Found this problematic like the 2016 I tried a couple of months back. Don't mind pyrazine notes usually, but this was dominated by unpleasant, unripe stems. On the palate, agree that this was a more powerful rendition of Clos Rougeard, while retaining some signature silkiness of the producer, but seemed a little flat overall (like the 2016).
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Nez fruit rouge (framboises), avec un coté herbacé noble. Bouche juteuse, souple et bien ouverte, avec des tanins fins, une bonne fraîcheur. C'est léger, encore primaire, mais délicieux et très bien réussi. 91+ pts
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
I decided to open a bottle in name of science to compare to the 2015 and 2016 vintage. This is the first vintage of new ownership and the wine doesn’t disappoint. Larger scaled than prior vintages but there are no hard edges. High acid and fruit is turned up and bell pepper notes turned down. This is open for business now even without much air. I’m sure this wine will improve some with time but it’s too hard not to drink it now. Cellar temperature accentuates the acidity and freshness. Drink or hold.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Yet another Terroir Tuesday at Table, Donkey and Stick ft. Clos Rougeard (Chicago, IL): My favourite of the three vintages tonight. Plenty of fruit, and darker in complexion than the other two. Maybe even a little bit of sweetness from all the dark fruit on display here. Leather and pyrazine accents (and only accents). Heavyset for Rougeard but very good for my palate.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Professional reviews have copyrights and you can view them here for your personal use only as private content. To view pro reviews you must either subscribe to a pre-integrated publication or manually enter reviews below. Learn more.
2/17/2024 - melvinyeowq wrote: 89 Points
Found this problematic like the 2016 I tried a couple of months back. Don't mind pyrazine notes usually, but this was dominated by unpleasant, unripe stems. On the palate, agree that this was a more powerful rendition of Clos Rougeard, while retaining some signature silkiness of the producer, but seemed a little flat overall (like the 2016).
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/20/2024 - d'Artagnan wrote: 91 Points
Nez fruit rouge (framboises), avec un coté herbacé noble. Bouche juteuse, souple et bien ouverte, avec des tanins fins, une bonne fraîcheur. C'est léger, encore primaire, mais délicieux et très bien réussi. 91+ pts
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/30/2023 - UFGators Likes this wine: 94 Points
I decided to open a bottle in name of science to compare to the 2015 and 2016 vintage. This is the first vintage of new ownership and the wine doesn’t disappoint. Larger scaled than prior vintages but there are no hard edges. High acid and fruit is turned up and bell pepper notes turned down. This is open for business now even without much air. I’m sure this wine will improve some with time but it’s too hard not to drink it now. Cellar temperature accentuates the acidity and freshness. Drink or hold.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
12/19/2023 - acyso wrote: 93 Points
Yet another Terroir Tuesday at Table, Donkey and Stick ft. Clos Rougeard (Chicago, IL): My favourite of the three vintages tonight. Plenty of fruit, and darker in complexion than the other two. Maybe even a little bit of sweetness from all the dark fruit on display here. Leather and pyrazine accents (and only accents). Heavyset for Rougeard but very good for my palate.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment