jddoyle

I can't believe I am mentioning this after all these great suggestions, maybe this one is just too obvious: Epoisses and Burgundy. White or red burgundy, I normally don't go above Premier cru status on the wine because the chees is strong enough to overwhelm the subtleties of the wine. I prefer red burgundy, though the wife says white. Guess which we normally go with? Anyway, great thread!

It is also the big grape here in Missouri, sometimes called cynthania. I am pretty sure of that, though I am not a fan so I haven't looked all that hard into it. It is surely unique. The one time I tried it, I found it to be heavy and dominated by a bitter coffee and tar element with hints of deep deep black fruits. It is not for the weak of heart/palate. My opinion of course. I've always wanted to ask why no wineries around here try to grow the "big name" grapes. The weather is fairly hot around here for the growing season but I can see syrah doing pretty well given my limited knowledge. Sorry to bring the thread off topic... Regards, Jay Doyle

That is weird, mine was a burgundy but it went away and all was fine. Maybe my taste wasn't keyed in on it...

Well in my case after it blew off the wine was excellent and exactly as I remembered it. I didn't find it as a fault at all, just something I had to wait out.

Brett and fermentation in the bottles are two completely different things. Brett is a description of odours/flavours caused by Brett yeast and is not the same as fermentation in the bottle. BWs Chris Kissack Thanks! Is secondary fermentation a bad thing? Please excuse my ignorance. Jay

I've had a 1999 Girardin (from his Baron de la Charierre bottlings)Maranges 1er Loyeres that last year had that "fizz" on the tongue which blew off after about 15 minutes. The only thing I could think that it was was a secondary fermentation, though now I think it may have been brett. It was a great wine (and I've got three more) after the bubbles blew off but it is very "earthy". Does this type of thing happen often with reds or red burgundies in general?

First tasting note post for me so I hope that it helps someone. Tasted over one evening with grilled beef tenderloin, roasted potatoes and a simple salad. Marques de Murrieta 2000 Rioja Neonato For the price ($12), this is a deep ruby, fantastic medium bodied wine. Started out a bit sweet, with red fruits, most noticably strawberry, but opened up to reveal smoke and underbrush, without ever losing the red fruits. The finish was pretty long, though as the first wine on a Friday night after a long week, the wine itself didn't last long so I didn't really get a good chance to check the finish. Tannins were there, smooth but a little drying which evolved out over the 45 minutes it took to drink the bottle. I would bet the bottle would give a couple of more years, but why bother? Excellent start to the evening. 2001 Feraud-Brunel Gigondas We opened this wine while it was still a little cool from the cellar. Upon opening, not much there, very little nose, which smelled faintly of blackberry and anise and very little on the palate. The color was deep purple to the rim. I decided to come back to this later after the next bottle. After about an hour and a half of being in the glass, this wine evolved into a full bodied wine, showing spice and stoney-earth. There was loads of white pepper with blueberry and tar, a good bit of oak and firm, present tannins with a long, spicy finish. After the wait, it was very good, though from what I could taste it could use a while in the cellar. I am going to open another in two years, though my bet (for what it's worth) is another five would do it better. ($21.99) 1999 Finca Sobreno Seleccion Especial Wine of the night right here. This was an amazing bottle of wine. HUGE nose of chocolate, tar, raspberry and chocolate (really, even the non-wine fanatics at the table instantly said "chocolate" when they smelled it). Full bodied and deep red, in the mouth it tasted of leather, tar, and chocolate covered blackberries with a long, long, powerful finish. The tannins were smooth and not overpowering, but definitely there. I would guess this will hold out for at least another 5 years and it would be worth it to try, if I can last that long! ($25.99) 2001 Shooting Star Lake County Syrah We were at dessert at this point and this went really well with a rich chocolate cake. Cherry red and simple but does it's job, it is sweet with rich red raspberry and cherry flavors. Medium-light in weight, the tannins were slight but sweet and not drying. The best way that I can describe this is to say that this would be like a Beaujolais made with Syrah, which to me isn't a bad thing. Won't last long but worth the $12.00. Jay Doyle

The wine list from what is supposed to be the "best" in St. Louis: Tony's Wine List

$19.99 in St. Louis. No idea what price is on the wine lists around here, though for most places this is a pretty reasonable town.

Wow, I am surprised that many of these are probably drinkable. Thanks for all of the help guys! I really do appreciate it. Jay

Oh, sorry, I should have included that. All of these have been stored in a temperature and humidity controlled cellar for as long as he has owned them, some (like that 75 Sichel, whatever the hell that is) were bought or given from other friends similar cellars. Provenance is not an issue... Thanks for reading... Jay

For Christmas, I went through my father-in-law's cellar and put it into an Excel spreadsheet. In doing so I came across a bunch of bottles that I think are probably over the hill or even vinegar by now. The problem is, my experience with ageing is fairly limited, so I was wondering if any of you out there can help me determine if any of the following are worthy of being invited to a "Dead Wine Party". The Wines: Germany (I don't know ANYTHING about German wines so God only knows if I got these names right): 1983 Dr Dahlem Erben Oppenheimer Herrenberg Riesling-Eiswein 1985 Kauenthaler Honnenberg Reisling Kabinett Rheingau 1989 Schmitt Sohne Niersteiner Gutes Domtal Auslese Rheinhessen 1990 Reichsgraf von Kesselstat Scharzhofberger Reisling Auslese 1990 Weingut Karl Joh Molitor Rheingau Rudesheimer Berg Schlossberg 1990 Dr. Paoly-Bergweiler Berkasteler Graben Reisling Spatlesse 1991 Herm Donnhoff Weingutt Oberhauser Grucke Spatlese Riesling 1992 Weingut Frita Allendorf Oestricher Lenchen Reisling Kabinett Australia: 1988 Lindemans Bin 45 Cabernet Sauvignon 1991 Lindemans Bin 45 Cabernet Sauvignon California: 1987 Rodney Strong Alexander's Crown Sabernet Sauvignon 1990 Sullivan Vineyards Cabernet Sauvignon 1991 St. Clement Cabernet Sauvignon 1991 White Oak Limited Reserve Zinfandel 1991 Kunde Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon 1992 Diamond Creek Volcanic Hill Cabernet Sauvignon Oregon: 1993 Amilty Vineyards Winemaker's Reserve Pinot Noir Other US: 1992 Wente Bros. Special Selection White Zinfandel OK, just kidding on this one, I think it is safe to say that this was bad the day it was released, but there they were, three, yup, three bottles of this... Spain: 1986 Baron de Ley Rioja Reserva Italy: 1986 Bolla Valpolicella 1988 Vignamaggio Chianti Classico France: 1988 Pierre Sparr Gewurztraminer Mambourg Vandages Tardines Alsace Grand Cru 1982 Chateau Mayne Leveque 1994 Chateau de Combebell "Comte Cathare" 1995 Couvent des Jacobins 1995 Larentz Alsace Grand Cru Altenberg de Bergleim And the winner: 1975 Sichel (from the Medoc, Bordeaux; sorry I don't have any more information) Thanks for any help in advance. Jay Doyle

www.wine-searcher.com is another good site even if you don't pay for "premium" access.

A little pricey but the one I like best is the Mumm Napa Valley "DVX".

Bill, I had a feeling when writing that you were going to be a lawyer and I was going to eat it with my comment I understand your points. And I do agree with you that WS is a "intro" magazine that looks good on a coffee table and therefore sells well. But I don't think that they deliberately skew there scores to those that pay for advertising. Thanks for the discussion. Jay

Thanks all! I normally hold it by the stem anyway, so I guess I was ok. Though the Spiegelau's I have seem pretty rugged actually. Thanks again, Jay

From law.freeadvice.com: Fraud is defined to be "an intentional perversion of truth" or a "false misrepresentation of a matter of fact" which induces another person to "part with some valuable thing belonging to him or to surrender a legal right". My point is only that those who say that the Wine Spectator intentionally gives out better scores to those who provide funds by way of advertising dollars are essentially saying that the Wine Spectator "intentionally perverts the truth" of their statement that they taste wines blind when determining the scores of those wines in order to convince their readers to "part with some valuable thing" [the reader's money] to purchase those wines. Now I'm no lawyer but it seems to fit to me. As to the statements about Tanzer and Parker, well I don't read much of Tanzer other than any reviews that a website may attribute to him for a wine I am researching, I know that Parker does not taste blind and to me that allows for too much personal feeling associated with the wine under test to come into play in the review. But that is just me. I'm not saying that I agree with the reviews all the time, I don't. I personally prefer Clive Coates, my taste seems to coincide with his. My final decision of a wines quality rests in my mouth and nose alone. But I do feel that any review can be a helpful tool in determining whether or not to spend my few dollars on a wine, at least I know what someone said about it, whether in be Coates, Parker or the WS staff. As for why a study wasn't done for Tanzer or Parker, I assume that because WS is available at most newsstands while Parker or Tanzer's aren't, those commissioning the study decided that the best bang for the buck would be to study the possibility of improving scores in WS. If it costs hundreds of dollars just to purchase, you can assume that it was quite expensive to commission! I wasn't trying to start a fight, I was just stating that if you were going to accuse a publication of fraudulent practices, you should have proof backing it up. If one study that no one can read or quote is good enough for you than great! It isn't enough for me. Jay Doyle

Ahh yes, I understand this completely, but I have to be missing something ehre, if you can't hold the stem, and are trying to polish the bowl, you have to hold the bowl right? So how can you hold it and polish it without leaving finger smudges where you are holding it? Sounds like a formidable Catch-22 to me. Please point out what I am missing, I would love to know...

Here are some additions from me, prices are actual in St. Louis pre-tax: Spain (my favorite hunting ground for affordable good wine): 2001 Borsao Campo De Borja $6.99 2000 Osborne Solaz $6.99 2001 Rivola $11.99 France: 2000 Castelmaure Corbieres Grand Cuvee $14.99 Italy: 2000 Monte Antico $11.50 2001 Vitiano $10.00 Hope this helps, Jay Doyle

I would have figured that as harsh as most people were to the Wine Clip here for it's unpoven claims, someone would have some actual proof to back up these accusations. If you don't like their scores, fine; I don't usually. If you don't like the wines they choose, fine. But to almost accuse them of fraud without any proof is questionable at best.

I agree that the "Top 100" is a ridiculous concept, but does anyone here have proof that advertising revenue has anything to do with related scores? If so I would love to see it, if not than that is a pretty harsh accusation to be casually throwing around.

I found this place, been meaning to order the Burgundy vinyard chart but haven't yet so I can't attest to their quality... http://www.omnimap.com/catalog/mapsi.htm

So by your reasoning, why hasn't anyone with enough talent saved their money, bought a ton of land here in Missouri and made a wine that equals that from other prestigious areas? According to you, it doesn't matter where it's grown, it is the talent of the winemaker that decides the wine's taste and character. I can't buy that, place has to have an effect. When I think terrior and of a great example I think Cote Rotie, syrah doesn't taste like that anywhere else. Why not? No one wants to do it?

I've been using mine to age, set the temp so that the middle hovers around 54 degrees or so. The temp doesn't change all that much, maybe flucuates around your set temp by 2-3 degrees or so, which I would assume a large, man made cellar would do as well. I've only had mine for a year but I have kept a bunch in there for that long and plan on keeping them there for some time. I really can't see where it would be bad to age in these. Jay Doyle

Below are two links; I have a Haier 30 bottle fridge that lets me set the temp exactly to where I want it or use two generic "red" and "white" keys that set it at preset temps. It also has a lock, an interior light, and displays the interior temperature at all times. It doesn't keep the temp at a constant setting but turns on once the temp. reaches a certain point (I think it is 4-5 degrees above your current setting) so the top of the fridge is warmer than the bottom; so I set it for about 52-53 degrees and I keep the whites at the bottom and the reds at the top. The whites are good right out of the fridge, but the reds need about an hour to drop to serving temp. I don't know about the Home Depot units, they seem a little cheap to last for long. I haven't had any problem with mine, got it at Lowe's a little over a year ago and built a bar around it, on it's own it is a bit ugly but if it is in the closet or in my bar all you would see is the door. http://www.lowes.com/lkn?action=productLis...d=WINE_CHILLERS http://www.homedepot.com/prel80/HDUS/EN_US...ID=9876&pos=n08 Hope this helps, Jay Doyle