11/27/2018 - wineracquet wrote:

2/3 of the reviews on this wine are by the same taster. That makes the average score quite questionable. What makes someone review the same wine 8 times, with basically the same notes and exactly the same 90 pt score each time? Does this have ant benefit? I certainly don't see any.

4/10/2018 - JimTaft wrote:

A nice, inoffensive, bottle of red wine. Good acidity, some fruit, background tannins. Better than the Spanish red I had on United business class flight yesterday. Not a wine to keep over time.

Interestingly, I paid $15, there is a gold disc with the number 98 on the label. Description of what the 98 stands for is in Italian!

6/2/2017 - tomoem wrote:

How did WS give this a 90 rating. Bought today and opened. No decant. The wine was thin and frankly watery. The aromas are bright fruit with a dominant strawberry. The flavors are also light red berry dominant with an fairly high acidity at first and then a tight mild tannin mid palette. Short finish of strawberry. Just too mediocre a wine. This is mostly light berry flavor that has some sourness with no follow up depth. At this price point try Benziger Family Sonoma County Cabernet. It is ...... Far better for under $20.00.

11/6/2016 - Les Kangas wrote:

I aired for an hour and think that was a mistake. Seemed more like a Merlot than a cab. Used Reidel cab glasses.

1/22/2017 - THF49 Likes this wine:

very dry, boring Sangiovese; none of my guests really liked it

8/29/2015 - Epicúreo Does not like this wine:

Dark garnet, black core; with skinny legs.
Big bodied, with intense aromas of black fruits, black pepper, allspice and hot peppers.
Woodsy; with salt water taffy, celery, leafy greens nuances.
Short finish.

3/24/2016 - wineracquet wrote:

This received a 94 point score from the increasingly generous wine critic, James Suckling. None of the past 8 vintages have received even a 90 on CT, so let's say I'm sceptical of a 94 rating. Cellaring mine for at least one year.

1/25/2016 - gbanks wrote:

Big. Lotsa tannin. Turns your teeth black. Don't even think about drinking this without a bloody piece of red meat. Would rather drink it a few years from now, but this is no doubt an honest and bold Argentine malbec and delivers very well at its price point.

As an aside: this bottle has a shiny "94 points - James Suckling" label on the neck. Suckling proves once again that his ratings shouldn't be taken seriously.

12/19/2015 - Carmen400 Likes this wine:

Went to a restaurant Saturday night and had this with Italian fare. Overall impression was this wine was light bodied, not much complexity here; light color and taste.

1/15/2016 - stevenrcagle wrote:

Nice wine for $10 - in fact very good value. Not a 92 point wine as WS described. Has some nice qualities, but never really came together for me.

12/23/2014 - nmoreilly wrote:

Halliday gave this a 94 ? I don't get it. I have literally nothing to say about this. Going to wait a year and open another bottle and see

2/23/2014 - DaveZack Likes this wine:

I bought this wine on winestilsoldout.com because Mark Squires of Robert Parker's Wine Advocate scored this wine 94 points, which was originally released at $80 a bottle (I bought three bottles at $27.99 a bottle, which seemed like a steal considering the fantastic review it received from The Wine Advocate).

The bouquet is very earthy, in addition to red and dark fruits (like plums) with hints of dried herbs and flowers.

The wine (at close to ten years old) is still very tart and tannic; I decanted it for about a half hour before dinner but should have decanted it for 1 to 3 hours. The flavor profile is a bit Pinot- and Grenache-esque, with about a 50/50 split of red and black fruit in the flavor profile (plums and blackberries, along with sour cherries and raspberries). There's also subtle, dried, savory herbs in the flavor profile, along with a firm, tannic backbone, zippy acidity, and a scorched earth/soil element peeking from the background.
This wine is well-balanced (earth, fruit, herbs, and structure), smooth, and pretty tasty despite the very firm tannins and acidity.

Perhaps this wine was a bit fruitier when Mark Squires reviewed it in February 2013. One year later, it's definitely not a 94 point wine. It's possible that this wine has passed its peak/prime and is maturing gracefully to it's ultimate death. Despite its less-than-94-points review, its still a tasty, smooth, well-balanced wine with firm tannins that should allow it to continue to mellow and age for another 10 to 20 years.

Though not one of the best wines I've had this year, it's still a nicely balanced/interesting wine that paired beautifully with Arthur's lamb stew. It should also pair well with just about any other red meat dish, especially a grilled ribeye smothered in Kosher salt, black pepper, Herbs de Provence, and a mushroom medley.

4/11/2014 - Ben Christiansen wrote:

Concrete eggs? Doesn't taste like Pinot. Tastes like south of Franc to boot.