Last Chris Wilford organized a group of winegeeks (mostly eBobbers) to
do a Stud or Dud tasting. Ground rules were that we would taste blind
some wines that had significant "spreads" between major critics and see
what we thought.

Restaurant was La Grolla on Amsterdam Avenue on the Upper West Side.
They were very gracious hosts, and put out a nice spread:
Antipasto -speck, salami, mortadella, roasted peppers, cornichons,
olives, pesto, toast
Puff pastry with mushroom and cheese with salad
Pasta with duck ragu
Wild game sausages with broccoli rabe (I chose this though I thought
not best match just because I don't sausage as often as I do lamb or
beef, but heard the lamb was great).
cheese

As Chris was bagging and numbering bottles, we tried a couple off-theme
whites:
2003 Josef Leitz R=FCdesheimer Magdalenenkreuz Riesling Sp=E4tlese
(Rheingau)
A little sweeter and less crisp than previous bottles (too warm?), but
an attractive peachy Rheingau. A touch of spritz,deep peach fruit with
a little lime zest, good. B/B+

1997 Baumard "Trie Speciale" Savennieres
Huge Chenin, great acidity holding up a big body. Concentrated peach
and apricot fruit, notes of lanolin, wool, and flowers. A-

On to the blind wines:

Flight One:
Wine 1 - Definite browning as poured. Really funky, a nose of dead
leaves, tar, and old cherries. Several are ready to toss immediately,
but to me (and one neighbor) there's some improvement on the nose after
a few minutes of air. Thin on the palate, though, with some tannins
sticking out. Guess is older Nebbiolo. At end of flight it's unveiled,
it's the 1989 Einaudi Barolo. I suggest giving it some time, but
there's no improvement. B for the after-10-minutes nose, C overall.

Wine 2 - soft easy and blah, I'm thinking off-vintage Chianti. Boring.
I'm shocked it's the 1997 Antinori "Pian delle Vigne" Brunello. I
brought this, this was a big bruiser (though not very Brunello-typical)
on release. This tastes more like Sangiovese than what I remembered,
but is far thinner. C+

Flight Two
Wine 3 - Sweet red fruit, soft acidity, soft tannins, not much on
finish. My guess is mid-90s CalCab, I'm off my 2 states and a decade:
1987 Chateau St. Michelle "Cold Creek" Cabernet Sauvignon
(Washington). C+/B-

Wine 4 - Rather exotic herby nose, very ripe dark fruit, oaky, edge of
sweetness and a little smoke on the finish. someone suggest OZ Shiraz
and that seems like a reasonable guess. Not my style, but with that
disclaimer I vote thumbs up as it's most interesting so far. It's the
2003 Marquis-Phillips Cabernet Sauvignon. B

Someone from another table brings over the 2002 Ridge Lytton Springs
Zinfandel. Nice zinberry nose, powerful yet not over the top. B+/A-

Flight Three
Wine 5 - Round and ripe with cassis and black plum. Clearly New World,
ok. 2001 Beaulieu Vineyards "Tapestry" (Napa). B

Another table sends over the 2001 Montelena Estate Cabernet Sauvignon.
I get the end pour, showing quite nicely, some muscle but a sense of
refinement. A-

Wine 6 - More ripe California dark fruit, earthier nose, with a touch
of herbs. Bigger and with better acidity than wine #5. It's the 2001
Beaulieu Vineyards "George de la Tour" Cabernet Sauvignon (Napa). B+

Wine 7 - More dark Cali fruit, but a bit muted. And to me there's a
hint of wet cardboard dancing around the edge of the glass. Some
tannins though they're ripe and supple, but I can't get past the
feeling this is lightly corked. Others at table disagree. Turns out
it's another bottle of the 2001 Montelena Estate Cabernet Sauvignon
(Napa). Now, I'll draw no conclusions as to Laube and Montelena. I've
now tasted 4 bottles of '01 Monty, only the last seemed slightly
corked. Of course, no one else at table thought it corked,and in any
case even if I was right it could be the fr$gging cork! But this was a
C+ for me if I had to rate (normally I don't put a grade on wines I
think are corked).

Flight Four
Wine 8 - Very ripe blackberry fruit, some smoke and mineral. This comes
across as hot. Too big for me, but obviously well-made. Modern Rhone or
Cali Rhone Ranger is consensus at table. 2002 Saxum Broken Stones B

Wine 9 - This one is ripe but not overripe, weighty without being over
the top. I don't recognize that we've already had a small taste of the
2002 Ridge Lytton Springs , but score simarly, A-

Other bottles from other tables were circulating, including:

1990 Mouton-Rothschild- I'm not a huge Mouton fan outside the '82, but
this is lovely. Ripe but no 1990 roasted notes, some acidity and
resolved tannins, notes of leather and graphite. A-

1997 Verset Cornas (Magnum)- Fruit seems thin, there's more olives than
fruit on the palate, clipped finish, damaged? C+

1998 Roger Sabon "Cuvee Prestige" Chateauneuf-du-Pape- this is a '98
CdP? Tastes more like a Guigal CdR from a so-so vintage. B-

1996 Pape-Clement- I've liked this before, but not much tonight. Mature
nose, acid seems out of balance on palate. Still, there is some
Graves-ness there with a bit of cigarbox and leadpencil as well as
earth. Rough stage? B/B-

I found it very tough to vote Stud or Dud. So many wines were good but
not great. I tried to set aside my palate preferences as much as
possible .

The group results we

Table A Wine Ratings Vote VERDICT
1988 Mouton 89 RP / 100 WS 0-9 Dud
1989 Margaux 89 RP / 99 WS 0-9 Dud
1990 Mouton 88 RP / 95 WS 7-2 Stud
1996 Pape Clement 94 RP / 8? WS 2-7 Dud
1997 Verset Cornas (Magnum) NR / 93 WS 2-7 Dud
1998 Roger Sabon CdP Cuvee Prestige 95 RP / 87 WS 3-6 Dud
2001 J. Phelps Backus Vin Cab. 93 RP / 79 WS 8-1 Stud
2001 Montelena 95 RP / 69 WS 6-3 Stud
2002 Ridge Lytton Springs 93 RP / 83 WS 5-4 Stud


Table B Wine Ratings Vote VERDICT
2001 Montelena 95 RP / 69 WS 4-3 Stud
2002 Ridge Lytton Springs 93 RP / 83 WS 2-5 Dud
2002 Bethal Heights Flat Block P.N Res. 91 RP / 83 WS 4-3 Stud
2002 Saxum Bone Rock Syrah 96 RP / 75 WS 3-4 Dud
1998 Fox Creek Reserve Shiraz 98 RP / 89 WS 5-2 Stud
2001 Kay's Shiraz Hillside 93-95 RP / 79 WS 1-6 Dud
1991 Quinta do Noval Nacional 85 RP / ? 4-3 Stud

Table C Wine Ratings Vote VERDICT
1989 Einaudi Barolo 95 RP / 71 WS 3-6 Dud
1997 Antinori Pian delle Vigne Brunello 90 RP / 97 WS 0-9 Dud
1987 Ch. St. Michelle Cold Creek Cab 95 RP / 83 WS 0-9 Dud
2001 BV Tapestry 87 RP / 72 WS 9-0 Stud
2001 BV George de Latour Cab. 88 RP / 69 WS 5-4 Stud
2001 Montelena 95 RP / 69 WS No Decision
2002 Saxum Broken Stones 95 RP / 75 WS 9-0 Stud
2002 Ridge Lytton Springs 93 RP / 83 WS 9-0 Stud

Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent
wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't
drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no
promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency

Interesting notes on the 2002 Ridge Lytton Springs. My parents, to
celebrate their 35th wedding anniversary, went on vacation to France.
During their trip, they were to dine with some old family friends in
Rueil-Malmaison, en banlieu de Paris, and they asked me suggestions of
a $30-$40 bottle of wine to bring as a gift.

I was tempted to send them off with a big California Cab, or perhaps
some Dom. Druhin Pinot Noir, but decided against something that they
would inevitably compare to their Old World versions. So, I sent them
off with a bottle of 2002 Lytton Springs. I've had the 2001 and loved
it, and I actually did have the 2002 once, but very late in a no-spit
tasting event, after my palatte was completely shot. But I figured it
would be a good example of a well made, very New World wine that has no
real equivalents in France.

I think your description of it sounds good. Ripe, weighty, not over
the top. I hope that they enjoy it, though I'll never find out for
sure of course, as they are very gracious people.

- Chris

Chris,
I'd say " well made, very New World wine that has no
real equivalents in France." sums it up. It's a good choice!

dale

Dale...did you really mean 69 WS rating on Montelena 2001?


"DaleW" wrote in message
ups.com...
Last Chris Wilford organized a group of winegeeks (mostly eBobbers) to
do a Stud or Dud tasting. Ground rules were that we would taste blind
some wines that had significant "spreads" between major critics and see
what we thought.

Restaurant was La Grolla on Amsterdam Avenue on the Upper West Side.
They were very gracious hosts, and put out a nice spread:
Antipasto -speck, salami, mortadella, roasted peppers, cornichons,
olives, pesto, toast
Puff pastry with mushroom and cheese with salad
Pasta with duck ragu
Wild game sausages with broccoli rabe (I chose this though I thought
not best match just because I don't sausage as often as I do lamb or
beef, but heard the lamb was great).
cheese

As Chris was bagging and numbering bottles, we tried a couple off-theme
whites:
2003 Josef Leitz Rüdesheimer Magdalenenkreuz Riesling Spätlese
(Rheingau)
A little sweeter and less crisp than previous bottles (too warm?), but
an attractive peachy Rheingau. A touch of spritz,deep peach fruit with
a little lime zest, good. B/B+

1997 Baumard "Trie Speciale" Savennieres
Huge Chenin, great acidity holding up a big body. Concentrated peach
and apricot fruit, notes of lanolin, wool, and flowers. A-

On to the blind wines:

Flight One:
Wine 1 - Definite browning as poured. Really funky, a nose of dead
leaves, tar, and old cherries. Several are ready to toss immediately,
but to me (and one neighbor) there's some improvement on the nose after
a few minutes of air. Thin on the palate, though, with some tannins
sticking out. Guess is older Nebbiolo. At end of flight it's unveiled,
it's the 1989 Einaudi Barolo. I suggest giving it some time, but
there's no improvement. B for the after-10-minutes nose, C overall.

Wine 2 - soft easy and blah, I'm thinking off-vintage Chianti. Boring.
I'm shocked it's the 1997 Antinori "Pian delle Vigne" Brunello. I
brought this, this was a big bruiser (though not very Brunello-typical)
on release. This tastes more like Sangiovese than what I remembered,
but is far thinner. C+

Flight Two
Wine 3 - Sweet red fruit, soft acidity, soft tannins, not much on
finish. My guess is mid-90s CalCab, I'm off my 2 states and a decade:
1987 Chateau St. Michelle "Cold Creek" Cabernet Sauvignon
(Washington). C+/B-

Wine 4 - Rather exotic herby nose, very ripe dark fruit, oaky, edge of
sweetness and a little smoke on the finish. someone suggest OZ Shiraz
and that seems like a reasonable guess. Not my style, but with that
disclaimer I vote thumbs up as it's most interesting so far. It's the
2003 Marquis-Phillips Cabernet Sauvignon. B

Someone from another table brings over the 2002 Ridge Lytton Springs
Zinfandel. Nice zinberry nose, powerful yet not over the top. B+/A-

Flight Three
Wine 5 - Round and ripe with cassis and black plum. Clearly New World,
ok. 2001 Beaulieu Vineyards "Tapestry" (Napa). B

Another table sends over the 2001 Montelena Estate Cabernet Sauvignon.
I get the end pour, showing quite nicely, some muscle but a sense of
refinement. A-

Wine 6 - More ripe California dark fruit, earthier nose, with a touch
of herbs. Bigger and with better acidity than wine #5. It's the 2001
Beaulieu Vineyards "George de la Tour" Cabernet Sauvignon (Napa). B+

Wine 7 - More dark Cali fruit, but a bit muted. And to me there's a
hint of wet cardboard dancing around the edge of the glass. Some
tannins though they're ripe and supple, but I can't get past the
feeling this is lightly corked. Others at table disagree. Turns out
it's another bottle of the 2001 Montelena Estate Cabernet Sauvignon
(Napa). Now, I'll draw no conclusions as to Laube and Montelena. I've
now tasted 4 bottles of '01 Monty, only the last seemed slightly
corked. Of course, no one else at table thought it corked,and in any
case even if I was right it could be the fr$gging cork! But this was a
C+ for me if I had to rate (normally I don't put a grade on wines I
think are corked).

Flight Four
Wine 8 - Very ripe blackberry fruit, some smoke and mineral. This comes
across as hot. Too big for me, but obviously well-made. Modern Rhone or
Cali Rhone Ranger is consensus at table. 2002 Saxum Broken Stones B

Wine 9 - This one is ripe but not overripe, weighty without being over
the top. I don't recognize that we've already had a small taste of the
2002 Ridge Lytton Springs , but score simarly, A-

Other bottles from other tables were circulating, including:

1990 Mouton-Rothschild- I'm not a huge Mouton fan outside the '82, but
this is lovely. Ripe but no 1990 roasted notes, some acidity and
resolved tannins, notes of leather and graphite. A-

1997 Verset Cornas (Magnum)- Fruit seems thin, there's more olives than
fruit on the palate, clipped finish, damaged? C+

1998 Roger Sabon "Cuvee Prestige" Chateauneuf-du-Pape- this is a '98
CdP? Tastes more like a Guigal CdR from a so-so vintage. B-

1996 Pape-Clement- I've liked this before, but not much tonight. Mature
nose, acid seems out of balance on palate. Still, there is some
Graves-ness there with a bit of cigarbox and leadpencil as well as
earth. Rough stage? B/B-

I found it very tough to vote Stud or Dud. So many wines were good but
not great. I tried to set aside my palate preferences as much as
possible .

The group results we

Table A Wine Ratings Vote VERDICT
1988 Mouton 89 RP / 100 WS 0-9 Dud
1989 Margaux 89 RP / 99 WS 0-9 Dud
1990 Mouton 88 RP / 95 WS 7-2 Stud
1996 Pape Clement 94 RP / 8? WS 2-7 Dud
1997 Verset Cornas (Magnum) NR / 93 WS 2-7 Dud
1998 Roger Sabon CdP Cuvee Prestige 95 RP / 87 WS 3-6 Dud
2001 J. Phelps Backus Vin Cab. 93 RP / 79 WS 8-1 Stud
2001 Montelena 95 RP / 69 WS 6-3 Stud
2002 Ridge Lytton Springs 93 RP / 83 WS 5-4 Stud


Table B Wine Ratings Vote VERDICT
2001 Montelena 95 RP / 69 WS 4-3 Stud
2002 Ridge Lytton Springs 93 RP / 83 WS 2-5 Dud
2002 Bethal Heights Flat Block P.N Res. 91 RP / 83 WS 4-3 Stud
2002 Saxum Bone Rock Syrah 96 RP / 75 WS 3-4 Dud
1998 Fox Creek Reserve Shiraz 98 RP / 89 WS 5-2 Stud
2001 Kay's Shiraz Hillside 93-95 RP / 79 WS 1-6 Dud
1991 Quinta do Noval Nacional 85 RP / ? 4-3 Stud

Table C Wine Ratings Vote VERDICT
1989 Einaudi Barolo 95 RP / 71 WS 3-6 Dud
1997 Antinori Pian delle Vigne Brunello 90 RP / 97 WS 0-9 Dud
1987 Ch. St. Michelle Cold Creek Cab 95 RP / 83 WS 0-9 Dud
2001 BV Tapestry 87 RP / 72 WS 9-0 Stud
2001 BV George de Latour Cab. 88 RP / 69 WS 5-4 Stud
2001 Montelena 95 RP / 69 WS No Decision
2002 Saxum Broken Stones 95 RP / 75 WS 9-0 Stud
2002 Ridge Lytton Springs 93 RP / 83 WS 9-0 Stud

Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent
wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't
drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no
promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency

Richard Neidich wrote:
Dale...did you really mean 69 WS rating on Montelena 2001?

I think that he did, Dick. Laube's ratings of '01 CalCabs were rather
infamous: he found pervasive cork taint in wines like Montelena (which
others didn't) and dissed them mercilessly as a result. Most people
I've spoken with about this seem to feel that Laube either: 1) Began
imagining TCA contamination in otherwise fine wines or 2) had some
bizarre bone to pick with selected wineries and took it out on them in
this way.

http://www.winespectator.com/Wine/Fe...7,2398,00.html

Mark Lipton

Thanks. I stopped reading Wine Spectator long ago and did not realize that.

Montelena in my opinion is THE abosolute best Cab in Napa.



"Mark Lipton" wrote in message
news:2mzCe.162544$_o.38205@attbi_s71...
Richard Neidich wrote:
Dale...did you really mean 69 WS rating on Montelena 2001?

I think that he did, Dick. Laube's ratings of '01 CalCabs were rather
infamous: he found pervasive cork taint in wines like Montelena (which
others didn't) and dissed them mercilessly as a result. Most people
I've spoken with about this seem to feel that Laube either: 1) Began
imagining TCA contamination in otherwise fine wines or 2) had some
bizarre bone to pick with selected wineries and took it out on them in
this way.

http://www.winespectator.com/Wine/Fe...7,2398,00.html

Mark Lipton

"Most people
I've spoken with about this seem to feel that Laube either: 1) Began
imagining TCA contamination in otherwise fine wines or 2) had some
bizarre bone to pick with selected wineries and took it out on them in
this way. "

Well, there's a 3rd (and most likely imho) possibility. That Laube has
developed a hyper-sensitivity to TCA. Bo has admitted there was a low
level contamination in the winery, and spent big bucks to reduce. Now,
it was under normal human detection levels, but it was there. One can
raise question re muted fruit, etc. But the main question is why should
a reviewer with an abnormal sensitivity be dissing wines that would be
fine for 99% of the audience? Less extreme but similar are issues re
Pierre Rovani and sulphur.

DaleW wrote:
"Most people
I've spoken with about this seem to feel that Laube either: 1) Began
imagining TCA contamination in otherwise fine wines or 2) had some
bizarre bone to pick with selected wineries and took it out on them in
this way. "

Well, there's a 3rd (and most likely imho) possibility. That Laube has
developed a hyper-sensitivity to TCA. Bo has admitted there was a low
level contamination in the winery, and spent big bucks to reduce. Now,
it was under normal human detection levels, but it was there. One can
raise question re muted fruit, etc. But the main question is why should
a reviewer with an abnormal sensitivity be dissing wines that would be
fine for 99% of the audience? Less extreme but similar are issues re
Pierre Rovani and sulphur.


Truly, your "3rd" possibility is for all intents the same as my #1, just
far more charitably put (small wonder, given your employer ;-)): Laube
has stated that he's trained himself to be hypersensitive and, in that
link I provided, he reports lab results that found 1-1.5 ppt levels of
TCA (where nominal human detection limit is 4-5 ppt) in the wines in
question. This begs the question, though, of whether Montelena is so
unique in having TCA levels in that range. Some of my more cynical
acquaintaces feel that he was making an example of Montelena and Gallo
of Sonoma. Speaking as a TCA-(hyper)sensitive myself, I find Laube's
description of a "chalky" character totally unlike any TCA taint that
I've detected.

Mark Lipton