The wife and I have been invited to another couple's house for dinner on
Saturday, next. Having had a few bottles with the couple, I know their
preferences in Wine (other than dessert) tend toward the bold and
massive. I picked the current vintage Cotes du Rhone (Guigal), for
pre-dinner. A 1999 Guigal Hermitage for the robust food (She's from
Hungary, and her dinners tend to be lots of meat, lots of spices (kinda
the way I like it g), and a 1995 Sauterne, Chateau Malle, for dessert.
Have any of you tried the 1995 Sauterne's yet? Any thoughts? I was (was)
confident in the dessert wine choice, but I have had a friend tell me
that the 95's were, a bit less than spectacular. I'm a bit more sanguine
about the Hermitage, at least there's a lot of meat to ameliorate some
of the tannin.

TIA,

Da' Bear

In article , Da' Bear
writes:

1995 Sauterne, Chateau Malle, for dessert.
Have any of you tried the 1995 Sauterne's yet? Any thoughts? I was (was)
confident in the dessert wine choice, but I have had a friend tell me
that the 95's were, a bit less than spectacular.

Ok, so they are less than spectacular. I much preferred (speaking Sauternes in
general not specifically de Malle) '97, and probably the '96 & '99 too. But
unlike say the '91s and '92s. they weren't diluted. Probably drinking as nicely
as they're going to right now. I'd say it's likely to be a good - though not
spectacular- dessert wine.

Not trying to be unhelpful. Just want to point out that the overall quality of
a vintage in a region doesn't :
1) neccessarily translate into a good or bad wine for a particular bottling
2) neccesarily mean it's the best for drinking right now. I'd rather OWN a
classified Bdx from from a highly rated vintage like '95 than '94, '97, or '99,
but at moment it would be my last choice for drinking now.
3) you gotta drink those babies sometime!

I was in a restaurant couple weeks ago as a nearby table ordered a bottle of
Brunello. "It's a '97, best vintage...blah blah blah" the guy ordering was
saying. Without getting into the quality of the vintage (I like it better than
RP but less than Suckling), I haven't heard anyone who didn't think most '97
BdM were both tannic and shutting down. Ordering in a restaurant, with no
opportunity to decant in advance? Not me!

I'd serve the '95 and enjoy!

Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply

"Da' Bear" wrote in message
...

The wife and I have been invited to another couple's house for dinner on
Saturday, next. Having had a few bottles with the couple, I know their
preferences in Wine (other than dessert) tend toward the bold and
massive. I picked the current vintage Cotes du Rhone (Guigal), for
pre-dinner. A 1999 Guigal Hermitage for the robust food (She's from
Hungary, and her dinners tend to be lots of meat, lots of spices (kinda
the way I like it g), and a 1995 Sauterne, Chateau Malle, for dessert.
Have any of you tried the 1995 Sauterne's yet? Any thoughts? I was (was)
confident in the dessert wine choice, but I have had a friend tell me
that the 95's were, a bit less than spectacular. I'm a bit more sanguine
about the Hermitage, at least there's a lot of meat to ameliorate some
of the tannin.


My question would be the Guigal CdR for a pre-dinner wine. It is rather
thin and sweet, might not a nice sparkling wine set the stage in a
better manner?

pavane