Pulled the cork on my first bottle of '05 Geyserville last night and
whoever said it was unlike any Geezer they had tasted before (maybe
Mark Lipton?) was right.

Nose lacked the big warm berry notes. The most predominant aroma I got
was onion skins! SWMBO said onions first, then chided me as un-upping
her with onion skins so she sniffed again and declared it was
shallots.

The bouquet doesn't carry over to the taste. But, there was none of
the zin character that usually knocks you over with Geyserville. This
was refined, almost subtle making me think a lot of Bordeaux. Some
pencil lead, a bit of dark bitter cherry, but lacking the pepper and
warm raspberries that I've come to expect.

Conclusion was a nice wine to lay down for a while, but not one that
would be recognizable as a Ridge zin if tasted blind.
Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

In article >,
Ed Rasimus > wrote:

> Pulled the cork on my first bottle of '05 Geyserville last night and
> whoever said it was unlike any Geezer they had tasted before (maybe
> Mark Lipton?) was right.
>
> Nose lacked the big warm berry notes. The most predominant aroma I got
> was onion skins! SWMBO said onions first, then chided me as un-upping
> her with onion skins so she sniffed again and declared it was
> shallots.
>
> The bouquet doesn't carry over to the taste. But, there was none of
> the zin character that usually knocks you over with Geyserville. This
> was refined, almost subtle making me think a lot of Bordeaux. Some
> pencil lead, a bit of dark bitter cherry, but lacking the pepper and
> warm raspberries that I've come to expect.
>
> Conclusion was a nice wine to lay down for a while, but not one that
> would be recognizable as a Ridge zin if tasted blind.
> Ed Rasimus
> Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
> "When Thunder Rolled"
> www.thunderchief.org
> www.thundertales.blogspot.com

When I went to the Sonoma tasting room they had the 2005 Geyserville and
I found it to be just unpleasant. Tasted like a cheap version of a Ridge
not at all what I expected. The Lytton Springs was not much better. Have
there been big changes at Ridge or was 2005 just not a good year for
Zindfandel?

Thanks, Ed. (Good part about the shallots.) I'm just about to head over to
their tasting room (it's nearby). Web site says unaffected by recent fire,
open for business as usual. See separate TN I'm posting with this one.

-- Max

On Sep 2, 3:52 pm, Lawrence Leichtman > wrote:
>
> When I went to the Sonoma tasting room they had the 2005 Geyserville and
> I found it to be just unpleasant. Tasted like a cheap version of a Ridge
> not at all what I expected. The Lytton Springs was not much better. Have
> there been big changes at Ridge or was 2005 just not a good year for
> Zindfandel?

Perhaps the blend has changed. Too much carignan or mataro would put
me off.

Mark

On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 20:40:11 -0000, Tire Bouchon
> wrote:

>On Sep 2, 3:52 pm, Lawrence Leichtman > wrote:
>>
>> When I went to the Sonoma tasting room they had the 2005 Geyserville and
>> I found it to be just unpleasant. Tasted like a cheap version of a Ridge
>> not at all what I expected. The Lytton Springs was not much better. Have
>> there been big changes at Ridge or was 2005 just not a good year for
>> Zindfandel?
>
>Perhaps the blend has changed. Too much carignan or mataro would put
>me off.
>
>Mark

17% carignane and 6% Petite Syrah this year.
Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

In article .com>,
Tire Bouchon > wrote:

> On Sep 2, 3:52 pm, Lawrence Leichtman > wrote:
> >
> > When I went to the Sonoma tasting room they had the 2005 Geyserville and
> > I found it to be just unpleasant. Tasted like a cheap version of a Ridge
> > not at all what I expected. The Lytton Springs was not much better. Have
> > there been big changes at Ridge or was 2005 just not a good year for
> > Zindfandel?
>
> Perhaps the blend has changed. Too much carignan or mataro would put
> me off.
>
> Mark

You may be right there Mark. The taste and nose were not that of a good
Zindfandel so I suspect the blend may have changed.

Lawrence Leichtman wrote:

>>Perhaps the blend has changed. Too much carignan or mataro would put
>>me off.
>>
>>Mark
>
>
> You may be right there Mark. The taste and nose were not that of a good
> Zindfandel so I suspect the blend may have changed.

Geyserville (and Lytton Springs) have been field blends for as long as
I've been drinking them (> 25 years now). Some years ago, Ridge dropped
the Zinfandel from their names (they're now copyrighted brand names
FWIW) to reflect the fact that, in a given year, the percentage of
Zinfandel in the blend could fall below the 75% mandated for varietal
labeling. As a consequence, the amounts of each variety in the blend
differs quite substantially year to year.

Courtesy of the Ridge website (easier than trundling down to the cellar)
here are the percentages from recent years:

2005 - 77% Zin, 16% Carignan, 6% Petite Sirah (as Ed said)
2004 - 75% 18% 7%
2003 - 76 18 6
2002 - 84 12 4
2001 - 74 18 8
2000 - 66 17 17
1999 - 68 16 16
1998 - 74 10 15 1% Mataro (Mourvedre)
1996 - 75 17 6 2
1995 - 62 15 18 5

So, over the past 3 years the blend has stayed abnormally consistent ;-)
If anything, a change might have been evident between the 2000 and 2001
vintages, when the percentage of PS dropped markedly or between 1998 and
1999 when the Mataro was dropped from the blend. However, there's
nothing about the blend in '05 to suggest such a different character to
the wine.

Mark Lipton

--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com

In article >, Mark Lipton >
wrote:

> Lawrence Leichtman wrote:
>
> >>Perhaps the blend has changed. Too much carignan or mataro would put
> >>me off.
> >>
> >>Mark
> >
> >
> > You may be right there Mark. The taste and nose were not that of a good
> > Zindfandel so I suspect the blend may have changed.
>
> Geyserville (and Lytton Springs) have been field blends for as long as
> I've been drinking them (> 25 years now). Some years ago, Ridge dropped
> the Zinfandel from their names (they're now copyrighted brand names
> FWIW) to reflect the fact that, in a given year, the percentage of
> Zinfandel in the blend could fall below the 75% mandated for varietal
> labeling. As a consequence, the amounts of each variety in the blend
> differs quite substantially year to year.
>
> Courtesy of the Ridge website (easier than trundling down to the cellar)
> here are the percentages from recent years:
>
> 2005 - 77% Zin, 16% Carignan, 6% Petite Sirah (as Ed said)
> 2004 - 75% 18% 7%
> 2003 - 76 18 6
> 2002 - 84 12 4
> 2001 - 74 18 8
> 2000 - 66 17 17
> 1999 - 68 16 16
> 1998 - 74 10 15 1% Mataro (Mourvedre)
> 1996 - 75 17 6 2
> 1995 - 62 15 18 5
>
> So, over the past 3 years the blend has stayed abnormally consistent ;-)
> If anything, a change might have been evident between the 2000 and 2001
> vintages, when the percentage of PS dropped markedly or between 1998 and
> 1999 when the Mataro was dropped from the blend. However, there's
> nothing about the blend in '05 to suggest such a different character to
> the wine.
>
> Mark Lipton

Well, that makes more of a puzzle to me.

On Sep 3, 3:35 pm, Lawrence Leichtman > wrote:
> In article >, Mark Lipton >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Lawrence Leichtman wrote:
>
> > >>Perhaps the blend has changed. Too much carignan or mataro would put
> > >>me off.
>
> > >>Mark
>
> > > You may be right there Mark. The taste and nose were not that of a good
> > > Zindfandel so I suspect the blend may have changed.
>
> > Geyserville (and Lytton Springs) have been field blends for as long as
> > I've been drinking them (> 25 years now). Some years ago, Ridge dropped
> > the Zinfandel from their names (they're now copyrighted brand names
> > FWIW) to reflect the fact that, in a given year, the percentage of
> > Zinfandel in the blend could fall below the 75% mandated for varietal
> > labeling. As a consequence, the amounts of each variety in the blend
> > differs quite substantially year to year.
>
> > Courtesy of the Ridge website (easier than trundling down to the cellar)
> > here are the percentages from recent years:
>
> > 2005 - 77% Zin, 16% Carignan, 6% Petite Sirah (as Ed said)
> > 2004 - 75% 18% 7%
> > 2003 - 76 18 6
> > 2002 - 84 12 4
> > 2001 - 74 18 8
> > 2000 - 66 17 17
> > 1999 - 68 16 16
> > 1998 - 74 10 15 1% Mataro (Mourvedre)
> > 1996 - 75 17 6 2
> > 1995 - 62 15 18 5
>
> > So, over the past 3 years the blend has stayed abnormally consistent ;-)
> > If anything, a change might have been evident between the 2000 and 2001
> > vintages, when the percentage of PS dropped markedly or between 1998 and
> > 1999 when the Mataro was dropped from the blend. However, there's
> > nothing about the blend in '05 to suggest such a different character to
> > the wine.
>
> > Mark Lipton
>
> Well, that makes more of a puzzle to me.

Other variables: ripeness levels, potential alcohol, yeast strains,
cooperage, brett. Lots of things affect the finished product.

Mark

In article om>,
Tire Bouchon > wrote:

> On Sep 3, 3:35 pm, Lawrence Leichtman > wrote:
> > In article >, Mark Lipton >
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Lawrence Leichtman wrote:
> >
> > > >>Perhaps the blend has changed. Too much carignan or mataro would put
> > > >>me off.
> >
> > > >>Mark
> >
> > > > You may be right there Mark. The taste and nose were not that of a good
> > > > Zindfandel so I suspect the blend may have changed.
> >
> > > Geyserville (and Lytton Springs) have been field blends for as long as
> > > I've been drinking them (> 25 years now). Some years ago, Ridge dropped
> > > the Zinfandel from their names (they're now copyrighted brand names
> > > FWIW) to reflect the fact that, in a given year, the percentage of
> > > Zinfandel in the blend could fall below the 75% mandated for varietal
> > > labeling. As a consequence, the amounts of each variety in the blend
> > > differs quite substantially year to year.
> >
> > > Courtesy of the Ridge website (easier than trundling down to the cellar)
> > > here are the percentages from recent years:
> >
> > > 2005 - 77% Zin, 16% Carignan, 6% Petite Sirah (as Ed said)
> > > 2004 - 75% 18% 7%
> > > 2003 - 76 18 6
> > > 2002 - 84 12 4
> > > 2001 - 74 18 8
> > > 2000 - 66 17 17
> > > 1999 - 68 16 16
> > > 1998 - 74 10 15 1% Mataro (Mourvedre)
> > > 1996 - 75 17 6 2
> > > 1995 - 62 15 18 5
> >
> > > So, over the past 3 years the blend has stayed abnormally consistent ;-)
> > > If anything, a change might have been evident between the 2000 and 2001
> > > vintages, when the percentage of PS dropped markedly or between 1998 and
> > > 1999 when the Mataro was dropped from the blend. However, there's
> > > nothing about the blend in '05 to suggest such a different character to
> > > the wine.
> >
> > > Mark Lipton
> >
> > Well, that makes more of a puzzle to me.
>
> Other variables: ripeness levels, potential alcohol, yeast strains,
> cooperage, brett. Lots of things affect the finished product.
>
> Mark

I agree but the blend tasted so totally different that the grape
varietals stood out as being different yet the mix was the same. Based
on what I tasted it seemed to be more Petit Syrah this time than
anything else even the Zindfandel so perhaps the Petit Syrah was much
more extracted than I have tasted before. Normally, I'm a big fan of
Ridge but 2005's did nothing positive for me.