Community Tasting Notes 9

• pouncey wrote:

  September 9, 2011 - Fantastic QPR!

  Comment

• kvswine wrote: flawed

  March 15, 2010 - I think this bottle may have been flawed or stored improperly, or perhaps just past its prime. Burnt Amber color, musky nose.. somewhat typical bordeaux taste, a tad sour, old leather.. I am still rating this 89 even though it may have been flawed. One more bottle left. I will open that soon.

  Comment

• garambler wrote: 90 points

  December 14, 2009 - I drank the 3rd bottle on 12/14/09. It had a very pleasant bouquet of cherry, cassis, tobacco, cedar, damp earth, spice, pepper and tea aromas. The palate was smooth, balanced and dusty dry with sour cherry, black currant, tobacco, dirt, spice and tea flavors. It was very enjoyable. I even wish I had more.

  Comment

• markcat wrote: 86 points

  January 3, 2009 - This wine would be rated about a 90 one year ago, but when I just opened one now, I noticed it was past it's prime. The nose had evaporated and the gorgeous flavors that I noticed a year earlier where no where to be seen. This was one of the weaker vintages in Napa Valley, so this wine did not keep as long as some of the other stuff from Juslyn. If you still own one drink it soon.

  Comment

• dv002i wrote: 83 points

  December 30, 2008 - Sour cherry, mushrooms, and wet musty straw on the nose. On the palate sour cherry and wet straw dominate as on the nose, but with a little wet pine forest floor. Disappointing, clearly not the best vintage for Juslyn and a bit past its prime.

  Comment

Pro Reviews 0

• No pro reviews found.

Wine Definition

• Vintage 2000
• Type Red
• Producer Juslyn Vineyards
• Varietal Red Blend
• Designation Proprietary Red
• Vineyard n/a
• Country USA
• Region California
• SubRegion Napa Valley
• Appellation Napa Valley

Community Holdings

• Pending Delivery 0 (0%)
• In Cellars 9 (13%)
• Consumed 60 (87%)

Food Pairing

Who Likes This Wine

More About This Wine