On May 7, 9:09 am, Lawrence Leichtman wrote:
In article ,
Emery Davis wrote:



DaleW wrote:
On May 6, 12:15�am, cwdjrxyz wrote:
The wines are Saintsbury Reserve Carneros Chardonnay 1990 & Burgess
Napa Cabernet Sauvignon 1978. Both were bought soon after release, had
a sound cork, a fill still in the neck, and were stored properly.

This was the last bottle of the Burgess CS, and I have had it before.
It has always been decent, but not quite at the top. It is still
holding well, but perhaps is beginning to lose a bit of fruit. It is
not in the class of the Ridge MB 1990 I reported recently, but few
other California CSs are. It is a bit simple compared with the best
examples.

[]
thanks for notes. Only Burgess Cabs I've tried were the '76 & '84, but
enjoyed both. Seem to offer good value.

Fascinating note on the Saintsbury, thanks.

Indeed. I meant to respond to this earlier. I'm pleased to hear the
Burgess
is still holding up -- we have a bottle (I think only 1) of the 84 left.
It was
hale when last tried, but that was years ago now.

I have 6 or so bottles of Mayacamas Chardonnay '92. Like your Saintsbury
it was doing remarkably well. I shall have to try a bottle soon.

Thanks for the great notes.

-E

Has anyone tasted any recent Burgess Cabs? The last I had was 1988.

I have not had recent Burgess CS, but they they are still listed in
Hugh Johnson's 2008 pocket wine book. The 1995, 97, and 99 are listed
in bold type meaning they are ready for drinking. Vintages from the
2000s are not listed yet. I don't know if they just have not been
tasted or if something has happened to change for the worse at
Burgess. There is mention that Burgess CSs are dark and weighty and
come from from hillside vineyards on Howell mountain. They also have
made some fairly powerful Zinfandel. If Burgess continues in their old
style, I would guess that any frome the 2000s in better vintages may
benefit from at least a few more years of age. Howell mountain has
produced several well known, powerful CSs.