People ask me a lot what wine I had last night. Most of the time I can barely remember what day it is let alone what happened the night before. So now that I am writing this blog thingy, I figured I could use this space to keep track of those type of things. As you will soon notice, we go through a lot of wine in this house, which, of course, I have convinced my wife is a good thing.
Notes about my notes:
Cost: A lot of the wine I consume I have purchased through auction, some I get through online retailers, and I even get some from the state monopoly, the PLCB. So I will try and list the current retail price when I can find it. Since I get wine from a number of sources, what I actually pay might not be all that relevant, but I will list it nonetheless.
Impressions/note: I will give a usually brief description of my perceptions of the wine. Since I think that tasting and drinking wine should be fun, I am going to try and make these fun and whimsical as well at times (although no promises there).
Score: I have had a long internal debate on whether to include a score or not with my notes. Finally, I decided to use the 100 point scale, just like almost everyone else. Why? Well basically, I’m just not clever enough to come up with a mind-blowing new method that would take the industry by storm and make me oodles of cash overnight. Don’t tell that to my wife, though. I think I have her convinced that I am the smartest guy in the room–otherwise, why on earth would she have agreed to marry me (and stay married)? So I am going to employ the widely used scale to represent what I think of the wine at the moment I taste it. I know what your thinking: “Why did you have to bold, italic, and underline all of that?” I really don’t know. I also should point out that I think that wines scoring about 83 and higher are worth drinking. Wines 88 and higher are worth buying and anything 93 and higher are worth buying a shitload of bottles. I should also point out that I have never given a wine a score higher than a 96. In fact, I have had only one 96 (1973 Dom Perignon) and two 95s (Krug Grande Cuvée and 1999 Van der Heyden Cabernet Sauvignon Estate Cornerstone). So maybe it is really a 95 point scale…. Come to think of it, I have only given one wine below a 70 (and it was really bad), so maybe I am really talking about a 25 point scale here, which really makes the most sense, but no one would like and some would not understand, so I will just stick to the 100 point scale. It’s a lot like the reason why I shave my legs in the summer–some cyclists will claim it’s to help with road rash (what happens to your skin when you crash), others think it is aerodynamics (nope). The real reason cyclists shave their legs? Because everyone else does it and you feel like a complete tool if you don’t, too. Cyclists, as a rule, are also quite narcissistic and we think shaved legs are sexier than hairy ones (you might not agree, but we don’t give a honey badger what you think). Sure, there are some holdouts, but the rest of us make fun of them (basically because we are jealous and do not have the gumption to buck the trend ourselves).
2004 DuMOL Russian River Valley Chardonnay: Retail ~$45. I paid ~$20. Tasted 1/29/2012. A little lemon curd and butterscotch with a hint of vanilla on the nose, really appealing–quite rich and fat. Seems to be a cross between a big California chardonnay and a Meursault from France. On the palate, quite viscous (due in no small part to the 14.5% alcohol), with the lemon curd really coming through. Great balance and acidity, even at this relatively advanced age. Really a wonderful wine. I would even consider paying retail for this–it was that good. 91-92 points. Paired this with a shrimp and scallop risotto and it was fabulous.
1996 Baron de la Charrière Meursault les Tillets: Retail $40?. I paid ~$23. Tasted 1/30/2012. I got two bottles of this of one of my auction sites a couple of months ago. We took the first bottle to our local BYOB, Hickory Lane. It was darker than I would have liked, but still very drinkable (even for my wife) and even ‘good’ (think 85-88 points). So when I pulled the cork on this second bottle and it was a similar color, I was not all that worried. Then I smelled it and subsequently tasted it. Yikes. This was completely oxidized and outright nasty. So while dinner was still in process, I ran downstairs and threw the Leflaive into the freezer (some claim that you should never put wine in the freezer–I think that is a bunch of crap since I do it all the time–the problem is leaving it in the freezer and forgetting about it). So this wine was flawed. It sucked. Out loud.
2001 Olivier Leflaive Meursault: Retail ~$40. I paid ~$20. Tasted 1/30/2012. After sloshing a bit in my favorite glass, I
One of these is the 2001 Meursault, the other is the 1996. Can you tell which one didn't suck?
really regretted not having tasted this next to the DuMOL from the night before, but being that this was a Monday, opening two bottles would have put me that last half step into full-blown alcoholism, for which I am not quite ready. On the nose plenty of lemon curd to go around, with a hint of vanilla bean. More caramel than butterscotch, though. On the palate, the fruit has started to fade, but very balanced with tons of acidity, making it an excellent food wine. 90 points. Paired with Jaime Oliver’s taglierini (we made it fresh) with a simple sweet tomato sauce and shrimps.
2004 Trefethen Cabernet Franc: Retail $38. I paid $28 as a club member back in ’07. Tasted 1/31/2012. My beautiful wife was in a red meat mood, so I picked up a couple of ribeyes and pulled this bottle from the bowels of the cellar. For years, I was a club member at Trefethen, if you get the chance to visit, you should. They have a really beautiful tasting room and the staff there seems to have a very relaxed and refreshing approach to the tasting experience. I might even still be a club member if I did not live in the Commonwealth of PA (don’t get me started on THIS again). As I mentioned above, we bought this back in 2007 at the winery, brought it back after a trip to the in-laws (apparently, my wife has been reading this blog and got rather upset about my comments about the in-laws, which were completely in jest, nonetheless, no more snide comments about the in-laws–for now). I opened this and decanted for about 30 minutes. The nose gave off a little mocha and raspberry, but also a bit of heat, which caused a bit of angst. Other than the heat, though, a really delightful nose. On the palate, the raspberry turns into a black cherry and the mocha persists. Medium to long finish with plenty of acidity and tannin to go around. Some life left, maybe another two years. 90 points.
2005 Viader Dare Rosé: Retail $25. I paid $8. Tasted 2/1/2012. As I mentioned on another post (‘Flawed‘), I rarely pour out wine, even if there is a problem. Basically, for me, part of loving wine is also understanding what happens to wine as it ages. That is why I took a bit of a flyer on this one. Most people would likely agree that the vast majority of rosé wines should be consumed rather soon after it is released. When I bought this wine, it was already well past what most would consider optimal. Nonetheless, I took the plunge. I have to say (and I think my wife, who is much less tolerant of wines that are less than flawless than am I, would agree), this wine was rather good. Sure, the fruit was a little disjointed up front, and there were some balance issues as a result, but all-in-all, this was a fairly good match for my spicy paella. I imagine this was due, at least in part, from the fact that the Dare Rosé is mostly cabernet sauvignon, which can hold up rather well over time. 86 points (would likely be a heck of a lot higher if I had this close to release).
2006 Chateau Lafargue Blanc: Retail ~$25. I paid 16€40 in 2007 in Paris. Tasted 2/3/2012. I picked these up at the ‘Salon des Vignerons Indépendents’ in Paris over Thanksgiving 2007. I bought three and I finally got around to drinking the last one. Golden color which caused some concern. Nose perfectly fine, though with notes of lemon curd and litchi. On the palate quite unctuous and full. An interesting blend of Sauvignon Blanc and Sauvignon Gris. This wine was also aged briefly in oak, and that is clear on the palate. Very low acidity, so I think these are better consumed in the short term. Good to very good. 89 points.
2006 Hirsch Sonoma Coast Chardonnay: Retail $50. I paid $30. Tasted 2/3/2012. I was fortunate enough to visit Hirsch last year and it is truly a magical place. Any pinot freak has heard of Hirsch for many producers make fabulous wine from the legendary fruit. When I saw these chards, I jumped. Bright and fresh fruit with bracing acidity. A bit of a balance issue on the finish, but otherwise fantastic. 89 points.
N.V. Mailly Grand Cru Champagne Brut Réserve: Retail $35 (at Total Wine). I paid 20€ (about $30 at the time). Tasted 2/5/2012. I bought this one at the winery in Champagne back in ’07 (one of the bottles in the boxes in the banner pictures) and it has been lost in the cellar since. Broke it out for Super Bowl XLVI, For which I had less than 0 interest. A little darker and not quite as effervescent as usual, showing its age. A little caramel note on the palate which also indicated it was time to drink. I still love this champagne, first introduced to me by our very good friends, Nico and Laura. 88 points.
1996 Domaine Jaboulet-Vercherre Beaune 1er Cru Clos de l’Ecu: Retail ~$35. I paid $17. Tasted 2/5/2012. Beaune is one of my favorite towns in Burgundy and this bottle brought back some fond memories of riding through the town and the surrounding vineyards. This was a really nicely aged red burg. Tons of cherry with a hint of barnyard. Medium finish marked by a bracing acidity. Outstanding. 90 points. I have one more bottle of this left and I plan on grilling up a nice pork tenderloin to serve with this bad boy.
2005 Loring Pinot Noir Naylor Dry Hole Vineyard: Retail $45. I paid $26. Tasted 2/5/2012. Brian Loring is rather well known in pinot circles for crafting rather big, opulent, fruity wines. Some have criticized him for that since many pinot freaks believe that pinot should be made to emulate the Burgundian style: restrained, elegant, food friendly. Brian, from what I have heard, likes to make wine in a style that he likes to drink. I say more power to him! While I certainly prefer the ‘Burgundian’ style of pinot, I also believe that one of the great things about pinot specifically and wine in general is the incredible variety of styles. Having babbled now for far too long, I really liked this wine. Sure, it was probably meant to be consumed much sooner, but I like my wine with a bit of age on it. This still had plenty of fruit. Tons, actually. And it was certainly a fun wine. When I busted this out after the Clos de l’Ecu, several people gasped “Wow” after the first sip. Same grape, very different expression. 91 points.
1995 Beaulieu Vineyards Cabernet Sauvignon Rutherford: Popped and poured. Tons of red fruit on the nose: raspberry and strawberry dominate. Also a hint of some barnyard. On the palate, the red fruit really explodes, I was really surprised by the fruit–this is a 16 year old wine, after all. After the fruit passed, there was still some nice balance. Very little acidity, though and the tannins are all but gone, making this a tough food pairing. Very good. 88 points.
1996 Beaulieu Vineyards Cabernet Sauvignon Rutherford: Popped and poured. We drank this right after the ’95, and before the ’97, so it was a fun little mini-vertical. The ’96 was much more vegetal on the nose with some darker red fruit as well. On the palate a bit of stuffing here as well. Plenty of acidity to balance out the fruit and quite a bit of tannin on the finish as well. Outstanding. 91 points.
2007 Château Paradis Coteaux d’Aix-en-Provence Terre des Anges: Tasted 2/7/2012
2007 Domaine de la Perrière Sancerre: Tasted 2/8/2012
1999 Mumm Napa DVX: Retail $50. I paid $33. We bought these back in 2005 while we were still members of the wine club and this was our last one. This was a very pleasant surprise. We had a bottle of this at Christmas (2011) and it was rather listless. This bottle was bright and cherry with great citrus and even a hint of brioche. Medium finish, lively sparkle. Outstanding. 92 points.
the drunken cyclist 