I am fairly new to cabs and Have tried a couple I liked and a couple I
didn't. The ones I liked where a Columbia Crest 2001 reserve and a
Raymond 2001 reserve. Can't remember the names of the ones I didn't
like.

My question, is it just a coincidence that the 2 I liked where 2001 or
is this a particularly good year for cabs? I was under the impression,
maybe incorrectly so, that cabs where better with age. Is this not
true?

Any way, the 2 I listed where very good. Any recomendations on similar
cabs?


Thanks,

Alan

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>I am fairly new to cabs and Have tried a couple I liked and a couple I
> didn't. The ones I liked where a Columbia Crest 2001 reserve and a
> Raymond 2001 reserve. Can't remember the names of the ones I didn't
> like.
>
> My question, is it just a coincidence that the 2 I liked where 2001 or
> is this a particularly good year for cabs? I was under the impression,
> maybe incorrectly so, that cabs where better with age. Is this not
> true?

Cabernets tend to benefit greatly from age, but some are very approachable
in their youth as well. 2001 was a very good vintage for Napa Cabernet, but
2002 looks to be at least as good.

Tom S

In article .com>,
says...
>
>I am fairly new to cabs and Have tried a couple I liked and a couple I
>didn't. The ones I liked where a Columbia Crest 2001 reserve and a
>Raymond 2001 reserve. Can't remember the names of the ones I didn't
>like.
>
>My question, is it just a coincidence that the 2 I liked where 2001 or
>is this a particularly good year for cabs? I was under the impression,
>maybe incorrectly so, that cabs where better with age. Is this not
>true?
>
>Any way, the 2 I listed where very good. Any recomendations on similar
>cabs?
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Alan

Alan,

I have only had the Raymond Reserve, but the ones from the '90s, and have not
tasted the '00 - '01. I have not had any of the Columbia Crest Cabs, so I
cannot comment. The Raymond Reserves are very nice Cabs and with pretty good
price points for the quality. As a good acquaintance's brother was the local
rep, I seemed to acquire several of these, and have enjoyed them. While not as
complex as many, especially some that are much more expensive, they have
offered a good wine over the years.

As to your question on aged Cabs, I'd say that there are several factors that
should dictate one's decision whether to age, or not:

1.) Personal taste - some folk like young Cabs, regardless of tannins, and how
well the wine has "come together." My wife likes young Vintage Ports, and I
like them with a few decades on them.

2.) Desing of the particular wine - some wine makers strive for a more readily
approachable style, rather than one that requires 5+ years in the cellar. This
seems to be a trend in many low -> mid-priced reds lately, but certainly not
all.

3.) Vintage of the wine - 1998's seemed to be ready to drink by many
standards, right upon release. They were panned, in general, by the wine-
press, but many well-made ones turned out to be great "restaurant" Cabs, as
they were lower in tannin, and seemed to come together much sooner. They
probably will also fade much sooner.

There might be some more considerations, but I can't think of them right now.

An important note: jot down the wines that you do NOT like, as well, so you
can use them as a standard of what you do not want, and so you will not order
them, when faced with a wine list in a dark restaurant.

Hunt

2001 has been hailed as an excellent year for CA cabs. Raymond
reserve is a "one of many" production better grade cabs that probably
is really helped by having a lot of good grapes around.

The columbia crest is from WA. Although some years the quality of CA
& WA coincide, frequently the quality does not. Sort of like Tuscany
and Piedmont, or Bordeau and Burgundy and Alsace, or even Burgundy and
piedmont. For example '99 is considered a bust in CA. WA had a good
year.

I have not seen a major taster's ratings of WA wines..


On 16 Aug 2005 07:30:56 -0700, wrote:

>I am fairly new to cabs and Have tried a couple I liked and a couple I
>didn't. The ones I liked where a Columbia Crest 2001 reserve and a
>Raymond 2001 reserve. Can't remember the names of the ones I didn't
>like.
>
>My question, is it just a coincidence that the 2 I liked where 2001 or
>is this a particularly good year for cabs? I was under the impression,
>maybe incorrectly so, that cabs where better with age. Is this not
>true?
>
>Any way, the 2 I listed where very good. Any recomendations on similar
>cabs?
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Alan

gerald wrote:
> 2001 has been hailed as an excellent year for CA cabs. Raymond
> reserve is a "one of many" production better grade cabs that probably
> is really helped by having a lot of good grapes around.
>
> The columbia crest is from WA. Although some years the quality of CA
> & WA coincide, frequently the quality does not. Sort of like Tuscany
> and Piedmont, or Bordeau and Burgundy and Alsace, or even Burgundy and
> piedmont. For example '99 is considered a bust in CA. WA had a good
> year.

'99 was *far* from a bust in CA, although your point is still a valid one.

Mark Lipton

Sorry my bad. Mean 2000. parker gives CA 78(worst since 1988((no
wonder why I have so many 88 cabs...)).....) and 2000 WA an 89 and
2000 CA rhone rangers a 92.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 10:05:52 -0500, Mark Lipton >
wrote:

>gerald wrote:
>> 2001 has been hailed as an excellent year for CA cabs. Raymond
>> reserve is a "one of many" production better grade cabs that probably
>> is really helped by having a lot of good grapes around.
>>
>> The columbia crest is from WA. Although some years the quality of CA
>> & WA coincide, frequently the quality does not. Sort of like Tuscany
>> and Piedmont, or Bordeau and Burgundy and Alsace, or even Burgundy and
>> piedmont. For example '99 is considered a bust in CA. WA had a good
>> year.
>
>'99 was *far* from a bust in CA, although your point is still a valid one.
>
>Mark Lipton

"gerald" > wrote in message
...
> 2001 has been hailed as an excellent year for CA cabs.

Agreed.

> For example '99 is considered a bust in CA.

By whom? Certainly not I!
Perhaps you're thinking of 1998 (Napa Cabs).

FWIW, I've found 1999 Napa Cabernets to be better than their 2000
counterparts.

Tom S

Tom S wrote:

> By whom? Certainly not I!
> Perhaps you're thinking of 1998 (Napa Cabs).

Tom, when I was visiting Ch. Montelena in Jan., I got to taste the '98,
'99 and '00 Estate Cabs. Much to my surprise, I found that the '98 was
deeper and more complex than the '99 (and the '00). So much for vintage
generalizations...

Mark Lipton

wrote:
> I am fairly new to cabs and Have tried a couple I liked and a couple I
> didn't.

They all suck. CS is NOT a good food wine.


> The ones I liked where a Columbia Crest 2001 reserve and a
> Raymond 2001 reserve. Can't remember the names of the ones I didn't
> like.

Moron. Buy Italian wine.

>
> My question, is it just a coincidence that the 2 I liked where 2001 or
> is this a particularly good year for cabs? I was under the impression,
> maybe incorrectly so, that cabs where better with age. Is this not
> true?
>
> Any way, the 2 I listed where very good. Any recomendations on similar
> cabs?

Barolo.

>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alan

Rule of thumb: don't take advice from someone who calls you a moron
because of what you like.

I don't know Raymond. Columbia Crest is amazingly good for the the
price IMO. Most of their wines are meant to be drunk young so there is
no advantage in holding them. Their 2001 Two Vines Syrah got good
reviews. It is simple, fruity, oaky, and pleasent. If you like it (I
do) enjoy it.

Andy

[posted and mailed]

On 27 Aug 2005, you wrote in alt.food.wine:

> Rule of thumb: don't take advice from someone who calls you a moron
> because of what you like.
>
> I don't know Raymond. Columbia Crest is amazingly good for the the
> price IMO. Most of their wines are meant to be drunk young so there is
> no advantage in holding them. Their 2001 Two Vines Syrah got good
> reviews. It is simple, fruity, oaky, and pleasent. If you like it (I
> do) enjoy it.
>
> Andy
>

Rule one is really don't respond to uraniumcommittee (he has a couple of
other names but the trademark is the insistence that one should only drink
Italian wines within minutes of openingthe bottle as breathing "destroys
the wine.")

He is relentless and won't let go and is in the kill file of just about all
of us.

--
Joseph Coulter
Cruises and Vacations
http://www.josephcoulter.com/

jcoulter wrote:
> [posted and mailed]
>
> On 27 Aug 2005, you wrote in alt.food.wine:
>
> > Rule of thumb: don't take advice from someone who calls you a moron
> > because of what you like.
> >
> > I don't know Raymond. Columbia Crest is amazingly good for the the
> > price IMO. Most of their wines are meant to be drunk young so there is
> > no advantage in holding them. Their 2001 Two Vines Syrah got good
> > reviews. It is simple, fruity, oaky, and pleasent. If you like it (I
> > do) enjoy it.
> >
> > Andy
> >
>
> Rule one is really don't respond to uraniumcommittee (he has a couple of
> other names but the trademark is the insistence that one should only drink
> Italian wines within minutes of openingthe bottle as breathing "destroys
> the wine.")
>
> He is relentless and won't let go and is in the kill file of just about all
> of us.

....and he doesn't care what you think or drink. He drinks better wine
than you do anyway...because he doesn't drink California Crap...



>
> --
> Joseph Coulter
> Cruises and Vacations
> http://www.josephcoulter.com/

> wrote in message
ps.com...
> ...and he doesn't care what you think or drink. He drinks better wine
> than you do anyway...because he doesn't drink California Crap...

Pheeyew! Who farted?

Oh. It was Michael.

On 26-Aug-2005, "AyTee" > wrote:

> Rule of thumb: don't take advice from someone who calls you a moron
> because of what you like.

Amen!!!

>
> I don't know Raymond. Columbia Crest is amazingly good for the the
> price IMO. Most of their wines are meant to be drunk young so there is
> no advantage in holding them. Their 2001 Two Vines Syrah got good
> reviews. It is simple, fruity, oaky, and pleasent. If you like it (I
> do) enjoy it.

Raymond is a very good, consistent producer with a range of everyday wines
to the reserves (which are much better for the slight increase in price, in
my opinion) to the sometimes hard to find, "Generations" which is their
ultra-premium cabernet. Fortunately, it's not priced like an ultra-premium.
The last time I bought any it was about $65/btl. I would probably stay
with the 2001 and 2002 vintages for the regular and reserve bottlings.

Gary

wrote:

> Raymond is a very good, consistent producer with a range of everyday wines
> to the reserves (which are much better for the slight increase in price, in
> my opinion) to the sometimes hard to find, "Generations" which is their
> ultra-premium cabernet. Fortunately, it's not priced like an ultra-premium.
> The last time I bought any it was about $65/btl. I would probably stay
> with the 2001 and 2002 vintages for the regular and reserve bottlings.

Precisely, Gary. Their Cabs will rarely excite, but they are among the
best value for the dollar Cabs in Napa IMO. And, the last time I was
there they distinguished themselves by not charging a tasting fee!

Mark Lipton