Who Likes This Wine(2)

  1. recorder


    11 Tasting Notes

  2. mattwoolley


    452 Tasting Notes

Food Pairing Tags

Add My Food Pairing Tags

Community Tasting Notes (5) Avg Score: 89.8 points

  • Seemed shot upon opening but rapidly improved. Brown red in colour with a nose of old red fruits, spicy green tinges and daggy old wood. Core of fruit is surprisingly good with decent depth and some tingly astringency. Almost fruit if you look hard. Drinking well but drink now. And would have been better 7 yrs ago.

    Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

  • Popped and poured on advice at the recorking clinic. We must have been lucky with this bottle. Really very impressive. Leather, roses, aniseed, beef stock sitting over plummy undertones. Still with so much structure yet refined and subtle; tannins actually get a little more assertive with air. Builds past the finish with depth with red fruits and cloves, charry and smoky. Surprisingly didn't tire over three hours. Wonderful experience that makes you understand the greatness of icons even in a lesser vintage. Fabulous gift from my partner for my birthday.

    Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

  • Corked - One of the worst cases of TCA that I have ever experienced.

    Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

  • Deep ruby core with a heavily bricking rim. Fresh jammy nose, with hints of cigar box and layers of molasses, tobacco and a touch of christmas cake. Quite a luscious and velvety palate wth soft, fully integrated tannins. Slightly drying finish. Still some body left here and not completely shot. Certainly fine to drink now and good for a year or so. Much better than expected.

    Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

  • NobleRottersSydney - Lots of birthdays this year (Lucio's, Paddington): Both wines [72 &75] were decanted for an hour or so prior to drinking. The 1972 was astonishingly dark in colour – solid red with barely and hint of brick around the rim. An initially outstanding nose shows formic acid, tar bitumen and dark pepper-spice fruit. The palate didn’t quite live up to the promise, being surprisingly astringent, with just a hint of volatility. Quite hefty in weight – not at all what you would expect from 1972, although I have read about some real inconsistencies among bottles from this vintage. Although I found this to be initially more impressive then the 75, as the two wines sat in their glasses the tables gradually turned and the 75 came to the fore. Only a moderate length of finish, though, and with more swirling time I felt the 72 was showing signs of drying out. But really very good, and far above expectation.

    Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

What Do You Think? Add a Tasting Note

Professional reviews have copyrights and you can view them here for your personal use only as private content. To view pro reviews you must either subscribe to a pre-integrated publication or manually enter reviews below. Learn more.

Add a Pro Review Add Your Own Reviews: