We happy that Bernard, who has sampled so many wines, has shared his notes with us. We do have, or have had for sale a few of the wines Bernard writes about, and we include a link to our stock page whenever it is a producer we carry (but since the stock page is kept up-to-date and the wines are sold, don't expect any but the newest of wines to show up in our stock!). Mostly though, since we specialize in County of Santa Barbara Wine and Central Coast Wine, we don't carry a lot of the wines Bernard writes about. But we think it is important that you be able to have an idea what they're like in case you are planning to buy some somewhere, or have them in your own collection. Enjoy.

Here are Bernard's notes from June 17, 2002:

Before dinner, Laurent served hors d’oeuvres to accompany Guigal’s 2000 Cote du Rhone Rosé. Quite an acceptable, even enjoyable, pinky that should sell for under $10. Nothing off-putting, but not as complex and full as Guigal’s Tavel, which should have been the selection for this audience.
 

Guigal’s 2000 St. Joseph Blanc was much better and, in fact, my favorite offering from the distributor at this meal. It accompanied a sensational Filet of Pike “Beurre Nantais” with Caviar and Baby Carrots. The caviar added complex and nutty depth to the buttery sauce based on fish stock reduction. The St. Joseph was balanced, minerally, stony, with a good bitter bite. It had nutty, brown butter elements, with honeydew and grapefruit flavors. 88 points, but a great match to the dish.

Next came Roasted Rack of Venison with Celeriac Puree. It was mismatched to the 99 Chateauneuf du Pape “Chante Perdrix”, but thankfully, other guests at the dinner filled in the blanks. The CdP had funky, animal fur aromatics. Dry tannins, some medicinal black fruit, tarry, bitter adhesive tape finish. Maybe just a stage. 86 (+?). 

Jeff had brought along the 94 Cote Rotie La Mouline which went nicely with the dish, but was quite satisfactory in its own right. Lovely bouquet. Some medicinal, tarry quality, good fruit, complex, beet, iron. Still some  tannins. 92+ initially, increasing to 94 points after some time breathing.

Also poured by others were the 92 and 94 Cote Rotie La Landonne (thanks, Quinn Barrow, for bringing along the latter). The 92 La Landonne was succulent, still a bit tannic, with iron, some medicinal character. It’s very good, needing 3-5 years. 91 points. I lost my notes on the 94, but it was in a somewhat dumb stage. Perhaps bigger than the 94 La Mouline, it will probably reach the 94 point level later this decade.

With the cheese plate, Guigal’s 95 Cote Rotie “d’Ampuis” was poured. This is the first vintage Guigal released from the young-vine Ampuis vineyard, which Guigal hopes may reach the level of its other single vineyard C-R’s, did not impress me several years ago when it first came out, and this second experience was just as much a let down. Nice bouquet of wild berries and patent leather. India ink, low fruit, very dry. No rating written in my notes, but probably mid-80’s at most.

Guigal also served a new label from their recently purchased CdP property, the 99 La Crau de ma Mère Chateauneuf du Pape. Sweet, black cherry, vanilla oak. Fine integrated oak, complex. Excellent. 92 points. But not an especially good match with the venison.

We were also poured the 80 Hermitage (I think it was brought by Charlie). Funky, stinky, reduced. IMHO OTH. Some tertiary aged, stewed tomato. Not bad. But not to my taste. 86.

With dessert, Poached Peaches with Strawberries and Basil Sauce, Guigal served the abysmal 99 Condrieu “Luminescence”. Anisey nose. Tangerine peel, licorice, Vermouth. Not appealing. Hot finish, too little sugar. Unpleasant. An experiment that will, gladly, not be repeated. 78 (I guess I was feeling generous.)  I think someone may have brought another sweet wine, but I don’t have anything in my notes.

A “get-real” BLOODY PULPIT:

The dinner was very enjoyable, but I have very little regard for the distributor rep who publicly hyped some of the wines while privately admitting they were flawed. The two Condrieu’s were mediocre and awful and never should have been poured. The 95 d’Ampuis could have been replaced to better effect by the generic 99 Cote Rotie. It seems the selection of wines was the distributor’s concept of dumping excess inventory on a bunch of cowpoke wine wanabees. I don’t think he had any idea that his audience was experienced with the greatest wines of the Rhone and would see through his bluff. Thankfully, some of us came prepared with good enough wines to avoid a big disappointment.