In article >,
Ian Hoare > wrote:
>Salut/Hi John T,
>
> le/on Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:30:00 -0800, tu disais/you said:-
>
>>> >>1990 Dom Perignon
>>> >
>>> >As it happens I've got a mag of this (cadeau from my brother) from your
>>> >comment, I'd guess it should be left a while yet. Agree?
>>>
>>> I agree. Leave it 5+ years.
>>
>>That's odd.
>>We had the 90 Dom at a dinner two years back and felt it was opening up and
>>was stunning, packed with bisquit and length.
>
>I had a bottle too for New Year's Eve celebrations 1999/2000. I'm not
>experienced enough with this wine to know if it had more to show, I liked
>it very much, btw. However, this IS a mag, and a mag does have the
>reputation of taking longer to come round.


I had a bottle of the 1990 Dom in August 2002. It was one of the best
wines of the 1990 vintage that I've had so far. That includes Veuve
Clicquot La Grande Dame, Pol Roger Winston Churchill, Bollinger Grand
Annee,


I tend to like a fuller, more yeasty style of champagne, but this Dom was
fantastic. I liked it much better than the 1988, which I almost had to
choke down in comparison. It was fruity, yet complex, with a long and
glorious finish. It had a certain quality that filled the mouth. It wasn't
as acidic as others, so I'd say it was more balanced. My experience with
Dom is limited to the 88, 90, and 93. I wouldn't even buy the other two,
but the 90 is worth twice its price. I've seen it for under $100.


Dimitri