Offline at restaurant Alba in London with Jamie, Nick, Rahsaan, Theresa and Victor. Great company, food and wine. Hope there will be another opportunity to meet up again soon!
Pol Roger Champagne Brut Cuvée Sir Winston Churchill 1990
Thanks to Nick. A bit nutty white Burgundy-like and darkly veggie-fruited. Fair enough body. Medium-fine perlage. Noticeable acidity. Not too long on the finish. Could be fresher and/or more refreshing. Balanced quantity-wise, but whether this can/will develop the corresponding harmony with bottle age. Not the expression I expect from a Champagne in this category. Rating: 89+/-?
Hans Wirsching Riesling Kabinett Trocken Ipfhöfer Julius-Echter-Berg 2006
Thanks to Rahsaan. It has been a while since I last had a Bocksbeutel from Franken. Pale transparent green colour. Nicely ripe white blossoms and blackcurrant. The 14% alcohol adds to the impression of light apple sweetness and/or warmth. Not too dry nor alcoholic, surprisingly, but the firm and forthright rather than expressive type. Even so, there is some subtlety especially on the nose. A positive surprise. Rating: 86-/85
Trimbach Riesling Clos Ste-Hune 2000
Thanks to Theresa. The first of a handful of wines that should have shown better, but appeared to suffer from travel shock. Full yellow-golden colour, but really looks very youthful. Very harmonious, quite rich, lightly advanced nose that someone (not me) found “a bit Australian”. Round, rich, flavourful. Some kerosene rather than petrol, Nick said (the latter being a characteristic one virtually never gets in CSH, by the way, in contrast to CFE). Nice acid cut. Pierre Trimbach apparently said to our friend Fredrik from Sweden in a conversation last year: "Le 2000 reste un grand millésime, mais je ne pense pas qu'il sera meilleur que le 1990." Fredrik also told me that Robert Petronio wrote in La Revue de Vin du France about the 2000: "Quand la maturité est plus importante, le CSH esquisse un sourire, il fait moins 'Trimbach'..." What I like about this wine (and have from the beginning) is that while it shows exceptional early harmony and many seemingly mature CSH characteristics early, such as golden veggies and ripe lime, forest earth, pine and pistachio, that sense of prematurity is deceptive, as the quite important structure and underlying backbone remain as youthful as ever – the wine has barely budged since release, and while there is that sense of early harmony, the wine remains adolescent, neither too precise nor elegant at this stage, nor does it open up with airing (on the contrary, it closed down as one would expect from such a young CSH). It would be a pity to drink this too early. Agreed, as powerful and minerally and ageworthy as the 1990 or 1971 (and to a slightly lesser extent, the 1983) it is not. But to call it "less Trimbach" in a vintage like 2000 is an exaggeration. Mind you, there have been such vintages (that is, where the terroir expression gets glossed over or blurry due to surmaturité), and given the climate change I am afraid there will be more. The 2000, however, is merely less of a toughie than the greatest vintages of the past. Rating: 93+/94+?
Clusel-Roch Côte-Rôtie 2001
Thanks to Rahsaan, who did not seem entirely happy with this bottle. Ruby-black with a soft purple hue, almost opaque at the centre. Some volatility and faint sewage, far from problematic. Bacon fat, lavender-tinged plum and cranberry jam fruit. Good sweetness and richness. Medium-plus weight. Integrated roasted herbs, soft laurel, tobacco and sage finesse notes. Relatively mild but firm enough tannin, medium metal note to not too high acidity. Medium-plus length. Could be more intense, but it was certainly fresher and more lively than the Ogier. New-oakier, albeit hardly in a negative way. Rating: 92+/93?
Michel Ogier Côte-Rôtie 1998
Thanks to Jamie. The standard cuvée spends about 18 months in oak, about 25-30% of which new. Over 70% of the grape material stems from the Côte Blonde. A bit denser or prunier garnet-ruby-black, minor pink-orange at the rim. Bretty sewage, although not off-putting. More viscous, more full-bodied than the 2001 Clusel-Roch. More oak-induced, marzipan-tinged tannin, and yet, I was told there is less new oak here. Soft Argan oil and smoke to the more jammy-modern plum in addition to the lightly bretty sewage. Minor strawberry jam sweetness. A bit coarser than the Clusel-Roch. Rating: 91+/92?
Marc Sorrel Hermitage Le Gréal 1995
Thanks to Nick. Syrah with 7-8% Marsanne blended in. Ruby-black, faint watery-orange rim. More iron, lighter, faint charcoal and smoke. Olive oil, soft black pepper. Probably telling that my notes contain no (primary) fruit descriptors. A bit tough, tight, somewhat worn-out tannin. A bit shorter than the other two wines. Far from bad, of course, but not a 1995 Hermitage I would hold on to any longer, in contrast to e.g. the Chave or the Pavillon from the same vintage. Rating: 90-/89?
Château Musar 2000
Thanks to Jamie. Served blind. Ruby with an orange hue, watery orange rim, some black reflections. Nebbiolo-like rose-hip, soft truffle, anise, acids and tannin, I thought, although unusually blurry and soapy for a Piedmontese wine (= I was happy to learn it was not, and no longer quibbling about the blurriness and soapiness when I learnt it was a Musar, as most if not all vintages I have tasted showed this characteristic, and never in a truly negative way – I like Musar’s relative weirdness). Sweetly red-fruity. Oregano and other herbs. Very long. Tasty. Rating: 89+/90
Roberto Voerzio Barolo Cerequio 1990
Thanks to Victor. Glossy, faintly pruney ruby-black, fine orange rim. Complex and precise, quite minerally fruit. Intense dried tomato, fresher cherry. Good cut. Quite tight and concentrated, sweet and dry. Less oaky than the La Serra and Brunate from the same vintage (let alone the best later vintages), although not without a soft charcoal note to the otherwise nice, not too dry tannin. Increasingly complex with airing. Faint truffle, rose petal and stronger blood orange finesse notes. “Slightly damp and cellary”, Nick said – I am clueless as to what made him think so. But certainly a powerful and austere kind of Nebbiolo, concentrated but without quite the fruit density and expression of the greatest later vintages, i.e. 1996 and 1997 in Voerzio’s case. It is a paradox if not irony that those manage to be more powerful without over-emphasizing power, as the 1990 does to some extent. Having said that, it cannot be denied this suffered from having travelled in checked-in luggage on Victor’s flight from Germany the same day (the sediment was not the main problem, rather the diminished expressiveness). After 36 hours a bit sweeter, more dried tomato and rose hip, with yet greater emphasis to the impressive smoky minerality. Rating: 93+/94
István Szepsy Tokaji Aszúessencia Danczka Dülö 1993
My contribution that night. 9.5% alcohol. 900 bottles made. I wrongly assumed a sediment-free late harvest sticky would suffer less from travelling in checked-in luggage on a flight from Switzerland earlier the same day – this showed significantly less well than earlier bottles. Amber-yellow colour. Coffee, round date, cocoa, apricot, almond, caramel, and an intriguing soft red-fruity quality. Came across as more intellectual, and less sensual than usually, as neither the viscosity, fruit, power nor length fully emerged. Showed a bit better the following day, but still not as expected. But: it is entirely possible this is going through the same in-between phase now as most top 1993s (even if this effect is less noticeable in the stylistically lightly oxidative Szepsy Aszús of the era than some stylistically more modern ones). Rating: 94+
Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________
„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
)