Should I buy a Geyserville '09?

IIRC I have only tasted one Ridge wine, the '78 Cab Sauv "York Creek", which I thought was amazingly good for a grape I generally dislike (or at least prefer blended with the better stuff). Finland will see a small shipment of the Geyserville '09 next month. Considering my vinous preferences, should I buy a bottle or two? Will this be like the York Creek that it needs a long time in bottle or can it be enjoyed young? Answers like buy one to try are not appreciated because the amount we'll get is so small it will sell out in an hour or two.

[David M. Bueker]

Otto

The '09 Geyserville is pretty shut down right now. It is also a much oakier wine than you would care for. It will need 15 years to come close to anything I see you liking.

I don't think any Geyserville should be opened much before its tenth birthday but if you can cellar 10 years why not buy a bottle or two. I'm sure it will be delicious in 10-15 years.


For what its worth (and I disagree totally with the start of the anticipated maturity - that's just absurd)...


"The 2009 Geyserville is a gorgeous wine. It shows expressive inner perfume, sweet black cherries, menthol and minerals. This is an understated, exceptionally elegant red endowed with considerable finesse and fabulous overall balance. A round, sensual finish makes it impossible to resist a second taste. In 2009 the blend is 74% Zinfandel, 17% Carignane, 6% Petite Sirah, 2% Alicante Bouschet and 1% Mourvedre. Anticipated maturity: 2012-2029. "

94 Points
The Wine Advocate

[David M. Bueker]

"understated"...funny. Geyserville is what passes for understated these days.

'09 was a pretty year in the Dry Creek and Alexander valleys, and the Zins came out with somewhat lower alcohol than most of the previous decade. I don't have any '09 Geyserville - Ridge is on the expensive side for me - but other regional '09s are in the range of 14.5% alcohol. If I had some, I'd agree with those who suggest waiting at least a decade. I have a bottle of '01 Geyserville and I'm in no hurry to open it.
In fact, I've only tasted most of the Dry Creek Valley '09s and I don't think even the early-drinking bottlings are really at their top yet, though they're Ok as party quaffers.

John

" In 2009 the blend is 74% Zinfandel, 17% Carignane, 6% Petite Sirah, 2% Alicante Bouschet and 1% Mourvedre. "

The Wine Advocate

Did the WA get a different wine?

The bottle of Geyserville 09 that I bought shows the blend as 74% Zinfandel, 19% Carignane, 7% Petite Sirah

" In 2009 the blend is 74% Zinfandel, 17% Carignane, 6% Petite Sirah, 2% Alicante Bouschet and 1% Mourvedre. "

The Wine Advocate

Did the WA get a different wine?

The bottle of Geyserville 09 that I bought shows the blend as 74% Zinfandel, 19% Carignane, 7% Petite Sirah

They must have sourced it from Rudy.

[David M. Bueker]

I think that's the 2008 percentages in the WA. Probably just an inadvertent error rather than anything nefarious.

[Jenise]

Speaking of the 08, any comments on that wine? Saw a few bottles on shelves over the weekend and wondered.

Well, I'm confused. How could a single-vineyard wine which is field-blended have a different mix from year to year? Am I missing something here?

Marc

[Jenise]

'09 was a pretty year in the Dry Creek and Alexander valleys, and the Zins came out with somewhat lower alcohol than most of the previous decade. I don't have any '09 Geyserville - Ridge is on the expensive side for me - but other regional '09s are in the range of 14.5% alcohol. If I had some, I'd agree with those who suggest waiting at least a decade. I have a bottle of '01 Geyserville and I'm in no hurry to open it.
In fact, I've only tasted most of the Dry Creek Valley '09s and I don't think even the early-drinking bottlings are really at their top yet, though they're Ok as party quaffers.

John

Wonder what happened to the Nalle then. Most disappointing zin I've ever had, I think, when you compare expectations to actual (thin, green, weedy), and I bought five bottles of it for a tasting so it wasn't one off bottle.

I just received the good news: I managed to get two bottles of this. So, I guess one to try now and one to bury for a decade.

[Jenise]

Cool, Otto. You may not find that you love the wine, but you're too good a taster to not get why this wine is held in such high esteem even if it's not your preferred style.

[David M. Bueker]

Jenise,

The '08 Geyserville is good, solid Geyserville. It's not in the same league with the '09, but it is very good.

Marc,

I am pretty sure that Ridge tries to keep the varieties separate during harvest & then creates a blend.

>> Wonder what happened to the Nalle then.

Darned if I know, Jenise. Remarkably, I've never tasted Nalle. The few times I've been up Dry Creek Road on a Saturday afternoon (the only time they're open except by appointment), the lines have been so long that I decided not to hang around.
'09 Zins are current release in most places, and they're touted as "drinking very well, nice and fruity." IMO they mostly taste like a barrel sample about three months before bottling. Nice fruit, a lot of fresh oak, and not much integration as yet.
One reason the '08s and '09s are still "current" is that the '10 vintage was difficult, with very small yields in many places, though the weather weirdness meant that one 10-acre plot would be fine and the one next door would lose 40% of its crop.
I'm glad I don't grow grapes for a living.

John

Well, I'm confused. How could a single-vineyard wine which is field-blended have a different mix from year to year? Am I missing something here?

Marc

Marc,

There could be several reasons, I believe.

1. They may keep the different grapes separate and blend the final wine slightly differently each year. Selling off some juice.
2. Some % of grape X may be considered not good enough and sold off (before fermentation).
3. US/California laws may give you some leeway on the percentages. You may get +- 1.5%, for example.

There may be other reasons.

[Jenise]

Jenise,

The '08 Geyserville is good, solid Geyserville. It's not in the same league with the '09, but it is very good.

Thanks; I should probably relieve one local retailer of their three remaining bottles, then; would be about $30 per which in our state is very reasonable.

Well, I'm confused. How could a single-vineyard wine which is field-blended have a different mix from year to year? Am I missing something here?

Marc

Marc,

There could be several reasons, I believe.

1. They may keep the different grapes separate and blend the final wine slightly differently each year. Selling off some juice.
2. Some % of grape X may be considered not good enough and sold off (before fermentation).
3. US/California laws may give you some leeway on the percentages. You may get +- 1.5%, for example.

There may be other reasons.

Another possiible reaons is that vines do not yield the same year to year. So while the percentage of Zin plants may not change year to year, the percentage of Zin fruit can.

Well, I'm confused. How could a single-vineyard wine which is field-blended have a different mix from year to year? Am I missing something here?

Marc

Marc,

There could be several reasons, I believe.

1. They may keep the different grapes separate and blend the final wine slightly differently each year. Selling off some juice.
2. Some % of grape X may be considered not good enough and sold off (before fermentation).
3. US/California laws may give you some leeway on the percentages. You may get +- 1.5%, for example.

There may be other reasons.

Another possiible reaons is that vines do not yield the same year to year. So while the percentage of Zin plants may not change year to year, the percentage of Zin fruit can.

Bingo! If I recall my conversation with Paul Draper correctly, these are called "field blends" because the vines are planted together in the vineyards and are picked together (in fact, it took a lot of hard work to even distinguish one variety from another which is why they called it Zinfandel for the first 25 years of its production). From year to year, the yields of the different varieties change, which leads to different composition. However, since they have the information to label the percentages (accurately, one presumes, or why bother?) why not pick separately? I'd guess that it boils down to doing it the way those Italian and Balkan immigrants did it 150 years ago...

Mark Lipton

Right on, Mark!

A field blended wine means a little more than having mixed varieties planted amongst each other in the vineyard. The blend itself is controlled or dictated (somewhat) by the mixed varieties planted within the vineyard. The field blends of yesteryear were most likely “true” field blends in the sense the grapes were picked all at the same time (the ripest of fruit and the not-so ripe fruit) and co-fermented together. Even then as mentioned by others the exact composition of the “field blend” could possible vary year to year due to “actual” yields. Today grapes are not harvested all at once, in a single vineyard depending upon its size and the grape varieties planted in it, the harvest could take a couple of weeks or even a month (maybe possible longer). Depending upon how many passes are made and what technique is used to harvest the grapes and produce the wine will determine whether or not a “true” field blended wine is made. If the ripe grapes are picked by variety and the juice processed separately a “true” field blend is not being produced. If the harvest is conducted by picking various blocks at various times within the vineyard, and the blocks consist of mixed grape varieties then we most likely could consider this a “true” field blend.
With all this said and done, I personally have nothing against a “fake” field blend.

Salute

With all this said and done, I personally have nothing against a “fake” field blend.

So, are you saying that Ridge Geyserville may be a "fake field blend" but Mouton is not?

“Fake” field blends could be just as good maybe even better than “true” field blends.

Salute

I finally opened one of these today. I am pleasantly impressed. I don't know if any of this will sound familiar to zin drinkers, because I simply don't drink much of it so I haven't developed the vocabulary nor the experience to talk about them. To me it seems spicy like a CdP rather than oak-spice, though there is a bit of oak showing, too. It smells plummy and sweet and has lots of berry flavors - but it also has a savory streak running through all of this so it doesn't seem porty. I sense more oak on the palate, but it is structured instead of just fruity. The 14,5% is well hidden. This is nice! Though those who said that I need to age these are right.