Mostly pinot

[Florida Jim]

1999 Dujac, Chambolle-Musigny:
Saturated cork; when first opened, not worth drinking (very acidic and shrill); after about an hour, very nice, balanced and characteristic Chambolle. Nothing here to excite but plenty to enjoy.

2003 Tardeau-Laurent, Gigondas:
Well beyond expectations; young, very slightly rustic but true to its place, no overt wood and excellent sustain. Not marred by the vintage and quite more than either the producer and vintage would suggest. Superb with steak.

2004 Rhys, Pinot Noir Home Vineyard:
Deep garnet; 13.4% alcohol; spicy, soft red fruit nose with a crisp element and a hint of earth reminds me of good Clos des Lambrays; whole cloth in the mouth with exquisite balance; flavors follow the nose with some black fruit and cut, good grip and real breed, a spherical impression; very long, finish. First sniff and I knew something wonderful this way comes I am sitting here trying to remember any CA pinot I have enjoyed more and nothing comes to mind. Maybe thats my memory but then, maybe its not. Many years left in the cellar.
Oh my!

1999 Hamacher, Pinot Noir:
Dark ruby: 13% alcohol; more truffled then the preceding wine (but really, this is an embarrassment of riches); this has darker fruit with mushroom/truffle nuances, some earth and is a bit more reticent; more rustic in the mouth but with so much intense flavor all of which echoes the nose big grip and a slightly drying but medium length finish. Not as fine as the Rhys but every bit as interesting and engaging. Many years to peak.

Best, Jim

 

[Keith Levenberg]

There goes another .5% of the commercial production of the '04 Home! Nice to hear it's doing well. I had pretty much the same reaction to it when it came out, and I still haven't had a better California pinot.

 

[VLM]

originally posted by Florida Jim:

2003 Tardeau-Laurent, Gigondas:
Superb

Jim likes oak, Jim likes oak...

But seriously, I have yet to have a Rhys pinot noir and am very much looking forward to it.

 

[Cliff]

At some point, I have to try one of those as well. I gave up on the list after too many disappointments with the Alesia wins, and then losing out on Home for not having bought enough Alesia.

 

[Jim Hanlon]

originally posted by Cliff:
At some point, I have to try one of those as well. I gave up on the list after too many disappointments with the Alesia wins, and then losing out on Home for not having bought enough Alesia.

They're going to stop making the Alesia wines with this vintage and go all estate, so you should sign up again!

 

[Keith Levenberg]

originally posted by Cliff:
At some point, I have to try one of those as well. I gave up on the list after too many disappointments with the Alesia wins, and then losing out on Home for not having bought enough Alesia.

I doubt that's what happened - Home production is tiny - 200 bottles sold and offered in 2s. You would have had to sign up very early to get it and it was first sold in their first offering, so wasn't contingent on any purchase history. I don't think too many people who didn't buy it in '04 had the chance to buy it afterwards no matter how much Alesia they bought.

 

[Jonathan Loesberg]

originally posted by VLM:
Nah-na-nah-na-nah-nah

originally posted by Florida Jim:

2003 Tardeau-Laurent, Gigondas:
Superb

Jim likes oak, Jim likes oak...

But seriously, I have yet to have a Rhys pinot noir and am very much looking forward to it.

I will second this reaction to liking anything from Tardieu-Laurent. I have never tasted a single one of their wines that tasted other than generic Southern Rhone souped up on oak.

But I haven't tasted this one. Maybe they were experimenting with foudres.

 

[David M. Bueker]

Too bad about Alesia if it's true (I have heard different tales from different sources). I actually prefer the Alesia wines to the Rhys estate wines.

 

[Jim Hanlon]

originally posted by David M. Bueker:
Too bad about Alesia if it's true (I have heard different tales from different sources). I actually prefer the Alesia wines to the Rhys estate wines.

My source is Kevin Harvey, who should know. As of July, he was considering making a Falstaff Road this year, as the only Alesia. I've since heard that he's not taking the Falstaff Road grapes.

 

[Rahsaan]

Looks like they recently had a dramatic increase in the size of this Home Vineyard. How does that work? Boundaries can get redefined? Why not, I guess it has happened in Burgundy.

Loading…

www.rhysvineyards.com

 

[David M. Bueker]

Kevin would know what he's talking about. Too bad. I will likely drop Rhys as a result. That's ok, as I want to pick up Tercero.

 

[Cliff]

originally posted by Keith Levenberg:

originally posted by Cliff:
At some point, I have to try one of those as well. I gave up on the list after too many disappointments with the Alesia wins, and then losing out on Home for not having bought enough Alesia.

I doubt that's what happened - Home production is tiny - 200 bottles sold and offered in 2s. You would have had to sign up very early to get it and it was first sold in their first offering, so wasn't contingent on any purchase history. I don't think too many people who didn't buy it in '04 had the chance to buy it afterwards no matter how much Alesia they bought.

I bought all I the Rhys I could (including the two bottles of Home) plus some Alesia in 04 and 05, but I was underwhelmed enough with the Alesia to just let it drop when the 06 allocation came and I didn't get the Home. No doubt they were just hitting their stride, and the 06 vintage is more in my wheelhouse certainly than 04. But there's too much wine I'd rather have that costs less. From everything I've heard, I think I'd like I'll the domaine stuff I have, when I get around to them.

 

[Keith Levenberg]

originally posted by Rahsaan:
Looks like they recently had a dramatic increase in the size of this Home Vineyard. How does that work? Boundaries can get redefined? Why not, I guess it has happened in Burgundy.

Loading…

www.rhysvineyards.com

You say that like there's something unkosher about it. They planted the vineyard; of course they can define its boundaries however they want.

 

[Ned Hoey]

originally posted by Keith Levenberg:

originally posted by Rahsaan:
Looks like they recently had a dramatic increase in the size of this Home Vineyard. How does that work? Boundaries can get redefined? Why not, I guess it has happened in Burgundy.

Loading…

www.rhysvineyards.com

You say that like there's something unkosher about it. They planted the vineyard; of course they can define its boundaries however they want.

And I guess it actually is his own home and backyard. As a terroir with zero history and no particular
specific soil or exposure parameters, whatever name it is given or boundaries it has doesn't mean anything anyway. Now the new younger vines are the majority of it. Will the tiny section of old vines
be bottled separately?

 

[Odd Rydland]

originally posted by Rahsaan:
Looks like they recently had a dramatic increase in the size of this Home Vineyard. How does that work? Boundaries can get redefined? Why not, I guess it has happened in Burgundy.

Loading…

www.rhysvineyards.com

Where it really happens is in Bordeaux. Petrus for example.

 

[Rahsaan]

originally posted by Keith Levenberg:

You say that like there's something unkosher about it. They planted the vineyard; of course they can define its boundaries however they want.

I don't know if it's kosher or not, but it does strike me as a bit disingenuous to start off saying we have a special plot of land called Home Vineyard that is only 1/4 of an acre. Then, when it sells well to suddenly find another 1.4 acres that can also be called Home Vineyard.

Ok, maybe they did extensive research to show that the geological properties of the new boundary carry on in the same spirit of the first section. I know the sizes are small but it seems to me that the 'new' wine will have to be different. Who knows, it could even be better. But it still seems like different wines to me.

 

[Jim Hanlon]

originally posted by Rahsaan:

originally posted by Keith Levenberg:

You say that like there's something unkosher about it. They planted the vineyard; of course they can define its boundaries however they want.

I don't know if it's kosher or not, but it does strike me as a bit disingenuous to start off saying we have a special plot of land called Home Vineyard that is only 1/4 of an acre. Then, when it sells well to suddenly find another 1.4 acres that can also be called Home Vineyard.

Ok, maybe they did extensive research to show that the geological properties of the new boundary carry on in the same spirit of the first section. I know the sizes are small but it seems to me that the 'new' wine will have to be different. Who knows, it could even be better. But it still seems like different wines to me.

Rahsaan, you should meet with Kevin next time you're in northern California. This is not a guy to dilute the Home Pinot just to make more money. If he didn't think the new planting would be of similar quality, he wouldn't have done it. After all, he does have another 30 or so acres of estate Pinot.

 

[Thor]

Yeah. Rahsaan, you're barking up the wrong vine here.

I did like many the Alesias, but for my palate the Rhys wines I've had were better in almost every way.

 

[Rahsaan]

originally posted by Jim Hanlon: Rahsaan, you should meet with Kevin next time you're in northern California. This is not a guy to dilute the Home Pinot just to make more money. If he didn't think the new planting would be of similar quality, he wouldn't have done it..

I believe you. Everything I see about his operation leads me to have such confidence. But it still seems kind of strange to have the same vineyard name for two different vineyards. Even if the quality is the same the expression will have to be different. But maybe only slightly in this case.

 

[Thor]

What are the two different vineyards?