Tasted blind, and thought it was a Beaujolais. On the nose cough syrup and candied cherries. On the mouth light-medium bodied with sweet cherries, dirt and cough syrup. I'd prefer a bottle of Robitussin.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
there's no bottle damage this is just crappy wine made with cheap fruit. no need to try and figure it out any further. had all the tell tale signs of cheap wine on the palate. tastes like it may have been water-backed or had oak chips added. a nuisance of a wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Dark ruby with med-lite viscosity in the glass. Closed nose of flowers and sour cherry. Lite body and sour with floral notes that turned soapy as it opened. Weak fruit and disjointed. Short finish. Opening hurt it.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Smoky, ash tray and rehydrated prune aromatics. The palate is equally dusky with faded fruit, stewed prunes, turpentine and flavors of heavy (?wide-grained Amer) oak. This wine did not improve over the course of several hours nor through the venturi or even the following days- with exception of the nose and slightly faded off putting flavors. This was available in the secondary market at a deep discount and there is a reason for it. After re-visiting a few times, I believe this wine is victim of improper storage (i.e. heat damage).
1 person found this helpful, do you? 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.
9/8/2022 - Murphy’s Cellar wrote: 75 Points
past it’s prime
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/19/2013 - La Peste Does not like this wine: 75 Points
Tasted blind, and thought it was a Beaujolais. On the nose cough syrup and candied cherries. On the mouth light-medium bodied with sweet cherries, dirt and cough syrup. I'd prefer a bottle of Robitussin.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/17/2013 - mike l. wrote: 65 Points
there's no bottle damage this is just crappy wine made with cheap fruit. no need to try and figure it out any further. had all the tell tale signs of cheap wine on the palate. tastes like it may have been water-backed or had oak chips added. a nuisance of a wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/16/2013 - christophee Does not like this wine: 74 Points
Dark ruby with med-lite viscosity in the glass. Closed nose of flowers and sour cherry. Lite body and sour with floral notes that turned soapy as it opened. Weak fruit and disjointed. Short finish. Opening hurt it.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
9/14/2012 - VinLancaster wrote: flawed
Smoky, ash tray and rehydrated prune aromatics. The palate is equally dusky with faded fruit, stewed prunes, turpentine and flavors of heavy (?wide-grained Amer) oak. This wine did not improve over the course of several hours nor through the venturi or even the following days- with exception of the nose and slightly faded off putting flavors. This was available in the secondary market at a deep discount and there is a reason for it. After re-visiting a few times, I believe this wine is victim of improper storage (i.e. heat damage).
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment