Comments on my notes

(3 comments on 3 notes)

1 - 3 of 3 Sort order
Red
2001 Chateau Montelena Cabernet Sauvignon The Montelena Estate Napa Valley
2/18/2017 - Jimmyjules wrote:
flawed
Second bottle opened within a month, both purchased direct from the estate via their futures peogram. First note as a comment to another taster. Both bottles were to my taste, pretty DOA. Secondary even tertiary notes, but no fruit, kind of dead. Very, very disappointing because so much more is expected from this winery. A year or so ago, the 2002, sourced and stored similarly, by comparison absolutely shined.
  • Jimmyjules commented:

    2/19/17, 9:59 AM - Yes, I was and am familiar. I went to the Montelena "tour" after that incident in Philly: Bo poured all his wines to demonstrate they were clean. Re: decanting, the first bottle a month ago was open for several hours. Just got worse. I thought this one was in the same place. Oh well. You forgot to mention the 86, which is amoung my all time favorites (talking to Bo at the time, he was pretty high on it also).

Red
2001 Chateau Montelena Cabernet Sauvignon The Montelena Estate Napa Valley
1/16/2017 - Justinwine wrote:
89 points
Was ok drinking. Pleasant. Lacked fruit and structure.
  • Jimmyjules commented:

    1/28/17, 4:28 PM - Opened a bottle Jan 27, 2017 and agree with this comment, for this bottle. Secondary aromas and flavors, but kind of dead. Not obviously corked, but considering the vintage and the supposed problems at Montelena at the time, I wonder....could a touch of TCA, not evident to us, mute the wine flavors?

Red
2014 Scarlett Wines Cabernet Sauvignon Rutherford
1/15/2017 - Badmonkey wrote:
94 points
Watching the NFL playoffs and I decided to put this against the 2013 vintage to see how they compared. Similar profile as the 2013 vintage but just a little lighter. Dark red and black fruit - dark cherry and blackberry. Smooth mid-palate with nice depth especially for the price point. Fairly fruit forward. Long/deep finish. Decanted for two hours and drank over another three. Improved a little with time but drinking quite well after the decant. In my opinion, more approachable young than the 2013 vintage but just a notch below the 2013 vintage - a little less depth. No surprise Parker rated the barrel sample 92 to 95 points.
  • Jimmyjules commented:

    1/15/17, 11:18 AM - I also watched footbal with this. Agree totally. It went through a fruit-bomb stage as it evolved in the glass.

1 - 3 of 3
© 2003-20 CellarTracker! LLC.

Report a Problem

Close