With tonight' dinner of BBQ ribs, cole slaw and rolls, Jean asked for a
Zin. Consultation of the database revealed that the most ready "Zin" we
had was:

2001 Ridge Geyserville
nose: initially oaky, briery, tar, raspberry
palate: medium-full body, oak-influenced, becoming more acidic, tar and
fruit

Initially, this wine seemed overly oaky and blowsy, but as it sat open
it became more acidic and structured. No shortage of fruit here, it was
better with the ribs, which brought out the more savory elements of the
wine. By the end of the bottle, it had morphed into a wine firmly in
the Geyserville mold, but still very primary. No hurry to open these,
folks.

Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.cwdjr.net

On 2009-04-10 19:54:38 -0700, Mark Lipton > said:
>
>
> Initially, this wine seemed overly oaky and blowsy,

Blowsy????

My 1951 Webster's unabridged (I like most things with a little age on
them...) says "red faced, fat and flushed; unkempt." Is that what you
meant? If so, good on ya - I've never heard that description of wine,
but it certainly is picturesque...
J

Ronin wrote:
> On 2009-04-10 19:54:38 -0700, Mark Lipton > said:
>
>>
>>
>> Initially, this wine seemed overly oaky and blowsy,
>
>
> Blowsy????
>
> My 1951 Webster's unabridged (I like most things with a little age on
> them...) says "red faced, fat and flushed; unkempt." Is that what you
> meant? If so, good on ya - I've never heard that description of wine,
> but it certainly is picturesque...

Yep. More metaphorical than is my wont, but I use it in the sense of a
wine lacking in structure, overly soft and forward.

Works for me,
Mark Lipton


--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.cwdjr.net

On Apr 11, 10:50�am, Mark Lipton > wrote:
> Ronin wrote:
> > On 2009-04-10 19:54:38 -0700, Mark Lipton > said:
>
> >> Initially, this wine seemed overly oaky and blowsy,
>
> > Blowsy????
>
> > My 1951 Webster's unabridged (I like most things with a little age on
> > them...) says "red faced, fat and flushed; unkempt." �Is that what you
> > meant? �If so, good on ya - I've never heard that description of wine,
> > but it certainly is picturesque...
>
> Yep. �More metaphorical than is my wont, but I use it in the sense of a
> wine lacking in structure, overly soft and forward.
>
> Works for me,
> Mark Lipton
>
> --
> alt.food.wine FAQ: �http://winefaq.cwdjr.net

Since I've been reading your reviews for a number of years now Mark, I
knew exactly what you meant. Thanks for the TN, I have a few bottles
left and I might drink one soon and hold the other.

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 09:01:33 -0700 (PDT), "Bi!!" >
wrote:

>On Apr 11, 10:50?am, Mark Lipton > wrote:
>> Ronin wrote:
>> > On 2009-04-10 19:54:38 -0700, Mark Lipton > said:
>>
>> >> Initially, this wine seemed overly oaky and blowsy,
>>
>> > Blowsy????
>>
>> > My 1951 Webster's unabridged (I like most things with a little age on
>> > them...) says "red faced, fat and flushed; unkempt." ?Is that what you
>> > meant? ?If so, good on ya - I've never heard that description of wine,
>> > but it certainly is picturesque...
>>
>> Yep. ?More metaphorical than is my wont, but I use it in the sense of a
>> wine lacking in structure, overly soft and forward.
>>
>> Works for me,
>> Mark Lipton
>>
>> --
>> alt.food.wine FAQ: ?http://winefaq.cwdjr.net
>
>Since I've been reading your reviews for a number of years now Mark, I
>knew exactly what you meant. Thanks for the TN, I have a few bottles
>left and I might drink one soon and hold the other.

Interestingly, a friend brought a bottle of 2000 Ridge Geyserville
over on Monday and we both agreed that it was

a) A Zin worth drinking
b) A Californian wine available in the UK worth drinking
c) despite being a Zin and Californian, worth drinking.

Sadly, both our experiences with Californian wines available here has
been on the bad side of mixed. Either good but well overpriced, OTT
(usually in terms of oak, extraction & residual sweetness), or overly
Parkerise, so we've tended to avoid them.

I remember a very poor experience of Opus One in the Far East a few
years ago which left me underwhelmed by the wine and very glad that
someone else was paying.

The Geyserville was nice in that it was obvious that it had structure
under the "in your face" elements. We both reckoned it could stand at
least another 5 years.

Is the 2000 considered better than the 2001?

However, in terms of US wines (not CA), we'd both love to know how the
Columbia David Lake Signature CS 1985 is drinking as it was one of our
standards a few years back. With a group of friends I believe I bought
most of the UK allocation, and it is long gone.

James

On 2009-04-11 13:03:26 -0700, James Dempster > said:
>
> I remember a very poor experience of Opus One in the Far East a few
> years ago which left me underwhelmed by the wine and very glad that
> someone else was paying.
>

I wouldn't put too much on wine experiences in the Far East. I had an
excellent sleeper bottle of Portugese red wine here in the States.
2000 Alentejano made of trincadeira and aragonez grapes. I found it
later in Macao, (in the Portugese trade mission store) and it tasted
like it had been shipped through the Suez in unrefrigerated containers,
then stored on the roof. Thoroughly nasty...

Bi!! wrote:

>
> Since I've been reading your reviews for a number of years now Mark, I
> knew exactly what you meant. Thanks for the TN, I have a few bottles
> left and I might drink one soon and hold the other.

If you open one soon, I'd give it a decant about an hour before
drinking, I think. As usual, Paul Draper's notes on the back of the
bottle should be ignored only at your peril: "...best if consumed at age
7 to 10 (12/02)"

Mark Lipton

--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.cwdjr.net