Nice Wine This Week (So Far)...

I'll start with last night then move back to Thursday night... The 1995 Pol Roger Cuvee Sir Winston Churchill was a pretty champagne. While not exactly my style (and certianly way too young), this is full of citrus, lemon, and toast - not bicuits - but toast. Not terribly weighty - perhaps even a bit light on the palate. But, it has a nice finish and I think if it adds some body as it gracefully ages, this will be a great champagne. The 2002 Louis Jadot/ Domaine du Duc de Magenta Chassagne-Montrachet Premier Cru "Morgeot" Clos de la Chapelle (wow... that's an awful lot of information!!!) was outstanding. Has a nose of wet stone, spices, and banana(?) along with pretty melons, pears, and lemon rind. This wine is soooo tight... The acid structure is awesome and the oak is completely integrated. This wine has a long, elegant, powerful life ahead of it. I wouldn't touch this for a few years. We let this air out about 3 hours before tasting it the second time, and it hadn't really opened up a whole lot. It took a good 15-20 seconds working it in the mouth for it to really show what it's got. A beautiful, classic, 2002 White Burgundy. The 1994 Philip Togni Cabernet Sauvignon is often forgotten about amongst the ranks of Harlan, Bryant Family, Colgin, Grace Family, etc.... but it shouldn't be. Up there with the best of the 1994 Cabs I've ever tasted, this black to purple wine still has years and years ahead of it. It's just showing hints of cigar and cedar with primary notes of black fruits still overpowering everything else. Why can't other Cabs hold up like these wines??? This is mammoth, one of the great Cabs I've ever had (the 3rd time tasted) and it's only getting better and better. This one too took a good 20-30 seconds in the mouth to really work through all of the layers. The finish is completely smooth - but oh so powerful. Awesome! The 1995 Chateau Talbot was pretty - already revealing some secondary bottle aromas of cedar and dried leaves. A very, very good Bordeaux - just needs a little more structure and weight. The 2003 Kistler Chardonnay Les Noissitieres (sp?) was no where close to my style, so I'll refrain from commenting.

Thursday... The 1990 Chateau Pavie-Decesse, Grand Cru, St.-Emilion was a pretty, pretty wine. Layers of black fruits intermixed with smoke, leather, and cigar box. A nice, lengthy finish that had just hints of anise (not my favorite quality), but it was a really good wine. The 1988 Chateau Haut-Brion was as pretty as the last time I had it (a few weeks ago). Very cedary and elegant. Classic Haut-Brion nose - but not a blockbuster like the 1989. The 1978 Chateau Margaux was pretty, if not a bit weak. Not the best bottle I've tasted. Very wet-leaves and earth with truffles thrown in, with just a hint of barnyard. A touch of sweet cherry on the backend with classic Margaux violets thrown in for good measure. Drink it if you've got it... The 1999 Domaine de la Romanee-Conti Richebourg is mindblowing... I wish I had one of these in my cellar. Classic DRC nose of clove spice, followed by the classic Richebourg black fruits (for power) and wild strawberries (for elegance). For the first time with this wine, I got a great deal of dried leaves and secondary bottle aromas coming through. It's not just fruit anymore - and it apparantly made all the difference on both the nose and the palate. You don't want to drink these - you just want to smell them forever!!! On the palate, this wine completely envelops every tastebud - all of that sweet fruit, but the pretty round tannins are what brings such depth - and length - to this wine. This required a good 30 seconds in the mouth really working air through it to bring all of the layers of this wine out. But wow. Good wines make your tongue dance - great wines make it do the Tango! One of the great Burgundies I've ever tried... keep it for another decade at least.

At a tasting on Thursday afternoon - the 2004 J.M. Boillot Puligny-Montrachet Premier Cru "Champs Gain" rocks. Awesome minerality, excellent weight. Let me make a few comments about the 2004 (and the 2003) vintages in Burgundy, based on my recent tastings. What I'm finding is that the 2004 Whites are very good - they are not superstars like the 02s. The are very terroir-driven (much like the 2001s), pretty wines that don't generally carry a tremendous amount of weight. These should be wines to put away for a year or two to let them flesh out and add a little body, then start drinking them. Once again though, the murmurs of 2005 are making their way around. Can't wait to try them... The 2003s are not my favorite at all. In both red and white, these wines do not show place, they do not show Burgundy. While they are certainly Pinot Noir and Chardonnay, they are not what Burgundy is all about. The big hype with the 2005s is that they are big and juicy - but they show tremendous terroir, something that the 2003s lack. I'll save my money and get some 04 Whites to drink and wait for the 05s....