Wine Tasting

When Kristi and Dwayne were in town, we did a tasting of Chateau Paveil de Luze, a Margaux from 2003 and 2005. These were both very good, but didn't have the characteristic Margaux nose or taste. This was surprising but not disappointing.

The 2003 had a full, earthy flavor and a very nice mouth feel and had a lovely, clear light garnet appearance. With a while to open up, it was ready to drink and will be drinkable for a long time to come.

The 2005 was a little sharp and earthy but not as smooth. It was a nearly-clear dark garnet color. It wasn't quite ready, and persisted in remaining "closed", but should be very nice in a few more years. It was better the next day, perhaps because the '03 was gone and I couldn't directly compare.

Recent Wine Reviews

I haven't managed to keep up with my recent wine tastings, so I'm combining a few tasting notes. It's been a mixed bag, but I've mostly forgotten the really bad ones, so the good stuff is below:

2003 Chateau Lagrange, Les Fiefs de Lagrange
Reviewed by Wine Spectator in March '06 (Rated: 88):

Some good berry and chocolate character, with just a
hint of fresh herbs. Full-bodied, with fine tannins and a medium finish.
Very good indeed. Second wine of Lagrange. Best after 2007.

I completely agree with the review. I had this at a birthday dinner at Mambu. It was a bottle I had picked up at Grand Cru (can't find the website). I stuck with my usual tuna, but the wine stood out. It's a very smooth and refined wine. It's certainly ready to drink now. I'm working on getting more.

◊ ◊ ◊

Next, while on vacation, I took my hosts my standard table wines (Clos du Bois Cabernet and Montes), and I selected a 2003 Chateau Cruzeau for a first tasting. We had the Montes on the second night with some fantastic ribs--good reviews all around. Before fishing on the last night, I opened the Cruzeau and a 2000 Ormes de Pez. My instructions when I bought the Cruzeau was to open it, let it sit for a few hours, then drink it. I'm pretty sure that heaven is coming in from a evening fishing trip to open bottles of wine. These two wines did not disappoint.

The Cruzeau has very bipolar reviews online--the most varied response I've seen. My wine guys all seem to like it and I was quite impressed. It started out much smoother than the Ormes, but ended up without the oomph. I went back and bought all that Grand Cru had left (unfortunately, they had only three).

The 2000 Ormes was definitely an Ormes de Pez. This is still one of my favorite chateaus of all time. I found a couple wine reviews (below) and I'm a little baffled by the "shoe polish" reference, but I was really happy to have a chance to have this. I've now had the 1996, 1997, 2000, 2003, and 2004. I have a couple bottles of the 1999 that I'm eager to have at some point. The thing that I like most about all Ormes I've had is the nose. There's something very distinct that really strikes me every time I drink this wine. Maybe it's the shoe polish, but I don't think so.

By Connoisseurs' Guide to California Wines, Apr 03 Rated: 87--Cru Grand Bourgeois. Cast in the tighter, firmer, more austere style that is the norm for the wines of St. Estephe, this bottling is among the least approachable of the wines tasted and is a touch light on the fruity extract shown by its more highly-ranked neighbors. Still a very solid effort, it requires a good deal of patience, but it is likely to remain more stiff than succulent despite long-term cellaring.

By Stephen Tanzer Stephen Tanzer's International Wine Cellar, May/Jun 03 Rated: 88Deep red-ruby. Medicinal black cherry, shoe polish and mint on the nose. Fairly intense but cool flavors of cassis, mint and shoe polish are supported by a firm spine. Finishes with broad, dusty tannins. Showing well today. Very St. Estephe.

◊ ◊ ◊

1975 Clos du Val Cabernet Sauvignon

I managed to taste a wine older than me. This was one of my goals for the next few years. A fellow wine geek had bought a case of the stuff in the early '80s. He gave away the last bottle in '85, but came across a bottle recently and decided it was time to have it opened. I was very much in the right place at the right time. The wine was very dark and earthy. The mouth-feel was like velvet. The finish was beautiful. Amazing.

◊ ◊ ◊

Finally, my birthday buddy and I (from above) went to Tayst to celebrate the successful defense of his proposal. We had the chef's-choice meal, which changes based on the available ingredients. This week's treat involved fresh salmon. First course was salmon tartare, beet and radish Napoleon, and apricot preserves, served with a French white (I didn't catch a name on any of the wines with the meal and I hesitate to guess from the wine list). Second course was a pumpernickel escolar, served with a French rose. Main course was a salmon fillet with risotto-stuffed morels, served with a Spanish red (I think it was a Tempranillo). Finally, the desert...a flour-less chocolate torte with a chocolate mousse topping, served with stout beer(!) and a creme brulee served with a Sauternes. Overall, a delicious inner. Additionally, the staff was amazing. One of the co-owners came out--almost chasing us as we walked out the door--thanking us for coming in and wishing us a good evening. A very good evening, it was.

1995 Chateau Simard

In a recent wine spree, Jeremy not only picked up nearly a case of my coveted Ch. Ormes de Pez. He found ten of the 1999s in a little liquor store in South Bend and rounded out the case (and then some) with a 1995 Chateau Simard (St. Emilion) and a 2003 Phelan Segur (St. Estephe).

While visiting this weekend, we took the Simard to mAmbu (my current favorite restaurant in N-ville). I insisted that Jeremy try the seared ahi--the only dish there that I've had. Not that I've heard anything other than good about the rest of the menu, it's just that the tuna is that good. The menu for the evening had venison carapaccio, arugula salad with fried goat cheese round, and the seared ahi.

The nose of the wine on first pour was incredible. After I got used to it, I was able to classify it as earthy with tobacco and perhaps a touch of chocolate. The first taste revealed a very smooth mouth feel with a flavor that matched the nose. I didn't instantly fall in love with the flavor. It was a little tight and I think I commented that it would do better with food.

I was extremely disappointed in the wine with the carapaccio. The dish was excellent, but heavy on the pepper. We needed a Zinfindel to stand up to the dish. There wasn't any spice in the wine and it clashed terribly. It clashed so much, in fact that I was concerned that I had missed a corked flavor during the initial taste.

My hopes were buoyed when the arugula salad came out and the goat cheese saved the day. The wine and cheese complemented each other beautifully. I tasted a new dimension to the wine--anise. Very nice. Additionally, the wine was opening more now. Hindsight says I should have had them decant for us.

The tuna finally came and while the pairing wasn't ideal, it was a very nice combination. We finished the wine and went on for coffee and dessert, but that's another post.

Here's the label: