WTN: 2003 Screw Kappa Napa Cabernet Sauvignon Napa Valley

%^)

Stelvin closure ... dark purple in the glass ... viscous legs ... nose of black cherries, chocolate, and vanilla (sounds like a sundae, huh ?) ... ripe black cherries with a subtle but nice hint of cassis on the front palate ... a big drollop of dark chocolate with a whisper of tart blackberries on the mid palate ... a little vanilla on the back palate but the mid palate is pretty overpowering so it's just barely there ... just enough tannins to give it the barest of "grip" ... faint bit of oak ... not much of a lingering finish but not short either ... 13.9% alcohol ... $7.99 at my local bottle shop ... a pretty nice bottle of grog at this price point but wouldn't pay the $11-13 I've seen elsewhere ... a good "quaffer" at best and as long as the price doesn't go up much, I would buy it again ...

Paired with a grilled medium-rare porterhouse steak (cooked on my charcoal Weber in 112 degree weather I might add - the Desert heat makes ya sorta crazy, ya know), pinto beans, pico de gallo salsa, and homemade bread ... the wine paired nicely with the bit of heat in the salsa and the earthiness of the beans ...

This is an offering from Don Sebastiani and Sons' Three Loose Screws Wine Company ... among all the wine varietals and numerous labels they're bottling, these guys are making 1.5 million cases of wine a year and NOT ONE bottle sees cork as a closure ! Neocork, Stelvin, Zork, and Vino-Seal is all they use ...

Clink !

%^)

Gosh, Bill. By reading the description, it sure sounds like more than "quaffable" and much more than 7.99. Actually, except for the quantity of chewable tannins, it sounds a lot like our WOTN, a 2001 Mt Veeder Cabernet, at least in so far as taste profile. The MV is a bit bigger, and lots more tannins, but tastes of all the things you describe, in the order you describe. And, of course, it was about 4 times as much. I guess I must try the SCN one of these nights. Thanks for the note.

Bill, I hope those were viscous legs, not "vicious" legs.

%^(

Fixed ! Thanks !

Clink !

%^)

%^)

Hello OW !

I consider myself a poor tasting note writer at best ... nobody at the table was impressed with the "Kappa" ... drinking this wine was like almost reaching the top of a mountain and then sliding back - over and over and over again ... nose, palate, tannins, oak, finish - all almost there but all somewhat lacking ... like I said - for the PRICE, I'd probably buy again but there are MUCH better wines out there for a couple/few bucks more a bottle ...

I'll continue to work on trying to convey a better discription of the wine I drink ... on the other hand, would be very interesting to see a note from someone like you on this same wine ...

Thanks for the reply to my post !

Clink !

%^)

I disagree - you write great notes. Mine would pale by comparison. Mine are more enthusiasm than substance. I get carried away by a wine once in a while, and tend to exaggerate when that happens, and it happens as often with a modestly priced wine that outperforms its class as it does with an expensive wine that is as good as it ought to be. But I am pretty lousy at describing all those subtle flavors - you know - not just chocolate but bitter sweet swiss chocolate, not just tobacco but virginia tobacco from a south facing slope, not just barnyard but Holstien cow barnyard alongside a tarred road and surrounded by lilacs in the spring, etc.... Hell, I'm lucky if I can tell the difference between horse saddle and cat pee, but I know I like one and not the other.

Hey Bill and OW, FWIW I much enjoy reading TNs from da both of you. The use of descriptors in TNs is, as we all know, fraught with subjectivity and (likely) varying degrees of imprecision. It bothers me when I find myself using the same small bunch of terms to describe different wines, or conversely, find myself reacting quite differently to the same wine at different times or in different settings. Most of that, I'm certain, has to do with my limitations as a taster. But some of it just comes with the territory. Acknowledging that imprecision, I personally still find great value in reading and writing TNs--both are learning experiences that in different ways help sharpen my perception. I suspect I'm preaching to the choir here.

But the differences between the Kappa and Mt. Veeder wouldn't necessarily lie in the specific flavor descriptors. (As it happens, I've tasted the MV but not the Kappa.) A good low-end Cal Cab could certainly be expected to have many of the same flavor notes found in pricier bottles like the MV that most of us would probably agree are qualitatively much better. What jumps out at me sometimes isn't so much the presence or absence of dark cherry or whatever but other facets (some related to flavor, and also subjective) like depth, intensity, delineation, structure, and length that I associate with quality. So when I find these traits, I try to incorporate them into my TNs--they're potent reminders when I refer back to the TN later.

What jumps out at me sometimes isn't so much the presence or absence of dark cherry or whatever but other facets (some related to flavor, and also subjective) like depth, intensity, delineation, structure, and length that I associate with quality. So when I find these traits, I try to incorporate them into my TNs--they're potent reminders when I refer back to the TN later.

That's where I botch it the most, distinguishing the wine from others of the same breed, but not of the same breeding. I keep learning.
Nice to hear from you Clinton. Go Maryland.

What jumps out at me sometimes isn't so much the presence or absence of dark cherry or whatever but other facets (some related to flavor, and also subjective) like depth, intensity, delineation, structure, and length that I associate with quality.

%^)

Hello Clinton !

Now THAT "hits the nail on the head !" What I was trying to convey in my WTN was exactly what you described ... many/most of those things were missing in the Kappa and IMHO that is what separated it from other "better" bottles of grog ... my WTN SHOULD have conveyed that sorta "ho-hum" feeling about the wine not because of what was there but because of what WASN'T there ... I'm still learning - not only about wine but how to put my feeling about wine in writing ... but then don't you learn something new everyday ?

Clink !

%^)