CWD: '94 Beaucastel

[MLipton]

Tonight, with temperatures predicted to fall below 0F, we hunkered down and grilled some ribeye steaks. With this red meat orgy, I opened a bottle of 1994 Ch. Beaucastel Chateauneuf-du-Pape, which was still inky dark going brick at the rim. It only had a mild barnyard aroma overlaying the dark fruit and olives
and had a nice acid backbone and smooth tannins at this stage of its life. Although I chose this wine primarily to indulge in the fantasy that I was somewhere in the Mediterranean rather than Siberia, it proved to be a more than decent match with the steak. Since I normally think of Grenache-based wines as being more suited to game and smoked meats, I attribute this different showing to the atypical, Mourvedre-heavy encepagement. This was the last of our '94 CdPs, though some '89s and '90s still linger in the cellar.

Reporting from the frozen Midwest,
Mark Lipton

 

[Rahsaan]

originally posted by MLipton:
CWD: '94 BeaucastelAlthough I chose this wine primarily to indulge in the fantasy that I was somewhere in the Mediterranean rather than Siberia, it proved to be a more than decent match with the steak.

So your final verdict is 'more than decent'? Nothing better?

If you want more I see Macarthurs is selling it for just under $70 per bottle.

 

[Chris Coad]

originally posted by Rahsaan:

originally posted by MLipton:
CWD: '94 BeaucastelAlthough I chose this wine primarily to indulge in the fantasy that I was somewhere in the Mediterranean rather than Siberia, it proved to be a more than decent match with the steak.

So your final verdict is 'more than decent'? Nothing better?

I'm not Mark Lipton, and I don't presume to speak for him, but I sense you may be taking the "more than decent" line slightly out of context. If we back the lens up a little, we see that Mark finds the wine "proved to be a more than decent match with the steak." It's a subtle distinction, but one worthy of notice.

 

[Rahsaan]

originally posted by Chris Coad:
I sense you may be taking the "more than decent" line slightly out of context. If we back the lens up a little, we see that Mark finds the wine "proved to be a more than decent match with the steak." It's a subtle distinction, but one worthy of notice.

Yes. But it was the only evaluation he offered. Just wondering if he was Damning with Faint Praise.

 

[Chris Coad]

originally posted by Rahsaan:

originally posted by Chris Coad:
I sense you may be taking the "more than decent" line slightly out of context. If we back the lens up a little, we see that Mark finds the wine "proved to be a more than decent match with the steak." It's a subtle distinction, but one worthy of notice.

Yes. But it was the only evaluation he offered. Just wondering if he was Damning with Faint Praise.

I'm still not Mark Lipton, and I continue to eschew the insistent urge to speak for him, but reading the note as a whole, it seemed a qualified endorsement of a good, solid wine to have with steak. As in, maybe it didn't rock his world, but it was pretty good nonetheless. Plus, it's damn frickin' cold out tonight.

Again, I can't claim to speak for Mark Lipton, but that's my interpretation, based on my fertile imagination.

 

[VLM]

originally posted by Chris Coad:

originally posted by Rahsaan:

originally posted by Chris Coad:
I sense you may be taking the "more than decent" line slightly out of context. If we back the lens up a little, we see that Mark finds the wine "proved to be a more than decent match with the steak." It's a subtle distinction, but one worthy of notice.

Yes. But it was the only evaluation he offered. Just wondering if he was Damning with Faint Praise.

I'm still not Mark Lipton, and I continue to eschew the insistent urge to speak for him, but reading the note as a whole, it seemed a qualified endorsement of a good, solid wine to have with steak. As in, maybe it didn't rock his world, but it was pretty good nonetheless. Plus, it's damn frickin' cold.

Again, I can't claim to speak for Mark Lipton, but that's my interpretation, based on my fertile imagination.

Get a job.

 

[Chris Coad]

originally posted by VLM:

originally posted by Chris Coad:

originally posted by Rahsaan:

originally posted by Chris Coad:
I sense you may be taking the "more than decent" line slightly out of context. If we back the lens up a little, we see that Mark finds the wine "proved to be a more than decent match with the steak." It's a subtle distinction, but one worthy of notice.

Yes. But it was the only evaluation he offered. Just wondering if he was Damning with Faint Praise.

I'm still not Mark Lipton, and I continue to eschew the insistent urge to speak for him, but reading the note as a whole, it seemed a qualified endorsement of a good, solid wine to have with steak. As in, maybe it didn't rock his world, but it was pretty good nonetheless. Plus, it's damn frickin' cold.

Again, I can't claim to speak for Mark Lipton, but that's my interpretation, based on my fertile imagination.

Get a job.

But I like sitting in my bathrobe and eating nachos while typing on the interweb. It's therapeutic!

 

[Thor]

But it was the only evaluation he offered.

But it was an evaluation of the pairing, not the wine.

 

[Jonathan Loesberg]

I'm neither Mark nor Chris. I find Chris's interpretation, however, careful, insightful and entirely persuasive. He should have been a literary critic and perhaps should seek a position in that field. He would need to get rid of his modesty, however, as not suitable to the outsize confidence that seems almost a job requirement in a field that certainly does not offer any ground for that confidence.

 

[mel hill]

Was 1994 considered an "off year" in CnP?
I'm not sure where I got a 1994 VT but I ended up taking it to my monthly poker game last friday.
Not a heavyweight for sure but IMHO a classic aged CnP.
1994 Beaucastel was until a couple of years ago a pretty good wine for under $35.... Now, at $70 I'd pass

 

[Jeff Grossman]

I'm neither Mark nor Chris nor Jonathan nor Mel.

 

[Rahsaan]

originally posted by Thor:
But it was an evaluation of the pairing, not the wine.

Well the whole thing was faint/decent. But then I'm not terribly concerned about meat details.

 

[MLipton]

originally posted by Chris Coad:

originally posted by Rahsaan:

originally posted by Chris Coad:
I sense you may be taking the "more than decent" line slightly out of context. If we back the lens up a little, we see that Mark finds the wine "proved to be a more than decent match with the steak." It's a subtle distinction, but one worthy of notice.

Yes. But it was the only evaluation he offered. Just wondering if he was Damning with Faint Praise.

I'm still not Mark Lipton, and I continue to eschew the insistent urge to speak for him, but reading the note as a whole, it seemed a qualified endorsement of a good, solid wine to have with steak. As in, maybe it didn't rock his world, but it was pretty good nonetheless. Plus, it's damn frickin' cold out tonight.

Again, I can't claim to speak for Mark Lipton, but that's my interpretation, based on my fertile imagination.

While I'm not Mark Lipton either, I think that Chris has got the right end of the argument here. And for Mel's benefit: '94 was an agreeable puppy of a year, but not really made for the long haul IMO. This was a very decent wine, but does suffer a bit in comparison to the '88, '89 and '98.

Sharon Bowman
Chris Coad
Englebert Humperdink

 

[Jonathan Loesberg]

With regard to 94, it had the reputation at the time of being lesser, especially in comparison to 95. Like 99 and 04, however, the vintage has its fans, of which I am one. I expect it has only a few more years of useful life, but since it is 15 now, that's about right for all but the very best CdPs. With regard to Beaucastel, I would agree that the 89 and 90 are better. I don't agree about the 88, which is a nice wine but somewhat military in its comportment. I have always liked the 94 a lot, though I haven't had one in maybe a year, so maybe it is starting to decline.

 

[Bob Semon]

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
I have always liked the 94 a lot, though I haven't had one in maybe a year, so maybe it is starting to decline.

I'll pull one from Eliot's sometime next week. We can revisit. Rahsann may wish to join.

Disclaimer: I am neither Eliot, Jonathan, nor Rahsaan. I was Sharon, once. Sharon Needles. But that was just a night job.

 

[Rahsaan]

originally posted by Bob Semon:
I'll pull one from Eliot's sometime next week. We can revisit. Rahsann may wish to join.

Sounds like a good idea. Saves me the trouble of going to Macarthurs to buy Southern Rhone wine. And of course I can contribute something else.

Is Eliot what you call your cellar?

 

[Jonathan Loesberg]

originally posted by Rahsaan:

originally posted by Bob Semon:
I'll pull one from Eliot's sometime next week. We can revisit. Rahsann may wish to join.

Sounds like a good idea. Saves me the trouble of going to Macarthurs to buy Southern Rhone wine. And of course I can contribute something else.

Is Eliot what you call your cellar?

Doesn't everybody call their cellar Eliot?

 

[MLipton]

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
With regard to 94, it had the reputation at the time of being lesser, especially in comparison to 95. Like 99 and 04, however, the vintage has its fans, of which I am one. I expect it has only a few more years of useful life, but since it is 15 now, that's about right for all but the very best CdPs. With regard to Beaucastel, I would agree that the 89 and 90 are better. I don't agree about the 88, which is a nice wine but somewhat military in its comportment. I have always liked the 94 a lot, though I haven't had one in maybe a year, so maybe it is starting to decline.

I think that I liked '88 in CdP more than most, just as I liked '88 in Bordeaux more than many (it has its adherents here, I know): it was a quieter, more low-key vintage, but developed really nicely with age and produced some memorable wines for me, among which was the Beaucastel. Count me among the fans of '94: every wine I cellared from that year has been pleasurable. I didn't buy them expecting a repeat of '89 or '90 and haven't suffered any disappointment in that regard. Sorry if I seem to be damning it with faint praise.

Mark Lipton

 

[Chris Coad]

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:

originally posted by Rahsaan:

originally posted by Bob Semon:
I'll pull one from Eliot's sometime next week. We can revisit. Rahsann may wish to join.

Sounds like a good idea. Saves me the trouble of going to Macarthurs to buy Southern Rhone wine. And of course I can contribute something else.

Is Eliot what you call your cellar?

Doesn't everybody call their cellar Eliot?

Not everybody. I call my cellar Amanda.

I love her.

 

[David M. Bueker]

Thor's cellar is named Amanda. But that makes sense since it's in Boston.