The place for all things wine, focused on serious wine discussions.

WTN: High expectations- the Shadow, Vissoux, and Thomas-Labaille

Moderators: Jenise, Robin Garr, David M. Bueker

no avatar
User

Dale Williams

Rank

Compassionate Connoisseur

Posts

11424

Joined

Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:32 pm

Location

Dobbs Ferry, NY (NYC metro)

WTN: High expectations- the Shadow, Vissoux, and Thomas-Labaille

by Dale Williams » Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:09 am

3 reasonably priced wines, all much anticipated, with one slight disappointment, one happily fulfilling expectations, and one home run.

So my Champagne dinner Saturday had started at 5:30, even with a long dinner I was home by ten. Waiting for Betsy to call after concert, I decided a glass of red would do. So I opened the 2002 Wayward Pilgrims of the Vine "the Shadow" Syrah (California). This is an Edmund St John wine, but that's only visible in the small print. I believe story was that Steve Edmunds wasn't happy with 2002 Syrah fruit, so blended various parcels and released when he felt more ready (but at $12, I guess he rebranded to not undercut normal releases). This got good buzz, but I was pretty disappointed at first. Rather generic Syrah - straightforward blackberry-blueberry fruit with a firm tannin level and decent acidic structure. Perfectly acceptable for the price, but not exciting. But retasted Sunday evening, a much more complex wine had emerged. Smoke and leather over meaty Syrah fruit, a sense of earth. I think I'll put my remainder away for a couple of years to see what happens. Very nice for price. B+

Sunday was a long day (I spoke at 4 consecutive masses at a church in Crestwood). Little energy for dinner, I took some defrosted chicken breast and rummaged through fridge, came up with celery and leeks to bake it with. Used a little white wine for moisture, then the same wine with dinner- the 2005 Thomas-Labaille "Les Monts Damnes" Chavignol Sancerre (I always struggle with how to list non-appelation places like Chavignol!). This was a bit of a disappointment- very typical, citrus (grapefruit) on the palate with an accent of flint, but without anything that stood up and grabbed my interest. A perfectably correct and acceptable Sancerre, but maybe a couple shades below what I expected from a favorite producer in a very good year. Still a solid B

Monday I picked up Betsy at LGA, came home to where I had dinner prepped. Did a very simple pork tenderloin with Calvados cream sauce (recent Bittman article in NYT- you brown the tenderloins, then slice and brown cut sides- very easy, very good), steamed broccoli, and new potatoes. I gave Betsy choice of big white or light red, she felt like red. I opened the much anticipated 2005 Pierre-Marie Chermette (Domaine du Vissoux) "Poncie" Fleurie. Big ripe Beaujolais, really lovely, excellent depth of fruit. Fruit is darker than I'm used to with Fleurie, but so tasty I don't care. Maybe doesn't have quite the sprightly grace of Fleuries like the '02 Coudert regular bottling, but makes up for it in depth, richness, and class. This is a wine that can please Beaujolais fans yet also appeal to those who sometimes find Beauolais too thin. A-

Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency.
no avatar
User

TomHill

Rank

Here From the Very Start

Posts

8088

Joined

Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:01 pm

The Shadow...

by TomHill » Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:19 am

Dale,
I don't believe it was because Steve was unhappy with his '02 Syrah fruit. My impression was he was just getting tired of dealing with it because of his wnry moves, it was slow in coming around, and just decided to blend it all together and blow it out the door at a great price. But the fruit behind it is very good.
It IS a puzzling wine. Not very impressive at all right out the door. It seems pretty tight and closed still. But it's got great structure, plenty of acid & tannins, and I think the fruit & EdStJ character is really going to come out down the road in a few yrs. Then there will be a lot of weeping and whailing across this great Nation with the typical EdStJohn lament..."I shoulda bought more"!!!
I think this is just a wine you have to trust Steve on. I certainly do.
Tom
no avatar
User

Redwinger

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

4038

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 2:36 pm

Location

Way Down South In Indiana, USA

Re: The Shadow...

by Redwinger » Tue Jan 16, 2007 1:30 pm

What Tom said.
Smile, it gives your face something to do!
no avatar
User

Dale Williams

Rank

Compassionate Connoisseur

Posts

11424

Joined

Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:32 pm

Location

Dobbs Ferry, NY (NYC metro)

Re: The Shadow...

by Dale Williams » Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:40 pm

I certainly enjoyed it more the second day. We all know that's not the same as aging, but it gives a clue. I'll revisit in 2009 or so. I suspect I will then kick myself for not buying more at $12. :(
no avatar
User

MikeH

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

1168

Joined

Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:07 pm

Location

Cincinnati

Re: The Shadow...

by MikeH » Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am

Dale Williams wrote:I certainly enjoyed it more the second day. We all know that's not the same as aging, but it gives a clue. I'll revisit in 2009 or so. I suspect I will then kick myself for not buying more at $12. :(


I have not tasted The Shadow yet but based on the buzz on this board did acquire 9 bottles in December. And the reccos that prompted me to buy indicated the wine needed some aging. Sounds like I should pick up some more!!!
Cheers!
Mike
no avatar
User

JC (NC)

Rank

Lifelong Learner

Posts

6679

Joined

Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:23 pm

Location

Fayetteville, NC

Re: The Shadow...

by JC (NC) » Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:48 pm

Nice notes Dale. Hope your talks at the church bring forth fruit.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ClaudeBot and 11 guests

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign