Important Update From the Founder Read message >

Seattle Wine Group - Sep 2013 Tasting - Theme: Aged WA Bordeaux Blends

Amaroso Room - Wine Storage Bellevue

Tasted September 11, 2013 by f22nickell with 783 views

Introduction

Following the successful Seattle CT Offline II in August, the 8 of us met again in the Amaroso Room at Wine Storage Bellevue to continue our monthly tasting events. Jason was the host this month and chose "Aged (10+ years) Washington Bordeaux blends" as his theme. To add some contrast, he also asked for a couple of aged California BDX blend as well. What we ended up with were 5 WA BDX blends, 2 CA BDX blends, and one actual BDX.

For food, Jason really raised the bar! What started with some bread and simple charcuterie and cheese plates has now evolved into culinary events!

Jason started with Poisson Cru as an appetizer. I am not a raw fish fan so I didn't partake. However, the rest of the group were moaning, groaning, and heaping much praise on Jason.

Following the Poisson Cru, Jason served Carpaccio with capers, leafy greens, and imported olive oil. Amazing presentation and fabulous fare.

For the main course, Jason served a perfectly cooked Chateaubriand, with garlic oven potatoes and a side salad. The beef just melted in the mouth. Outstanding!

Flight 1 - Wine with dinner (2 notes)

I brought the Chianti
Brandon brought the Viognier
Jason brought a 2009 Syncline Scintillation Blanc de Blanc, but I didn't take any notes.

Red
1995 Fattoria di Fèlsina Berardenga Chianti Classico Riserva Italy, Tuscany, Chianti, Chianti Classico DOCG
92 points
Setting: This wine was popped and poured.

Sight: This wine is bright, clear, with some evidence of gas, but no particles. Color is ruby at the core and fades to garnet 1/4”-1/2” from the meniscus. Light concentration of color. Legs are slender and move fairly quick down the glass.

Nose: This wine does not smell flawed. Aromas are rose petals, licorice, dried flowers/herbs, fig, and slight sour cherries in the background I do pick up some mineral hints. Very light smell of oak, mostly in a hint of wood spice. I do not pick up any heat on the nose. This wine smells of old world; Fruit is in the background, secondary aromas drive this wine suggesting it is fairly old.

Palate: This wine is light bodied. This wine has strong flavors of sweet plum, tobacco, cedar, dark cherry, and clay. Very little oak coming through.

Structure: This wine is dry. Acid is medium-plus. Alcohol is medium-minus. Tannins are medium and well integrated. Finish is medium to long. Complexity is medium.

Conclusion: This wine is from the old world; wine appears unfiltered, fruit is in the background, lots of secondary flavors, and tastes of clay. From the alcohol indicators, this appears to be from a slightly cool vintage. Quality producer.

Final Conclusion: This is an excellent bottle of wine. This is my 3rd bottle and I am very impressed with how well it is holding up given it’s a 20 year old Chianti. This wine is still very fresh and alive, yet still has the complexity of an older wine. Tannins are fully integrated, but the acid will keep this bottle going for several more years.
1 person found this helpful Comments (1)
White
2012 Alexandria Nicole Viognier Crawford Vineyard USA, Washington, Columbia Valley
87 points
Setting: This wine was popped and poured, served slightly chilled.

Sight: This wine is star bright, clear, with no evidence of gas or particles. Color is light straw at the core and consistent to the rim. Light concentration of color. Legs are thin, but move very slow down the glass.

Nose: This wine does not smell flawed. Aromas are stone fruit, mainly peach and apricot. I also pick up citrus echoes that are hard to nail down. I pick up traces of what could be minerality, but unable to nail the type or even the certainty of it. No hint of oak or heat on the nose. This wine smells of youthful, bold fruit.

Palate: This wine is full bodied. This wine is a bit sweet, with flavors of candied peach or apricot. Fruit flavors are very primary, no real nuances or secondary flavors. On the palate, I realize the traces of minerality I picked up on the nose are more like the stone fruit pit itself. I do not taste any oak, but the full mouth-feel suggests there might be some here.

Structure: This wine is off-dry. Acid is medium to medium-minus, but feels low due to the sweetness. Alcohol is medium to medium-minus. Finish is short. Complexity is low.

Conclusion: This wine is from the new world; wine appears filtered, fruit is primary, very little minerality (despite the peach pit nuances). From the alcohol indicators, this appears to be from a slightly cool vintage. Mid-level producer.

Final Conclusion: This is a decent bottle of wine. The wine appears to be made well; however, the sugar to acid ratio is a bit off. A little less sugar or more acid would have upped this wine by at least one or two degrees of magnitude. As it stands right now, I don’t find much to say beyond “its OK …”

Flight 2 - Wine Tasting Event - "Aged Washingtion Bordeaux Blends ... With a few ringers thrown in" - Double-Blind (8 notes)

A great line up of wines

Red
1999 Quilceda Creek Red Wine Columbia Valley USA, Washington, Columbia Valley
88 points
Setting: Bottle “A” in the blind tasting. Notes were taken before I knew the wine identity.

Sight: This wine is hazy, with no evidence of gas. The wine does show particles. Color is ruby at the core and fades to garnet 1/4” from the meniscus. Medium concentration of color. Legs are thick and move slowly down the glass.

Nose: This wine does not smell flawed. Strong intensity. Aromas are black cherries and mint, with a trace of cherry cough syrup on the edges. No trace of minerals. Very light smell of oak, mostly in a hint of wood smoke. I pick up some heat on the nose. Not sure where to place this wine.

Palate: This wine is medium bodied. The fruit is subdued, but I can’t tell if its bound up or simply faded. Given that I expect this wine to be over 10 years old, I will go with faded. Still, I did not pick up much secondary notes either. What I was left with was primarily a medium size dose of oak.

Structure: This wine is dry. Acid is medium-plus. Alcohol is medium-plus. Tannins are medium-plus and not well integrated. Finish is medium. Complexity is low.

Conclusion: Although the fruit is very subdued and the wine appears unfiltered, I will guess this wine is new world; no earthy or mineral notes. From the acid and alcohol indicators, this appears to be from a slightly cool vintage. Unknown quality producer.

Final Conclusion: This is an “OK” bottle of wine. It’s obvious that it’s an older vintage, but I couldn’t get much out of it. The flavors were subdued, the nose was difficult, the finish wasn’t too long or complex. All in all, I wasn’t very impressed.

My Ranking: 7th out of 8 bottles
Group Ranking: 6th out of 8 bottles
Red
2001 Pepper Bridge Cabernet Sauvignon Walla Walla Valley USA, Washington, Columbia Valley, Walla Walla Valley
90 points
Setting: Bottle “B” in the blind tasting. Notes were taken before I knew the wine identity.

Sight: This wine is dull, with no evidence of gas or particles. Color is ruby at the core with very little color variation or fading to the meniscus. Light concentration of color. Legs are medium width and move medium speed down the glass.

Nose: This wine does not smell flawed. Medium Intensity. Aromas are of dark fruit, primarily blackberry. The wine has secondary notes of pencil lead, mocha, and cedar, with hints of sage/herb. Some earthiness, but not in any distinct way. You can smell some new oak in the cedar. I pick up very little heat on the nose. It will be interesting to see how old this wine is because the fruit is still a bit up front.

Palate: This wine is light bodied. Unfortunately, the palate doesn’t follow the nose. The palate is restrained. Hints of cocoa, but very little fruit left. Secondary notes are of nice cedar and leather suggesting the oak is well integrated into the wine.

Structure: This wine is dry. Acid is medium. Alcohol is medium. Tannins are medium, but not well integrated. Finish is short. Complexity is low.

Conclusion: This wine is from the new world. I pick up some earthiness, but I tie it to what remains of the fruit on the nose. On the palate, there is nothing about this wine that speaks old world. Acid and alcohol are straight across medium, so I guess this to be a fairly normal vintage. Quality producer.

Final Conclusion: This is wine appears to be well made, but I believe it’s on the downswing. The aromas are still holding on, but the palate seems to be headed towards life support. Some secondary cocoa notes and the remainder being some well integrated oak notes. Maybe it just needs a little more air to open up the flavors?

My Ranking: 6th out of 8 bottles
Group Ranking: 5th out of 8 bottles.
Red
2002 Spring Mountain Vineyard Napa Valley Red Wine USA, California, Napa Valley, Spring Mountain District
91 points
Setting: Bottle “C” in the blind tasting. Notes were taken before I knew the wine identity.

Sight: This wine is bright, with no evidence of gas or particles. Color is deep purple at the core with a slight fade to ruby at the meniscus. Deep concentration of color. Legs are thick and move slowly down the glass.

Nose: This wine does not smell flawed. Strong intensity. Aromas are of red and dark fruit, primarily blackberry. The wine has secondary notes of mint, chocolate, and violets. I do not pick up any earthiness or mineral traits. Some new oak, but it hides behind the strong fruit aromatics. I pick up some heat on the nose. This is another wine that will be interesting to see how old it is because the fruit is so "in your face" and up front.

Palate: Whoa, this tastes like a very young wine. This wine is heavy bodied. The palate is thick with flavors of blackberries, mint, and bitter chocolate. This wine is very chewy, full bodied, and still very tannic. If it didn’t have the mint flavor, I would have called this a “Gorman Red Mountain Cabernet.” I do taste some new oak, but it is well integrated into the wine.

Structure: This wine is dry. Acid is medium-minus. Alcohol is medium-plus. Tannins are medium-plus and not well integrated … yet. Finish is short. Complexity is low.

Conclusion: This wine is from the new world; filtered, bright, little to no earthiness or minerality. I guess this wine to be from CA. Acid is low and alcohol is high which suggests a warm vintage. High quality producer.

Final Conclusion: This is wine appears to be very well made. I believe it to be from CA as the palate comes across either very young or the tannins need many more years to integrate. Unfortunately, that sense of being young also translates to low complexity and an uninteresting finish. For me, no matter how well made it may feel, it comes across as an "in-your-face" extracted wine bomb. Give it another 10 years to mellow then let me at it.

My Ranking: 5th out of 8 bottles
Group Ranking: 1st (tied) out of 8 bottles.
Red
1999 Dominus Estate USA, California, Napa Valley
93 points
Setting: Bottle “D” in the blind tasting. Notes were taken before I knew the wine identity.

Sight: This wine is dull and hazy, with no evidence of gas or particles. Color is ruby at the core consistent to about an 1/8” from at the meniscus. Medium concentration of color. Legs are thick and move slowly down the glass.

Nose: This wine does not smell flawed. Light intensity. Aromas are of cassis and blue fruit, primarily plum and a little blueberry. The wine has secondary notes of dust, spice, and cedar. I do pick up some mineral traits. I detect some burnt oak that does always “quite fit” the wine, but not in any meaningful way. No alcohol on the nose to speak of.

Palate: This wine is light bodied. The palate follows the nose with flavors of blue fruit, dust, a little earthiness, spices, and dust. This wine has hints of vanilla and tobacco. I do taste some new oak, but it is well integrated into the wine.

Structure: This wine is dry. Acid is medium. Alcohol is medium. Tannins are medium and well integrated. Finish is long. Complexity is high.

Conclusion: This wine straddles the new/old world line; dull, hazy, and some mineral/earthiness, but cocoa flavors and light blue fruit. I guess this wine to be from WA, specifically Walla Walla Valley. Acid is medium and alcohol is medium suggesting a typical vintage. High quality producer.

Final Conclusion: This is very well made. Whoever made this wine did an excellent job bridging old world with the new. New world fruit flavors with controlled acidity; yet controlled alcohol with secondary notes of tobacco, earthiness, and spice that suggests old world. Just a little more "oomph" would place this wine as #1 of the night for me. Looking forward to finding out what this wine is.

My Ranking: 2nd out of 8 bottles
Group Ranking: 3rd out of 8 bottles.
2 people found this helpful Comment
Red
1980 Chateau Ste. Michelle Cabernet Sauvignon Reserve Cold Creek Vineyard USA, Washington, Columbia Valley
Setting: Bottle “E” in the blind tasting. Notes were taken before I knew the wine identity.

Sight: This wine is light, cloudy, with no evidence of gas or particles. Color is garnet at the core fading to brown ¼” from the meniscus. Light concentration of color. Long, slim legs that move slowly down the glass.

Nose: This wine smells a bit flawed. Light intensity. No fruit aromas to speak of. The wine has secondary notes of dried herbs and rose petals. I do not pick up any earthiness or mineral traits. Wine smells tired and old, with little life left in it. No alcohol on the nose to speak of.

Palate: This wine is light bodied. The palate tastes of minerals, spice, and just a little oak. Again, this wine is tired and on its last legs. The oak is well integrated into the wine.

Structure: This wine is dry. Acid is medium-plus. Alcohol is medium. Tannins are medium-minus and well integrated. Finish is short. Complexity is low.

Conclusion: This wine is old, with nothing left but minerals and a bit of oak on the palate. I guess this wine to be from Bordeaux due to the cloudiness and minerals. Too far gone to judge type of vintage. Unknown quality producer.

Final Conclusion: This is obviously old, slightly flawed on the nose, and tired on the palate. I don’t have much experience with wines like this so I can’t really guess or judge it. I know I don’t like it, but I can’t say if its atypical or representative of the wine. My least favorite of the night, but I will put this down as a “NR.”

My Ranking: 8th out of 8 bottles
Group Ranking: 8th (tied) out of 8 bottles.
Red
2005 Columbia Crest Walter Clore Private Reserve USA, Washington, Columbia Valley
90 points
Setting: Bottle “F” in the blind tasting. Notes were taken before I knew the wine identity.

Sight: This wine is bright, filtered, with no evidence of gas or particles. Color is light ruby out to the edge. Light concentration of color. Legs are thin, but move very slowly down the glass.

Nose: This wine does not smell flawed. Nose is muted. Took some coaxing, but aromas are of red fruit, primarily raspberries and a hint of dark cherry. The wine has secondary notes of menthol, vanilla, and cedar. I do pick up some forest floor earthiness. Mad use of oak, over the top. The fruit smells youthful. This wine smells of Columbia Valley.

Palate: This wine is medium bodied. The palate has flavors of red fruit and blueberries. The fruit is very primary. Secondary flavors consisted mainly of vanilla and a hint of cocoa. The wine is still fairly tannic, and there is some heat as well.

Structure: This wine is dry. Acid is medium-plus. Alcohol is medium. Tannins are medium-plus and not well integrated. Finish is short. Complexity is low.

Conclusion: This wine is from the new world; filtered, bright, and youthful fruit. I guess this wine to be from WA, specifically Columbia Valley. Acid is higher than normal and alcohol is medium which suggests a normal to slightly cool vintage. Quality producer.

Final Conclusion: This is wine appears to be decently made. I believe it to be from WA as the nose just smells of Columbia Valley. I like this wine. I seem to be an outlier here as my score is higher than the group consensus.

My Ranking: 4th out of 8 bottles
Group Ranking: 8th (tie) out of 8 bottles.
2 people found this helpful Comment
Red
2003 Château Lanessan France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Haut-Médoc
91 points
Setting: Bottle “G” in the blind tasting. Notes were taken before I knew the wine identity.

Sight: This wine is star bright, light, with no evidence of gas or particles. Color is light ruby to garnet about ¼” out to the meniscus. Light concentration of color. Legs are fat and move slowly down the glass.

Nose: This wine does not smell flawed. Light intensity. Aromas are of candied red fruit. This wine has secondary notes of seaweed, olives, cedar, and earth floor. I do detect some use of oak, but it is integrating well. No alcohol detected on the nose.

Palate: This wine is medium bodied. The palate has flavors of sweet plum. The fruit is light, secondary flavors of cigar box, sweet tobacco, and cedar drives this wine. The wine definitely uses a fair share of new oak, but it doesn’t take away from the wine. There is some heat as well.

Structure: This wine is dry. Acid is medium. Alcohol is medium. Tannins are medium-minus and well integrated. Finish is medium. Complexity is high.

Conclusion: I can’t tell where this comes from … This is either new world made in an old world style, or old world from a hot vintage and the wine maker pushed it. High quality producer.

Final Conclusion: This is wine appears to be well made. I believe this wine to be from Bordeaux or a new world Bordeaux blend. Due to the candied flavors, I believe this wine to be from a warm vintage. I really enjoyed this wine.

My Ranking: 3rd out of 8 bottles
Group Ranking: 4th out of 8 bottles.
2 people found this helpful Comment
Red
2002 Leonetti Cellar Reserve Walla Walla Valley USA, Washington, Columbia Valley, Walla Walla Valley
94 points
Setting: Bottle “H” in the blind tasting. Notes were taken before I knew the wine identity.

Sight: This wine is cloudy, with some evidence of gas, but no particles. Color is medium ruby all the way to the edge. Medium concentration of color. Legs are medium width and move quickly down the glass.

Nose: This wine does not smell flawed. Strong intensity. Aromas are of tart blue fruit, primarily blueberries but some blackberry as well. This wine has secondary notes of mint and eucalyptus. I do detect some use of oak, but it is perfectly integrated and very complementary. No alcohol detected on the nose.

Palate: This wine is lush, medium bodied. The palate has flavors of blueberries, blackberries, coffee, and vanilla. The blueberry flavors scream Leonetti. The fruit is laser focused, but not overbearing. The fruit, wood, and secondary notes are in perfect harmony. Mouthfeel is very silky smooth, lush. Just a hint of heat.

Structure: This wine is dry. Acid is medium. Alcohol is medium. Tannins are medium and perfectly integrated. Finish is very long. Complexity is high. This wine is integrated very well on every level.

Conclusion: This wine has to be my offering, the 2002 Leonetti Reserve, Walla Walla Valley. Leonetti’s tell tale blueberry notes are immediately recognizable. High quality producer.

Final Conclusion: This is wine is very well made. This wine is perfectly integrated and balanced. The primary and secondary flavors, in conjunction with the acid, alcohol, and tannins, are all in harmony and support each other. Very complex, the incredibly long finish keeps evolving. My favorite of the lineup.

My Ranking: 1st out of 8 bottles
Group Ranking: 1st (tie) out of 8 bottles.

Closing

Wow, what a meal and flight of wines. This was a fantastic evening. Big thanks to Jason for the wonderful feast. Next month is Mike's turn to host, and he chose "Southern Hemisphere Reds" as his theme. As always, looking forward to it!

© 2003-24 CellarTracker! LLC.

Report a Problem

Close