No Pinot Noir for you!

Usually when R & I are on fire, there is a lot of Pinot Noir that goes out (Burgundy, Oregon, New Zealand, California). None. Zero. Zilch. All Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot based wines. No complaints though... The 1995 Chateau l'Eglise-Clinet, Pomerol, was slightly corked (though easily mistakable for the cedar qualities that develop in the older Bordeaux), and very bretty (Brettanomyces claussenii - a yeast strain that causes a fault in wine. An almost dirty, super-mushroomy, earthy, unclean nose. It's also the yeast strain used in the production of Guiness Stout.) Those two things together completely killed the wine for me... I've had it before and it's a great wine, this just wasn't a good bottle. The 1990 Chateau Pavie-Decesse, St.-Emilion started out as a beautiful cedar and cigar box full-bodied wine with lots of black plum and dried leaves. After about 20 minutes, it was gone... Very pretty, a very nice wine, just not a great wine. The 1998 Chateau Figeac, St.-Emilion is fabulous... perhaps the 4th or 5th time I've tasted it this year, this wine is massive. Coffee beans, cocoa, black plums, black currants, cassis, and just showing hints of cedar. The wine is huge right now - though it is not overly tannic. The 1998 Right Bank wines are so undervalued. I wish we had more of this, but unfortunately, we are out. I might have to pick a few up for my own cellar. Great stuff.

Now that the Bordeaux are out of the way... we also had the opportunity to taste two wines from arguably the greatest Estate in California - Bond and Harlan. The 2002 Bond Melbury is a classic Bill Harlan wine. How they get the concentration that they get in these wines blows me away. Drinking almost like a great bottle of Penfold's Grange, this wine has notes of black pepper, raspberry, black plum, cocoa, and figs. It was sweet, but the concentration was so thick. The tannins are soft and round, and the finish goes on and on... It only falls a tiny bit short of one of the great wines of the world, and one of the best wines from California I've ever had... the 2002 Harlan Estate. We've had these bottles in for about a month and were waiting for the right time to sell one. While the wine is great (I'll get into specifics in a second), I think we'll wait a while before selling another. The wine has nearly the same nose as it's little brother - minus the raspberries. No where near as fruit-forward, this wine is slightly closed with notes of cocoa, black plum, figs, pepper, anise, and cassis. Harlan Estate is making wines close to that of Chateau Latour. While definitively California, it has a certain earth-element that drives the wine, versus the pure lush fruit of the Bond. The concentration in the mouth is immense, with layers and layers of components consuming every part of your mouth. Instantly stains the teeth purple. While a great bottle of wine, I do not think that this wine is as good, nor will it be as good, as the 2001. I am generally more of a fan of the super-concentrated 2002s vs the fruit-forward and slightly lavish 2001s. But the 2002 does nto appear to be as balanced as the 2001. Maybe in time it will flesh out somewhat and really gain weight and body on the midpalate, but right now the attack is immense, followed by a slightly hollow midpalate and then a long, concentrated, if not slightly tannic, finish. The alcohol and acid are balanced, the tannins appear a little higher and the fruit needs to be more integrated. Give it time. This baby is not going anywhere anytime soon, so if you have some, hold them. Not among my top 5, but among the top 10. 100 points? doubtful... maybe 99 though.