Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: Very intense, very ripe nose with some alcohol heat. Dark fruit, mostly ripe cassis, herbs, crushed rocks and with time more earthy notes which helps to balance the ripe fruit. Super well-defined. Just a bit too ripe and a tad too much heat. On the palate lots of ripe, even port-like fruit but mixed with fresher cassis and even some blue notes. Beautiful minerality, some nice herbs, some toasty notes. Quite complex and again, very well defined. Perfect silky tannins, very good freshness, superb creaminess and balance. Just too ripe and some heat I dont like to be overall a winner but still a good wine. 91/92 pts

Decanting: Not decanted. Not much change in the glass. No extensive decanting needed.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: Deep, mineralic nose with layers and layers of crushed rocks, blue fruit, ripe cassis, lots of herbs, a touch too ripe and some hints alcohol heat. Still, due to the complexity and precision still a very intriguing nose. On the palate this is much lighter than the 2003, the first vintage that shows a bit of that magic weightlessness only very few Napas achieve. Much lighter, fresher than the nose implies with even some floral aromas complementing the ripe dark fruits and minerality, some herbs too. Very fine tannins, ultra light, very good freshness, nicely creamy, so balanced. Medium long finish. 93/94 pts.

Decanting: Not decanted. Not much change in the glass. No extensive decanting needed.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: Ripe blue and black fruit, herbs and earthy notes, minerality. For my tast just a touch too ripe and with traces of alcohol heat. But precision and complexity are on a good level. On the palate this has a lot of herbs, crushed rocks, ripe dark fruit but also brighter red fruit, some floral notes even and some hints of blue fruit. Very light, fine tannins, round and high acidity, weightless and super balance. No alcohol heat on the palate. This could be a rockstar if it would be a touch less ripe. 94/95 pts

Decanting: Not decanted. Not much change in the glass. No extensive decanting needed.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: Dark and dusty nose with lots of ripe dark fruit and minerality with some more earthy notes with time in the glass and a touch of truffles and tobacco which make it much more interesting. At first a touch less layered than the 03-05 in the same flight but then it more than catched up. No alcohol heat. With time more open and frehser. On the palate lots of ripe but not too ripe dark fruit, cassis, black currant, blue fruit, minerality and herbs. Not as layered and precise as the others. Not at absolutely weightless as the 04/05 but still without much weight. With time it gets more and more weightless. Ultra fine tannins, good freshness, nice creaminess, good length. Overall a great wine but short of exceptional missing a bit of substance and precision. 94+ pts. This was neck-on-neck with the 2005 for the wine of the flight (03-06).

Decanting: Not decanted. This needed a bit of swirling to come out of its shell and seems to need an hour or two in the decanter.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: Very intense nose full of ripe dark fruit, cassis, lots of minerality and earthy aromas. Quite ripe and layered and very precise. On the palate this is much less ripe, much more red fruits and floral aromas, violets, minerality, earthy notes and herbs. Light as a feather, absolutely weightless, ultra fine tannins, high and perfectly integrated acidity, good length but not a really expanding finish. A great wine with some points deducted for the slightly too ripe nose and rather unspectacular finish. But easily 95/96 pts and the best vintage since the inaugural 2003 vintage.

Decanting: Not decanted. Does not seem in need of lots of air, good from the go.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: Less complex, cooler, fresher in style on the nose. On the palate beautiful, well-defined blue and red fruit with some ripe black fruit mixed in. A wonderful fruit/floral profile. Not too ripe. Again weightless, but not as weightless as some others, again fine, balanced, fresh, light, creamy but with a slightly short finish. Overall still a very good wine but not on par with the other vintages. The highlight, which was the very fresh and cool profile, changed into a more ripe and less intriguing expression with time in the glass. At first I was at 94/95 pts, towards the end rather 92-ish.

Decanting: Not decanted. I wouldn’t decant it.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: Intense, expressive nose with ripe dark and dark red fruit, some herbs and earthy notes. The nose is good but the palate is magic. On the palate this is the first vintage which shows more coffee and chocolate notes complementing the blue and red fruit, strawberries, with ripe cassis underneath. Earthy notes and minerality. Perfect structure and weightless. Good balance and harmonious. Great finish with good length. This is a complete wine from start to finish. My guess: if I could have followed it over an evening which would have brought out more complexity, it would be higher than the 95/96 pts.

Decanting: Not decanted. No extensive decanting needed.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: Ripe but not too ripe nose, young and fresh, the whole fruit spectrum but with a dark core. Same on the palate, perfectly delineated blue and black fruit, a bit younger and with powerful black fruit and hence showing not as much red fruit and floral notes yet. Still a bit bold but beautiful and a very structured structured vintage for Scarecrow (and Napa) where the tannins still need time to fully melt and make the wine as weightless as the other vintages. The potential is great but the wine is not yet there. This is certainly a vintage with a very long life ahead. 94 pts with much more potential.

Decanting: Not decanted. This would have needed a few hours to open up and soften (butter wait a few years).

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: In this cool vintage, Scarecrow has not as much substance as in other years. However, it is still a highly intriguing wine and probably as complex as the very best 2011s with lots of fresh red and blue berries and tons of florals notes, the strong earthy and herbal notes on the nose and palates (a touch of brett too?). Unsurprisingly, the least ripe wine of the night and with the most Burgundian contours: Weightless, ultra-fine tannins, high freshness, perfect balance. For quite a few people, this was the best wine of the night and for me also among the very, despite the fact that it has not the same depth as others have. 96/97 pts.

Decanting: Not decanted. No extensive decanting needed, good from the go.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: Blue and black fruit nose, minerality and herbs, earthy notes and some chocolate. Quite nice, no alcohol, well balanced and super precise. On the palate this shows bright red fruits, red flowers, some hints of dark and blue fruits only. Nice minerality, some tobacco, hints of coffee. With time more chocolate and toasty notes. Wonderfully structured with ultra fine tannins, high freshness but so round and well integrated, super creamy and absolute weightless, even if it still has some baby fat in Scarecrow terms, Quite long and nice finish. Doesn’t yet have the absolute elegance the older vintages have but already great. 95 pts today but I’m convinced that if I could follow this over an evening, the score would be a few notches higher.

Decanting: Not decanted. Got better with time, more expressive and layered. I would give it an hour or two.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: Deep dark nose with cool blue and black fruit, tobacco and chocolate, minerality and herbs. Some nutty notes with time which are to die for. Very layered but in typical 2013 fashion still not revealing everything. On the palate you still have a tiny touch of baby fat. Well structured, fresh, complex, precise, balanced, long, no shred of too much ripeness… so complete but at the same time with so much more potential. 95 pts at first but after 45 minutes in the glass the wine got much softer, opened up, got brighter and purer and with a touch more sexiness and even more nutty flavors. 97 pts which is conservative. I’m sure if the wine would have been decanted or I would have had another hour to dive further into the wine, this could have been close to perfection.

Decanting: Not decanted. This needs time and at least two, three hours in the decanter.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: I expected this to be quite similar to the 2012 (rated 95 pts), a tad fresher and less ripe than most other vintages in the last decade but the contrary was true: this shows the ripest profile with lots of ripe dark fruit with less blue/red berries and floral notes but still a chunk of minerality and herbs to keep it in check. Also a touch less pure than most others. Still this is a layered wine with fine tannins, good acidity, airy feel and good balanced. I guess on its own and following it over a few hours could have brought out more. 93 pts.

Decanting: Not decanted. My guess is that this needs 2, 3 hours in the decanter at this point.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: I’m not the biggest fan of the 2015 vintage in Napa as I find most wines too ripe and bold but this Scarecrow defies the vintage. Yes, it is a bit riper than other vintage with ripe dark fruits, pure cassis magic, but still some fresh red berries and herbs and the dusty earthiness. Superb, precise nose. Same aromas on the palate which is so s wonderfully light for a 2015, pure and fresh, round and balanced. Yes, there are the Napa sugary, baking spice notes but in a manner that are more feature than bothersome. Easily 95 pts.

Decanting: Not decanted, no extensive decanting needed.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: If had this a few weeks before and it showed so magical (rated 98 pts). Constantly changing over the few hours we followed it, incredibly layered, hyper precise and with that magic weightlessness. This bottle, however, was nothing like that. Muted, dark brooding on the nose. On the palate full throttle dark, dense, ripe, baking spices. Rather sweet. High quality tannins, good freshness and balance but without the light and airy feel. 92/93 pts today but I don’t doubt its greatness.

Decanting: Not decanted, this would have needed a few hours. The last bottle I’ve had showed better from the go but also improved significantly with air.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: This was the least interesting, least layered wine of the evening. Sure, my palate was probably a bit tired after so many wines but this had neither the expression, complexity, precision nor the structural frame in the same category as all other wines of the night. It was certainly not a bad wine but just nothing truly exciting. Looking at the critic scores and the CT reviews, this was probably just a muted bottle.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: Toasty sexiness, coffee ripe dark fruit, at first a bit of heat with time the fruit encapsulate the alcohol a touch better but this remains an opluent Scarecrow nose. On the palate this is ripe, dark and red fruited, some minerality but at this point mostly about fruit and some oaky notes. And a bit of sugar. In the end, this is a great wine, which will need to flesh out a bit more. Today and with so many more ready and elegant vintages present, this couldn’t shine. The stuffing and structural frame to become a very good to great wine are obviously there.

Decanting: Not decanted. Always difficult to predict what decanting does to such a young wine. My guess is that à bit of time in the decanter would have helped here (2+ hours)?

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: This 2019 was pure magic and together with the 2013 the wine of the tasting for me. While it is obviously young, it shows so incredibly elegant and light, already a prefect balance, superb freshness and the finest tannins imaginable. The ripeness is kept well in checks which allows for many other more subtle aroma layers to shine through and render this wine highly complex, despite its youth. All the signature aromas are there on the nose and palate with the whole fruit spectrum from dark to blue and bright red fruit, floral notes, luxurious oak notes, sensual toast and coffee notes, earthy, herbal and minerality aromas. From start to finish greatness in the bottle and for sure contender for perfection.

Decanting: Not decanted, needs no decanting.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: We had two ultra-rare (production of 60 bottles per vintage) Premier Napa Valley Scarecrow bottlings side by side. Both show incredible aromatic intensity and density which seems to be a touch above the regular bottling but it is also clear that these wines will require much more time to get to the weightless and absolute elegance which make Scarecrow so great. I would not exclude that the 2012 will rank among the very best Scarecrows once it did shed its baby fat. The 2014, on the other seemed a touch too ripe and bold. 2012: Intense, intoxicating nose full of ripe but not too ripe dark fruit, herbs, crushed rocks, nutty and toasty notes. Yes it is ripe but it is so layered, precise with some singularity to it. Great nose I couldn’t stop smelling, although it is a bit too ripe for my taste. On the palate this is hyper, hyper precise, so layered with blue, black and hints of red fruit, hints of floral aromas, some fine, luxurious toasty notes. This is so packed and so precise but at this point in its evolution it doesn't have the absolute weightlessness the regular bottlings have. It it still absolute weightless in Napa terms, of course, but it will need a few more years to reach the realm of the best Scarecrows, it certainly has the substance, structure and length for it. 96+ pts

Decanting: Not decanted. 2 hours would certainly help.

Non blind. Not decanted. It is obvious, why Scarecrow has the status it has. This is truly one of the very best Napa wines. A few observations: 1) The absolute highlight in almost all vintages is Scarecrow’s ability to combine aromatic density and intensity with absolute weightlessness. Very, very few Napa Valley wines achieve that kind of weightlessness - other than Harlan, probably no other wine that consistently over the vintages. More recent vintages are of course a touch less weightless (due to their youth) but are as light and airy as any wine in the respective vintage. 2) The wines have a lot of substance with a flavor profile with lots of red berries and floral notes complementing the dark Cabernet fruits, always lots of earthy minerality and some herbs and sensuous, luxurious oaky notes reminding me of Cheval Blanc. 3) While probably Bordeaux-esque for Napa standards in its appearance, it is still distinctively a Napa wine. In the early years, I even found a touch too much ripeness and some alcohol heat in the wines which doesn’t seem to be an issue in the vintages of this decade. 4) These wines all are great to drink, only the structured vintages of 2010, 2013 as well as the 2016 were not really open for business and would have needed decanting. All others showed great right out of the bottle.

TN: We had two ultra-rare (production of 60 bottles per vintage) Premier Napa Valley Scarecrow bottlings side by side. Both show incredible aromatic intensity and density which seems to be a touch above the regular bottling but it is also clear that these wines will require much more time to get to the weightless and absolute elegance which make Scarecrow so great. I would not exclude that the 2012 will rank among the very best Scarecrows once it did shed its baby fat. The 2014, on the other seemed a touch too ripe and bold. 2014: The nose shows pure black, blue and some pure red fruit, lots of minerality, lots of earthy, dusty notes, some hints of chocolate, some hints of green bell pepper as well. Unfortunately, even though its not too ripe, it shows a bit of alcohol heat which is a downer. On the palate this shows a lot of intensity, lots of floral aromas, lots of baking spices and sugar, rather brighter dark and red fruits, minerality, herbs. Some chocolate and coffee notes. The tannins are very fine but still slightly noticeable and will need to further melt, superb freshness, creaminess and without much weight, weightless for Napa but not as weightless as the best vintages of Scarecrow. A promise but a touch heat and too much sweetness is there. This was, together with the 2003 and 2008 the least “Scarecrow”, the most „another Napa“ wine in the lineup. 93/94 for all the complexity and precision but for my taste.

Decanting: Not decanted, maybe 2-3 hours would have helped here.