11/30/2019 - California Cape wrote:

Thanksgiving. Solid but not worth the wait.

10/21/2019 - California Cape wrote:

Estimate date. Loved it!

11/21/2019 - California Cape wrote:

Unknown date

9/7/2019 - California Cape wrote:

Behrens Sonoma house

8/9/2011 - California Cape wrote:

last one to go, wedding wine, 11+ years later, really came into its own, evolved, grew up, nothing like a young Silver Oak. No oak anymore, all old world earthy tones, iron, mineral, tannins fully integrated, color almost blood-brown/dark orange. tasted like a french Bordeaux, worth the wait and sad to see the last one go. cork crumbled like bread crumbs but didn't affect the wine.

8/8/2011 - California Cape wrote:

getting better, first bottle might have been flawed. second bottle was better, third was downright good.

8/8/2011 - California Cape wrote:

very pleasant, served with ahi tuna

8/8/2011 - California Cape wrote:

Better than i remembered, perhaps already evolving

2/2/2011 - California Cape wrote:

Oak was the predominant - but not overwhelming - first impression. Really enjoyed this wine. Deep, dark, big - but not overpowering. Drinks like a cab but the PV seems to add something (maybe only to the nose?) -- positive, nonetheless. The alcohol never overwhelmed. Simplest way for me to review a wine: would I seek this wine out and buy more? Yes, no question. A crowd pleasing teeth-stainer.

3/8/2008 - California Cape wrote:

Really enjoyed this - popped and poured. Outstanding aroma, balanced flavors, a nice break from the overpowering Aussie shiraz. This is a great find at a great price. Not quite as good the second night, but still enjoyable.

2/19/2008 - California Cape wrote:

3 hour decant helped a lot. Brought to a dinner party, big hit during wine/cheese (bleu cheese and pear on crustini). Great color, nose, and finish. Agree with GV.

2/19/2008 - California Cape wrote:

This fell short of expectations, lacked structure, seemed watered down.

2/2/2008 - California Cape wrote:

I have to give this a second try and may increase my rating. This might have been a slightly corked bottle because there was a distinct smell/taste of mildew/basement dampness.

1/28/2008 - California Cape wrote:

Awesome - plenty written here already that I agree with. Excellent now, but more time will reward the patient collector. Didn't even decant much, but drank over two nights and enjoyed the evolution.

1/13/2008 - California Cape wrote:

Revised rating. Opened two more recently - much better. Balance.

1/13/2008 - California Cape wrote:

Dominant oak but I really liked this a lot. Save it.

1/13/2008 - California Cape wrote:

Nice Sauvignon Blanc

12/26/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Good but not worth the price. Subtle for a CA cab, but smooth and round. Improved over the course of the day. Nothing wrong with this wine other than the price.

12/21/2007 - California Cape wrote:

I not skilled or experienced enough to distinguish between wines 97 and above - when I come across a wine that good, it's just plain excellent. So I could rate this higher I suppose. I've had a few wines that are this good, this complete, on so many levels (color, smell, taste, texture, finish) -- 02 DR Stephens, 97 Harlan, maybe a few others. This was as good a wine as I've ever had. Decanted 5 hours, then brought to Gary Danko - so the food and overall experience certainly added to the enjoyment of the wine. Long, slow, preserving sips -- I can't imagine how good this wine will be in a decade.

12/19/2007 - California Cape wrote:

I really liked this wine, and the RP review is spot on - wonderful aromatics, especially by the second glass. Each glass improved, and we only splash-decanted it. It has the body of a pinot noir, but definitely the flavor of a syrah/grenache, so it's a nice wine on its own without the need for a big supporting meal. Great blend, not one we come across everyday; it works. Good wine/winery to look for as an interesting addition to the cellar. Parker says it will improve with 4-5 years but I agree that it's drinking very nicely now too. Buy more.

12/12/2007 - California Cape wrote:

I liked this wine. Everything about it is feminine - floral, perfume, strong lavender. If paired right (excellent with high flavor appetizers, cheese/crackers) it works. Expect a feminine wine and be open it accordingly, and it won't disappoint. And of course, de-cant at least a little bit (30-60 min).

12/9/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Marcassin? Um, no - not close. Maybe expectations should be set more realistically. This is a nice Pinot, but it's better on the nose than on the palate. The finish leaves a bitter/sour flatness (sour dairy?) that disappoints. In a blind tasting against similarly priced Russian River/Anderson Valley PN's, this would get lost.

12/9/2007 - California Cape wrote:

A case of "rare" and "outstanding" not being synonymous. A very long wait and a huge dose of hype. If Keller bought 70% of the total production, he probably over-bought (and so did I). De-canted for 5 hours, this wine was monitored for evolution from the opening. I kept waiting for it to really come into its own, and never really did (including the next day). This is a good but not great Aussie shiraz - neat story and interesting collector's item, but not worth the price as a wine on its own. Perhaps more time in bottle will pay off. The things I typically look for in an Aussie shiraz weren't there: big flavor, roundness, spice. Alcohol stayed present up front and detracted from the wine.

12/5/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Undrinkable. Tainted? Cork was very dry and hard to extract, but didn't crumble. Stored properly at my house so far, but hard to know what it's experienced from France to Seattle to me. Upon opening, all I smelled was overpowering mildew. Wet, locker-room dirty socks. So far, I've completely struck out with European wines via Garagiste.

11/23/2007 - California Cape wrote:

We really loved this wine. Decanted at noon, drinking beautifully at dinner, with baked pasta. Great balance of fruit, spice, oaky aroma, long finish. The wine had tastes and smells of a great Napa barrel cellar. Buy more.

11/19/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Outstanding, right out of the bottle. An ideal Thanksgiving wine. Sampled tonight before T-day, but will definitely be serving this as the centerpiece wine of the meal. Wonderful nose, palate, smooth in all aspects. Beautiful in the glass.

Buy more. Great wine at this price point.

11/19/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Very good. Beautiful color, nose. Decant a bit - excellent fall wine.

11/19/2007 - California Cape wrote:

This was better than the first earlier in the week, but something is still off. More time? Maybe. This wine drinks more like a cognac - tons of heat and sting/burn in the nose and palate. Decanted at noon for dinner, and cooled. Better, but still a lot of rough edges. Not elegant at all. I don't expect mellow but this is not the layered, smooth fruit-forward wine I have heard about.

However, by night two, I really enjoyed what was left of it. Really calmed down and started to show.

11/16/2007 - California Cape wrote:

This is a generous score, honestly. What am I missing? Was this bottle flawed? Cost Plus is not a typical source of wine, so I'm unsure where this wine has been - but despite decanting, this wine was rough. Heat, alcohol, dust. I could detect elements of greatness but only occasionally, and it never got better.

Next bottle will decant hours and cool slightly - deserves a second chance for sure, given the reviews of this wine from others.

11/5/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Good, but well below expectations. Garagiste suggested this would show like an Aubert - no way. Maybe this is me getting used to Aussie Chardonnay, but I found this tart and dry; not buttery, burgundian, or wet. Mineral evident in the nose, which was nice, but I prefer more butter, more lemon, more citrus. Way too expensive for what this turned out to be.

10/29/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Decent, but not one of the top Central Otago Pinots I've had. Lots of earth in the nose (dirty?) which wasn't really off-putting but definitely noticeable. Good affordable opening wine of the night during appetizers. Guests liked it.

10/29/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Awesome. 7 hour decant paid off. Unbelievably smooth mouth-feel, tons of flavor - overwhelming chocolate. Got greedy and opened a second bottle - didn't decant (and it was a mistake). Big difference.

10/22/2007 - California Cape wrote:

By day 2, this was a solid 92-93. But it was drinking better on day 2. Oaky and some heat the first day despite decanting. By day 2, this wine showed great balance, nice nose, long finish, nice fruit - not port-like at all.

10/22/2007 - California Cape wrote:

I should have known better. I was talked into this bottle at a new wine shop in town - the owner claiming to have some of the best Aussie wine around (while I know of many other better resources). Penfolds has always been an over-rated, over-priced label to me. This was drunk over two days, head to head, against Anomaly. They opened up close but grew further apart. This had too much alcoholic sting to start and then turned into sweet syrupy port by day two. We'll see if the shiraz he sold me is any better.

10/19/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Another good one - this wine has been a nice surprise this year. When decanted and cooled, this wine holds up really well, lots of fruit up front, full bodied spicy shiraz. At this price, I'm happy drinking this regularly this year. Be ready for the high alcohol, though. Have some bleu cheese crumble on hand to nibble on.

10/12/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Nice fruit, and nice temp served a little cool. I agree that a longer decant would've helped, but the heat wasn't bad at all. Nice nose; a little pricey for what it is, though.

10/1/2007 - California Cape wrote:

This didn't live up to the review I read here, but it was still decent. I remember liking this during the tasting at the winery, but it was a little thin at home.

10/9/2007 - California Cape wrote:

The best wine of the night on a night when this was followed by a so-so shiraz and then two so-so cabs/blends. A distinct pinot, one I've now had a few times this year - I could pick this out of a blind taste with ease. A certain palate (latex band-aid another user said?) but not as unpleasant as that sounds. Nutty? Woody? Smoky? I actually like this wine quite a bit but the price is way too high for this - NZ pinot can do this and more for half the price.

10/9/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Decent, not spectacular. Decanted properly.

10/9/2007 - California Cape wrote:

I had this over the summer and was not wildly impressed. Tried it again and more of the same. Decent cab with a decent steak dinner, but not in the same league as many of my sought after CA cabs. Worth the money? I guess, given the relative cost of CA cabs - but I'd rather drink a different varietal in this price range.

10/9/2007 - California Cape wrote:

This never did it for me. Two bottles, both decanted, served at cellar temp, the first one over two nights. Second night of first bottle was the peak, but the overwhelming port nose really bothered me. The spice and fruit I look for in an Aussie shiraz was hard to find.

9/24/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Very high expectations; fell just a little flat. Needed more decant time. Last year's blew me away, but this year is still very good.

9/22/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Maybe just an off night, I'm not sure. This was my first bottle of any kind from Hunnicutt. I'm a big fan of DR Stephens so I want to support son Justin's efforts. Looking forward to trying his Cab. This zin was decanted for about 90 minutes but then was still giving off hot alcohol on the nose. Started out watered down and a bit flat; weak fruit. Improved a bit with food (cheese, spinach dip, sausages, corn), and supported the meal well enough, but then turned quite a bit after dinner with time and without food. I was hoping for more fruit and more spice, but that might just be a personal preference with zin.

9/16/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Fantastic. Decanted for 1 hour, poured at Ad Hoc with tri-tip. Got better with time. Continues to be an exceptional 03 CA cab.

9/11/2007 - California Cape wrote:

I was very impressed with this wine. 2 hour decant and cellar-cooled temperature, paired well with spicy baked pasta/sausage. Lots of crisp spice, some oak, nice fruit. Definitely buy again.

9/8/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Decant this wine. First sip was really rough but even after a few minutes of air this wine really opened up and became excellently balanced, flavorful. Dark fruit, great nose, peppery. Smooth mouth feel. Definitely buy more.

9/3/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Solid Pinot. I have preferred a number of Russian River Pinots in this price range, but this was an enjoyable cocktail hour wine. Served a little too warm and might have been better with appetizers with more zip. Good, but not mind blowing. Fruit was present and balanced but it the finish disappeared quickly and the elegance of a real memorable Pinot wasn't there.

9/2/2007 - California Cape wrote:

I'm new to Bordeaux so I've been trusting others. 2005 has gotten a lot of praise and this wine came recommended. I'm just not a fan. Watery, flat, a little sour, dry; makes me pucker. I strongly prefer Cal Cabs, Aussie/NZ reds. Nothing about this impressed me in terms of what I typically look for: big nose, round full fruit, spice, finish. Others praised it but they might have been being polite - or lacking adequate comparison. I could drink this again as a table wine but it's not a special occasion wine for me, at all. Better than some of the others I've purchased from the same source, however.

9/2/2007 - California Cape wrote:

Probably my favorite 2002 California Cab. We've had a lot of this wine and yet not enough. Sold out, I believe, so time to be frugal with what remains. Immediate pronounced chocolate infused notes. More chocolate than fruit. Satin-smooth, fully balanced, tremendous mouth feel, wonderful palate, long finish, and yet doesn't overpower. 60 seconds after the first sip, a second reference to chocolate became evident. This particular vintage of this particular wine was a noteworthy achievement. Decanted 2 hours, served cellar cool.

9/1/2007 - California Cape wrote:

This rating is probably unfairly low, because it rates the experience as much as the wine itself. Served at room temp and without de-canting, and following a bigger shiraz -- not a smart choice. Give this one another chance but not for another year or two. This wine's fruit and nose were lost beneath acid and heat.