jrufusj

I haven't tasted the 2004 version, but have tasted prior vintages of several Yellow Tail wines, including the Shiraz. I'm not a fan. There's nothing objectively wrong with it and it's certainly not "gross", but it is -- to put it bluntly -- just plain insipid compared to other things available in the range. Anytime anyone makes broad generalizations about vintages, you should beware. However, I'm about to do that. 2002 was very wet in the southern Rhone (as well as other parts of Europe). While there are some good wines out there (which might be very good bargains), I would be very, very wary of buying anything in this range without tasting first. You are at high risk of winding up with something very dilute and maybe with the nastiness of hail damage. However, you may be able to find similarly priced CdR from 2001 or 2003, either of which should be a bit safer bet. I've not had any of the Rex Goliath wines, but know a number of people (with palates I respect) who believe the Rex Goliath Pinot Noir is one of the very best values on the market today. Don't know about the Cab. Similar to the Rex Goliath comment, I haven't tasted it, but know a number of people who think this is pretty good wine at a fantastic price. Good luck, Jim

geo t.: Thanks for the notes. Quite an evening! The '85 Beaucastel was actually the first Châteauneuf I remember drinking. I went to a casual tasting party in the early '90s at a coworker's house and his brother (who was very much into wine) brought along mags of the '85 Beau and '82 Poujeaux. My meager contributions were 750s of '87 Cain Five and '86 Mildara Coonawara Shiraz. I've written of the Cain Five on other threads. The Mildara was a helluva bargain that I really enjoyed until I had bought the shop out. I can still recall the nose on the Beau almost perfectly. I've always found a certain gamey smell in both the Beau and the Coudelet (but not La Vielle Ferme) that I can only describe as fishiness. It's not an unpleasant smell at all, but I can't think of another term to describe it. It's something altogether different from the brett that shows up in so many southern Rhones and I've never found it to anything near the same degree from any other producer. I don't have the most acute nose or palate, but I seldom have a hard time picking out a Perrin wine blind. I was interested that nothing in your notes was even close (except maybe saddle leather). I've never had the pleasure of a mature Beaucastel. I wonder if this is something that fades with age. Or is it something that only I find in even the young wines? Only other wine I can remember from that night was an Argentine Cab that still serves as my benchmark of the term dried out. I felt like someone had stuck a vacuum cleaner in my mouth, then swabbed it out with a dessicant. Ugghhh! Such memories should not linger. Again, thanks for the notes. Jim

I've not had the opportunity to try recent vintages either. I think the most recent I have tried is the '90. Back when I had those memorable '87s, I was not at a point in my learning and confidence to be taking notes. How I wish I had tried anyway! My memory may be a little faulty (and a lot romanticized), but what stands out looking back is that it was perfectly balanced, but still had the forwardly luscious fruit that can be so appealing in California Cabs. Clearly, it was designed to echo Bordeaux and seems to have done a good job of that, but I can't help comparing it to the best Chiantis and sangiovese-based SuperTuscans/IGTs. What I mean is that it somehow managed to have strong spine of acid to go with the tannins, but also had great fruit that can only be described as juicy. Flavors and weight were all Bordeaux, but balance and bracing quality echoed Tuscany. Don't know if I'm making sense or not. Matt Kramer once asked Hugh Johnson why he was so fond of claret and Johnson replied that it just goes down like water. I would apply that comment to the Cain Five, but perhaps substitute the best fruit juice for water. An acid/fruit combination that is perfectly quenching, but also makes one scream for more. I just cracked the first bottle of my half case of '99 Fontalloro the other night and got that same sensation. I'll post a note on that soon. Short preview: really enjoyed it -- would drink another now if I had a full case -- but it greatly benefitted from being open 2 or 3 hours -- so I'll leave the other 5 alone for at least a few years. (uhoh! that was a dork comment, wasn't it?) For what it's worth, I'm no fan of Opus either. Of the brand-driven, luxury Euro/Cal ventures, my favorite by far is Dominus (though I haven't had recent vintages of that either). I did recently have a bit of their second label (Napanook, is it?) and was impressed with the wine and the price. Take care, Jim

Okay, let's see what I am... 1. A dork will make you feel uncomfortable. They are supercilious, punctilious, and from my point of view, just plain supersillious. A geek, however, will make you feel comfortable, and value your opinion of his wines. I can be silly, even super-silly, but I hope I am not supercilious. I certainly enjoy expressing my opinion, but like to think I listen well to others. One of the things I enjoy most is sharing wine and seeing someone's eyes light up and their thoughts (good or bad) just come pouring out. Geek 1/Dork 0. 2. A dork holds his glass by the base, or with his fingers curled sensuously around the body of the glass. A geek grabs his glass by the stem and just sticks his nose in. All business. Definitely geek. I find holding a glass by the base awkward in both feel and appearance. And I can't wait to get my nose in! Geek 2/Dork 0 3. Geeks love sweet wine and the women who drink them. Always keep a bottle on hand for the sensual possibilities. A dork does not keep sweet wine or palate deadening spices in his kitchen. I do like sweet wines, though I find a lot of them unbalanced. Good ones, however, are awesome. And as a fan of Thai and Korean cooking, I definitely have a few spices. Geek 3/Dork 0 So far, so good. 4. Dorks love to mention Bordeaux and Burgundy. Geeks speak and kiss French. Okay, Burgundy is absolutely, positively my favorite region. Bordeaux is okay. Enjoy, not crazy about it. I try to speak French, but my accent makes my wife cringe and it would make you cringe too! If you heard me try to speak French, you wouldn't want to kiss me -- French or otherwise. Geek 3.5/Dork 0.5 5. Dorks spend as much as possible for large bottles at auction, hoping for the ultimate photo opp. Geeks barter, trade and wheedle for wine, but always seem to have plenty on hand. Living in Tokyo, I don't have much opportunity to barter or trade. I do like magnums and will buy wine in magnum when the premium is not excessive. Guess the answer is that I'd like to be a trading, wheedling geek, but have to settle for dork. Geek 3.5/Dork 1.5 6. Dorks will ask, "How long will this wine cellar?" Geeks will age a wine only as long as necessary to make it drinkable. They have been known to pick up old bottles and hold them up to the light, shaking the sediment around, and saying, "Do you think I can drink this now?" Okay, I guess by this definition I am definitely a dork. I completely disagree with the only holding until a wine is "drinkable". I definitely don't shake the bottles I'm itching to drink. I've never asked "how long can I hold this?", but I do care about full development and not just drinkability. I do find something thrilling in a completely mature wine...even one that has started down the backside of the slope. Geek 3.5/Dork 2.5 7. In a restaurant, dorks will swizzle wine loudly through their teeth before taking the first swallow. Geeks never do this on a first date, because they know if you laugh, the wine will come out your nose. Not only are loud swizzling noises unseemly, they're also unnecessary. Also, while I love the nose of a great wine, I have no desire to have great wine in my nose. Safely in the geek range here. Geek 4.5/Dork 2.5 8. Dorks will order food, then a wine to match. Geeks order wine, and a totally unrelated food. They're always surprised by how well food and wine go together. Sometimes the order is reversed -- choose a wine, then food to match -- but I'm definitely thinking matching when I order wine and food. I really enjoy the exercise and really believe it is essential to enjoying both the wine and the food at their best. Guess I'm a dork. Geek 4.5/Dork 3.5 9. Dorks follow numerical wine ratings and place their bets accordingly. Geeks are the hecklers of the wine world, and can often be overheard saying, "That wine got an 87? Geesh, I woulda given it a 91. 92?!? How did that wine rate? Are we sure that's not the judge's age??" Don't subscribe to any newletters that use numerical ratings and don't use them in my own notes. Certainly don't buy off ratings. But then again, neither do I respond with "woulda given it a xx". I just say, "Man, what was wrong with [insert critic name] that day. I really like/don't like that wine." If the note is accurate and ratings are off, I attribute it to palate differences. This happens often with Parker. If the note seems like it came out of left field, then I really wonder. Think I'm a geek here, but maybe that's wishful thinking. Geek 5.5/Dork 3.5 10. Dorks have a proper cellar for their wine collection, with adequate temperature controls, and chairs. Geeks and winemakers use their cellars for "important stuff," and store their personal selections in the garage, between the kayak and the workbench. Definitely no chairs; can't figure out where they'd go. I do, however, have proper storage. It's not elegant -- a wine fridge on the landing leading down to my basement and good passive storage in an ugly storeroom in the basement -- but it is good storage. This whole exercise seems to be about enthusiasm versus snobbery/show, so I have a problem believing a properly enthusiastic geek wouldn't care about storage. Okay...no chairs or fancy decoration, but good temp control...split the difference...half geek and half dork. Geek 6.0/Dork 4.0 Bummer! I didn't think I'd come out a full 40% dork. I'll have to fix that. Maybe I should start trading...yeah...that's it! Any of you pureblood geeks have any properly stored magnums of old burgundy that you want to unload? I know that wouldn't be worth much to a real geek, but I could come up with a few dollars, I'm sure. Thanks Mary. This was fun. Jim

One recent thread asked about the last time one was "blown away by a 'Meritage'". Another asked for stories about "crossing the line" from wine interest to wine geekdom. Here's my Meritage answer... In the early '90s I picked up a mixed case of wines from John Walker on a business trip to SF. I had always enjoyed wine and had paid some degree of attention to it before, but the '87 Cain Five was probably the single wine that most pushed me over the line. For whatever reason, it struck me like no wine I'd ever had before. I almost cry when I think about what those two bottles might have been like had I let them reach even some semblance of maturity. At least I didn't drink them when they were shut down. At that point in my life, I would simply have thought the wine had little to offer. My tastes have changed over time and I don't drink as much California wine these days, but this is one of those bottles that I would pay far above fair QPR to buy more today, if I knew it had good provenance. We've probably all got wines like that -- whether for sentimental or oenological reasons. Whatever it was that we did when we "crossed the line", these are the wines that made us do it. My quick, off-the-top-of-my-head list -- 1. 87 Cain Five -- for reasons described above 2. 85 Dom du Chevalier -- At that point, I was a CaliCab and Bordeaux drinker. This Graves, with that earthy, bricky character that CS and its brethren seem to deliver nowhere else in the world to quite such a degree, was probably what turned me into an old-world, terroir, Burg-focused drinker. I just had to find more earth...rocks...minerals...sunwarmed brick... 3. 89 Vieux Chateau Certan -- First wine I ever had to buy because of a tasting. Had it with about 8-10 other 89 and 90 Pomerols (including La Conseillante, L'Evangile, Trotanoy, Lafleur). To top that off, Cathryn and I served it at a meal to celebrate a landmark in the life of a very dear friend and discovered after the fact it was one of his favorite wines as well. 4. 90 Mugnier village Chambolle -- I was already on the road to becoming addicted to Burg in a way that was devastating to my pocket book and free time, but I had not realized what absolute sheer beauty could lie in Chambolle (and in Volnay as well), but what strength and chiselled definition could be right there underneath it. Kind of like trying to wrap a racehorse in ornamental Japanese tissue paper. Damn near impossible to do...but if it happens, what an amazing revelation to unwrap. This village level wine did it for me. 5. 90 Dom Weinbach Cuvee St. Catherine -- The second wine I had to buy because of a tasting and the wine that first led me to understand that grapes other than chard and sauv blanc could deliver stunning white wines. I drink more German than Alsation riesling now, and drink more white Burg than either, but riesling is probably my favorite white grape and this wine was the gateway. 6. 88 Joly Coulee Serrant -- Ordered by someone else at a business dinner and one of those wines that just makes you stop and take on a stunned expression. I literally have no idea what went on for several minutes of that dinner, and this in spite of the fact that it was a baby. Just had another bottle two weeks ago and was pleased to find it did not disappoint at all. Less shocking, because I had a good sense of what to expect, but all the better for having walked a fair portion of the path to maturity. 7. a. 88 Chalone Chard -- Went and bought it after attending a tasting with Matt Kramer where we had tasted various things from the Chalone/Carmenet/Edna stable. He got me curious about what could be found outside the more typical 80's era Napa/Sonoma chards and this wine showed me. Such an erratic producer and wine, but the highs are so damn high. b. 86 Sauzet Puligny Combettes -- The Chalone sent me on my quest and this was the first time I felt like I was close to the grail. Until that moment, I never imagined such lusciousness could ever be made of steel. 8. 95 Sorrel "Les Rocoules" Hermitage Blanc -- Objectively, not even that great a wine, but a partner in what is probably the most inspired (or damn lucky) food and wine pairing I have ever made. This was only two years ago -- and I have consumed more than my fair share of good wine since the Cain Five that started it all -- but I was still knocked speechless that this good, but rather ordinary wine could turn into absolute nectar due to a food match. Oddly enough, this was for a different dinner with the same dear friend as in the VCC story above. (You can Google alt.food.wine for "'Hermitage Blanc with Easter Dinner" and the original notes on the meal and wine will be there. I would post a link, but don't know if Google Groups links are static.) None of these wines is the best version of its appellation/type that I've had, but each of them soars over its betters in my own calculus of value because of place or time or learning or revelation or affection. Okay, how about everyone else? Jim

Foreplay and mischief often go together...but I've never been involved in any play that could cause such an implosion. Painful even to think about. Oh..sorry! You meant foul play. Jim

Here are some tasting notes from a few recent dinners in Tokyo. I've posted writeups on these meals (and a few others) here that would put the notes below in a little better context. Le Bourguignon -- The wine list is not enormous, but is very well selected and fairly priced. Had a 2002 Maison Alex Gambal village Chassagne Montrachet. I don't often buy negoce wines for home, but the better ones often provide good value in restaurants. Gambal is one of my favorite negociants. As he has now built good relationships with his sources, he is able to work with about 60% fruit and 40% must for the whites. He also has a good degree of control of the viticulture. His wines are made in a traditional style, without excessive cooling, extended soaks or maceration, or loads of oak. This wine had a lot of color for its age, which was backed up by strong pineapple and lanolin nose, and a little sense of sweetness on a young round palate. It was in its sexy blush of youth and had just enough apparent acid to balance the richness of the foie/eel dish. Also had a 1991 Simon Bize Savigny les Beaune Grands Liards. This was nicely mature, with a faded but bright red core and a little thinning at the edges. Bright pinot (beetroot/cherry) and tart berry fruit on the nose, along with a little hint of earth. Palate showed a little remaining greenness, along with solid plum and red berry fruit. The 1991s from the Cotes de Beaune have been much maligned and came out very, very green at release. This was perhaps a little dilute and still a little green, but it had developed very nicely for a small wine from such a vintage. I'm liking this vintage more and more each time I try it. Finally, had a 1976 Moulin Touchais with cheese and dessert. This is a good value on the list and I love mature chenin blanc. Bottle variation, however, has long been a problem with this producer and this most recent bottle had little acid structure left and a fair degree of oxidation. Okay to drink and not bad enough to complain, but very disappointing compared to the younger tasting, fresher bottle I had last time I was here. L'Osier -- The other three people began with a kir royale, while I began with a glass of the house Champagne. I never managed to ask what it was, but it was a damn fine house pour. May or may not have been a blanc des blancs, but was definitely at that end of the spectrum. Very fine mousse, good acid, piercing white fruit, more nuttiness than toast. Precise, delineated, but still very light (in all the best ways). Can't imagine it could have been Salon as a house pour, but was very much in that vein. Maybe the best house Champagne I've ever had. Based on the sommelier's recommendation, we went with a '98 Domaine Cordier Pouilly Fuisse Juliette la Grande. First course was a tough match, with my oysters, the seared foie, and foie ravioli with truffle pave. '98 white burgs had nice sexy fruit and started drinking well very young, but were a bit blowsy in general. That was actually a good call with the three foie dishes, in a complement rather than contrast way. It was less good with the oysters, though the sweetness of the fennel helped bridge the gap a little. The wine was extremely open, advanced in color development, with a little more apparent oak sweetness and vanilla on the nose than I might have liked. Not my style exactly, but strongly concentrated with very ripe white and citrus fruit on both nose and palate. A little more acid and a little less oak and I would have been thrilled. As it was, very well made and very good showing for the vintage. Any concerns about the match with my oysters went away when they brought me a glass of '96 Clos St. Hune without my asking (or paying). Just a nice thought? Or second guessing the Cordier recommendation? The Clos St. Hune was a perfect match, with great acidity, good riesling steeliness, but the generosity that only comes out in Alsation riesling. No petrol, but mineral galore. Great wine. I wasn't ready to hear any recommendations from the sommelier on the red, as there was a '93 Montille Pommard Pezerolles on the list at a pretty reasonable price. Both Montille's wines and the 1993 vintage in Burgundy are controversial, but I happen to love both. Besides, I couldn't imagine a better match for my pigeon! For once, I was right. This wine had matured the way we always hope burgundy will. The tannins had receded way to the background, the acid was bright and strong, but very much in balance, and the secondary aromas of earth, mineral, and flower essence were coming on strong. Montille wines can be almost painfully austere when young, but the signature Montille acid provided a great structure to hold up the Pommard fleshiness. This one is drinking great right now, but should have 3-5 years development left (and a nice little holding period after that). I think the general consensus on this vintage is just going to get better and better as the wines mature. I really wish I had some of this in the cellar and will buy some if I can find it with certain good storage. Bright, clear, fleshy, getting more and more complex and oh so detailed with nice persistent finish. There are so many good winemakers in this Pommard/Volnay part of the world -- Montille, d'Angerville, Lafarge, Pousse d'Or -- and they often represent such good value on restaurant lists. Take care and sorry for the long post, Jim

The best accessible authority I know on port is a guy named Roy Hersh who is a regular on the Squires board. He is US-based, so may not be able to help with merchants, but will be able to recommend what houses were best in 1945 vintage (and which wines seem to have had least bottle variation and held up best). I can tell you that Fine and Rare Wines in the UK has a great selection, but I've never bought from them, so I can't vouch for reliability. Good luck, Jim

Kazuo-san, et. al.: Sorry for my long silence. Cathryn and I took a ski trip in lieu of a big dinner out, so we didn't get to any of your recommendations in February. However, we have her parents in town now, so we've been making the rounds. So far, we have hit: Hokkaido -- This is a chain izakaya. Nothing truly remarkable, but everything very solid and a broad enough menu that it provides a good sampling ground to figure out what they do and don't like in Japanese food. Also, the Ebisu Garden Place branch is 10 minutes from Kami Osaki (my house) and provides a great view of Tokyo. As always, the imo-mochi with Hokkaido butter were a roaring success. Fried tuna tails with tonkatsu-style, fruit-based sauce were also very popular. Also discovered that my 10-month old daughter will put down taraba-gani like a trencherman. A new trattoria two doors from my house -- Just opened a few months ago by staff from the Il Boccalone/La Bisboccia restaurants. Nothing really special, but good solid Italian cooking from across Italy. Of note were a good frito misto including zucchini blossoms and artichokes, as well as a pretty good tripa alla Romana. Wine list is pretty meager and doesn't list vintages. I'll continue to go back, though, as it is convenient for a spur of the moment meal and is plenty good for a neighborhood trattoria. Croce & Delizia -- This was my second trip here. Last time, Cathryn and I went alone and had one of the course menus, along with a '96 Clerico Pajana (not my favorite producer, but one that tends to drink pretty well this young). This time, we were four and ordered a la carte. Standouts included: a great cuttlefish ink taglialini with a bit of cuttlefish meat and a gentle, garlic-driven sauce; a truly fantastic grill of Iberico pork; perfectly shun white asparagus with a smoked Piemontese cheese (forget the name of the cheese); lamb chops I didn't taste, but about which my father-in-law raved; and a wonderfully light risotto with spring vegetables. Wine was simple -- a few glasses of prosecco to carry us up to a '98 Chianti riserva. Everyone was tired, so this was a light night on the drinking. The Chianti was just fine; still had good, solid color; typical nose of cherry, a little earth, and a (very little) sweet oak; firm on the palate, but tannins completely subsumed by a little sweet fruit; no real length, but no holes either; perfectly adequate. This is probably more of a note than it needed. Le Bourguignon -- This is one of my favorites. As we were six, a set menu was required. Menu was: carrot mousse with uni and a gelee of beef consomme; a "cake" of foie gras and unagi; a white fish (similar taste and texture to suzuki but didn't get the name) in a red wine reduction sauce; a beautifully rare breast of duck; assorted cheeses (always a small but good selection); and choice of dessert. The mousse is one of my favorite dishes and was excellent yet again, though my one criticism is that the uni is a bit lost in the combination. The "cake" is extremely rich with the combination of foie and unagi, but the earthiness (fresh water fish taste) seems to cut through the fat a bit. Fish was fine, but not stellar. Duck was excellent. I'm always a bit disappointed with desserts here. Yet again, I forgot that the citrus-driven desserts tend to be best. My one complaint is that the set menu had changed little since I was last there. I need to go back with a smaller group so that we can order a la carte. The wine list is not enormous, but is very well selected and fairly priced. Had a 2002 Maison Alex Gambal village Chassagne Montrachet. I don't often buy negoce wines for home, but the better ones often provide good value in restaurants. Gambal is one of my favorite negociants. As he has now built good relationships with his sources, he is able to work with about 60% fruit and 40% must for the whites. He also has a good degree of control of the viticulture. His wines are made in a traditional style, without excessive cooling, extended soaks or maceration, or loads of oak. This wine had a lot of color for its age, which was backed up by strong pineapple and lanolin nose, and a little sense of sweetness on a young round palate. It was in its sexy blush of youth and had just enough apparent acid to balance the richness of the foie/eel dish. Also had a 1991 Simon Bize Savigny les Beaune Grands Liards. This was nicely mature, with a faded but bright red core and a little thinning at the edges. Bright pinot (beetroot/cherry) and tart berry fruit on the nose, along with a little hint of earth. Palate showed a little remaining greenness, along with solid plum and red berry fruit. The 1991s from the Cotes de Beaune have been much maligned and came out very, very green at release. This was perhaps a little dilute and still a little green, but it had developed very nicely for a small wine from such a vintage. I'm liking this vintage more and more each time I try it. Finally, had a 1976 Moulin Touchais with cheese and dessert. This is a good value on the list and I love mature chenin blanc. Bottle variation, however, has long been a problem with this producer and this most recent bottle had little acid structure left and a fair degree of oxidation. Okay to drink and not bad enough to complain, but very disappointing compared to the younger tasting, fresher bottle I had last time I was here. Hatanaka -- This is a tiny tempura place in Azabu-juban. Not my favorite neighborhood, but this place has no English signage and seems to get little to no gaijin traffic. I really love this place. The night's standouts included: beautiful green asparagus; several early season sanzai; nice and sweet botan ebi; perfect anago; and succulent little whole tamanegi. Everything else was great, but these really sang. House sake went perfectly. This was a big, big hit with Cathryn's parents. L'Osier -- We went here last night, as a party of four. This had been uniformly recommended as great food, perhaps the best classic French in Tokyo, but there had also been plenty of "over the top" type comments. As a general comment, I would say that the food, as well as the full experience, was up to two-star standards, with the price about in line. The room didn't strike me as garish, but it's certainly not to my style. I guess I can see how repeated visits, where the focus and the eyes wander a little more, might bring out a bit of that. Service was restrained, but there whenever needed, the way it should be. I was particularly impressed with the speed with which they realized that my wife would be tasting each of my dishes and began to appear a few minutes after each course with a clean bread plate for sharing and would carry the sample around the table to her. The cutlery for a few of the courses was a bit over the top, with sauce spoon, knife, and fork appearing a few times when they were not all necessary or even usable. On to the food...I had the diner de saisons set menu, while everyone else ordered a la carte. The fact that they allowed this was a nice bit of flexibility. Amuse -- A rice and mussel croquette. Nice small bite, clean and not a bit starchy or overly rich, with a clear mussel flavor and a hint of cream to round it out. Entrees -- Two people had the grand ravioli of foie gras with black truffle pave. Both of them loved the dish. I tasted it and thought it was fantastic, but can understand your wife's comment that it was a bit rich. It was a large portion of a very rich dish that might have been a little too unctuous or cloying if I'd had an entire portion. One person had a traditional seared foie gras dish, with a very fine bread crumb and spice crust. I didn't taste it, but he raved. My oysters with a fennel coulis and sea water gelee were clean, crisp, a bit briny, but perfectly round and integrated. I love what fennel does to round out shellfish. Poisson -- I had a plate of broiled langoustines, garnished with uni. Probably the least exciting dish of the night, but still very, very good. Langoustines were perfectly cooked, but lacked the sweet ocean punch that I expected. I expect it was an issue of ingredients rather than execution and I can't really complain. I would be happy to eat them again. They just fell a little short of the standard the rest of the meal set. Soup -- At the same time as my langoustines, everyone else had a bowl of chestnut veloute soup, which I didn't taste but which was pronounced as very good. My wife preferred the soup to her taste of my langoustines. Viandes -- I had a perfectly cooked dish of pigeon, with a liver croustade as part of the garnish. This was stunningly good and the best bird I have had in a very, very long time. Other dishes were lamb chops, wagyu filet, and a concoction including uni and ossetra. I didn't taste any of these, but there were smiles and contented sighs around the table. Fromages -- Very large selection of well handled cheeses. Highlights were an aged Epoisses and a Comte-like cheese that I had never seen before. Desserts -- Huge selection, with my grapefruit tart being excellent and my white peach cake being even better. I prefer prunes in Armagnac, but the prunes in Port were also good. Petits fours and mignardises were also very good. The other three people began with a kir royale, while I began with a glass of the house Champagne. I never managed to ask what it was, but it was a damn fine house pour. May or may not have been a blanc des blancs, but was definitely at that end of the spectrum. Very fine mousse, good acid, piercing white fruit, more nuttiness than toast. Precise, delineated, but still very light (in all the best ways). Can't imagine it could have been Salon as a house pour, but was very much in that vein. Maybe the best house Champagne I've ever had. Based on the sommelier's recommendation, we went with a '98 Domaine Cordier Pouilly Fuisse Juliette la Grande. First course was a tough match, with my oysters, the seared foie, and foie ravioli with truffle pave. '98 white burgs had nice sexy fruit and started drinking well very young, but were a bit blowsy in general. That was actually a good call with the three foie dishes, in a complement rather than contrast way. It was less good with the oysters, though the sweetness of the fennel helped bridge the gap a little. The wine was extremely open, advanced in color development, with a little more apparent oak sweetness and vanilla on the nose than I might have liked. Not my style exactly, but strongly concentrated with very ripe white and citrus fruit on both nose and palate. A little more acid and a little less oak and I would have been thrilled. As it was, very well made and very good showing for the vintage. Any concerns about the match with my oysters went away when they brought me a glass of '96 Clos St. Hune without my asking (or paying). Just a nice thought? Or second guessing the Cordier recommendation? The Clos St. Hune was a perfect match, with great acidity, good riesling steeliness, but the generosity that only comes out in Alsation riesling. No petrol, but mineral galore. Great wine. I wasn't ready to hear any recommendations from the sommelier on the red, as there was a '93 Montille Pommard Pezerolles on the list at a pretty reasonable price. Both Hubert de Montille and 1993 are controversial, but I happen to love both. Besides, I couldn't imagine a better match for my pigeon! For once, I was right. This wine had matured the way we always hope burgundy will. The tannins had receded way to the background, the acid was bright and strong, but very much in balance, and the secondary aromas of earth, mineral, and flower essence were coming on strong. Montille wines can be almost painfully austere when young, but the signature Montille acid provided a great structure to hold up the Pommard fleshiness. This one is drinking great right now, but should have 3-5 years development left (and a nice little holding period after that). I think the general consensus on this vintage is just going to get better and better as the wines mature. I really wish I had some of this in the cellar and will buy some if I can find it with certain good storage. Bright, clear, fleshy, getting more and more complex and oh so detailed with nice persistent finish. There are so many good winemakers in this Pommard/Volnay part of the world -- Montille, d'Angerville, Lafarge, Pousse d'Or -- and they often represent such good value on restaurant lists. Oh well, almost through the visit and just a few meals left. Cathryn and her parents are off to Kyoto tomorrow and I'm going to send them to my favorite sushi-ya in all of Japan -- Sushi Iwa. They are back on Saturday and we'll hit Shunju to give them the upscale izakaya experience. Take care and sorry for the long post, Jim

Great book. Highly opinionated, but a helluva lot of fun to read (and largely on the mark, to my taste). It is, sorry to say, out of print and trading for north of $100 at places like Amazon and such. If you find one at a price that is reasonable to you, snap it up. I keep hoping it will go back into print, as has Making Sense of Wine, or be updated, as has Making Sense of California Wine. Jim

I second that. The book is called "The Great Vintage Wine Book". It has tasting notes on wines back to the 18th century. ← Great book. The new book is called "Vin­tage Wine: Fifty Years of Tasting Three Centuries of Wines". This was released a couple of years ago, I believe. The version Mark mentions may be slightly better for older wines, as Broadbent has dropped notes on some wines he hasn't tasted recently in the newest release. On the other hand, some of the vintage ratings have changed slightly with ten years evolution and additional tasting. Jim

I usually post my tasting notes on three different fora. Most often, a post will generate comment or discussion on one of the fora, but not on the others. Seems to be random which place gets comments. This set of notes, however, has generated discussion on all fora and the theme of the discussion has been pretty similar -- an unbalanced competition because of age issues. In one place, the gist of the discussion was that the French wines were all too young and likely to be closed down tight -- thus, unfair advantage to Australia. In the other, the response was that age should not be an excuse, as the Aussies were too young as well. I generally hate to repost something I've written somewhere else, but down below is a (slightly edited) copy of my response on another board. It takes the wines one by one and discusses how they were showing and where they might go. The unusual age and style matches were a function of the way the event was organized. Two members of the club's wine committee were chosen as "champions", one for each country. Each champion was then given the charge to select five wines of the stipulated grape varieties that were locally available, within a defined budget, and that they thought would best compete. Hence, the choices made by each champion produced some unusual matches. I'm interested to see how the Leeuwin will develop. I won a bottle of the Leeuwin at the tasting and am planning to put it away for a while. Though I much prefer the Puligny, the Leeuwin was certainly a good wine. Sorry for (all too usual for me) long post, Jim

AUSTRALIA V. FRANCE - Tokyo American Club (1/21/2005) This is an annual event pitting one country's wines against those of another. This time it was Australia versus France. Five pairs of wines...varietally matched. Group voting determines the winner. Welcome Wine 1995 Laurent-Perrier Champagne Brut Millésimé - France, Champagne From Magnum Bright, light straw yellow. Restrained small mousse. Giving very little on nose...varietal chardonnay aroma, slight wite fruit, pretty unexpressive. Tight, light mouthfeel with acid more evident than mousse. More munier/noir on palate...apple, white plum, a little creaminess in texture. Somehow slightly cloying despite being dry. Flight One -- Sauv Blanc/Sem 2001 Cullen Wines - Australia, Western Australia, Margaret River Light, light yellow...very bright...almost white at rim. Aggressive sauvignon character on nose...simple varietal aromas, with bright freshness and generic white fruit. With time, tart greenberry and floral come out on nose. Alcohol and white pepper very evident in finish (in the chimney). My WOTF. 2003 Château Carbonnieux Blanc - France, Bordeaux, Graves, Pessac-Léognan Slightly deeper in color, but similar to previous. Much more restrained on nose (no greenberry/cat pee), but with a little smokiness. Rounder in mouth with relatively short finish. Flavor impact mostly in front of mouth and waxy. Oak is slightly intrusive, covering any fruit on nose. Group WOTF. Flight Two -- Chardonnay With crab terrine and pan-seared scallop 2002 Domaine Leflaive Puligny-Montrachet - France, Burgundy, Côte de Beaune, Puligny-Montrachet Bright yellow...solid to rim...clearly viscous. On pouring, nose gives nothing. On first sip, oak immediately evident and dominating fruit. Amazingly long finish, though, that turns to malo/butter and apple. Good acid, full but not heavy body. Oak quickly recedes on palate to reveal the fruit. With a few mintes in glass, mineral and a little toast on nose, along with a tad of fruit trying to come through. A lot there, but tight and closed right now. Personal WOTF, WhWOTN. 2001 Leeuwin Estate Chardonnay Art Series - Australia, Western Australia, Margaret River Slightly lighter than previous, with a little less viscosity and a little less brilliabce. Much more toast, butter on nose. Rounder, more giving with more tropical fruit character. With time, the oak steps up and starts to dominate the fruit. Maybe better with a few years for the oak to integrate???? Group WOTF. Flight Three -- Pinot 2003 Paringa Estate Pinot Noir Reserve - Australia, Victoria, Mornington Peninsula Rich, red ink, young. Spicy fruit aroma -- major toasty oak (American??). Could be syrah if I didn't know better. Oak on palate with big rich red fruits -- plums and such. Good nose, good taste, but it ain't elegant -- a baby shiraz. After an hour, oak is ahead of the fruit. 1996 Domaine Daniel Rion et Fils Chambolle-Musigny Les Charmes 1er Cru - France, Burgundy, Côte de Nuits, Chambolle-Musigny Slightly orangey but still relatively young. Just starting to show age. BURGUNDY NOSE -- sous-bois/animalle/leather. Definitely better right now on nose than palate. New oak oversteps the fruit, but good acidity comes through to make it lively -- with bright cherry fruit. Good while to go -- too much iak, but the fruit and acid hold it up. With time (1 hour) gaminess gone from nose -- relatively shut down -- but with great complex, exploding palate. Personal WOTF; Group WOTF Flight Four -- Syrah With lamb chops and mashed potatoes 2000 Bernard Chave Hermitage - France, Rhône, Northern Rhône, Hermitage Deep, inky color, absolutely solid to rim. Mild hit of leatheriness (a la Coudelet) turning quickly to a little spice and pepper. Very much closed down I think...but clearly with a lot more to come. Palate is pper and slightly drying tannins and plum and berry. Tannins come out and shut down fruit with more time. This note doesn't read very well but this was really good. Rich fruit hiding behind the tannin and a nose that revolves among leather and a little game and the spice and primary fruit...getting stronger the longer it is open. As palate closes, nose opens. Wait 8-10 years or more...this will be amazing. Personal WOTF, WOTN. 2002 Torbreck The Factor - Australia, South Australia, Barossa Valley Deeper, inkier. Absolutely dense looking. Lots of wood on nose, licorice, candied fruit. Very, very primary!! Viscous and sweet and jammy on palate. Chocolate in both feel and flavor. Lots of fun! With food??? Don't know. Way, way young. Rich berry fruit, tannin coming out on finish, but not in any aggressive way. Needs the tannin to cut through the rich sweet fruit. Flight Five -- Cab, et. al. 1999 Moss Wood Cabernet Sauvignon - Australia, Western Australia, Margaret River Young deep purple...solid...surprising reddish color at edge. Cedary, cassis nose. Immediately seems to be the Bordeaux -- nose settles down and becomes restrained after a little time. Fruit is sweet berry. Damn good wine and a tough competitor to its flight opponent. Group WOTF. 1996 Château Ducru-Beaucaillou - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, St. Julien Young healthy purple -- no age showing. Nose incredibly closed at first...seems like water...with time some slightly dusty cassis comes out, along with the cigar box/ pencil/etc...With a little more time, a nice sweetness on the nose. On the palate, this one is clearly the French one. A little tannic and dry, but with the acid and cherry and breadth on the finish to be the winner. Personal WOTF. As inconclusive as can be! (1) Flight by flight, it was tied at 2 1/2 to 2 1/2 for the group. (2) On total votes across all wines, Australia won it. (3) The formal tiebreaker was the WOTN vote. The Chave was group WOTN, but -- interestingly enough -- only tied with the Torbreck within its flight. Go figure! I was 5 for 5 in picking country of origin, but that was hardly an achievement as this was a pretty easy exercise. The wines were miles apart. Only tough one was the cab pairing -- and the finish made that pair clear. Posted from CellarTracker!

Will do. Thanks. Jim

Thanks very much. This definitely helps. The two above had been recommended by others. The remainder are new to me. Jim

Kazuo-san (and others who may have views): I'm looking to try a new French place for my wife's birthday next month. Your Italian recommendations have been spot on, so I thought I'd tap your brain again. You've probably got a general idea of what I like from the bit I've written previously. As you know, wine list is important, as well as food quality. Japanese ingredients and sensibility are a plus, as long as it doesn't veer too close to (con)fusion cuisine. Would also welcome input from anyone else who has any thoughts. Thanks in advance, Jim

Had to post this in honor of the recent release of the Wine Advocate Rhone issue. Other than the pear, this could describe any number of highly extracted, jammy grenaches, couldn't it? Jim

Coop: Thanks for your response. I would separate what you've said into several thoughts (with apologies for my paraphrasing -- please correct me if I misunderstand): 1. Wines today are made for more current consumption, e.g., 99 Brunellos. I would certainly agree that there has been a significant trend toward making many wines for earlier consumption. Like all good generalizations, this is true as a picture of a big trend, but false in many, many individual cases. For example, while Etienne de Montille seems to have moderated his father's style somewhat, I could never imagine calling one of his reds "early drinking". In fact, some of these wines can be downright painful to drink young, but they mature to a thing of beauty that cannot be found in any young burg of my experience. Similarly, I don't think the best Chablis, from Raveneau or Dauvissat, is early drinking. Sure, it can be pleasant and enjoyable, but 75% of what's there won't even be showing yet. Do a higher percentage of wines drink well when young? Sure they do. Do all of them? No. Can they all be consumed inside ten years? Sure, the vast, vast majority can be -- either in their blossom of youth or after they open from their dumb period. Are there many wines, though, that will not even begin to offer their full glories at ten or fewer years of age? I believe there are. 2. Assumption in point # 1 above is a good thing. I guess this really depends on whether one goes loopy like I do over what can come out with extended aging. Each of us can drink our wines as we choose to suit our preferences. What may be sweet faded fruit and glorious bouquet for me may simply be weakness and decay for another. What concerns me more is that -- whether one likes it or not -- there most definitely IS something entirely different that comes out with extended aging. When wines are consciously made to drink younger -- and without concern for longer term development -- that is most likely lost. I don't regret the number of wines that are being made to drink younger. In fact, I buy and enjoy many of them for everyday consumption. The vast majority of fruit in the world should not be used to attempt to make vins de garde. What does cause me regret is when a producer takes fruit from a site that is capable of showing forth the glories of extended aging and makes a very ripe, highly extracted, cold macerated/fermented, forward fruit wine with it. Every time I drink a Clerico Barolo I want to shed a tear. 3. Wines held longer than 10 years (or insert appropriate date) won't/mayn't be "alive". I recently had '74 Barbaresco Riserva from an average producer. Had the wine crested the hill and started to head down? Sure, but not by too much. Was it a fantastic drinking experience that I would love to repeat (and will soon, with my last bottle)? Absolutely. There is a certain risk inherent in drinking older wines. Leaving aside questions of provenance for wines acquired in the secondary market, there is still an ever increasing risk, each year of a wine's life, that it will have started to come apart. If I want reliability, I will certainly drink a younger wine. On many ordinary days or nights, that is what I want. But I also love the anticipation and discovery and surprise (and possibly even the risk) that comes with pulling the cork on an older wine and catching that first bit of nose and watching it come to life (or not). Nothing ventured, nothing gained! 4. Drink now, for tomorrow you may die. Well, this just gets down to a much broader philosophical question. If your house had a large garden in appropriate climate, would you plant a fig tree, which will take years to produce? If not, how would you ever enjoy that wonderful, sun-warmed, fresh picked glory that is the first fig of the season? Do you save for retirement? Buy life insurance? I know, life insurance (and some saving) is for those who outlive us. But I'd also like to think that I am leaving my son (and wife, should she survive me) a cellar of treasures that he can enjoy long after I'm gone. Believe it or not, that really matters to me. He's now six years old. If I don't lay it away now, where are we going to get an '02 Ramonet to pour at his rehearsal dinner in twenty (or however many) years? I'd like him and his quests to have that -- whether I am around or not. (Though I damn sure plan to be!) Good thing about this subject...nobody is really right or wrong are they? We're just damn blessed to be able to drink the wines and have such good natured debates, aren't we? By the way, I might disagree about the '99 Brunellos, as well. Sure they taste good now, but I think they've got a lot longer to go. Same with the '96s, no matter what others may think. It's the '97s that I'm worried about how well they will hold and develop. Damn odd year that '97. But that's another thread altogether. Pax, Jim

Mel: Thanks for joining us. As you are making pinot noir and chardonnay (with none other than Jim Clendenon), I have a few questions related to those. Particularly with regard to pinot noir, what relationships have you found between maceration methods, temperatures, time, etc., and the ability to integrate oak? New style versus old style is a gross overgeneralization, but have you found that cold soak, whole cluster maceration, etc. have hurt the ability of wines to integrate new oak as they age? In a similar vein, what relationship have you found between ripeness levels and oak integration. It is clear that Leroy-style ripeness lessens the apparent level of new oak in young wines. Her wines also seem to have no problem integrating over time. Taking that to another level, what about the Loring or Marcassin style wines? I've not tasted these and am curious how you think the ripeness will play out with the new oak over time. Finally, if I can be so rude as to ask a third question, can you describe the philosophy and vineyard management and winemaking for your venture with Clendenon? ABC-styled or something different? I've not seen your wines here in Tokyo. Are the production levels high enough to warrant broad distribution? Any chance I'll see them? Thanks for your time and thoughts, Jim

Amazing! I just found this wine here in Tokyo. I was seriously doubting that I would ever get to play along. Granted I found it here for about $25/bottle, but if that's the price I must pay to play, so be it. Seriously, it was approximately $25. Sad to say, that's not entirely out of line with wine prices here. I've often got easy access to stuff that other people have a hard time getting, but I have to pay. I guess in a market where so many people will pay the price, limited wines are well distributed. For example, as long as I act with reasonable speed, I have not had any trouble getting my case of Rafanelli zin. Think it's about time to break into a 2001. Poor but well supplied in Tokyo... Notes to come... Jim

with all due respect, those blends sound terrible! whats the point? one buys a bourgogne blanc specifically for the particular terroir; therefore, a chablis is different than a rully, a meursault, or a puligny & vice-versa same goes for a bourgogne rouge. certainly a côte de nuit chambolle-musigny is different than a côte de beaune volnay, n'est-ce pas? & i don't believe one would include a rully from the côte chalonnaise in the above group; & besides, everyone knows, rully is better known for its blancs than its rouges as to AOC, i believe it refers to appellation; whereas, AC "refers" to village wine(??) ← With all due respect...the vast majority of bourgogne rouge and bourgogne blanc are blended from wines made by others and bought in from end to end of the bourgogne appellation area. These wines often include fruit spread practically from Dijon to Macon. Now, that doesn't mean that I don't generally agree with you that I would prefer even simple bourgogne to have a more focused sense of place. Look for something like Lafarge's Bourgogne Rouge, which comes from plots that used to be classified as Volnay. Many domaine bourgogne will have that sense of place, particularly from a smaller grower who has fewer sources of fruit. They may cost a little more, but generally will better meet a desire for a sense of place. There are even some lieu-dit borgougne, which is a guarantee of fruit from a certain place. Depends on who's making it whether the sense of that place comes through in the wine, but at least one knows where the fruit was grown. Most (but not all) negociant bourgogne rouge and blanc wines, however, will come from all over. If they are at a price point sufficiently below domaine wines, they can be good value and a far sight more intriguing than $20 pinot noir or chardonnay from California, which have been identified as Drouhin's target in this endeavour. While, like you, I don't have a great deal of interest in paying $25 for a regional blend, I will likely give these a try. There are probably plenty of other things at that price point that I would rather drink, but Drouhin deserves a shot. They're not trying to make a terroir-based wine; they're trying to make something with the reliability and brand sense of a Cakebread or Kendall-Jackson or a major Champagne house's NV. I know, Cakebread and KJ are very different wines, of different quality and style, at very different price points. However, they have both achieved the same commercial success -- a clearly defined brand that delivers virtually the same product every year, despite vintage variability. I also know that, if I were going for that sort of thing, I'd probably be much better off with the Drouhin product. Among the major houses with both negociant and domaine businesses, I have found Drouhin to be perhaps the most consistent and my favorite. If I have to recommend reliable, reasonably priced, widely available merchants that hit enough real highs to be exciting, Drouhin is one of the houses I'll name. Jadot owns some fabulous land and makes some great wines, but I find their lower level wines and their negociant line to be clean and reliable at best. Latour hits a few highs with some domaine whites and provides some serviceable and reliable negociant whites, but I've never had a red with any stuffing from them. I really want to like Faively. They make wines in a traditional style similar to one of my favorite small negociants, Bouree. However, with the exception of a few high end wines, I've generally found that something of the silk or finesse or seduction is missing in the Faively wines. Sure, they're traditional and structured and all that, but something is missing that just leaves them a little rough and bare. Oh yeah...there is no difference between AC and AOC. AOC is the proper form, but people often use AC. In France, basically something is either AOC or VDQS or VDP or vin de table. I may have missed some lower step that recent EC legislation may have introduced. Regional bourgogne rouge and blanc, village wines, premier cru wines, grand cru wines, and any of these with or without any further elaboration of the vineyard are all AOC. Do note though, that the vineyard must be named on a grand cru wine. One cannot blend, say, Le Musigny with Bonnes Mares and sell the wine as grand cru. Within an individual village, one can blend any number premier cru vineyards together and maintain premier cru status. One cannot, however, blend a wine from Gevrey Chambertin with Morey St. Denis and maintain premier cru status or even village status. The best one can then obtain is bourgogne rouge as an appellation. Sorry...this is probably more confusing than elucidating. Jim

I started to write something about the south/southwest in general, but held off because it's changing so fast and I don't have enough experience. From my all too limited experience, I would agree with Bandol (wish I'd tasted more) and would also add Cahors. For those who have only tasted South American Malbec, it can be a revelation. I've also had some interesting age-worthy wines from the Pyrenees, but only in Basque bistros in Paris and I couldn't call them by name if my life depended on it. (And there's always an element of right place, right time, right food. I don't know how well the Basque wines would show in some other environment, but that's true for all wines isn't it?) I've been hoping that someone from the West Coast or Oceania or South Africa or South America or simply someone who knows those wines well would chime in on New World agers. I know they're out there, but I'm not up to date enough to know what ages well in the right price range. I could trot out comments about leaner Coonawara cab, or Hunter semillon, or Eden or Clare riesling, but I couldn't name specific wines or price points. Similarly, I used to think that more classically structured and/or transparent Cali Cabs like those from Clos du Val, Pine Ridge, Diamond Creek, Dunn, Hess (the Mt. Veeder one), and the like aged pretty well. So did chardonnays from people like Stony Hill, Woltner, Sonoma-Cutrer, Chalone, ABC. But I haven't had most of those in years and I fear they've crept (or leapt) out of the affordable range. Some, like Dunn and Stony Hill and Diamond Creek, were never there. Also, most of my favorite producers seem to have higher peaks and lower valleys, so the risk makes the effective cost higher if one is buying the wine blind. I think some zins hold well, but I'm not convinced they gain much with age, though some of the more claret-styled offerings from places like the Dry Creek Valley sometimes seem to show the potential. I just enjoy them too much for current consumption to give them a chance. Some of the less sappy Ridge zinblends also can gain, but they're hardly cheap either. I had a few of the early Atlas Peak sangiovese. They were from young vines then, but seemed like they might be up to it in time. Anyone have any recent experience here? Absolutely agree that not all wines from the listed regions age well. There have always been poor wines from even the best of appellations. Add to that the number of fruit-forward, New World style producers out there now and one must be very careful about what to lay down. Come on, New Worlders, what are your recommendations? Jim

Brad: Although I'm a big fan of Loire chenin blanc, for some reason or other I've never tried either of these sparklers. My Loire sparkling experience is limited to some mediocre Montlouis. Perhaps that's what's put me off. Huet's whole line of Vouvray, from sec to moelleux (though I haven't had the chance to try the Cuvee Constance), and Baumard's whole line, but particularly the Quarts de Chaume, are among my favorites, so I need to try their sparklers. Looking at winesearcher, it looks like these are priced at low/mid teens for the whites and high teens for Baumard's rose. Have you tried the rose? I love good rose Champagne, but have found roses from most other sparkling areas to be a little heavy and insipid, lacking acid. That shouldn't be a problem in the Loire, I would hope, particularly from such conscientious producers. Do you know if they grow the fruit or if it is bought in? Have you tried Huet's with any age? Any notes on any of these? If they're really good, that's a hell of a value. Do these get good distribution? Huet can be hard to find in general, but is well distributed here in Tokyo. Sorry for the barrage of questions, but I'm intrigued. Thanks, Jim

Rereading my note, I realize that I really gave short shrift to Bordeaux. As I said, if you choose chateaux well, some of the satellites, like Cotes de Bourg, Fronsac, Canon Fronsac will do well for medium term aging. I should add Lalande de Pomerol to that list. Some of the St. Emillion satellites may also do well, but I really don't have any experience with those wines. Also, some of the Cru Bourgeois from the Medoc can offer particularly good value at a price point just at or above $20 (or a tiny bit below for some, if well bought, perhaps by the case). These will also age longer than most of the satellites. Ones that come immediately to mind include: in Moulis (Poujeaux, Chasse Spleen), in St. Julien (Gloria and Lalande Borie), in St. Estephe (Les Ormes de Pez). I generally find these three communes, along with the Haut-Medoc, to provide much better quality and value at the Bourgeois level than Paulliac or Margaux. To make a gross generalization, St. Juliens tend to drink well a little sooner than Moulis or St. Estephe. I don't think there is much good in this range in Pomerol (but I'm not a big Pomerol fan, other than VCC, which I really love, but which also has more Cab Sauv than other Pomerols). I'd like to find something to love in this range from Graves, but haven't yet. I really don't know enough about St. Emillion to have an opinion. Actually, while I've tasted enough of them at friends' houses or store tastings or elsewhere, I don't think I've ever bought a St. Emillion. Sorry for replying to myself! Jim

On the EC v WC palate thread, an interesting subtopic has arisen: wines that don’t cost a bundle, but that will age well. As a big, big fan of mature wines, with their wonderful secondary character, fully integrated oak (when used), and captivating noses, affordable agers is something I am always seeking. I won’t try to stick to any specific price limit, but would point to some wines that hold very well (and benefit from age) and that I believe represent good value for what they are. Here we go… Spain Well made, traditionally styled Riojas have always been great agers. Some are great value; others are more expensive. This is an appellation that rewards investigation for those who want to try aging at a reasonable price. Though many of these wines will start in the $20’s, you might want to try the Rioja Reservas from CVNE, Lopez de Heredia Tondonia or Bosconia, Murrieta, Riscal. Some will be available in the teens. I am sure there are great value agers from some of the emerging appellations in Spain, but I don’t know them well enough to comment. Portugal Some of the single quinta, colheita ports produced in generally non-declared vintages can be had at good value and, like all good bottle ports, will reward (even demand) time in bottle. This is a dynamic wine country that is changing day-by-day. Others who are more up-to-date and experienced with those wines can probably offer good advice. Italy First, traditionally made Chianti riservas do nice things with a little age. Particular value can be found in the Rufina and Colli Senese appellations, as these are often overlooked by the American trade. For a Rufina Riserva, see tasting note here. Also in Tuscany, Vino Nobile de Montepulciano is arguably underpriced and needs/benefits from some bottle age. Second, some of the “lesser” nebbiolos from the Piedmont can also show very nice development at a price that won’t kill. Think Ghemme, Spanna, Gattinara. Again, often overlooked by the American trade. From the Veneto, Amarone is hardly cheap, but (avoiding great but fully priced producers like Quintarelli) provides great value compared to wines of similar quality and ageability. Masi and Tommasi are good value names that pop into my mind. There’s some cool stuff going on in the South, but I don’t know it well enough to comment. Joe “Beppe” Rosenberg frequents alt.food.wine and is a great source of recommendations on these sorts of things. He spent a career ITB as an Italian specialist. France Loire I believe the Loire (chenin blanc, not sauvignon blanc) to be one of the most undervalued regions in the world. Even though prices for some have crept up recently, there’s still good value here. Vouvray, both in drier and moelleux styles, ages incredibly well, as does Savennieres. When you get into Bonnezeaux and Quartes de Chaume, the prices go up, but the wines are fantastic. If you can find some 2002 Huet Vouvray sec wines, try those over time and watch what they do. The Le Mont, Clos de Bourg, and Le Haut Lieu are all great wines that can, I believe, be had in the high teens/low $20’s in major US markets. The moelleux wines are also great value for what they are, but are more expensive. For a couple of Huet's, see tasting notes here. For an example of what mature sweet Loire wines can do, Moulin Touchais Coteaux du Layon can be had at prices in the $50’s and $60’s reaching back to great older vintages like the ’76. That’s certainly not cheap, but is one of the cheaper ways to taste the glories of bottle age. For the '76 Moulin Touchais, see tasting note here. Rhone The wines of Cornas absolutely demand bottle age (at least the traditionally made ones). They are not cheap in an absolute sense, but are probably the most efficient way to taste a mature Northern Rhone. Crozes Hermitage is less demanding of age, but can certainly benefit from eight to ten years in good vintages from more traditional producers. One of the great things that has been happening over the last fifteen to twenty years has been the establishment of separate appellations for many of the Cotes du Rhone villages. Gigondas and Vacqueyras can definitely reward age, but have crept up in price. Cairanne is often a better value and producers like Christine Couturier (Dom. Rabasse Charavin) are making wines that develop very nicely. For an '89 Rabasse Charavin, see tasting note here. The recent Cairanne basic cuvee can be had for under $15/bottle on a case basis and the premier cuvee d’Estevenas can be had for not too much over $20. Just be aware that Cotes du Rhone is a minefield with regard to aging. Good depth of fruit and good acid levels are critical. I would look for domaine wines rather than negociant wines and would look for a recommendation or do frequent sampling before waiting too long on most CdR. The link above for the Rabasse Charavin note also contains a note on the '01 Mas de Boislauzon, a CdR that I’m enjoying very much now and am glad I bought, but that I don’t think will age very well. Champagne Okay, Champagne is not cheap…good champagne, bad champagne, none of it is cheap. However, I would argue that there is more difference between young Champagne and mature Champagne than for almost any other wine type. (Of course, I exclude wines in their closed period or those that are simply painful to drink young.) Even as much as I love mature Burgundies and Nebbiolos, I’ll still stand by my statement. Beware, though, that many people simply do not like the taste of mature Champagne. This is a case where I would recommend finding a mature Champagne somewhere you can trust the storage (and storage is most critical here) and trying it before you shell out the bucks and tuck your young Champagne away. After gritting ones teeth and accepting that no good Champagne is cheap, there are some producers who provide better value and make age worthy wines. You might try: Jacquesson, Duval Leroy, Egly-Ouriet, Pierre Peters. 1996 is a vintage that has produced wines that are just screaming for age. The Duval Leroy ’96 is, by all reports, drinking well now, but probably has the stuff to age as well. I am told that it can had for under $35, a great value for good vintage Champagne. I’ve not been able to find this one in Tokyo. If you are into Champagne, there are a few Danes and an Aussie over on the Squires board who can steer you right and frighten you with their enthusiasm (and liver capacity). You might also try the NV wines from some of these (or other good value) producers, but only if there is a degorgee date on the bottle. I have found that date of disgorgement is probably even more important than vintage in assessing how “old” a Champagne will be. See notes here for an RD sweetie that tasted younger than it was and a Blancs de Blancs that came across as older. Bordeaux I don’t follow Bordeaux closely or buy much of it, but there are some good agers (and good values) from the best chateaux of Canon-Fronsac, Fronsac, Cotes de Bourg, etc. I bet someone else here can provide some suggestions. I would see these drinking best at four to ten years, depending on the wine and the character of the vintage. Burgundy Oh boy. Nothing good in Burgundy is cheap in any absolute sense. There are some wines that are better values than others, though. I find Bruno Clair’s Marsannay wines to be great wines and good values that will reward aging. Savigny-le-Beaune in general provides good value and needs/rewards bottle age. (Beware, however, that Clair’s fantastic Savigny lieu-dit is far, far from cheap – one of the most expensive in the appellation.) For reds, my two favorite villages are Chambolle and Volnay. Perhaps I’m prejudiced, but I also think you will find the most consistently good winegrowing/making in these villages across the village/premier/grand spectrum. Again, nothing is cheap, but for a couple of examples, I believe the wines of Mugnier and Boillot and Lafarge and d’Angerville are undervalued relative to the rest of the market. (On the flip side, I think the worst village-level winemaking and value are found in Gevrey and Vosne. I suspect this is due to several factors. First, these are so premier and grand cru dominated that there is little good village land. Second, these “names” have been bid up in the market more than others. Finally, the leading makers in these communes seem to have bigger signatures than those in other communes and the village wines just don’t seem to have the stuffing to stand up to the signature.) Also, the best Bourgogne Rouge will provide good value and age a bit for the moderate term. You might look to: Lafarge, Mugneret-Gibourg, de Villane (the last for both Bourgogne Rouge and Mercurey). I’ve not tried the Mugneret-Gibourg, but it is recommended by Allen Meadows and his palate is usually dead-on. (He’s very much a terroir-driven Burg specialist.) I’ve only had the Lafarge Volnays, but another person with a palate I trust swears by the Bourgogne Rouge. I believe it contains a good bit of declassified village-level Volnay fruit. On the white side, Chablis represents a tremendous value (from good producers, of course) and absolutely demands age to show its real stuff. Even the Raveneau wines, which can be hard to find and are far from cheap, are good value compared to comparable (or lesser) quality great whites from elsewhere. Since the late ‘90s, Fevre has significantly cut back the oak and the wines are widely available and very reasonably priced. To my mind, probably the best widely available producer is Dauvissat. Long-Depaquit and the La Chablisienne cooperative also make good wines. The Moreau wines are good, but in a younger drinking style (which, to me at least, is contrary to what PC and GC Chablis should be). If budget would allow, I would lean toward premier cru and grand cru Chablis, rather than generic or petit wines, at least for aging. I’m sure Florida Jim can add a lot to this. Also on the white side of things, the negociant side of Leflaive is very conscientious and provides good value. However, as much as I love well-aged white Burgundy, I don’t think the same quality is generally found in village-level whites as can be found in village reds and ageability is not really there with most ordinary Bourgogne Blanc. I wouldn’t age them too long (and I’ve only had them young), but I suspect the Boillot Rully premier cru wines might gain some with a little bottle age. For a young Boillot Rully, see tasting note here. Alsace The Weinbach gewurz and riesling wines will repay age and some are available from the $20’s. The “Reserve Personnelle” wines are good value in this range. Same with Hugel; the Reserve Personnelle and Tradition wines can be good value and repay some bottle age. The Trimbach riesling Cuvee Frederic Emile can be had in the low $30’s by the case and is also a great ager. As long as you avoid VT’s and SGN’s, some of the Zind Humbrecht wines can be had in the $20’s and will age very well. They are a great source of long-lived Pinot Gris (fka Tokay). Beware of ZH though, as the winemaking is eccentric and experimental. While they reach dizzying heights, sometimes they just seem a little too sweet or a little out of balance. I think their style works better with late harvest wines and Pinot Gris. To me, these are the big four producers, but there are other producers that do a good job as well. Some of the Mann and Sparr wines I’ve had have been good and I’ve also heard some good things about Schlumberger and Deiss. All four of these, however, I’ve only had at the simplest levels. Beaujolais All of the Beaujolais crus, at least from good producers, will develop in the bottle. Moulin-au-Vent is well known for its development and Morgon is the other cru I would focus on if looking for age. The key here is to look for domaine wines. This is one of the better places to look for reds that will show suprising development for not too much money. You also won’t have to wait a lifetime to see the beneficial effects of a little time in bottle. Germany Wines from good growers in the Mosel-Saar-Ruwer, Rheingau, and Rheinpfalz can provide good current drinking combined with some aging potential and are quite good values at the lower Pradikat levels. I’ve had ten-year-old Kabinetts and fifteen-year-old Spatlesen that have come along very nicely. The key here is to look to producers that are of good quality (don’t overcrop, etc.), Einzellagen rather than Grosslagen, wines made from Riesling (especially NOT Muller Thurgau), and vintages with a good balance of acidity and ripeness. This balance is critical to ageability. (For current drinking, some of the QbAs and Grosslagen from the best producers can also be a pleasure, but I don’t look to them as much for aging.) Kabinetts should be available from the low-teens and Spatlasen from the high-teens/low $20’s. If you avoid the biggest name Einzellagen (Wehlener Sonnenuhr, Sharzhofberg, Graacher Himmelreich, Bernkasteler Doktor, Erdener Treppchen, et. al.), you can get to some pretty low cost wines, but you will also miss some great ones at prices that are very fair for what they are. For value, I would generally avoid the Berkastel wines and (maybe) the Wehlener Sonnenuhr. I did, however, just pick up a couple of ’01 Thanisch W-S Auslesen at a great price. Not my favorite producer, but these should improve over a good long while. Thanisch (the larger of the two after the ’88 split and the one that has more of a merchant/contract producer business as well) is far from weak, I just think the value is not normally there and they fall short of the best like Prum. The Prum W-S wines are among my favorite wines, but they come at a (well deserved) premium. I’m not a huge fan of the Trocken wines, but some great producers (especially Charta members in the Rheingau) are reported to be doing good things with them, especially in Auslesen and wines downclassified from Auslese to Spatlese. I find the lower Pradikat levels generally to lack stuffing when made in a Trocken style, so I doubt their ageability. I’ve not tasted enough of them, however, to have earned the right to express a real opinion. Austria I’ve loved the Riesling and Gruner Veltliner I’ve tasted and would like to learn a lot more about them (and drink a lot more of them), but they’ve been a fairly recent entrant to the world of well distributed wines and it’s still hard to find much of a selection here in Japan. Since I’ve been in Asia for five years, I’ve never really had the chance to learn much about them or taste too many. They are, however, great candidates for some bottle aging. There’s an Austrian wine writer named Michael Pronay who frequents alt.food.wine and the Squires board. Herr Pronay knows them better than anyone I’ve read and is also very kind about offering advice. Conclusion This is entirely an Old World list. I don’t mean to suggest that New World wines can’t age and aren’t available at good price points. I’m just writing about what I know best and those areas with which I have the most recent experience. Okay, I’ve been terribly long-winded again. My apologies. Also, be aware that – while I have first-hand experience with most of what I’ve recommended – the wine world is fast changing and I’m out in the far reaches where we don’t see a lot of the producers I’ve liked over the years. Thus, I rely to some extent on reports from others whose palates I trust. Also, my sense of value may be a little out of whack given that I pay more for everything living in Tokyo! Final caveats Producer matters! Especially these days, with the proliferation of younger drinking, lower acid, “New World” styles across the classic regions, you need to make sure you are cellaring wines from a producer that has grown and made them to develop and last. Vintage matters! I admit that – for me at least – one of the charms of wine (particularly from difficult sites) is the variety and discovery provided by vintage variation. However, even from the best producers, certain vintages just aren’t made for holding. Like the ’94 clarets, they can be great value on a restaurant list and be good for drinking young (the classic “luncheon claret”), but they just don’t have the stuffing, structure, and balance to improve and last. As usual, I'm sure I've forgotten many deserving wines, producers, regions. My apologies to all of them. Enjoy, Jim edited for format