A nice surprise. This was a bit puzzling at first, but most of the table eventually guessed it was a new world Chard, most probably Aussie, and mos probably from the mid-1990s. It had a really golden yellow colour, something you would only expect from a Burgundy at least a decade or two older. The nose started out really funky as well. In fact, it smelt a bit Epoisse at first, before the initial layer of funk blew of a little to reveal deep aromas of earth and sous bois, honey and beeswax, some caramel notes and just the lingering remnants of pineapple, kumquat and almonds scents. Complex, deep and very tertiary. It seemed really aged on that nose. Nice though. The palate was far more youthful and was actually still pretty enjoyable. It was creamily textured, almost oily in fact in a way that hinted at the warmer origins of the wine. However, there was tons of acidity as well, with really fresh, lemony notes underscoring an open-knit mouthful of honey, beeswax and slightly pineappley fruit. The tertiary notes picked up on the nose showed up again as the wine moved into an earthy finish with bit of menthol and some kumquat peel notes. The palate was admittedly a bit simpler than the nose, and a bit too bright on the acidity without food to tame it, but it was still a real pleasure. A quirky wine, but very good.

I thought this was pretty decent - one of those rather rustic, but still fun and enjoyable wines from a traditional region. If anything, I enjoyed this quite a bit more than many an Argentinian Malbec I have had in recent years. The nose was not dissimilar from its new world cousins, with rich aromas of ripe black fruits - plums and blackberries - a touch of truffley earth and some green menthol accents. The palate was where the difference came in. This was marked by rather firm tannins that girded its simple, but hearty flavours of black fruit, truffles and earth all the way into a decent finish where some mint and menthol notes peeked out. This was a wine of some character. It should improve over the next few years, but I can see it being very enjoyable with a nice bit of game meat and some black Cahors truffles even now.

Excellent. This was a rather unusual vintage Krug - more focused on Chardonnay than usual, less powerful (probably a result of both the vintage and the cepage), and more about elegance and grace than presence or weight. However, if one can put aside expectations of what a vintage Krug "should" taste like, this really was a first class Champagne. It had a lovely nose, still rather young and shy, but already showing very attractive aromas of brioche and cream, a little whiff of kelp and lots of apple flesh aromas, and then just a slight nutty, yeasty scent at the edges. The palate was tight and rather unyielding on first pour, showing nothing much beyond bright, lemony, limey flavours that were very reminscent of a freshly disgorged bottle of the Grande Cuvee NV. In fact, even though the wine caressed the mouth beautifully with its super fine mousse, the acidity so zippy, almost to the point of tartness, that it shot through the mousse in a flash. Only with time and air did the wine really begin to show its quality, with some quietly persistent notes of sweet apple emerging to take the fore, matched by a march of citrussy grapefruit notes at the rear. The acidity had melded a bit better with the rest of the body by this point, making for an ultra-fine, super-clean and beautifully pure expression of Chardonnay fruit. The finish was very impressive too, stretching away in a lithe, elegant show of minerailty - almost linear and laser-like in the way in underpinned the fruit and pulled away at the back-palate. Lovelu stuff. While this was not as powerful as say the 1996, 1995 or 1990, it certainly had lots of depth or substance. What struck me most, however, was how elegant and refined it always seemed in spite of the depth of the wine. This was as feminine a vintage Krug as I have had in ages. Still painfully young (it only started showing well past the first hour), but there is so much to like here. One to try again in 8-10 years I would say.

This was beautiful. Last bottle in the cellar, disgorged in July 2009, and it was probably one of the best bottles of Initiale that I have had so far. The table was split between this and the 1998 Krug on the same flight. My vote went marginally for the Krug, but I can see why at least half of us preferred this. It had a typically expressive Selosse note, with white meat and umami accents floating around a core of lovely ripe red apple notes and some macadamia nut aromas. Super-expressive and really attractive. The palate, as would be expected, was deep, powerful and compelling, with red apples galore on the attack kissed by some macadamia and walnuts. Really yummy fruit here, with a fleshy, ripe, muscular suppleness that was ever so different from the lithe, elegant 1998 Krug. It is not to say that this was brutish or clumsy in any way though - as always, it was beautifully balanced, in fact rather better balanced than a few other bottles of Initiale I have had, with the tad bit of time in the bottle lending the wine a nice sense of integration between its fresh acidity, creamy mousse and reservoirs of powerful white fruited notes. The finish was lovely too, with a long line of mineral and a touch of earth fringed with a little suggestion of vanilla bean. With time, and especially when paired with a juicy piece of scallop sashimi, some playful notes of cinamon and cloves, some nutmeg maybe, starting floating out. Really enjoyable - this was a hedonistic champagne, especially when compared to the far more serious Krug. At a nice place now, although I felt the bottle would have benefitted even more from another year or two in the cellar. A lesson that Selosse wines really do need a few years after disgorgement before serving.

I thought this was wonderful - as Burgundy-like a Barolo as I have ever had. It had a clear, soaring nose, with beautiful aromas of dark cherries and sweet berries, roses and earth, tar and smoke, all ringed with a lovely hint of fresh herbs and a touch of wood spice. Absolutely beautiful. The palate was charm personified. Fine tannins have started to soften out, revealing lovely layers of sweet, fleshy, juicy, and absolutely pure cherry flavours that filled the mouth with joyful, perfumy notes laced with more floral accents. The finish stretched on beautifully after that, still showing the wine's youth with its touch of fine tannins framing gentle notes of wood spice and a twist bittersweet herbs. With time, some smoky bacon notes floated out at the back-palate. Young though this was, it already had a lovely sense of integration and balance, along with an understated elegance shown most in its almost effortless sense of focus and purity. Really wonderful stuff, and given the fact that it is from an early vintage, actually starting to drink pretty well with some time in the glass. It says something that it was the fastest bottle to be downed on a night with many nice wines. This does deserve time though, and I think it will be a thrilling wine in 3-4 years' time. Special mention goes to the fact that this was a great pairing with the beef dish.

Beautiful. This was another wine that split the table - half preferring the more understated, serious 2000 G. Mascarello Barolo on the same flight, while the other half liking this rather more expressive wine. I plumped for the Barolo at first, thinking that it was far better. However, on drinking the leftover glass or two of the Barbaresco on night two, I found it hard to choose between the two. This had really grown over the 24 hours to show as a beautiful wine. Even on first pour, it had a lovely nose with drifts of sweet spice and dried flowers, jasmine maybe and some violets, and then sweet notes of blueberries and dark cherries. A lovely, feminine bouquet. The palate was surprisingly soft and mellow for such a young Barbaresco, almost velvety as it unfurled in lovely flavours of sweet dark cherries and blueberries and violet flowers, all coating the mouth in a plush, luxurious cloak with just enough tannins and acidity to keep the wine focused, precise and perfectly balanced. The finish was long and superbly integrated, showing in a lovely mouthful of red cherries and flowers. This was surprisingly drinkable, a beautifully elegant wine, nicely resolved, with lovely purity to its dark cherry fruit framed by interesting secondary notes that are just starting to emerge in the background. Good now, it should be even better in a couple of years. Absolutely lovely.

Very good, but amazingly tight and unyielding. We thought it was a left bank at first, especially given its very Pauillac-like nose, with deep aromas of dark cassis fruit peppered with toasty tobacco notes, hints of broiled meat and a healthy dose of sous bois. The only that did not quite fit in was a rather lifted Manuka-honey like sweetness to the bouquet. The palate was amazingly young for a wine well past its 20th year, with fresh, juicy acidity and fine-boned but still firm tannins holding court. Beneath that, there were super clean black fruited notes ranging from black cherries to dark berries and then cassis notes seasoned with a touch of spice - typical Angelus elegance wed to a well-built 1986 structure. Still though, one got a sense that there was so much more that the wine was not showing at the moment. It was only towards the finish where some complexity set in. Here, the wine was fresh and vibrant, almost cool, as it slid into the back-palate, with a great length of cassis and black cherries touched by bits of mint chocolate and menthol and a little dose of Merlot spice. After some time, the rather obtuse youthfulness pulled aside just a bit more, showing some interesting notes of luo han guo, kumquat and herbal tea on the midpalate. Still super-fresh, super-young - this needs a lot more time. There is good underlying material though, and it should continue growing and developing in the bottle over the next decade.

This was special. Probably my favourite red in the midst of a very strong line-up. In a strange twist of coincidence, we ended up with two blind bottles of Château Angélus on the same flight. However, while this bore striking similarities to its older 1986 brother, it was clearly a league apart in terms of sheer quality. It had a wonderful nose. More clearly right-bank than the older wine here, it was loaded with earth and truffles, and lush aromas of plums, black cherries and cassis, all ringed by a lovely halo of tobacco smoke. Gorgeous stuff. The palate was crazy beautiful as well. This is why I love a good bottle of Angélus - it was plushly rounded, beautifully balanced and wonderfully integrated, with a stunning purity to its black fruited depth showing through flavours of cassis and black plums as the wine. These were then loaded on the midpalate by a lovely waft of sweet spice notes. Masculine in strength and depth, yet ever so feminine in its grace and supple, velvety elegance, the finish matched the rest of the wine stride for stride, filling the back-palate with notes of earth and truffle, cloves and nutmeg, and just that whiff of tobacco to fill in at the edges. Really wonderful stuff. Still clearly on the young side, this may well be better in four or five years down the road, but it is delicious even now. This is a St. Émilion that I could drink over and over again.

A beautiful wine - opened 3 hours before serving, this was completely in its element amidst choice pieces of Aburi Sushi. It had a beautiful nose, far more expressive than the last couple of bottles - this was literally bursting out of the glass with lovely scents of white flowers and honey, grapefruit and green mangoes, peach and pears and then a more clearly Sauvignon Blanc touch of white asparagus and ripe gooseberry aromas. Beautiful. The palate was quite a knock-out. There was loads of honey on the attack along with a nice underscore of chalky mineral, just before the fruit came in on the midpalate with notes of green mangoes, green apples and pears. Wow. There was a wonderful purity to those expressions that, again, were missing in one or two of the other bottles consumed through the years. Pass that, and into a long, powerful finish, the wine showed pitch perfect balance and some beautiful minerality that lent the soft, fleshy fruit a solid sense of definition and purity. Finally, there was just a kiss of hay at the very end that spoke of the varietal once more. I am quite sad that this was my last bottle - I thought that it was just about creeping into its peak drinking window, with little complexities coming in and the various disparate parts of the wine starting to settle and integrate, so that it seemed less "big", less in-your-face. I loved this. I should also add that it was quite transcendent when paired with the Sushi, with unxpected low-tones of truffles, earth and spice being drawn out from the wine. A triumph for the late D. Dagueneau.

Stunning. I thought this was one of the two best wines of the night and certainly the best white, beating out a couple of great Champagnes and a Dagueneau Silex on the same flight that was absolutely singing. This had integrated and developed so well that we were not sure what it was at first, with many guessing an old Grand Cru Burg, before a few finally spotted it as an old Bordeaux Blanc. It had an enchanting nose, with matured honeyed notes wed to dollops of cream, some earthy, mushroomy scents - Chanterelles I thought - and then red apples, and fragrant Chinese pear aromas, all sprinkled with just a touch of Mandarin orange zest. So much going on here. The palate was really developed and very complex as well, from its super-honeyed attack with a toffee-like undertow, to a melting, creamy midpalate redolent with white peach and red apples, and into a super-long finish with more honeyed pears and lovely floating notes of white flowers - this was perfectly integrated into a complex, compelling whole that beggared description. Rich yet fresh; deep, yet blessed with a great sense of life and energy - this was multifaceted jewel of a wine, yet it was so well integrated that it was hard to pick its constituent bits apart. I was just satisfied to enjoy sip after sip of this. It disappeared from my glass in record time. Glorious stuff, and in quite a perfect place now. Excellent with a range of Aburi Sushi as well.

Excellent. This was rated terribly by Burghound upon release, primarily due to an inordinate amount of oak used. However, 15 years down the road, all but the last remnant of the wood has dissipated, leaving behind a truly lovely wine that spoke quite eloquently of its terroir. It had a wonderful nose, wafting out of the glass with red cherries at the fore, with trailing scents of darjeeling tea and fresh herbs, some earth, a bit of dried flowers, and just the faintest hint of rubber bringing up the rear. A classic Gevrey bouquet. The palate was really quite delicious. Here, firm but fine 1995 tannins framed superbly integrated flavours of dried charries and red berries laced with well-shaped acidity. Past the midpalate, this opened up into lovely flavours of red dates, dried cherries and plums, all unfolding into a long, flowery finish that just refused to quit. We were all very taken by this wine. Blind, we were in no doubt that this was a Burgundy Grand Cru. My own intial guess was a Clos de Beze from a slightly weaker vintage. I am not sure there is much room for improvement and it lacks a bit of complexity to make it a truly great wine, but this was nevertheless an excellent Charmes, besting a 2004 Clos de Tart on the same flight by quite a fair distance.

Very nice. This was a good way to end the evening. After a string of 2004s that were entirely devoid of green meanies, this was a bit more obvious, with some clearly stemmy notes and hints of Chinese herb drifting in and out of an otherwise classic Clos de Tart nose with its dark cherry and cranberry aromas wed to deeper, more savoury notes of meat and earth. I must say though that the greenness was of a level where it added to the wine's sense of character and complexity rather than distracting the drinker. It was there, but certainly in the background rather than at the fore. Another good sign for the vintage perhaps. However, while the nose was a bit controversial, the palate was clearly very good. It had a nice dose of fresh, lively acidity that lent a lovely sense of defintion to deep flavours of black cherries and berries on the attack. These were lined with sweet spices and more meaty, earthy notes on the midpalate. Pretty solid stuff, if a bit primary at the moment. It had nice finish too, with just a twist of herbs finding their way into the meaty nuances at the back-palate. Rather too young I think, but there was certainly no harm in drinking it on the night after it had sat for several hours in an open bottle. I actually was surprised to see how open this was for a young Clos de Tart. Still though, this is a bottle that will definitely benefit from another 3 to 5 years in the cellar.