3/23/2011 - headdocs wrote:

Seems to have lost some of the fruit compared to 1 year ago - will drink the rest soon

12/22/2009 - headdocs wrote:

Nice spice notes & depth but little fruit - disappointing

11/21/2009 - headdocs wrote:

It took a while to open, even after decanting. This wine is past its prime and is "good" at best.

10/31/2009 - headdocs wrote:

Held up much better than I expected given its age - nice fruit remained

10/31/2009 - headdocs wrote:

Held up much better than I expected given its age - nice fruit remained

8/9/2009 - headdocs wrote:

Dickie Brennans - $99

8/9/2009 - headdocs wrote:

Drank with Roman

8/9/2009 - headdocs wrote:

Drank with Roman

7/25/2009 - headdocs wrote:

JJ's birthday dinner

6/6/2009 - headdocs wrote:

Fantastic red!! Especially for a '98 Napa. Great fruit even 11 years after harvest. My only regret is that this is the last bottle.

5/23/2009 - headdocs wrote:

Beautiful dark color with great fruit remaining.

11/15/2008 - headdocs wrote:

This does not seem to be a very balanced blend. Tastes mostly of Zin (supposed to be 50%) and seems to have high alcohol content - a little "hot" on the tongue. I was not impressed with the first bottle - ? shipping effect as it had only rested ~3 days.

10/7/2008 - headdocs wrote:

The last few bottles had been so disappointing, that I almost gave up and didn't open this one. However, as soon as I removed the cork, I realized that this was going to be good. It had a nice red color with good cabernet fruit. I "gassed" the last half and drank the next night. It did not hold up. My impression of this wine is that there is significant bottle-to-bottle variability with scores between 75-90. If you open one and it is drinkable (2 of mine were just tossed out), then consume it is one sitting.

9/18/2008 - headdocs wrote:

I still love this wine, but I am glad this was my last bottle. 7 years ago it was amazing, and 5 years ago it was still outstanding. The two that I drank in 2008 lacked the wonderful fruit that I remember in years past. Goodbye to a fastastic wine. At least there will be the memories...

2/24/2008 - headdocs wrote:

best ever -- can't get it out of my head

10/13/2007 - headdocs wrote:

I was suprised by the lack of typical Cabernet fruit in this young bottle, especially with all of the WS hype. Look forward to seeing how it ages .

3/17/2007 - headdocs wrote:

For the price and with Heidi Barrett as winemaker, I was disappointed - less fruit than I would expect from a cabernet of this relative youth - I hope the other bottles are better than this one

3/17/2007 - headdocs wrote:

Very disappointing - much less fruit than I expected from a wine that costs this much and has such a good reputation - the worst Vineyard 29 that I have ever had

8/12/2006 - headdocs wrote:

Less fruit than I expected from a port of this age and vintage -

11/21/2006 - headdocs wrote:

My second bottle of this vintage. Very young, but great balance and body that will last decades - it is certainly outstanding and the Wine of the Year honors may be deserved based on this tasting.

1/1/2007 - headdocs wrote:

I have tasted 4 bottles with the same results - lack of fruit and body that I would not expect from a wine of this vintage and pedigree - my 1990's taste newer than this one - drink 'em if you got them

12/30/2006 - headdocs wrote:

nice balance of grenache, shiraz, and cab - would definitely try again at this price - drank two bottles with similar results

12/24/2006 - headdocs wrote:

Too "fruity" for my taste

7/15/2006 - headdocs wrote:

Disappointed in this bottle - Given that I am a large fan of Oakford, I was sorry to hear that this was their final release, though it was not from Estate grapes, as best as I understand. We drank it from a magnum, and the fruit wasn't as strong as their typical wines. It was good, but not their best efforts.

12/27/2005 - headdocs wrote:

Compared to the other times that I have enjoyed this wine, for the first time, I thought that it was losing its fruit. While still wonderful, it does not measure up to past tastings and doesn't come close to the Fonseca from the same year. Maybe this was an "off bottle," but I plan on consuming the rest of them in my cellar in the coming year or so.

11/10/2005 - headdocs wrote:

Worse than 80 upon opening, but better later on after decanting and letting it "air" for several hours. Overall, a disappointment.