Slightly reductive nose, but starting to open up. Glasses a bit narrow to do this justice. Still quite tightly wound on the palate. Quite yeasty. Silky smooth. Very fine stream of bubbles and mousse. Lots of precision. ****
Slightly oxidised nose initially, pulling itself together a bit with air to show a slightly atypical beef tea character. Reasonably rich attack, a bit hollow and lacking through the mid-palate, and pulls up short. Showing well or it's age, but not a pristine bottle. (*)**1/2
This is several steps up. Lovely mature Rioja nose, orange peel, fireside Christmas spice and old leather. Mid weight, silky texture, good bright acidity, mellow red fruit and a positive finish. Really lovely. *****
Glorious nose. Palmer richness with cedar and a touch of cigar. Sweet fruit. Plush, fresh, long, glorious. Beautiful poise and line. Rich, complex and comforting. *****
Family resemblance. A little less rich. Good through the attack to front of mid-palate, and then lighter and less complex than the 89. Plenty of interest though. Fills out a bit with air. ****
Ripe, quite rich-fruited nose in an elegant and restrained manner. A hint of new world, but fragrant, smooth and long. Refined and elegant but just showing a little bit of leg. Enticing. ****1/2
Blind. Another Ridge. A little dustier on the nose with some blackcurrant leaf. Colour makes this seem a little younger but the palate suggests a little older. Softer. Early 90s Santa Cruz Cab? No, 97 Santa Cruz Merlot. ****
Mid ruby to full garnet. Quite bright. Sweet red fruit, a little spiritual in these glasses. Quite light, sweet-fruited, a little spice. A touch of liquorice too. Moderate length. As ever, port isn't really my thing. ***1/2
2002 Dom Pérignon Champagne 93 Points
France, Champagne
Slightly reductive nose, but starting to open up. Glasses a bit narrow to do this justice. Still quite tightly wound on the palate. Quite yeasty. Silky smooth. Very fine stream of bubbles and mousse. Lots of precision. ****
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No