WineTalking.com

A glorious wine, with an earthy and animalistic savage wrapped around the berry fruits. (92 pts.) – Tasted 4/27/2009.

Popularity: unranked [?]

(94 pts.) – Tasted 4/26/2009.

Popularity: 3% [?]

Very closed and clearly opened a decade too early. Still the pedigree is evident. Very balanced with silky smooth tannins, well integrated fruits and oak, wet stones and graphite. Even in its muted form, it is quite enjoyable. Would be great with more years down the road. But for now, it is just now showing its colours yet. (91 pts.) – Tasted 4/25/2009.

Popularity: unranked [?]

Really enjoyable classic. (89 pts.) – Tasted 4/20/2009.

Popularity: unranked [?]

This wine is starting to emerge as a seriously good option for the often over-rated Heathcote shiraz. Not miles away from the 2005 (supple, smooth, pure fruited) but I think this vintage showed better and softer structure. A fraction hot and hard on the finish when opened but 24hrs opened and softened the wine nicely. Some vanilla oak inthe back palate but I like the way it filled the fruit out. Looking really good at 3yrs but like the 2005 I’m note sure if there’s any point pushing beyond 5 or 6 years. (90 pts.) – Tasted 4/18/2009.

Popularity: unranked [?]

1.5hr decant in med-base @68F. COLOR- looks like dark, red Cabernet juice. NOSE- uh oh — cedar-oak in that way I find so cloying; clove, stewed dark fruits, oak-vanilla, coconut suntan lotion, and a little green pepper; definitely not my favorite profile for a wine bouquet. PALATE- stewed plums and clove, sour cherry compote, cassis reduction, flavored wood, and hot oak on the tail end. This has a decent mouthfeel and its balance of acid, fruit, and tannin is fair enough, but I’m not a huge fan of the oaky, tired flavor profile. To me this tastes like anything else from Napa or CA for that matter, and I’m not really sensing the least bit of depth, terrior or just plain ol’ character. The body is medium-full. The mid-palate does not droop. The finish is medium to medium+ in length. And the score is 86 points. Even at $20, I wouldn’t buy this again. And on a day of giving many monies, a day leaving me to feel I’ve been made a royal chump, this wine didn’t help any. And finally, yes, if I had a tardis handy, I probably would hock back to warn myself against buying a quad of these. (86 pts.) – Tasted 4/15/2009.

Popularity: unranked [?]

When I tried this last year, it was much better the second day. If disappointed, cork it and put in fridge, not down the drain. (91 pts.) – Tasted 4/14/2009.

Popularity: unranked [?]

Double decant and hour open. Initial nose of cherry pie and crust, then bacony smoke and candied spice. In the mouth, nice thick mouthfeel with syruppy strawberry as primary fruit. Boggy / smoky on the mid palate and through the finish. Outstanding at this price point. Understand recent criticisms of somewhat unbalanced fruit up-front, but for me this is a wonderful wine for a wide range of foods. (90 pts.) – Tasted 4/13/2009.

Popularity: unranked [?]

With tobacco, truffle, cassis, spice, blackberry and floral aromatics, this concentrated wine filled your mouth with elegant, dark berries, cherry and coco. Fleshy, rich and round, this mature wine is still young and will only get better from here. (94 pts.) – Tasted 4/2/2009.

Popularity: unranked [?]

Outstanding !! (94 pts.) – Tasted 4/1/2009.

Popularity: unranked [?]