2005 Domaine du Jaugaret

Community Tasting Notes (3) Avg Score: 86 points

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View John Dunlap's profile
  • Report Issue

  11/1/2017 - John Dunlap Likes this wine: 92 Points

  Let me say this right up front: This is a wine in need of more bottle age or a ton of time in the decanter....
  
  Wine stored upon release in a very cool cellar. Ullage was excellent. Cork did not "go gently into the night," as it did not budge and ultimately broke apart. Managed to extract without cork floating inside the bottle.
  
  Decided to decant this wine. A bit of sediment was noted inside the bottle post decant. Started to drink immediately, but it really its too young at 12 years. Color is quite dark and youthful looking, and clearly indicative of a wine with many years of life ahead of itself. This wine was quite closed with elements of iron being the dominate first impression. At about ten minutes, it started to taste a bit bitter followed by something animal or barnyard-like. To its credit, it did open up over the next several hours and was much more impressive toward the end of the night. At 3.5 hours, the nose was much more inviting with lovely dark fruit, strawberry, and a bit of teriyaki meatiness. Flavors have evolved too, but are still shrouded in tannins. That said, the wine is now more enjoyable to drink and good with food. Seems to have an old-school profile. Alcohol: 13 percent.

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

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View slapsht007's profile
  • Report Issue

  8/22/2014 - slapsht007 wrote:

  Don't know quite how to rate this as I found the wine had virtually no discernible flavor whatsoever. Not bad. Not good. Nothing. But not water either. Don't know if had broken down or shut down or what. Hope others who have it fair better.

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

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View mathwonk's profile
  • Report Issue

  10/13/2010 - mathwonk wrote:

  Well, I knew this was early to try this wine even though there is virtually no information online available about it except eric asimov's plea to try this eccentric and wonderful small production from a man who does wine "to please himself , not consumers". Well I hope he really likes his own wine. At over $75 bottle this will not likely survive a long time in the marketplace. It is different, but not rich, not super interesting, not thought provoking. A little on the light side, a bit strange tasting, minty? in an odd chewing gum way. Not one i will ever buy again. I think the economics of wine do not favor a guy this eccentric who also must sell and market his wine. In a world with Andrew Will, Lagrange, Randy Dunn, Clos du marquis, these wines just cannot command these prices. A big disappointment but not a big surprise. There is a reason no one has ever heard of this label. My wife handed it back after one sip. This may become our first $85 cooking wine. As I should have known, you can't believe articles in the newspaper, only those of us who are not making money off wine, but rather losing it, can be believed, but even we cannot be trusted.
  
  Ok after mixing it with some jordan cab 2005 and some fiefs de lagrange 2006 and some ice cubes, it is beginning to pair acceptably with some haagen daz vanilla 2010.
  
  second night: complete swill. probably will not even cook with it. we are drinking andrew will ciel du cheval 2006, fiefs de lagrange 2006, and corison cab 2004, all MUCH better, and cheaper. but do as you will. bless diversity.
  
  third night: beginning to be drinkable but not quite enjoyable. To be semi- fair, maybe this would be good in several more years, like some other reticent 2005's. But I will not buy more. I mean, when 1994 leoville las cases, and 1998 latour (close out last year) cost only $150, and Randy Dunn Howell 2004 mountain costs about $100, why pay $85 for this?
  
  7th night: still possible to take a few sips, but still sharp and unenjoyable. We are drinking instead kronos corison cab 2004. Now there is a wine that is not ready to drink
  but still good. I can imagine someone might like the jaugaret after a few more years, but I cannot be confident of that. I pretty much give up on it. This is probably the first st julien I have ever disliked.
  
  10th night: well, its better. At this rate in another week or two it could be pretty good. It tastes so far like a decent $30 wine, but more refined. I can see now that this might be good under the right circumstances. I suggest visiting the site as eric did, I am sure Msr Jaugaret can blow you away with a good bottle of his own choosing. Still this will not get my dollar in the store. But I am now curious maybe to try one that has 15 or more years bottle age. But even wine searcher has none older than 2004.
  
  11th night: I don't know the traditional language of smells, but tonight this smells kind of like a grilled chicken leg. Maybe now I can serve this to unsuspecting guests, and "ask their opinion"..... well nobody really liked it enough to drink much.
  
  13th night; At last! I am an honest man so I admit, this stuff is finally tasting pretty good tonight. It is very smooth and refined, no harshness of any kind. The taste is subtle and mild but enjoyable. Probably we will at last finish it tonight. Still seems pricey, but we are enjoying it, what is left at least. What an odd experience. How in the world would you assign a numerical score to such a wine? Maybe if it had a sticker that read "do not drink for 2 weeks after opening , if before 2015."
  
  Finally, the last half glass was delicious elegant and sweet. This reminds me at last of a good lagrange. It paired perfectly with my wife's shrimp and fresh goat cheese linguine. Obviously this man knows how to make wine. I would try it again sometime, but preferably not at this price.

  2 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment

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.