Comments on my notes

(5 comments on 4 notes)

1 - 4 of 4 Sort order
1990 Pétrus Pomerol Red Bordeaux Blend
12/3/2016 - Dave Canada wrote:
95 points
The Fifteenth Annual Stonefields Wine Tasting Dinner for Charity (Guelph, Ontario, Canada): Tasted on first pour this was unreal and likely warranted a much higher score. I only had a small taste but was not able to write a note. Only thing I scratched in my book was "unbelievable"
6 hours later, after this wine had been double decanted and put in a wine fridge for the intervening period I thought it had lost a bit of its verve. When I got to writing a note later on this wine is was still utterly stupendous...just a little weaker than on initial pour.
Nose showed bitter chocolate, plum, flowers, cherry, earth, moss and pyrazene. Palate had such pure fruit....utter cashmere. Cherry, raspberry, spice, flowers earth, moss and a myriad of other flavours dance on the palate.
Finish is long and layered....a legend.
  • Dave Canada commented:

    9/27/17, 10:50 AM - Why not....1990 is a very strong vintage....with proper storage should last another 10-20 years easy

2004 E. Guigal Côte-Rôtie La Landonne Syrah
5/8/2013 - Dave Canada wrote:
94 points
No formal notes taken but it drank quite well.....still quite a bit of new oak but nice.
  • Dave Canada commented:

    5/9/13, 4:57 AM - Hmmm....tough call. These wines have the ability to age really nicely but I find Mouline the earliest of all three in terms of drinking window. I have one more bottle and will give it 15 years from vintage at least now....maybe even 20

2004 Siro Pacenti Brunello di Montalcino Sangiovese
9/29/2012 - Dave Canada wrote:
Similar to other notes...there was a greenish white sediment that seemed very different from any other sediment that I have ever seen. The wine was a bore.....I really expected a lot and it just did not deliver.....huge disappointment....muted nose, thin palate and no length.........i'll be generous and call this flawed but I would never buy this again
  • Dave Canada commented:

    2/19/13, 11:52 PM - If you scroll through some of the other comments you'll see that others have noticed this whitish sediment as well....not sure I can comment more than that except to say that the bottles that I had was just terrible

2006 Casanova di Neri Brunello di Montalcino Tenuta Nuova Sangiovese
11/15/2012 - Dave Canada wrote:
89 points
absolutely underwhelming....100pts my arse
this was very modern and showing limited integration or sense of place. i don't know what to say....just not anywhere near the wine I expected
  • Dave Canada commented:

    11/26/12, 4:34 PM - yup.....I have had so many Casanova di Neri's recently.......this was not off...just not good. I went through 6 2004 Tenuta Nuova's and only had one that was good.....not using the Cabernet anymore is hurting them ;)

  • Dave Canada commented:

    1/5/13, 5:34 PM - Thanks for your comment....but I score the wines as I see them. I had many of the 2001 Casanova Tenuta Nuova's and they were fabulous in 2007....similar timeline as when I drank the 2006. Granted...the 2001 likely had some cabernet in there. To me Casanova is a prime example of a house that has really gone down hill after the brunello scandal. I also am not one to give them a pass on making substandard wine. They are a modern producer...not Biondi Santi etc....their wines do not require that much age. The fact that you are willing to wait is great, i just do not think that the wines will improve at all....they weren't tight...they were lacklustre

1 - 4 of 4
© 2003-20 CellarTracker! LLC.

Report a Problem