9/13/2010 - mjraica wrote:

Structured nose, lost of earth/leather/tobacco. A little red fruit, mainly currant, but fairly faint. Better fruit on the palate, lots of currants and pie cherries. A little thin on the mid-palate but the back end holds pretty well with good acid pretty well integrated tannins. All in all a good wine, but I think it has peaked and is on the back slope. Should have another couple drinkable years.

7/19/2010 - mjraica wrote:

Nose was completely oxidative. Sherry flavors on the palate with dried fruits and a little spice. Interesting bottle.

5/10/2010 - mjraica wrote:

Fruity but basic. After the initial red fruit flavors the wine doesn't have too much going on. Maybe a little earth on the midpalate. Nose is muted.

3/3/2010 - mjraica wrote:

Wow, this wine has changed. Completely one-dimensional. Fruit is pretty much dead. Just kinda bland. Cassis hangs on but the jammy, dark fruits are non-existent. Mid-palate is completely gone. This wine obviously did not age well over the last 18 months.

11/27/2009 - mjraica wrote:

Very acidic still. Tannins were strong but silky. Fruit was still there, but I think the tannins on this one will outlast them. a good wine, but not everything I expected at this stage. May be in a dumb phase, hard to tell as I am not experienced with wines of this year....

6/20/2009 - mjraica wrote:

AMAZING

9/10/2008 - mjraica wrote:

Toasty oak on the nose, strong blackberries hint at a jammy wine. Strong oak on the palate, thin and not very much fruit to speak of. Ok value but disappointed after the recommendation of the local wine merchant.

8/8/2008 - mjraica wrote:

Rose petal on the nose, and I have to agree with a previous tasting, lots of watermelon on the palate. Dry enough not to be white Zinfandel and sweet enough to please those looking to expand. Not bad for a $9 bottle.

8/6/2008 - mjraica wrote:

Silking smooth, lots of chocolate and dark fruit. Definitely has some aging potential.

7/20/2008 - mjraica wrote:

Had an ok nose, but on the palate was very hot, alcohol seemed way out of balance. Did not like this bottle much at all.

7/15/2008 - mjraica wrote:

Jammy on the nose, lots of dark fruit/cassis and a little pepper. Lots of dark fruit again on the taste, little bit of tannins kicking. Very smooth for such a young wine in my experience. Mid palate gets skipped a little but is still there. Taste lingers for a t least 30 seconds. I would say one of the best Colorado wines I have tasted.

7/13/2008 - mjraica wrote:

Not bad for an $8 wine. Little fruit on the nose, but got a little bit of rubbing alcohol as well. Not necessarily the smell but the little antiseptic burn. Not unpleasant but odd. Pretty typical sangiovese on the taste but muted. Not a great wine, but a decent QPR.

5/5/2008 - mjraica wrote:

Oaky but not over the top. Vegetal on the nose, lots of acid on the palate. Not great, but not bad for a $25 Burgundy.

2/18/2008 - mjraica wrote:

This was great! Very full bodied, citrus and spices

2/18/2008 - mjraica wrote:

Not the greatest 'wurtz in the world, but respectable for the price

1/7/2008 - mjraica wrote:

I surely hope this was a bad bottle as it has received some decent ratings. Tasted purely of sugar. Was almost clear, although I am in no way an expert on port, I have usually associated them with a darker red. Would be hesitant to try again.