BYO bottle over lunch at Riviera. Appearance is clear, pale intensity, ruby going garnet colour. Big sediment at bottom of bottle only. Legs. Nose medium+ intensity, with aromas of red cherries, red plum, touch of tertiary earth soil, sous bois with bits of dirty meat broth. Prominent Asian spice with air. Developed. On the palate, dry, high acidity, medium alcohol (13.5%), soft medium tannins, medium+ body. Medium+ flavour intensity, with flavours of sweet tea leaf, tertiary earth soil, savoury meat broth, hints of brown vegetation, red cherry and red plum in background, lots of spiciness with more air. Very long finish. Very good quality. Drinking in a good place already. No need for further ageing unless you want a tertiary dominant profile.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Tasted over 3 hrs -nearly semi-translucent med red mild bricking -moderately expressive melange of dark berry and earthy stewed tomato -med acidity, med weight belies the considerable yet understated powerful backbone, a dusting of subtle dark cherry berry sits on a core of soil-prominent earthiness and minerality finishing with a bitter note laced with the med- tannins -first time with an RSV, more powerful but less elegant than I would have predicted especially for the producer and vintage, drinking well now without overt mature elements
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Tasted single blind against a 98 Corton Renardes and 00 Vougeot. Still in need of more bottle aging. There is much to admire with its dark cherry and spice framework and brooding palate. All needing another hour or 2 to unfurl.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Start quite tight,but opens up over an hour or so. Quite precise red fruit with good focus and a floral top note, but this still feels quite tight. The spring unwinds slightly over a couple of hours, but it's still quite taut. Promising. ***(*)
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Purplish red still; light tobacco notes; spices, cigar smoke; developing very slowly. After taking on air for several minutes it levels out to show some poise and real balance. Still needs time!
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Cool notes of blue fruit and eucalyptus. On the palate rather austere, reflective of the vintage. Fine dry tannins, dark berries and great acidity. Needs food, preferably something fatty. I don't think this wine would benefit from long cellaring - the fruit will fade.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Elegant and complex with hints of mint. In a prime drinking window, but should certainly last for several more years and continue to evolve gracefully.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Definitely much fresher and expressive than the01 chambertin. This has vibrancy and dark red purple blue fruits with violets and purple roses. Definitely needs more time.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Prime of Life Dinner (Yan, National Gallery, Singapore): First of a pair of rather disappointing Potel bottles. I have had a couple of bottles of this particular wine in the past. One really nice one in 2012 followed a very disappointing example in 2013. Unfortunately, this bottle was more akin to the later than the former. It was not a bad wine by any means, but again fell way short of what one would expect from a good RSV. I must say that it did have a beautiful nose, with whiffs of black cherries and the very darkest berries tossed together with some funky earth and meat, and a twist of licorice. Nice, but not quite RSV – this came across more like a very extracted Pommard or, dare I say, even a Chateauneuf-du-Pape with that bouquet. No one got it right blind. The palate shared some of the character of the nose. Far from the elegance and silk one would expect from the vineyard, we instead got lots of power and richness in the wine’s expression of dark cherries and blackberries. On the attack and midpalate at least, this certainly had impressive depth, even for a Grand Cru, and a nice bit of freshness as well. I just thought it felt rather clunky and lacking in charm, with a certain monolithic stubbornness that sometimes afflicts Potel’s wines. The finish conspired to thin out a little too, with the fruit fading behind a cloak of spice and herb Altogether, a decently good drink but, even in a magnum format, this is a wine that seems to be quickly losing its vitality and charm.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Decent balance and structure, didn't have the complexity nor depth I would expect from a vineyard as such. Consistent and maintained intensity thru the night but not much evolving. Could be source and/or condition (bottle shock from long haul)?
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Glad to see this coming around (and glad to drink someone else's bottle, knowing I have 4 or 5 of these still). Very fresh and floral, coming into its own. RJ's note is quite accurate.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
William & Gina's Wedding (Park Palace, Grand Park Hotel): From a 1.5 litre. After a great experience with another magnum a year back, this was a great disappointment. Served blind, I thought this was a decently good Burg, but would never have placed this as a Grand Cru, let alone one of the quality of Romanée St. Vivant. It seemed really advanced. The nose certainly smelt like something a lot more mature, with a wildness to its herb and meat and sous bois notes along with prettier notes of dark cherries, wild berries and some violet flowers. It was far from unpleasant, but this was nowhere near the aromatic fireworks that I recalled from the nose of the last bottle. It was the palate where this was a real let down though. There was nothing quite wrong with the wine - it was very clean, almost a bit lean, with fresh acidity and rather ripe tones of dark cherries and blackberries held in fine but firm tannins that seemed to be just on the verge of softening. Not a bad drink at all, but it was just that everything seemed a bit ho-hum, with not much complexity or even much interest to go around. While the finish had good length, with a little bit of earth and mineral and spice, it also seemed a bit light-weight, a little soft for an RSV. All in all, a decently good wine, but a bit boring. I am not sure whether it was shut down or whether this was an odd bottle. Whatever the case, the last bottle we was so much better that this seemed to be a different wine altogether.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Meet the man - Nicolas Potel (Imperial Treasure Super Peking Duck @ Paragon): Sweet, almost caramelize but yet there is this freshness to prevent it from being over the top. Exotic spices, seductive floral tone, dried rose petal, savory herbs and sweet dark fruits, autumn leaves all bind into a lovely musical melody. Medium bodied, still a bit backward with fine, ripe tannin supported the lush dark fruits, cloves, cinnamon, autumn leaves as well as smoke meat, capture in an absolutely perfume, velvety mouth feel. I especially like the lovely acidity in it. Stunning length that's goes on and on. Again, this may not possesses top notch finesse or purity, it is still utterly delicious.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
2010 Maison Roche de Bellene / Nicolas Potel Dinner (Imperial Treasure Super Peking Duck, Paragon): An entrancing wine. The RSV vineyard always seems throw out wines with stunning aromatics - Chambolle in Vosne if you will - and this wine was a brilliant example with its deep, complex bouquet of wood spice and angelica root with pats of wet earth and funky undergrowth, all lovely savoury aromas winding their way along a deeper core of dark cherry and berry aromas, with sweet molasses glistening in the background. Incredible stuff. The palate was perhaps not quite as stunning as the nose, but it was nevertheless really nice. There was a melting balance and velvety tannins, making it rather softer than the edgy 2001 Clos de Beze on the same flight, and savoury flavours of sour plum and meat and earth, then black cherries and mulberries on the midpalate, all lined with a wonderfully integrated rush of of Vosne spice and herb. The finish seemed a bit more reserved at first, showing a touch of citrussy orange peel alongside more sour plum and dark fruited notes, but there was clearly lovely Grand Cru depth throughout. In fact, the wine, while clearly feminine, still packed quite a bit of oomph. It kept growing with time in the glass too, taking on more warm spices and darkly floral accents at the back-end. I really liked this. It was only a touch of leanness at the edges that seems to afflict some 2001s as they pass their first decade that prevented it from being a great wine in my book. But that is nitpicking - this was an entrancing RSV. From a magnum, this came across as a beautiful wine that was just about ready to drink.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Two bottles tasted, with consistent notes. Very dark color; tight and brooding on the palate; showing lots of power and tannin but not much spice or finesse. The fruit is dark and ripe (but not roasted), and the wine picks up a brown sugar/sassafras note on the long, staining, slightly green/austere finish. This comes across like a good Pommard (and one in need of a considerable amount of additional cellar time) rather than an RSV. I'm not sure more cellar time will result in more typicity in the bottle. @MNWineGuy
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
I don't want to be too churlish about this wine, as it clearly has plenty of substance and extract, but was it enjoyable to drink? Frankly, no: in fact, it was hard work. The colour has a distinct brown tinge, and the fruit on the nose has a vegetal aspect. The palate is fairly dense, but there is a slight bitterness coming from rather dry and not fully resolved tannins. This would have been better when the fruit was still youthful; perhaps it will be better again in a few years if it softens. For now, it is a disappointment.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Characteristic five-spice aromatics along with something deeper and meatier. But just when you're preparing yourself for a real RSV joyride, it kinda lets you down, since the tannin is so rough it comes across very unfriendly and totally contrary to the usual silken elegance of RSV. This will need lots more time if it's ever going to get there.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Healthy garnet color with substantial clear rim; reticent nose, not at all like the blow your hair back, knock-out nose of the Mazis Chamb tasted ~ year ago; red berry fruit is pushed to the back by toasty spice scents. Giving it an hour has not opened things up at all; I should probably not rate this at all as it is clearly not open for business. Has the texture of great burgundy though a bit thin with muted flavors; tart fruit character comes out in long finish. Seemingly alot of class and breed all trapped in an impenetrable shell. If I shelled out big bucks for this in a restaurant, I'd be pissed. But no one's fault really, it's just plain not ready. I tried this because it was portayed somewhere as the most accesible of his GCs.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
This was opened the night before and a glass was saved for me. A bit hard to evaluate completly but no question the quality is there. A big wine with vibrant fruit and balance. There is much life left in this wine and I anticipate maturity in another half decade.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
12/6/2022 - Derek Darth Taster Likes this wine: 95 Points
BYO bottle over lunch at Riviera.
Appearance is clear, pale intensity, ruby going garnet colour. Big sediment at bottom of bottle only. Legs.
Nose medium+ intensity, with aromas of red cherries, red plum, touch of tertiary earth soil, sous bois with bits of dirty meat broth. Prominent Asian spice with air. Developed.
On the palate, dry, high acidity, medium alcohol (13.5%), soft medium tannins, medium+ body. Medium+ flavour intensity, with flavours of sweet tea leaf, tertiary earth soil, savoury meat broth, hints of brown vegetation, red cherry and red plum in background, lots of spiciness with more air. Very long finish.
Very good quality. Drinking in a good place already. No need for further ageing unless you want a tertiary dominant profile.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
4/7/2020 - Cote d'Or wrote:
Tasted over 3 hrs
-nearly semi-translucent med red mild bricking
-moderately expressive melange of dark berry and earthy stewed tomato
-med acidity, med weight belies the considerable yet understated powerful backbone, a dusting of subtle dark cherry berry sits on a core of soil-prominent earthiness and minerality finishing with a bitter note laced with the med- tannins
-first time with an RSV, more powerful but less elegant than I would have predicted especially for the producer and vintage, drinking well now without overt mature elements
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
5/21/2019 - acheng wrote:
Tasted single blind against a 98 Corton Renardes and 00 Vougeot. Still in need of more bottle aging. There is much to admire with its dark cherry and spice framework and brooding palate. All needing another hour or 2 to unfurl.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/22/2017 - vinhonotte Likes this wine: 93 Points
Cellaraid - Chardonnay Corfefe Luncheon and red wine based Dinner (Tonny's Restaurant): this one was good; clear, deep ruby; pronounced nose of cherries, blackberries, and some tertiary characteristics of tar, ceadr and meats; also had similar congruent flavours on the palate, finished long; can expect more good years to come from this
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/9/2017 - SimonG wrote: 92 Points
Start quite tight,but opens up over an hour or so. Quite precise red fruit with good focus and a floral top note, but this still feels quite tight. The spring unwinds slightly over a couple of hours, but it's still quite taut. Promising. ***(*)
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/21/2017 - jmoore431 wrote: 92 Points
Purplish red still; light tobacco notes; spices, cigar smoke; developing very slowly. After taking on air for several minutes it levels out to show some poise and real balance. Still needs time!
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/1/2016 - AMRS wrote: 90 Points
Excellent nose of earth and red fruit. Palate a bit lean, red fruit, harsh. Food wine high acidity. Better in 5 years from now i guess. 89-90.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/1/2016 - Rani Likes this wine: 91 Points
Cool notes of blue fruit and eucalyptus. On the palate rather austere, reflective of the vintage. Fine dry tannins, dark berries and great acidity. Needs food, preferably something fatty. I don't think this wine would benefit from long cellaring - the fruit will fade.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/29/2016 - jerhardt wrote:
Elegant and complex with hints of mint. In a prime drinking window, but should certainly last for several more years and continue to evolve gracefully.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/16/2015 - Alex H wrote: 90 Points
Definitely much fresher and expressive than the01 chambertin. This has vibrancy and dark red purple blue fruits with violets and purple roses. Definitely needs more time.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/15/2015 - Paul S wrote: 91 Points
Prime of Life Dinner (Yan, National Gallery, Singapore): First of a pair of rather disappointing Potel bottles. I have had a couple of bottles of this particular wine in the past. One really nice one in 2012 followed a very disappointing example in 2013. Unfortunately, this bottle was more akin to the later than the former. It was not a bad wine by any means, but again fell way short of what one would expect from a good RSV. I must say that it did have a beautiful nose, with whiffs of black cherries and the very darkest berries tossed together with some funky earth and meat, and a twist of licorice. Nice, but not quite RSV – this came across more like a very extracted Pommard or, dare I say, even a Chateauneuf-du-Pape with that bouquet. No one got it right blind. The palate shared some of the character of the nose. Far from the elegance and silk one would expect from the vineyard, we instead got lots of power and richness in the wine’s expression of dark cherries and blackberries. On the attack and midpalate at least, this certainly had impressive depth, even for a Grand Cru, and a nice bit of freshness as well. I just thought it felt rather clunky and lacking in charm, with a certain monolithic stubbornness that sometimes afflicts Potel’s wines. The finish conspired to thin out a little too, with the fruit fading behind a cloak of spice and herb Altogether, a decently good drink but, even in a magnum format, this is a wine that seems to be quickly losing its vitality and charm.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
12/10/2015 - bacchuszuo wrote: 92 Points
Decent balance and structure, didn't have the complexity nor depth I would expect from a vineyard as such. Consistent and maintained intensity thru the night but not much evolving. Could be source and/or condition (bottle shock from long haul)?
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/12/2015 - jmoore431 wrote: 92 Points
Glad to see this coming around (and glad to drink someone else's bottle, knowing I have 4 or 5 of these still). Very fresh and floral, coming into its own. RJ's note is quite accurate.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/14/2015 - Koods wrote:
So much variation in this bottling
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/20/2013 - Paul S wrote: 91 Points
William & Gina's Wedding (Park Palace, Grand Park Hotel): From a 1.5 litre. After a great experience with another magnum a year back, this was a great disappointment. Served blind, I thought this was a decently good Burg, but would never have placed this as a Grand Cru, let alone one of the quality of Romanée St. Vivant. It seemed really advanced. The nose certainly smelt like something a lot more mature, with a wildness to its herb and meat and sous bois notes along with prettier notes of dark cherries, wild berries and some violet flowers. It was far from unpleasant, but this was nowhere near the aromatic fireworks that I recalled from the nose of the last bottle. It was the palate where this was a real let down though. There was nothing quite wrong with the wine - it was very clean, almost a bit lean, with fresh acidity and rather ripe tones of dark cherries and blackberries held in fine but firm tannins that seemed to be just on the verge of softening. Not a bad drink at all, but it was just that everything seemed a bit ho-hum, with not much complexity or even much interest to go around. While the finish had good length, with a little bit of earth and mineral and spice, it also seemed a bit light-weight, a little soft for an RSV. All in all, a decently good wine, but a bit boring. I am not sure whether it was shut down or whether this was an odd bottle. Whatever the case, the last bottle we was so much better that this seemed to be a different wine altogether.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/19/2013 - wineberg Likes this wine: 93 Points
Charleston Bad-Ass Burgundy Thursday (S1s House): Black cherry and tea, woody mushrooms, and hints of florals. Long life left ahead still.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
11/22/2012 - cellarid wrote: 93 Points
Great now. But can cellar easy. Finally coming together. Stunning nose. Don't drink again for a few years.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/22/2012 - Sleepy Dave wrote: 93 Points
Meet the man - Nicolas Potel (Imperial Treasure Super Peking Duck @ Paragon): Sweet, almost caramelize but yet there is this freshness to prevent it from being over the top. Exotic spices, seductive floral tone, dried rose petal, savory herbs and sweet dark fruits, autumn leaves all bind into a lovely musical melody. Medium bodied, still a bit backward with fine, ripe tannin supported the lush dark fruits, cloves, cinnamon, autumn leaves as well as smoke meat, capture in an absolutely perfume, velvety mouth feel. I especially like the lovely acidity in it. Stunning length that's goes on and on. Again, this may not possesses top notch finesse or purity, it is still utterly delicious.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/22/2012 - Paul S wrote: 94 Points
2010 Maison Roche de Bellene / Nicolas Potel Dinner (Imperial Treasure Super Peking Duck, Paragon): An entrancing wine. The RSV vineyard always seems throw out wines with stunning aromatics - Chambolle in Vosne if you will - and this wine was a brilliant example with its deep, complex bouquet of wood spice and angelica root with pats of wet earth and funky undergrowth, all lovely savoury aromas winding their way along a deeper core of dark cherry and berry aromas, with sweet molasses glistening in the background. Incredible stuff. The palate was perhaps not quite as stunning as the nose, but it was nevertheless really nice. There was a melting balance and velvety tannins, making it rather softer than the edgy 2001 Clos de Beze on the same flight, and savoury flavours of sour plum and meat and earth, then black cherries and mulberries on the midpalate, all lined with a wonderfully integrated rush of of Vosne spice and herb. The finish seemed a bit more reserved at first, showing a touch of citrussy orange peel alongside more sour plum and dark fruited notes, but there was clearly lovely Grand Cru depth throughout. In fact, the wine, while clearly feminine, still packed quite a bit of oomph. It kept growing with time in the glass too, taking on more warm spices and darkly floral accents at the back-end. I really liked this. It was only a touch of leanness at the edges that seems to afflict some 2001s as they pass their first decade that prevented it from being a great wine in my book. But that is nitpicking - this was an entrancing RSV. From a magnum, this came across as a beautiful wine that was just about ready to drink.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/13/2012 - Siggy wrote: 89 Points
Two bottles tasted, with consistent notes. Very dark color; tight and brooding on the palate; showing lots of power and tannin but not much spice or finesse. The fruit is dark and ripe (but not roasted), and the wine picks up a brown sugar/sassafras note on the long, staining, slightly green/austere finish. This comes across like a good Pommard (and one in need of a considerable amount of additional cellar time) rather than an RSV. I'm not sure more cellar time will result in more typicity in the bottle. @MNWineGuy
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/7/2011 - La Grappe wrote: 86 Points
I don't want to be too churlish about this wine, as it clearly has plenty of substance and extract, but was it enjoyable to drink? Frankly, no: in fact, it was hard work. The colour has a distinct brown tinge, and the fruit on the nose has a vegetal aspect. The palate is fairly dense, but there is a slight bitterness coming from rather dry and not fully resolved tannins. This would have been better when the fruit was still youthful; perhaps it will be better again in a few years if it softens. For now, it is a disappointment.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/25/2011 - cellarid wrote: 94 Points
Fabulous nose and body. Needs a bit of air to get going.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/13/2009 - Keith Levenberg wrote: 89 Points
Characteristic five-spice aromatics along with something deeper and meatier. But just when you're preparing yourself for a real RSV joyride, it kinda lets you down, since the tannin is so rough it comes across very unfriendly and totally contrary to the usual silken elegance of RSV. This will need lots more time if it's ever going to get there.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/23/2008 - jmoore431 wrote: 90 Points
Healthy garnet color with substantial clear rim; reticent nose, not at all like the blow your hair back, knock-out nose of the Mazis Chamb tasted ~ year ago; red berry fruit is pushed to the back by toasty spice scents. Giving it an hour has not opened things up at all; I should probably not rate this at all as it is clearly not open for business. Has the texture of great burgundy though a bit thin with muted flavors; tart fruit character comes out in long finish. Seemingly alot of class and breed all trapped in an impenetrable shell. If I shelled out big bucks for this in a restaurant, I'd be pissed. But no one's fault really, it's just plain not ready. I tried this because it was portayed somewhere as the most accesible of his GCs.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/31/2008 - JOsgood wrote: 92 Points
This was opened the night before and a glass was saved for me. A bit hard to evaluate completly but no question the quality is there. A big wine with vibrant fruit and balance. There is much life left in this wine and I anticipate maturity in another half decade.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment