WTN: 03 Rieussac, 02 Raymond-Lafon, and 92 Noble One

[Jenise]

At a friends' home this weekend, one guest brought a half bottle of the 02 Raymond-Lafon from Sauternes. A discussion of the wine ensued, with it's bearer finally asking "Is this wine worth $30?" "Yes", responded I who favor less-sweet lemony, herbal flavors and "no!" went our hosts who prefer honeyed, botrytis styles. I'm not schooled in tasting young Sauternes, but I thought this resembled a riesling-based off-year Auslese more than it did Sauternes with grapefruit and coconut flavors but for the lower (but not too low) acidity. Still, I found it's restraint and subtlety quite fetching, and could see it becoming quite a bit more interesting with more time in bottle.

To demonstrate why they said "no!", our hosts trotted off to the cellar to nab a full-size bottle of 03 Rieussac which they had not tasted yet but purchased several cases of on futures as Parker's description reminded them of the '83, their favorite dessert wine of all time. It's $42 price tag was supposed to put an end to all discussion of value on the Raymond-Lafon. We were all quite stunned by our first sip: it's thick. And I don't mean viscuous, I understand viscosity and this was beyond what we mean by viscuous. This was THICK. Mouth-coating, pancake syrup THICK. Also quite orange for a new release. In flavor, very honeyed and mono-dimensional, also (no surprise) rather low acid. I've never had a Sauternes like it, and I wouldn't care to again.

Then we opened the dessert wine we'd been planning to have all along, the 1992 Noble One from Australia which was now chestnut-colored from age. Spicy nose with dried orange peel, on the palate lemons, dates, dried apricot, and clove. Very tangy and Madeira-like, it just danced in our mouths. Excellent.

Sorry, Jenise, I'm being anal, but it's an e not an a in the Rieussec!

FWIW, here's my note from 6.10.2006: Typical Rieussec nose, rather dark toned and brooding and oaky, with lots of orange-smelling botrytis. The palate is big and sweet and low in acid yet paradoxically fresh and light. I don't know how it is possible, but even for my acid craving palate, this worked. I like it, but it needs lots of time for the oak to settle.

For long, I've wondered why I can tolerate and even like such "big" wines if they're sweet, but in table wines I would find a similarily big style offensive. Very odd.

[Jenise]

Otto, no problem with the correction. Re the wine, though, I'm interested in the fact that your note made no mention of the rare viscosity of this wine. I can't imagine that not standing out. Is it possible there are barrel differences?

Jenise - I wonder if the Rieussec shows differently from a .375. I had a taste a couple of weeks ago, and found it quite nice. I expected the lack of acidity due to the hot vintage, but it didn't come across as overly sweet and unbalanced as in your description.

I always try to have one bottle of the noble one at home. It's a great alternative dessert wine that aways surprises my guests for dinner.

[David M. Bueker]

The viscosity of the Rieussec sounds odd. I've had it twice with no issue like that. It's certainly rich stuff (richer than I prefer...I love the 2001!), but not over the top.

I actually ordered futures of the 2005, and now I'm hearing that acidities are even lower than in 2003. Yikes! It'll probably get a great score, and then I can unload it.

[Jenise]

Diane, I expected the low acidity too, but I didn't and wouldn't say it's overly sweet. The sweetness level was about where I expected it to be (it's merely a personal taste thing that I preferred the other two less sweet wines)--it was the thickness that was so surprising. I can't even imagine how that's possible. Ever have a Pedro Ximenez? A PX would be even more extreme, but it was kind of like that. And it wasn't just me--we all thought so, and we were all taken aback.

Which makes it so interesting that three of you have had the wine and none of your wines were similar--you're all experienced tasters, and had your wine been as thick as this one it would be the first thing you'd remember about it since it's so unusual.