like a lot of trockens and halbtrockens, there was also a certain brutality and bitterness to it. All that aside....I find it hard to believe this 100% riesling. It doesn't make sense at all. If it is riesling, it lacks varietal typicity and seems way off base, other issues aside. 82 points.

1992 Riesling Spatlese halbtrocken "Gimmeldinger Mandelgarten" (Muller-Catoir)
This is more like it.  Identifiably riesling, the wine also had some nice flavors that expanded and softened with air. It seems a touch bitter and steely on the finish, though.  It was really a wine that would have done better with a little more residual sweetness and I wondered how much nicer this would have been with some sweetness given its nice depth  and nice attack.  I wish I could like these drier Germans more, really I do. But I just can't warm up to them.  87 points.

1975 Rulander Auslese "Bornheimer Adelberg" (S&J Bliem)
Elderly rulander. Wheeze. Gasp. On opening it was cooked apricots, oxidized. And then....miracle of miracles. It pulled itself off the floor, pulled itself into some balance and delivered a lot of flavor with good depth and viscosity to boot. There were still some annoying oxidative notes; the wine was not perfect. But I had to admire the great balance of sweetness, richness and acidity in a 26-year-old Rulander!  87 points.

1999 Riesling Spatlese "Oberhauser Brücke" (Donnhoff)
There's a big hit of sugar up front, but that quickly integrates into the nice, packed body. The fruit is gorgeously fragrant and mouth coating. The finish is long, dripping with succulent fruit.  It adds a nice, persistent and powerful nose. A pleasure to drink, rich and concentrated. Some producers don't make auslese this rich.  90-92 points.

1990 Riesling Auslese "Josephshofer" (Reichsgraff von Kesselstatt)
This beautiful Mosel is penetrating and precise. It grips your mouth with the long finish. The residual sugar is just enough to prevent the acidity from being overbearing. The flavors are classical and lovely.  Very fine, very charming, very deep Auslese. 92 points.

[Return to Top]

Italy (except dessert/sparkling)
1998 Secco Cà de Merlo Bianco(Quintarelli)
Bone dry, inoffensive, this wine seems to do nothing particularly well. It just exists. There are moments when I think some sherry notes will come to fore, and it reminded me of old-style, dry furmint in some ways. It finishes a little bitter, having delivered no flavor for the pain. This was a chore to drink. 82 points.

1989 Barolo Riserva “Faletto di Serralunga” (Giacosa)
I was quite certain this would be unapproachable. Wrong! Burly and thick, it nonetheless had all tannins under control, although there were some on the finish in particular. With air, even those moderated. The wine pulled together beautifully, throwing off continuous bursts of flavor, ending in a long finish. The packed, dense mid-palate was remarkable. The structure in general promises a long life. Forgive the alliteration, but this is stunningly beautiful Barolo.  96 points.  

1997 Tignanello (Antinori)
On opening, this was curiously muted and I think closed. It never really opened up while I had it in the glass. The depth seemed reasonable, and with air I could tell that there was fruit struggling to emerge. I liked the development more and more as time wore on, but I ran out of wine before it ceased telling all the stories it had to tell. From this bottle, this wine was pretty much closed for business and all but impossible to evaluate in the time I had. Judgment reserved. Come back in a couple of years.

1997 Montiano Merlot (Falesco)
A bit funky, powerful and dense, this seemed to be a dead ringer for a big, slightly bretty Bordeaux. It was hard to believe this was Italian merlot--and I wouldn't have believed it if this had been served blind. The concentration level was superb, as was the finish and balance. The structure seemed likely to give the fruit a supporting backbone. If you could deal with the funk, this was a superbly crafted merlot that handles the task of being merlot in a way that most Pomerols and St. Emilions do, but most Californians don't, managing to impose structure and power onto a sometimes simple grape. 90-92 points.

1997 Ateo (Ciacci Piccolomini) QPR Winner
I last had this about six months ago in Italy. It seemed seductive, but a bit light and a touch hollow in the mid-palate. This hardly seems like the same wine, and it is a clear step up from the Italian bottle--which itself was rather good. The juicy fruit is still there, as are the scents of violets and blueberries. But the mid-palate seems rather packed now, the intensity seems redoubled and the finish is much better.  It doesn't have the depth of the Montiano, above, but the fruit is more pristine, and the texture pure velvet. Different bottling? The effect of some more bottle age? Poor storage on the Italian bottle? I dunno. But this is pretty fine for a wine that sells for under $25. 91 points.

1996 Ornellaia (L. Antinori)
Beautifully structured, beautifully made and superbly balanced, this is a what a Super Tuscan should be. It opened a bit tight and closed. There was at least a bit of bright, red berry fruit. It quickly became more tanninc and tighter. Then, finally it opened. Once open, it showed soft, sensual texture to go with the bright red berry fruit, and it always kept the supporting backbone. Realistically speaking, this is still a few years away, but it did come around by the end of the evening. 92 points.

1998 Barbera d'Asti  "Quorum" (Hastae)
This producer has obviously decided to jump on the cult wine bandwagon by making a super expensive, super premium Barbera. The wine has no typicity whatsoever, at least while I had it in the glass (for some hours). Tasted blind, I went through several guesses. All of the guesses involved cabernet, though the wine had  hints of game nuances from something different. I was wondering if this might be a cab-syrah blend, maybe a Languedoc? An Australian new wave wine?  But Barbera? Yikes. For all of that, I liked it a lot for awhile. But when the bright red fruit finally calmed down, there was nothing left. The wine went flat, seemed boring. It dissolved into something boring and clunky, showing some weight and not much else. Premium pricing (over $50) but not premium product. I liked it less and less as the evening wore on, not more and more, which is a bad sign for something this expensive. Does anyone really want a super premium Barbera? Is there any point to it? If you want some great Barbera at a fraction of a the price, try some Parusso 98, around $20.  86 points.

[Return to Top]

England (except dessert/sparkling)
1995 Pinot Noir (Clocktower)
No, that's not a typo. England. As in UK. Not a part of Burgundy.  The good news is that it reminded me enough of pinot noir so that I could guess it was pinot noir blind. The bad news is that after I did so (while it was still blinded), I wondered whether my guess was wrong and there was some grenache in it. It was clearly weird in some way. Maybe an Aussie pinot-shiraz blend? South Africa? It reminded me a bit of some pinots I had from wineries in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The wine lacked much depth at this point in its life, but it held admirably. It did not seem over the hill, as many East Coast, USA pinots would be at this age.  The odd notes, however, were sour cherry notes in the mid-palate, and a candied fruit finish that was rather annoying and cloying. Still, all in all, there was a lot right here, and it certainly exceeded expectations. Somewhat amusing is that some of the British hopefuls that tasted it liked it better than Beaux Freres. I think I'd like to do that again blind.  84 points.

Rhone/South/Southwest France (except dessert/sparkling)
1998 Chateauneuf-du-Pape "Vielles Vignes" (Tardieu-Laurent) 
This sure ain't your daddy's Chateauneuf!  True Rhone lovers will probably hate this wine. Take it for what it is, and you may be lots happier. Laced with licorice, anise and mint, the wine shows lots of oak, lots of flamboyance, and not much Chateauneuf typicity. On the other hand, the fruit is focused, bright and pure, there is good ripeness and the wine is otherwise well balanced. How you react to will depend on where your priorities are. This is a wine that is difficult to score--that always happens when there are typicity issues--because how you react to its flamboyant features will be a very personal decision. On pure quality of winemaking, however, 88 points.

1998 Coteaux du Languedoc "Cote Rousse" (L'Aigulière)
This begins a review of three superlative Languedocs that I tasted at the same moment, and that I rate more or less evenly--but they have very different personalities.  This is a great estate in the Languedoc in great form in this vintage. I was not quite as impressed with the Cote Dorée, their other specialty cuvée. But this is superlative, everything you want from this winery.  Rustic and rich, with a velvety, sensual texture, this also has the trademark Montpeyroux "garrigue"--some would same L'Aigulière ''brett"--notes on the bouquet and palate hat big, fat L'Aigulière tends to throw off. It's so much more, though, given its depth, concentration and structure, so don't focus just on that.  There are tannins underlying the big fruit, and the wine is a bit astringent on the finish after it airs out for awhile. But it never fails to be seductive.  Approachable now, better in two to three years. 94 points.

1998 Coteaux du Languedoc "Grande Cuvée" Pic St. Loup (Chateau Lancyre) QPR Winner
I reviewed the mid-level bottling from this estate recently, the "Vielles Vignes," and it was a terrific $13 wine that bust out of its price category. So, too, did this. As good as the VV was, this is a big step up. Blueberry scented on opening, it gives way to a rich, ripe core of fruit. It is deep and thick, round and smooth, with some vanillin notes from oak. It goes down easy, but the depth is remarkable. In my area, this was a $20 wine, although "list" price is more like $30.  In trying to pick between this or the Cote Rousse or the Mas de Daumas Gassac (below), I can only say that they were equal in quality, but individually distinctive, very different in styles.  The Lancyre is perhaps a bit more flamboyant and internationally styled and the one whose aging ability I would be first to question, the Rousse a bit more rustic and burly, the Mas de Daumas Gassac sharper, tighter and sterner.  Pick whatever pleases you--or for that matter, there is no reason to choose. Buy them all, and drink them at different stages.  90-92 points.

1998 Mas de Daumas Gassac QPR Winner
Since 1970, this has been one of the most famous estates in the Languedoc, although it has always marched to its own beat, making Bordeaux-blend styled wines. This is one of the best I have had in some time from here, perhaps ever, and it was available in my area for just a litte more than $20, which is an amazing steal.  On opening there are notes of cassis and violets, but the palate follows through to red berry fruit. The density of the mid-palate is exceptional, and there is a beautiful core of sweet fruit. At this price level, the concentration seems rather amazing. The wine remains bright, with good tannins, and a generally perfect structure. It seems completely in balance, and merely needs a year or two to settle down and finish the task of integrating its components into a seamless whole. There are also notes of game and herbs. This wine does not have to apologize to any Bordeaux.  92-94 points.

1998 Cotes du Luberon (Domaine de Fontenille) QPR Winner
A traditional "best buy" in the Cotes du Luberon, this Languedoc rarely is on the shelf for more than $11.  As usual, it is terrific for this price range. While it lacks the depth of the big boys, it has elegance and fruit, and plenty of supporting structure to age gracefully for at least another five to seven years. In fact, I think this needs a year or two of cellaring, as the tannins were rather ferocious. I know from experience that the wine does come around and develop with cellaring.  88 points.

1988 Chateauneuf du Pape "Cuvée des Cadettes" (La Nerthe)
I was a bit disappointed in how this showed. On opening it seemed to project on the palate and the nose, a sour bouquet that I found unappealing. The palate eventually improved, but the smell did not ever really go away. On the palate, the fruit was pleasant but modest, and there seemed little of  distinction. The bottle? The wine?  It is fair to say I was unhappy. 80 points.

1998 Chateauneuf du Pape (Vieux Telegraphe)
This superlative VT is showing very big, very tannic, and very hard these days, quite a bit unlike the lush, soft style the winery has showed in the past. But there is so much more stuffing here! The pure power is a wonder to behold for VT, and I can only guess how much cellaring this needs. Certainly, it will not show its very best until about 2008, I suspect. At the moment, it is all potential, hard to evaluate, and seems to have closed down a bit. 92-94 points.

1998 Chateauneuf du Pape (Beaucastel)
And so here we finally have a vintage where the Beaucastel seems to have less pure power than the Vieux Telegraphe. Perhaps age will change that impression.  But there also seems to be more fruit here, and layers of it that constantly unfold. It has plenty of tannin underneath, but on top there is a considerable exuberance and incredible persistence of flavor. This is a Beau that will age gracefully for a couple of decades, I think, but also begin drinking decently in a couple of years, too.  Exotic, sexy, deep and concentrated, this is superlative Beaucastel. 93-95 points.

1998 Chateauneuf du Pape (Guigal)
One taster summed it up nicely: a simple wine without enough depth in this fabled vintage.  Over the last few years I was beginning to think that Guigal was an underrated Chateauneuf producer. Well, not by any evidence here. The wine is noticeably light, and while some supple tannins are obscuring the mid-palate, it seems more like modest Gigondas that big league Chateauneuf.  Of course, it was also only $21. Still, I wanted more. All that said, it was not bad. It had pleasing, delicate grenache flavors, bright cherry and strawberry notes. It will make a pleasing, uncomplicated wine.  But it coulda been a contender, not a pretender.  86-87 points.

1998 Chateauneuf du Pape "Cuvée Chantermerle" (Bosquet)
Luscious and flavorful, this ripe, succulent, forward Chateauneuf seemed like pure hedonism. It was so ripe and round that some questioned whether it would age gracefully. Personally, I think it will hold for a reasonable time, although the color was a bit light, and although it will not age as well as, say,  the Vieux Telegraphe, above, next to which it was tasted.  At the moment, it was hard for me to ignore its flavorful fruit and lush, round texture. 90 points.

1998 Gigondas Reserve (Raspail-Ay) QPR Winner
Remember when Gigondas was the poor man's Chateauneuf, simple, pleasant, fruity wine? Well, this is not your father's Gigondas. This reserve bottling from this very fine estate is superlative. Burly and succulent, bright and flavorful, the wine has a perfect balance between the concentrated fruit and the fine, ripe tannins. This is a Gigondas that will be approachable in year or so, but will age well, too. I think it will improve dramatically in a couple of years. About $25.  90-92 points.

1989 Chateauneuf du Pape “Cuvée Marie Beurrier” (Bonneau)
This is simply what you expect from Bonneau in a great vintage. It is stupendous Chateauneuf, firing on all burners, putting most of the rest of the appellation to shame. The depth and concentration of the fruit is remarkable. The mid-palate is as solid as possible. Yet, it is open and flavorful, sexy and seductive, with gorgeous nuances of strawberries. It is never stolid and unyielding. The texture is crushed velvet. The bouquet signals pure power, yet, while there are fine tannins underneath, they are ripe and never unduly intrusive. Rich, robust, sensual and long, this is wonderful Chateauneuf.  95 points.

 NV Hermitage “Le Pavillon” (Chapoutier)
This late '80s bottling shows well, but hardly would remind anyone of a cult wine in the making. Elegant and spicy, bright and subtle, the wine shows sweet, charming fruit, and blueberry nuances. The fruit is not very deep, though, and the finish is just adequate. From a wine of this prestige and price, I expect more depth and intensity. It is just missing too much.  87 points.

1997 Hermitage Blanc "Chevalier de Sterimberg" (Jaboulet)
This is not the best Sterimberg I've had, but in the context of the vintage it is a remarkable achievement. It is also one of the more recent wines that marks a style change, namely, allowing maloactic fermentation.  Opulent, and seductive, this gorgeous wine (about 2/3ds Marsanne, the rest Roussanne), delivers everything. The depth, concentration and richness are all notable. I also liked the nuances. By turns this was spicy, and then scented with some oaky vanillin notes. I also liked the long finish. This may mature a bit faster than other Sterimbergs--and it is drinking well now--but it leaves little to be desired. 92 points.

1985 Hermitage Blanc (Chave)
Thinning, but not dead, this wine needs to be drunk. Yet, it shows no trace of decay or oxidation, and it is holding on gamely, not yet ready to concede to age. If you had this young, you'll remember more lushness and thickness and depth. It seems fairly light now, with acid dominating the finish.  For all that, it still pure and pristine, with nice hits of flavor, scented with caramel and coconut. Easygoing and gentle, it is a charming old dowager with a few interesting stories left to tell. 88 points.

1998 Minervois La Livinière Pic St. Martin (Domaine Cantaussel)
In flavor profile, this reminded me of a more modestly styled specialty bottling from  L'Aigulière, one of the benchmark Languedocs these days.  Strawberry nuanced fruit laced with bacon fat nuances, provided a distinctive sort of sweet "garrigues" note to the wine that I rather liked. I also liked the texture and its velvet feel, but the wine lacked the depth of some top Languedocs I've had lately, and it was also a bit overly bright. Still, some hints of tannic structure popped up with air, the distinctive flavor profile was consistently enjoyable, and the price was right (around $20 in my area). Very good, but not the coup de coeur along the lines of the L'Aigulière "Cote Rousse", or Chateau Lancyre "Grande Cuvée", or Combes Blanche Minervois "Chandelière" on which I've reported recently.  The Lancyre and "Chandelière" are comparably priced, the Cote Rousse is about $10 more in my area.  Tip: Lancyre's Coteaux du Languedoc "Vielles Vignes" is only about $12 and many will like that as well or better.  87 points.

1995 Hermitage Blanc "Chante Alouette" (Chapoutier)
Youthful and pristine, this is bright and powerful, but lacks the lushness of mature Hermitage Blanc. I think it will benefit by more cellaring.  The finish is mouth-gripping and intense, and is certainly the best feature on the wine, which continued to evolve as it warmed up and aired out. At the moment, there is a little more restrained than I would like to see, but I am betting it will continue to improve. 89-91 points.

[Return to Top]

---

South Africa (except dessert/sparkling)
1996  "Paul Sauer" (Kanonkop)
Medium bodied, with just enough depth, this pleasing, charming wine is a Bordeaux-blend (mostly cabernet sauvignon, 20% cab franc, 10% merlot) that doesn't seem very Bordeaux-like. That aside, I liked the distinctive sour cherry note, and enjoyed the bright demeanor. There was a touch of green pepper on the finish that I could have lived without. Still, this went down easy, the biggest problem being the price. Over $30 seemed excessive for what was here, but that will have to be your call. 87 points.

1999 Chenin Blanc (Ken Forrester) QPR Winner 
Some melon notes provided a nice flavor nuance after this warmed up, and the weight was reasonable for a modestly priced wine. The finish was short, and as it continued to air out, its appeal diminished. Reasonable, but modest, this is a nice quaffer with unusually good depth for its general price range.  84 points.

[Return to Top]

---

Spain (except dessert/sparkling)
1996 Rioja "Coto de Imaz Reserva--Selection Pedro Guasch" (El Coto)
This well known estate scared me a little with this wine at first. Then, all was well. On opening, it seemed a bit vegetal, with asparagus notes. It also seemed a bit too thin.  It did not take much air for the wine to shake off both problems. Soon, the primary flavor nuance was semi-dry cherries, and the mid-palate showed some solidity and depth. The wine kept some gentle elegance from start to finish. As new-wave Rioja, it seems hardly like Rioja at all. It blends in a couple of other grapes, primarily grenache with tempranillo.  It feels to me more like Tuscany than Rioja. This is the first bottling for "Selection Pedro Guasch."  Very good, but with room for improvement. 89 points.

1995 Ribera Del Duero Reserva (Ibernoble)
Medium bodied, with a little bit of cabernet tossed in, this wine seemed unbalanced at first due to the atringency of the tannins vis-a-vis the relatively subdued fruit.  It opened surprisingly quickly, and projected some roasted cherry flavor. It lacked the pure depth of fruit of the El Coto, above, next to which it was tasted, although it was ultimately brighter and more tannic.  I enjoyed this, but it seemed to me it could benefit from a couple of more years of age although I wasn't completely convinced as to its balance between tannin and fruit. I was not sure where this wine was going, and found it less than exciting. Maybe I'll be thrilled in five years.  87 points.

  [Return to Top]

---

This site designed and created in content and in form
by Mark Squires, copyright © 2001,  all rights reserved.