8/9/2023 - CS_pikes wrote:

Oxidized, but not undrinkable. Nowhere close to as good as on release. Pre-mox strikes again. Waited too long with the expectation of classic white Burgundy being able to age well.
No score given because it is flawed at this point and wouldn't reflect the original quality of the wine. But, at 16 years old, I'd probably give it something in the range of 83. Pretty good, but not where it should be.

7/15/2023 - CS_pikes wrote:

Still hanging on, but not where it was on release. No score given because I think it is unfair to expect a 10 year old Rosé meant to be consumed early to perform much at this point and it drags down the average when people see it to evaluate a wine in general. Today I would give it an 86-87. Decent drinking wine still, but nothing more.

6/2/2023 - CS_pikes wrote:

First, the wine is good and I like it. The tannins are fully mature and soft, but still plenty of structure. Very fruit forward, but almost no sweetness like you find in many Cali wines. It drinks a bit like BDX in a very ripe vintage that is fully extracted, but without the secondary notes you get with BDX. Perhaps a bit too much.

5/14/2023 - CS_pikes wrote:

One bottle was oxidized, but surprisingly the second was drinkable. Decent enough, but clearly not a very good wine and past its prime. Disappointing purchase to be towards the end of the road for a Burgundy at 16 years old. But, at this point with these, I'm pleasantly surprised when they aren't fully oxidized.

5/13/2023 - CS_pikes wrote:

A very solidly good wine that was surprisingly built to last. Tannins are still holding 15 years in. Great balance and fruit. It's probably just now entering its prime drinking window, but I expect this to still be good 5+ years from now. Not sure if it will ever develop secondary characteristics like BDX. It has basically been a wine that was good young and still holding just fine. I'll be drinking my bottles regularly at this point because I would be concerned that it will never be anything more than a good wine. Again, very impressive at 15 years old.

6/26/2019 - CS_pikes wrote:

From 375. Exceptional bottle of BDX. Beginning to show aged BDX characteristics. Many years of life ahead, but at 14 years old, it's starting to bloom. Haven't had this wine for 7+ years and was skeptical based on tasting back then, but no more. Looking forward to the next 20+ years.

Not really sure how to score it as I've become less enamored with numbers. But, it is excellent and I'm very glad to have more.

10/29/2017 - CS_pikes wrote:

Fully mature for a domestic pinot. Tannins have completely resolved and there is just a hint of alcohol on the back end which indicates to me the time has come to drink up and enjoy. Overall, a very nice wine. No real mature notes like you might find in Burgundy, but that might be attributable to the screw cap.

6/9/2016 - CS_pikes wrote:

My expectations were low to moderate based on recent experiences with Right Bank BDX from 2003. Sometimes you get a beautiful surprise. This bottle at least, was wonderful for me. Hope the rest are so nice.

5/18/2016 - CS_pikes wrote:

Age, different time, different mood, whatever, but this was much better than the last bottle I had several years ago. Very nice! Glad I still have some and didn't sell them off a few years ago!

11/9/2015 - CS_pikes wrote:

Corked.
Is it fair to say "I don't like it" for a fatal flaw that doesn't necessarily reflect the wine quality?

8/7/2015 - CS_pikes wrote:

Oxidized once again. Perhaps not as bad as with other bottles, but not really enjoyable past a couple of sips.
This wine should be an embarrassment to Oliver Leflaive. I'll never buy another bottle of his unless it's for immediate consumption.

6/25/2014 - CS_pikes wrote:

Corked.

4/6/2014 - CS_pikes wrote:

Solidly good wine. Not a lot of complexity, but plenty of acidity. I'm just happy it's not oxidized considering it's a white Burg.

7/8/2013 - CS_pikes wrote:

A very good Syrah that competes with the elite in California Syrah. It far surpassed my expectations and was better than my first bottle a few years ago. Sorry, no specific tasting notes taken last night. But, it was a big, intense, and focused Syrah - much in the vein of Saxum. Oak is pretty well integrated. I wish I had bought more!

5/20/2013 - CS_pikes wrote:

Oxidized - again. Both bottles. I'll never buy with this closure again.

5/7/2013 - CS_pikes wrote:

Oxidized - again!

4/15/2013 - CS_pikes wrote:

Oxidized - again!!!

I opened two halves. One was very good (prob. 93+) and then the 2nd was oxidized. That's about right - 50%+ oxidized. Won't buy more from Matrot.

4/8/2013 - CS_pikes wrote:

Premox'd. Again!

3/21/2013 - CS_pikes wrote:

Horribly corked. Down the drain.

3/18/2013 - CS_pikes wrote:

Decent, pleasant wine but nothing special. After it had been open an hour or so, the alcohol started to come to the forefront. This is better than before, but probably as good as it's going to get. This would have been a good wine if the alcohol would not have been such a prominent component of its profile. Plenty of fruit and adequate tannins.

3/13/2013 - CS_pikes wrote:

Drink sooner rather than later. Started out great, but started falling off after 2 hours in the glass.

3/13/2013 - CS_pikes wrote:

Pre-mox strikes again. My first 2008 showing evidence of this problem. Hopefully it was an isolated bottle as I still have a good bit of this left.

1/8/2013 - CS_pikes Likes this wine:

Paired with grilled rack of lamb. Tannins appear pretty much resolved and the wood has been integrated. Just a slight touch of heat, but no alcohol "sweetness". This was a pleasant surprise as I had cellared it for a while. Very good, but lacking some complexity. I don't see it improving from here, so I would say drink up over the next few years.

11/10/2012 - CS_pikes wrote:

I was looking for smoke and didn't find any. However, there was spritz initially and the wine seemed stripped. A fine drinkable wine, but nothing really desirable. Good in comparison to the overall wine world, but definitely not up to Anthill standards. Expensive at this quality level. Glad this was my only bottle. However, this was better than my expectations based on discussions I've seen.

7/28/2012 - CS_pikes wrote:

Scored it in the high end of "Good" per CT. Definitely not aging well and nowhere as good as my earlier bottles. IMO this was just a wine that should have been consumed early when it was singing. The baby fat has gone and left a slightly stewed profile. A fine wine, but no longer excellent. Drink up if you have them.

7/24/2012 - CS_pikes wrote:

Very atypical for an Ames wine. Started out tight and fairly harsh. It did open up and improve which gives me hope that time is the answer.

6/22/2012 - CS_pikes wrote:

Nose belied the underlying wine as it was expressive and inviting. The initial palate impression was good, but it immediately went downhill. There is no structure or acidity holding up this wine. It starts off dense and sweet and just stays there. It's like drinking dense grape juice with some alcohol. It's drinkable, but not really enjoyable. Probably a mid 70's score since that would fall in the "Below Average" category.

10/9/2010 - CS_pikes wrote:

Decanted for 2 hours. All I can say is TIGHT and tannic. This wine needs at minimum another 5 years to even be approachable. I hope there is enough fruit to carry it long term. I can't score it under the current circumstances.

7/7/2010 - CS_pikes wrote:

2nd in a row of this wine that was oxidized. Not as bad as the first bottle, but still very disappointing!

6/9/2010 - CS_pikes wrote:

Oxidized completely.

3/6/2010 - CS_pikes wrote:

This is a beautiful wine that competes at the top of the Cali cab world. Huge with vanilla, creme de casis, typical big boy lusciousness, and gobs of fruit. Fortunately it is balanced by plenty of acidity and a good amount of tannic structure. It drinks well now, but I expect it to be outstanding in a few years as the acidity, tannins, and fruit all come into even better balance. I was pleased to find no discernible overt alcohol on the palate which I have found often on the big Cali cabs in general. The wine is in balance. I look forward to putting this into blind tastings! It's too bad this is the last vintage.

3/5/2010 - CS_pikes wrote:

Nice, but a soft fruit bomb with little acidity or tannic structure. Still drinking well for what it is, but definitely not for the very long haul. Enjoy and drink up over the next few years. Slight amount of somewhat covert heat, but not blatantly alcohol. Likely to be a general crowd pleaser in a very casual wine crowd.

12/25/2009 - CS_pikes wrote:

Shockingly good for a Haut-Medoc. Very little visual signs of aging, but perhaps a very little bit of bricking at the edge. The nose was classic Left Bank aged BDX and the palate was the same. Medium to full bodied. Slightly short finish or else this would have merited an outstanding score. This is drinking perfectly now and I don't anticipate it getting better, but it will probably hang in this great spot for years. Drink up!

12/20/2009 - CS_pikes wrote:

Much thinner than I expected for supposed declassified To-Kalon fruit. Heavy on the oak and the alcohol is very noticeable. Definitely a disappointment, but a decent wine. The remaining bottles will go on my wife's shelf in her Eurocave and I won't buy more.

12/6/2009 - CS_pikes wrote:

A great bottle of wine. Typical Grenache sweetness with black pepper spiciness typical of CDP. Mature tannins and pinot-like color, but very little or no bricking. A joy to drink and definitely "in the zone". I have no idea how long it will stay here, but I don't see it declining soon. Then again, there is no reason to wait. This is why you age wine!
(BTW - Chapoutier's Barbe Rac from 1998 is even better and more opulent.)

11/16/2009 - CS_pikes wrote:

Craig Potts

10/19/2009 - CS_pikes wrote:

Nice weeknight drinking wine. Very good fruit with moderate acidity. The one flaw was some spritz on the palate which I can live with in a "drinking" wine, but others may find severely off-putting. Enjoy over the few years.

9/18/2009 - CS_pikes wrote:

Simple, sweetish Cali pinot with some heat on the palate. Not really impressive. Drinkable, but not desirable. Very disappointing considering my expectations. I have several other SVD's that I had about a year ago and they were all better. I will have to revisit them to see if this is what a year in the bottle means (hope not). I revisited this bottle after being open for 26 hours and it was undrinkable - tart and completely lacking in fruit - which bodes poorly for its future.

4/7/2009 - CS_pikes wrote:

Initial pop and pour pretty disappointing. Nice, but nothing to get excited about. Decent nose of espresso and roasted fruit. On the palate, about the same with just a touch of heat. Fast forward about 4+ hours and this wine has transformed itself. The nose is extremely expressive of espresso and dark cherries in an almost new-world pinot like way. The palate is medium bodied and round with excellent roasted fruit. It bumps up against being overripe without going over. Big tannins are present with the wealth of fruit. This will be much longer lived than most Monbousquet wines. After my initial impression, I was inclined to sell off 1 of my 2.5 cases. After it opened up, I'm contemplating buying more and realizing the 2005 BDX vintage continues to excel across the board! Frankly, it reminds me of the 03 Pape Clement which is high praise around here! The potential is for a much higher score.

1/1/2009 - CS_pikes wrote:

Nose with sweet cherries and espresso and slight burnt toast. In the mouth very integrated tannins and prominent cherry taste. Smooth, round, but slightly empty on the back palate. It's a very nice wine, but lacks the oomph of a great wine. Probably a product of the vintage. I don't think this will improve much from here, but that depends on what you're looking for in a wine. I didn't really detect any secondary nuances typical of Bordeaux wines and these may come with more time. However, with the lack of oomph I wonder how long the fruit will last. I'm sure it will drink well for the next 5 years though. Drink up and enjoy. On my personal enjoyment scale I would have rated it 90-91, but the scale listed in CT states 90=the beginning of "Outstanding" wines and I can't quite call it outstanding. However, I would be willing to drink this anytime.

2/23/2008 - CS_pikes wrote:

Oxidized

5/23/2008 - CS_pikes wrote:

Over the hill, but you could tell something nice was once there

5/25/2008 - CS_pikes wrote:

Big, fruit driven, jammy with just a hint of heat. I will be interested in how this is with another year in the cellar

5/26/2008 - CS_pikes wrote:

Intense pepper and typical CDP profile. Very dense, but not a heavy feel. Needs more years in the bottle, but this is a wonderful bottle of wine. Opened because I noticed this bottle was leaking. It was not damaged. This wine may be bigger than the 01. Will check back in 2010.

5/3/2008 - CS_pikes wrote:

On first popping the cork, beautiful New World pinot nose, but very muted taste. After about 45 min., this was rocking! Balanced with firm tannins on the end. Another year or two might improve it even more.

4/8/2008 - CS_pikes wrote:

Second and last bottle tasted. Similar thoughts as before, but not even as good. Bitter and thin throughout despite leaving it open for several hours. My wife, who is an unbiased (couldn't care less) taster made an awful face on tasting this and immediately poured it down the sink. Generous with a 70 score.

4/6/2008 - CS_pikes wrote:

Very nice and full bodied Cali. Cab. Dark fruit is huge, but is backed up with plenty of structure from the extensive tannins. I think this is already drinking well, but it will undoubtedly evolve with age. I will drink these over the next 15 years or so.

3/31/2008 - CS_pikes wrote:

I don't see how anyone could score this higher than "Below average" which is 70-74. On opening, the nose is muted, but pleasantly pinot noir. In the mouth, this is a thin, nearly flavorless wine with a very bitter finish. It's very close to being in the "Avoid" (50-70) category, but I suppose there is someone out there that can get it down.

3/12/2008 - CS_pikes wrote:

Opulent, rich, velvety, sweet Pinot Noir. Excellent concentrated dark cherry nose and palate. The nose is intoxicating by itself. I have no idea how long this will last, but I would guess at least 5 years. This is now my "go to" wine when I want to blow someone away with new world Pinot who is not a routine wine (or PN) drinker.

3/11/2008 - CS_pikes wrote:

This wine is gone and over the hill. It is just a shell of it's former self. Very easy drinking because the tannins have melted away. However, the fruit is gone too, and there is a musty smell. This is the 3rd bottle I've had recently from my cellar that have all been consistent. RP's drinking window was way off on this one.

Earlier in life, it was actually like a Pegau-lite and I had high hopes for it as a less expensive substitute. It did not go the distance. It is not bad, but just very hollow. Sad to see.