Blind Cab Tasting:W/ a 72 point Montelena, K. Lawrence, Von Strasser + more

A few of us have a small group that meets about once a month to go through different themes. The group is made up of wine-geeks with deep collections and aspiring wine-geeks with small or no collections. It is great fun to get a perspective on particular wines from palates that come at it from different angles.

Starters:
2002 Pax Hillsides (Sonoma County): Didn’t take much of a note. Just remember the wine be very restrained at this stage. Great aromas but not showing much complexity on the palate.

1995 Von Strasser Cabernet Sauvignon (Diamond Mountain): At first it was off-putting to me. Strong tart acids along with olives. Later in the day showed better, especially with the food. A unique wine.

1997 Corison Cabernet Sauvignon Kronos Vineyard (Napa Valley): Again not much for notes but this was showing very nicely. Still young but very plush and rich. An elegant wine.

Mystery White: A nice “racy” wine. Grassy elements along with rich fruits. Oily mid-palate. A very nice wine … and I forgot to right down what it was … Dietz?

On to the Cabs (served blind. We only new they were Napa Cabs from 2002-2005)

Wine #1: Lots of fruit on the nose. Lots of chocolate on the palate. Finishes with heat but overall pretty nice. 2003 Sterling (Votes: 1st = 1, 3rd = 2 – 5 Points = 3rd place)

Wine #2: Not much on the nose. Lots of red fruit on the palate. Finishes with solid tannin and acid. Needs time. 2003 Karl Lawrence (Votes: 2nd = 1, 3rd = 2 – 4 Points = tied for 4th) I think this wine will improve with time and rise above some of the others.

Wine #3: Didn’t know what to make of this at first. Not much on the nose. Palate is a bit green. Some earth but then finishes with heat. 2002 Waterstone Rumor has it that this is made from declassified Harlan Fruit. If it is true…we know why it was declassified. (Votes: Zero)

Wine #4: Nose is showing nicely. Seems to foretell a restrained cab. Nice on the palate. I thought it was showing oak. Good structure and the wine worked well. Long finish. 2003 R-Collection (Raymond) (Votes: 2nd = 3 – 6 Points = 2nd place)

Wine #5: Aromatics are light but what it is showing is big. Fair amount of concentration on this thing. A simple and straight forward cab. Finish hot and short. 2004 Ramsay ($9.99) (Votes: Zero) I stuck this in there to see how it would do. Nice value.

Wine # 6: Big and ripe. Lots of fruit and oak but then a slight touch of green pepper. Not bad but seemed a little out of balance. 2005 NHL All Star (Made by Miner for the NHL All Star game) (Votes: 1st = 1, 3rd = 1 – 4 points = tied for 4th)

Wine # 7: Wow. The nose immediately sets this apart. Melisa smelled sea salt which hurt the wine for her. I love it. Very approachable but still tons of structure. Lots earth and leather on the palate but it is all covered with nice fruit and acid. Way more interesting and showing more complexity than anything on the table. On the finish there is lots of tannin and wood. 2002 Chateau Montelena The Montelena Estate (Votes: 1st = 3, 2nd = 1 – 11 points = 1st place) I had been waiting to taste this in a blind setting after Laube’s asinine rating of 72 points. As it should have in this lineup, it really stood out. Although I was actually surprised a young Montelena was showing so well. Clearly a little more hedonistic than usual.

1st Place – 2002 Chateau Montelena The Montelena Estate – 11 Points
2nd Place – 2003 R Collection – 6 Points
3rd Place – 2003 Sterling – 5 Points

Cheers,

Jason

Wow...given the price difference between the R Collection and Ch. Mont.

Still, sounds like a nice wine, indeed. I liked it a lot at the winery.

[Jenise]

Cool. Love reading reports like this.

The white was Banyan 2005 Viognier.. comes from Madera in the Central Valley of California.. north of Fresno... great value at $15 or less... lots of florals on nose, spicy, good mouthfeel.. tropical fruit on the palate.. nice stuff...

I was not too surprised that the Karl Lawrence was holding back.. I've had it a couple of times before, but I thought maybe being open a couple of hours would help... still needs time...

Yeah...that Montelena was nice...

[David M. Bueker]

I get to try current vintages of Montelena on a regular basis, and I have yet to run across a single bottle with TCA or any other faults. Time after time they are fantastic wines.

Wow...given the price difference between the R Collection and Ch. Mont.

The R Collection was very nice but the Monty was far superior. You can't get them from retail anymore but I used to get all my Montys on futures. I think the 02 was around $60 but they used to be $45-$50. Nice price for a wine of this quality.

J

I get to try current vintages of Montelena on a regular basis, and I have yet to run across a single bottle with TCA or any other faults. Time after time they are fantastic wines.

I am sure Laube could pick this wine out by tasting it...even if it was blind... Conspiracy I don't mean nuthin by it ... I'm just sayin.

J

I loved the Monty too, but I remember the at the winery price was a lot more than $60 ($125 now!). Unless this is a different bottling we are talking about? Time to google.

$95 now.

[David M. Bueker]

Montelena has their own futures program - much cheaper.

I should look into this! But-I already have too many wine clubs, and enough Cali Cab for years.

[Jenise]

I get to try current vintages of Montelena on a regular basis, and I have yet to run across a single bottle with TCA or any other faults. Time after time they are fantastic wines.

My experience, too, though I can't compete with your first statement. If California were going to institute a growth system like Bordeaux's, Montelena would be my first nom for First Growth.

If California were going to institute a growth system like Bordeaux's, Montelena would be my first nom for First Growth.

I rarely buy California Chardonnay, and almost never spend $30 or more for it. But IMHO, Montalena's Chardonnay is fabulous. (If I'm remembering correctly, this was the white wine that pulled the upset at the original Judgement of Paris.) Among Bordeaux's First Growths, is it only Haut Brion that does a white as well red? That would put Montalena in pretty exclusive company indeed.

[Jenise]

Clinton, I'm thinking that Margaux also produces a white, but I can't say I remember seeing a bottle myself. There are several whites we never see here that have surprised me over the years. Agree with you on Montelena, though. And furthermore, a few years ago a friend produced a bottle of 74 that had been in his father's cellar for over two decades, and that was easily the best domestic white I've ever had. Still pale and youthful in color, but explosive flavors. Amazing.

If California were going to institute a growth system like Bordeaux's, Montelena would be my first nom for First Growth.

Indeed! I don't think I have ever had a bottle that wasn't in the "great" category. They can shut down hard though...so I think some people miss their greatness. I am not sure the 02 will have as long a life as some of the other vintages but it will bring much pleasure for many years.

Jason