hankj
Posts: 4672
Joined: 6/26/2008 From: Seattle, WA Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GalvezGuy quote:
ORIGINAL: ChrisinSunnyside quote:
Not sure why so much general confidence that Washington State red wines are gonna be palatable 20 years after vintage. I've had a few that were fine at that age, many more that were well out of their prime and overwhelmed with rancia funk (or gone over the hill in a variety of other ways), including Leonetti, both reserve and regular. I've had probably 10-15 Washington Cabs/blends in the 15-30 year range, one that was 50 years old, and never had a bad experience. Luck of the draw maybe, but the acid and tannic structure is there and if stored properly, they last. I have quite a few I have cellared myself going past 10 years, and I really don't worry about them aging out. I'd wonder about cork failure as being a primary cause of problems described as rancia funk. Syrah from WA is a completely different animal in my experience and I've have some of those fall apart after 5 years, many not last to 10 years. I need to start pounding that side of my cellar. Chris, I am with you. I recently drank a couple of older Cayuse wines (2004 Widowmaker and 2002 Flying Pig) that I thought although ready could still be spectacular for another 10-15 years. The Columbia Crest Walter Clore Reserve is another great ager that drinks well young but still keeps going. I would not be at all surprised to see WA Bordeaux varieties make it well past 21 at a great range or price points. I think it is the lively acidity that you mentioned that allows them to age effortlessly. I also think back to a 24 year Quilceda Creek cab that I had last year. It was still spectacular. Hard to go wrong with the Leonetti suggestions here. I just drank a 2002 Cayuse Camaspelo BDX Blend about a month ago. My impression was that it was 3 years past peak and falling off quickly. But the 2012 a month before that was incredible. I do know that a lot of people are deep in WA State BDX wines, and really think they age wonderfully. To each their own! Personally I'm generally unhappy with wines that come across with a lot of elements of organic decomposition. I don't really like big soft Brunellos with a lot of age for instance. Will say too that this idea that WA State wines are both high alcohol and high acid is only half true. I hear people all the time call WA State reds high acid when what they really are noticing is sharp astringency. No matter what else is going on with a wine, no matter how dense it is, if it's acidic it will make you salivate, the more saliva the more acidic. All of these 14.4% alcohol on the label, 15.3% in reality WA State reds are just too ripe to have a lot of acid, no matter what the "cold nights good acid" marketing myth says. We tasted through a 10 year vertical of Leonetti Reserve several years back (didn't really like 8 out of 10, though all were high 90's Parker darlings), and I would call all of those wines low to mid acid, except the 2007 which was mid+. But high tannin/high astringent. We all know that w/o acid wine won't age cleanly, maybe not a turn off for wine geeks, but most ordinary people find lower acid old red wines gross, no matter how much tannic structure they have to prop them up. Anyway though, I will say I've had some pretty good 20 and 30 year old WA red wines, almost never the ones you'd suspect, rather more modest bottles stored perfectly. And again we all have different palates, and I'm quite fussy about even mildly off aromas in aging wine. But the OP probably will be just fine buying WA red for 20 year cellaring. In good conscience I think I can say that red Bordeaux is far more of a sure thing, but Leonetti isn't bad, particularly the non-reserve Cabernet. I suppose it wouldn't be a mistake.
_____________________________
There are those who'd call us a bunch of sots but we don't see ourselves like that. We see ourselves as hobbyists. - Kevin Barry
|