Went to this trade tasting on Friday, March 7. Did not have much time, tasted only the handful wines I was most interested in, plus a few overpriced rarities I’d always rather sample for free.
Presented in the order the wines appear in the flyer, not necessarily the order I tasted them in.
Domaine du Vieux Télégraphe Châteauneuf-du-Pape La Crau 2005
A blend of 65% Grenache, 15% each of Mourvèdre and Syrah etc. Quite a fruity and terroir-typical La Crau, good body, warming alcohol but not hot, some forest undergrowth and roasted herbs, fairly long on the finish. Probably the best Vieux Télégraphe since 1998, although again less dense and more loosely structured. Oliver finds the 2005’s fruit simply too ripe. Rating: 89+?
Château Peyreau St. Emilion 2005
Nutty oak. A bit bitter and leafy, a bit lean on fruit, if balanced to some degree. Rating: 83+/84
Château Clos de l'Oratoire St. Emilion 2004
A blend of 90% Merlot and 10% Cabernet Franc. As deeply and especially densely coloured as the 2000 La Mondotte, just more evolved despite its youth, and much, much oakier on balance! Dense jammy fruit, slightly oak-driven tannin, a bit aggressive, lots of coffee chocolate. Fairly high alcohol. But quite long on the finish. Easy to interpret, all too obvious style – the problem is, this hyper-modern style of wine-making becomes a wine of this size much less well than one of the magnitude of the 2000 La Mondotte. Rating: 87+?
Château La Mondotte St. Emilion 2000
More similar to than dissimilar from the 1998, if a fraction less opulent. I had expected the tannin quality to be more finesseful, in parallel with the Clos de L'Oratoire 2000 versus 1998, but it is not different from the tannin quality, finely-grained if more chocolatey than black tea-like, I remember from the 1998, perhaps a bit tighter. It is just another modern-styled Neipperg/Derenoncourt, too young to open now, but I find it hard to tell to say if there is much to gain from cellaring it for too long (the more sanely priced Neipperg bottlings I know do not appear to age well beyond a few years). Even if caught at the right time, this will still be a ridiculously overpriced modernity, whether of near-perfect quality or not. Very deeply coloured as expected. Complex oak notes, roasted nuts and coffee, dark chocolate, tobacco, earth. Port-like fruit but well-structured. Quite long on the finish. For the right people, opened at its prime – regardless, my preference lies with ancient-styled wines, I cannot really say I care... Rating: 94+/95(+?)
Elvio Cogno Barolo Ravera 2004
Nice rose petal and blood orange. Not particularly fruity, wish it were more finesseful, too. Lightly dusty-dry tannin but no drying. One to cellar for a few years. Rating: 87+/88?
Castello di Ama Chianti Classico 2005
Not a top vintage for Ama it looks like, but well-made. A bit leafy-herbaceous underneath, faint bitterness, but fair enough concentration, soft metal note to medium complexity of, well, “fruit”. Some alcohol. Rating: 86+/87(+?)
Fattoria La Massa Giorgio Primo 2004
Same blend of 50% Sangiovese and 40% Merlot, with the rest Cabernet Sauvignon and Petit Verdot, aged 18 months in French barrique, I tasted in September – and forgot about (I am getting old, then again, what do I care about wines like these...)! What is it I wrote about it last time: Modern wine-made-to-impress that might have its place in gastronomy at half the price? That covers it very well. Modern in a relatively inoffensive manner. A bit oaky and hot, milk chocolatey fruit, easy to interpret wine, not bad but could be deeper and longer. Rating: 87(+?)
Bodegas y Viñedos del Jaro Ribera del Duero Jaros 2004
A bit oaky, but fairly racy and old-viney at the core, crystallized berry fruit here. Seems like a promising vintage, perhaps not quite on the level of the 2001, but certainly more so than 2003. Rating: 87+?
Bodegas Roda Rioja Reserva Roda 2004
16 months in barrique, 50% of which new. A nicely old-viney, faintly saline but essentially round wine of good body and complexity, drinking well already and should keep some. Rating: 88(+?)
Bodegas Roda Rioja Reserva Roda I 2004
16 months in barrique, 50% of which new. Significantly fruitier, sweeter, quite noble fruit, no longer on the finish, though. The “Uno”, while again a relative standout of the tasting, is no longer a bargain. Rating: 89+/90?
Bodegas Roda Rioja Cirsion 2006
12 months in barrique, all of which new – the raison d’être of this cuvée being to make a wine that will give pleasure early and age well, if possible. Smooth, chocolatey, some mocha, more Amarone-like, very polished, quite thick and sweet, offers nice warmth and fairly good length, but not optimally fresh, let alone refreshing – just the relevant bit duller due to what appears a lesser vintage in direct comparison to the two “standard” 2004s. One of many trophy cuvées I find already borderline-priced in top vintages, and impossible to recommend in lesser ones. Rating: 88+?
Noon Winery Mc Laren Vale Eclipse 2006
A blend of Grenache and Shiraz. Light, nutty-oaky and slightly bitter next to the 2000 La Mondotte, and syrupy-sweet on the finish. But nicely old-viney, with good tannin quality, probably a fairly ageworthy wine. Brandy-like heat at 15.5% alcohol, unfortunately. Not easy to judge, that is, look behind or rather beyond a style that inherently, I cannot bring myself to like, but know for a fact (albeit I have a hard time understanding why) many people do. Rating: 87(+?!)
Clarendon Hills Shiraz Mc Laren Vale Astralis 2005
Same as last time, if a fraction more closed, putting more emphasis on structure/its backbone. Tannic, firm, definitely the most Côte-Rôtie-like since the great 1997 (anyway by far the most French-styled trophy Aussie). The usual hazelnut coffee and dark bitter chocolate notes are still prevalent in this youthful Astralis, with the old-viney, earthy-minerally core currantly reigned in. Oliver thought this “okay” but overpriced (needless to emphasize), and added the wines he most liked that day were the 2000 La Mondotte and Heitz’s 2002 Trailside. Pricing aside, I thought this clearly the most structured and ageworthy wine of the tasting, followed by the La Mondotte (which I would not trust nearly as blindly beyond the mid-term). But note it would not cross my mind to drink it in this youthfully burly stage – this is when it differs least from all the other big brutes. Rating: 96+?
Heitz Cellar Cabernet Sauvignon Napa Valley Trailside Vineyard 2002
Some oak, a top note of walnut albeit without the bitterness, ripe and sweet but still fresh, round, pretty, not overdone like the Martha's Vineyard of the same vintage, and more structured than the Bella Oaks. Lightly peaty-smoky Malt Whisky finish, without being alcoholic, rather long. Not bad at all, more reminiscent of the sorely missed style of old. Rating: 92(+?)
Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________
„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti