Wines to Age

[jrufusj]

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

Edited January 11, 2005 by jrufusj (log)

[jrufusj]

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

[wkl]

I agree with your reccomendations and would be interested to know what your experience with old barbera is.I have drunk 10 and 15 year old barberas from Elio Grasso that have been wonderful.

[Brad Ballinger]

Adding one -- the first word that came to mind upon seeing only the title of this thread -- Bandol. I love it with age on it. Of course, it's hard keeping my hands off it.

Your point about an entirely Old World list isn't surprising. But I wouldn't dismiss all New World wines. And, of course, there are Old World wines from all of the regions you list that won't age as well as others.

[jrufusj]

Adding one -- the first word that came to mind upon seeing only the title of this thread -- Bandol.  I love it with age on it.  Of course, it's hard keeping my hands off it.

←

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?)

Your point about an entirely Old World list isn't surprising.  But I wouldn't dismiss all New World wines.

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?

And, of course, there are Old World wines from all of the regions you list that won't age as well as others.

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

[winesonoma]

Adding one -- the first word that came to mind upon seeing only the title of this thread -- Bandol.  I love it with age on it.  Of course, it's hard keeping my hands off it.

←

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?)

Your point about an entirely Old World list isn't surprising.  But I wouldn't dismiss all New World wines.

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?

And, of course, there are Old World wines from all of the regions you list that won't age as well as others.

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

←

I wish I could help but I simply can't afford Napa Cabs. Most of what I drink here in Sonoma is less than $10 a bottle, $20 on weekends and $50 on special occasions. I age what I make but that's more because it's there. Most of what I drink ie Zin's don't age well.

[Really Nice!]

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. 

Jim

←

Penfold's makes some great wines under $20 a bottle that have aging capability well past 10 years.

Bin 28 - shiraz 1999 and 2000 are capable to go through 2015. The 2001 will go through 2025

Bin 138 - shiraz, grenache, mourvèdre 1999 and 2001 are capable to go through 2010.

Bin 389 - cabernet, shiraz 1998 is capable to go through 2030. 1999 through 2020, and 2001 through 2020. Bin 389 can be had for under $18 a bottle!!

I'm currently collecting three bottles of each vintage every year. I can't wait to do a vertical/horizontal tasting 10 or 15 years from now.

[Coop]

I come at this from a different side. I have collected wines since the early 80's. At this point I can see no reason to drink anything older then 10 years. Wines today are being made for early consumtion, thank god. I have seen 99 Brunello's on many wine lists in the last 6 months. Even they can be drank upon release. Save yourself the dissapointment, drink the wines while they are still alive. Age them for a couple of years if they have had a long journey to your cellar, but don't wait too long you could get hit by a bus.

[jrufusj]

I come at this from a different side. I have collected wines since the early 80's. At this point I can see no reason to drink anything older then 10 years. Wines today are being made for early consumtion, thank god. I have seen 99 Brunello's on many wine lists in the last 6 months. Even they can be drank upon release. Save yourself the dissapointment, drink the wines while they are still alive. Age them for a couple of years if they have had a long journey to your cellar, but don't wait too long you could get hit by a bus.

←

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

[Coop]

Jim I agree with your points. I do hope that the 99 Brunello's warrant some bottle age, I have put away about a case and a half of the usual suspects. That being said I will try one or two bottles of each this year after they have had a little lie down in my cellar.

My comments concern what works for me. I have been less then thrilled by the wines from the 80's I have collected. I wish I drank them earlier. I have only had a few wines that were more then 10 years old that really made me take notice.

In some ways it's a science (or art) that takes some time. I have found after investing time, effort and money that I like my wines to be drank within 10 years of the vintage. The only way one can really make their own decision on this subject is try it your self.