WTN: 1999 Guigal Chateau Neuf du Pape

[docsconz]

I had the wine last night (sans wine-clip) at a charity wine tasting event in my home town. While it wasn't bad and may have been better with a particular food pairing, I didn't think it was particularly special or even representative of its type. The irony is that my impression of CDP is that they are big, bold,tannic, fruit driven wines (this may be because I have come of age wine-wise in the parker era- see Craig's articleon 100 point wines and wine scoring) and this is anything but. I found it to be thin and too acidic without enough tannic backbone or fruit to support it. The fruit it did have tasted of grapey pez and wasn't particularly complex. I tasted it several times over the course of the evening without much change.

My taste in CDP tends to run more along the Beaucastel and Vieux Telegraphe lines. If I'm thinking of matching a CDP with a nice beef or lamb roast, they are what I have in mind. The Guigal might have been a good match with a tomatoey pasta sauce.

Is my thinking simply a product of Parkerization and world homogenization of wine styles and the Guigal is what CDP is really supposed to be like?

Edited October 12, 2003 by docsconz (log)

[Mark Sommelier]

I had the wine last night (sans wine-clip) at a charity wine tasting event in my home town. While it wasn't bad and may have been better with a particular food pairing, I didn't think it was particularly special or even representative of its type. The irony is that my impression of CDP is that they are big, bold,tannic, fruit driven wines (this may be because I have come of age wine-wise in the parker era- see Craig's articleon 100 point wines and wine scoring) and this is anything but. I found it to be thin and too acidic without enough tannic backbone or fruit to support it. The fruit it did have tasted of grapey pez and wasn't particularly complex. I tasted it several times over the course of the evening without much change.

My taste in CDP tends to run more along the Beaucastel and Vieux Telegraphe lines. If I'm thinking of matching a CDP with a nice beef or lamb roast, they are what I have in mind. The Guigal might have been a good match with a tomatoey pasta sauce.

Is my thinking simply a product of Parkerization and world homogenization of wine styles and the Guigal is what CDP is really supposed to be like?

So doc,

What have you learned from this? Guigal makes shitty wines, or Wine Spectator is a suck up joke of a publication? I can assure you that I can show some Guigal wines that will blow you away. I am currently pouring Guigal CNP 2001 by the glass. Parker actually drank my last 2 bottles of Guigal La Mouline '99 ( $500 each) in my restaurant. He gave them 100 points, BTW.

Edited October 12, 2003 by Mark Sommelier (log)

[docsconz]

Mark,

I most certainly do not conclude that Guigal makes "shitty" wines. I have had several bottles of the LaLas including the glorious '91's. They and other Guigal bottlings are magnificent, which was one reason why I was surprised to dislike this wine as much as I did. The other reason I guess was its quality relative to its hype as WS "Wine of the Year". The wine was ok, but nothing special.

Having tasted 6 of the WS Top ten wines at this tasting (my favorite was the 1999 Leoville Las casses at No.10), my conclusion is that the WS list has no basis in reality (at least not my reality). The other wines I tasted if I remember correctly were the CDP Chateau la Nerthe 2000 (No. 9) that was similarly structured to the Guigal, Pine Ridge Stag's Leap CS (No.4) which was probably the favorite of most of the people I talked with (it was a tasty wine drinking well at the time), Castello Banfi's 1997 Brunello (No.3), still very tannic and somewhat closed, and Chateau St. Jean Cinc Cepages 1999 ( once again a very nice wine, but No. 2?). I realize that the rankings are not based solely on a wine's "quality", but the combination of quality and price - its relative value. Nevertheless, this experience does reinforce a sense that there is more behind this list than meets the palate.

[Mark Sommelier]

doc wrote:

"I realize that the rankings are not based solely on a wine's "quality", but the combination of quality and price - its relative value. Nevertheless, this experience does reinforce a sense that there is more behind this list than meets the palate."

This is true, although as soon as the wine was made WOTY, the price shot up. Still, it is hard to comprehend how the year before, Cinq Cepages was WOTY with a score of 95 and Chateau Margaux was #2 with a score of 97. Could the Beringer Blass Wine Estates connection have something to do with it? I wonder.

[eat2much]

Hmmm, sucker that I am I bought 2 cases at a relatively reasonable $41 Cdn (approx $26 US at the time) based on the WS recommendation. Is it worth holding or should I start drinking it in order to free up space in the wine cellar?

[docsconz]

Hmmm, sucker that I am I bought 2 cases at a relatively reasonable $41 Cdn (approx $26 US at the time) based on the WS recommendation. Is it worth holding or should I start drinking it in order to free up space in the wine cellar?

It's not bad wine, it is just grossly overrated in my opinion and not representative of what I believe is CDP. I suggest trying it for yourself. Let us know what you think.

[Coop]

I believe that this wine is not a great example of CDP nor is it a great example of the wines of Guigal. If you want a great CDP look for La Nerthe La Cailloux, or Beaucastel. If you want a great wine from Guigal look for the wines from the Cote Rotie. If you want some good reasonably priced stuff stick to thier Cotes du Rhone.

As for Wine Spectator I think they were more true to thier readers when thier wines of the year were the highest scoring (for the most part) wines they tasted. When they started to look at other factors, thats when they screwed up. How can you justify this as the wine of the year? Would you pass up Petrus, or Grange Hermitage to load up on this stuff? That being said if you bought the stuff for $41 cdn you did okay. I also don't think you believed you were truly getting the best wine released that year.

[Carema]

I think there are other issues at play here too:

Guigal's masterpieces (as mentioned before by mark and others) come from up in the Nothern Rhone- Syrah land. La Famille Guigal seem to understand the nuances of this terroir intrinsically, they understand there difference between cote brune & blonde and make the famous single vineyard stuff that only fancy pants restaurants can buy ( I mean this in the sweetest of all manners) and us here at the cash n carry retail level have to beg on our knees and sometimes worse to get our collectors a bottle a year.

Down in the S rhone I think the bottlings are more about commerce for Guigal.

At the time the Spectator article came out, the price was much lower on the CNP. When I first tasted it i thought, ok very young grenache easy going, crushed raspberry, tasting like a gigondas more to me than a CNP. The Speculum released the top 100 early, the distributor got wind of it and immediately jacked up the price. We had it in (only one case at the time, it sold and I didn't re-order) for about 32 bucks per bottle but I think if I had ordered it the Sept before it would have been about 25.

I like a little more Mourvedre in CNP than the Guigal offers. But I think for the most part a good Vacqueyras will do in any situation where you might think CNP is the only solution.