WTN: Round One of the Christmas Gluttony -- Six Wines

We had seven middle-of-the-road wine geek friends for Christmas Eve Eve dinner last night, with six tonight and five tomorrow night.

We toasted with Lenoble Rose Millesime. The blend is 85% Chardonnay Grand Cru and 15% Pinot Noir Premier Cru vinified as a red wine. Very light on the sweet side, the salmon-pink wine is full and round, with a lively mousse. Fresh red fruit dominates. I bought a case and am pleased now at the purchase. Everyone enjoyed the wine -- no descents.

We enjoyed a host of appetizers with a 2001 Scharzhofberger M-S-R Spatlese. This is a lovely Riesling, correctly made, but somehow doesn't grab your interest and hold it. It cut through the French goose liver pate well though. I bought six and am glad it was not a case.

Next came a delicious broccoli soup which was accompanied by another German Riesling which did grab your attention and shake your senses -- the 2001 Tyrell Eitelsbacher Karthauserhofberg Riesling Spatlese. Loaded with delightful fruit and slate/petrol notes, this was the hands down favorite of the two Rieslings. It is a stunning Spatlese. Bought a case; wish I'd bought three.

Next came the main course -- dry-aged prime rib. Unfortunately everyone wanted medium or medium well (YIKES!), so I got the rarest piece of the rib roast I could find, which was leaning towards medium. I served two reds with the meat, and the results were not what I expected. The first wine was the 1995 Château Lynch-Bages, Pauillac. Seeming fully mature, the tannins were very soft on the entry. Black currants, berries and cedary notes prevailed. It went very well with the meal. The second wine was from the same vintage but from the New World -- 1995 Quilceda Creek, Washington. Fully mature right now, the wine has developed better than expected. The oak is integrated and the flavors are just delightful. Hands down this was the favorite of the crowd. I would have taken bets on the favorite of the two wines and lost -- a pleasant surprise.

Carole served her yule log for dessert, which was accompanied by a 1992 Baumard Quarts de Chaume. Always a delight, the sweetness and acidity lends itself well to almost any dessert. It is still drinking very well, with lovely complexity.

Overall, lovely food, wine and friends -- you can't ask for much more.

[Jenise]

You say the QC got the crowd vote, did it get yours too?

It did. What can I say?

I have not had a QC older than 2000...and that one still had too much sweet oak for my palate... was this more integrated???

Jim, I had the same reservations before opening the bottle. It fooled me. The oak was well integrated. I unloaded a lot of QC from '97 on because of all of the new oak....

[Jenise]

Well, I'm happy to read these results on the 95. I just this second remembered that I have two bottles of it. Hmmm...maybe that's what I'll take to go with prime rib today instead of the Georges La Tour I was planning on.

The Baumard QdCs are oaky beginning in 1997? Sorry to hear that. But I was impressed with the 2001s and bought something like a case and don't recall the oak, which turns me off in dessert wines. Damn shame how much wood is sneaking into the Loire, not just in the stickies.

The only really old B CdCs I've drunk -- 20-something years old I think -- were a couple that Vinny Lee opened one year during the after-hours part of the Manning's annual party, and these were absolutely lovely, and by that stage of the game so perceptively dry I would no longer call them dessert wines.

I've been trying to keep my hands off a 1996 B QdC, waiting for it to dry itself out of the desert mode. Anybody know how that is drinking now? It's still in its sweetie stage, I'm sure.

The Baumard QdCs are oaky beginning in 1997?

QC = Quilceda Creek. Sorry for the confusion.

The Baumard QdCs are oaky beginning in 1997?

QC = Quilceda Creek. Sorry for the confusion.

These senior moments are getting embarassing. Now that I take a peek in my cellar I see my case of Baumard QdC is 2002, not 2001.