• WoodieBayArea wrote: 92 points

    June 11, 2020 - very nice and very 2006, saw my note from 2014 and wasn't surprised (it had words like brooding, darkish, tannin etc)... I'm finding the 2006 vintage to be more like that and less 'soft' (which is what I thought when it came out)... this also an NSG so leans that way typically... but this was very very good, after two hour decant I tasted and loved it but also thought it should have been 4-6 hours of air... enjoyable with dark fruit, brooding oak, smoke, spice with big mouthfeel... if you're looking for elegant (which I often prefer), this is not it... but nonetheless very good... and I suspect even better in 7-10 plus years

    1 person found this helpful Comment
  • PIntag wrote:

    February 23, 2020 - Beautifully perfumed on the nose with fresh, ripe strawberry and a little rhubarb. Expansive and deep. On the palate, this showed pretty tight, but well-balanced and fleshed out a little as it aired. Nice, but lacked concentration. Some overt oak was on display as well. Fairly clean - not muddled. Suggest to hold for another few years to see if this develops further and integrates the oak better. At this point, the nose delivers the goods, but the palate disappoints a bit. 89 - 91 if scoring.

    1 person found this helpful Comment
  • rokerhill wrote: flawed

    February 11, 2020 - TCA (corked) affected...!!

    Comment
  • Rupert wrote: 91 points

    February 2, 2020 - Soft, chalky, red fruited NSG, a streak of acid giving it life - not exuberant, but there's power lurking there.

    1 person found this helpful Comment
  • swyang wrote:

    November 30, 2019 - Still too young. Hold if you've got some of it, this will be great in a few years time! Cheers,

    1 person found this helpful Comment
  • acyso wrote: 88 points

    September 17, 2019 - Chevillon study (Chicago, IL): Far better than the Roncières, but this doesn't manage to escape the vintage. Dark-fruited and brooding, with a bit of licorice and unfortunately also a bit of beetroot. Either I've become more and more sensitive to it, or the 2006s haven't been evolving in a good way (probably the former). This has a pretty hefty palate presence, but the flavours are a little jumbled and dirty here as well.

    1 person found this helpful Comment
  • olemski wrote: 91 points

    August 31, 2019 - A bit on the fresh side, and missing a bit of fruit at the core. However, a much better showing than a year ago. Earthy with crushed cherries and a hint of cheese. Persistent. Got great, but very good.

    1 person found this helpful Comment
  • jerhardt wrote:

    June 30, 2019 - Basically the same showing as my prior note. Good, but a meaty and robust burgundy that merits more time in the bottle. Try again in 3+ years.

    1 person found this helpful Comment
  • rocknroller wrote: 91 points

    April 10, 2019 - Mixed WTDS at The Kenwood (The Kenwood, Mpls, MN): Medium red color. PNP, drank a glass over 90 minutes. This was reductive to start, used the copper trick to improve it substantially. Still a little reticent on the nose, earth, minerals, distinct iron, red cherry fruits that are susllen right now. 90+ to 91pts.

    Comment
  • jerhardt wrote: 92 points

    December 29, 2018 - Nice wine that tastes like it should. Meaty and robust, with surprising density of fruit for the vintage. Still quite young and not showing much in terms of secondary development. Very good.

    Comment