Blog

The 2002 Romanee Contis

The 2002 vintage for Romanee-Conti is about to be released this Spring, so as is customary, their U.S. importer, Wilson Daniels, held an exclusive tasting of all the new releases at Per Se for the who’s who of the New York Metro area wine trade. Aubert de Villaine was there himself and spoke about the wines and answered questions. There was one unasked question, Why is Romanee Conti the world’s greatest wine?. Because if you ask me, it is.

The event started at 10AM, with a round of Champagne amongst friends, countrymen and Romans such as Daniel Johnnes of Montrachet, Tim Kopec of Vertitas, William Sherer of Atelier, and Fred Shaw. You knew it was a big tasting how often do you see Michael Aaron and Jeff Zacharia in the same room? Let alone, yours truly. 🙂

Everyone eagerly took their seats in the main dining room at about 10:45AM, when the room quickly fell silent to Jack Daniels. (of Wilson Daniels) introduction. Aubert then spoke and later answered questions, but more on that later. First, the wines :

The wines were opened at 9AM and single decanted, poured approximately at 9:45AM, and the tasting really did not start until 11AM by the time everyone was seated.

The 2002 Vosne Romanee Premier Cru, Cuvee Duvault-Blochet. had a noticeably lighter color than the rest of the wines, but a fresh nose nonetheless with rose, plum, stems and an herbal/dill edge. The fruit seemed plump but dressed elegantly to the point where you can’t see the fat&yet. It got less herbal with air, and more violet came out with a pinch of vanilla and wood. The palate was clean and pure, with long acids yet soft tannins and obviously young with some woodsy flavors wrapped around its tender core of violet fruit flavors. There was a drop of that dill on the palate, with a side of crème fraiche (90).

The 2002 Echezeaux had a reserved and shy nose that was instantly emitting more cinnamon, brick, rust and earth in front of a cascade of cherry fruit. The nose was smoky, almost ripe but not quite, possessing great tension between the fruit and spice in a medium way. There were some secondary floral aromas, including stalks. The palate showed a lot more stems and tannins than the Vosne Romanee. William was scratching his head as he found it very closed, especially compared to his memory of 2001 last year. It was reticent, but there was a lot of wine still there! The palate was more stemmy and slaty, with a touch of earth. There was nice a hybrid of red and purple fruit flavors, and the wine’s finesse was most appreciable (92).

The 2002 Grands Echezeaux also initially had an herbal edge with the dill (almost pickle), forest, pine and menthol, but it also had lovely rose aromas, leading into the cherry, dusty and lightly snow-frosted earthy side of its personality. There was a pinch of aggressive wood in its herbal component, but the palate was certainly more powerful than the Echezeaux and much more finish-centric at first. The finish was heavy with its wave of tannins, alcohol and acid that was put together well enough to satisfy the most skilled of wine surfers. I must admit, at first the flavor bothered me a little as I got a bit too much of the wood and herbal side, along with extreme citrus. The wine was wound and a bit angular, but it really fleshed out with time in the glass it really needed that time to get deliciously fleshy and lose that herbal edge (94).

Just when I thought that I would not have another wine from Romanee St. Vivant for a while, next up was the 2002 Romanee St. Vivant. It had a garden-fresh nose with lovely fruit balanced by the green of the stems and fruit, not a bad green, but a green as in an adolescent green of fruit about to bud. There was iron, rose, blood and earth behind it, all buried in the wide-bodied red, violet and plum fruit. A touch of caramel sweetness poked its head out with a band-aid on top of it. The palate was fleshy and deep, with wide-angle fruit, firm yet elegant structure, and a long, slinky and earthy finish. There was excellent balance that was both powerful and feminine. The wine blossomed in the glass, getting redder and less green, and the wine overall was cleaner and fresher in its overall impression and was a bit more elegant on the palate than the Grands Echezeaux (93+).

Ahhhh, the great 2002 Richebourg. It was a step up as the fruit was much more in your face thick, rich and ripe with meaty, plummy and smoky aromas along with vanilla and sweet fruit on the blackberry and plum side. The nose had gorgeous, absolutely gorgeous fruit. It was stunning. There was a touch of cinnamon, and someone keenly observed it stood out for its amplitude and opulence.. The palate was deliciously rusty, with great length and style to its acids, and tannins that make you lick the roof of your mouth but not smack your lips. There was almost perfect sweetness to the wine on the palate and its black fruit, a fruit only matched later by the Romanee Conti itself. A touch of leather rounded out its palate (96).

The 2002 La Tache was a left turn with a very distinctive nose that initially put you in a room recently, yet not freshly, painted. You really had to work the wine in the glass to wake up this sleeping giant’s rose, pre-budding green (as mentioned before), and touches of smoke, rock and wood. There was almost an unsweetened mesquite edge and a pinch of herbs still lying on the vine fresh in the garden. The nose had the royalty factor but was indubitably young and a bit confused, or grumpy perhaps. Why was it being disturbed this early in its life? J There was no confusion about the palate, which had an explosive and long finish, that of a thirty-plus-year wine without a doubt. Don.t touch it for at least five more years, though. The nose morphed into this exotic chocolaty, almond, caramel, marshmallow and Smores thing, and the palate stayed young with its signature green bean flavors accompanied by forest, tang and unbudded fruit waiting to grow up. There is no doubting the pedigree of this wine, but it was the least ready to be evaluated. I am sure it will climb the point ladder in decades to come (95+).

The 2002 Romanee Conti made me want to pull out a dozen clichés such as the real deal, the same as it ever was, the best of the best.. The nose was unbelievably great, phenomenal, awe-inspiring and death-defying, if you will. It is really hard for a young wine to turn me on like this Romanee Conti (and Richebourg for that matter) did. What amazed me the most was how inviting and warm the fruit was in the nose. There was incredible depth of rose, plum, cassis and blackberry aromas. The wine was heavy, yet light on its feet as far as its nose was concerned. Ladies and gentlemen, the heavyweight champion of the worrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrld, Romanee Conti! (Applaud now). There were also stems, smoke, coal, forest and chocolate in the nose. The palate was rich, luscious, thick and seductively long. The wine kept getting more and more exotic, and although I assume that the wine will have to shut down in the bottle sooner or later, for the time being all I could say was wow wow wow.. (98+)

The 2002 Montrachet was like licking a rock, William jested, because it was all mineral. to him on the palate. There were piercing minerals in the nose but very tropical and buttery aromas as well, almost Cali-esque I hate to say, but I did have flashbacks of young Kistler and Peter Michael – on steroids, of course. Jason Giambi should get a case for his cellar ouch. (Let’s go Mets, by the way, but I am not a Yankee hater either, for the record). It did have that smoky edge, as well as nice citrus ones. The palate, however, was obviously not California Chardonnay with its layers of fruit and acid, and its length to both. There were great citrus, butter and mineral flavors to the palate, which was very intense and wound with a rocky (positive) finish. The wine was still a baby, but definitively great Montrachet and a bridge between Old and New World styles (95+).

I will close this segment of Vintage Tastings with some comments from Aubert, snippets I got here and there between the introduction and Q & A session. Aubert said that while some have said that 2002 is an extremely opulent vintage with wines that offer immediate appeal and drinking, that was not the case with . There is quality, purity, elegance, finesse and transparency.. In the end, Aubert thinks that 2002 will be another magical vintage like 1962 because it has the finesse and feminine character to back up its substance. The climate can sometimes be your enemy and sometimes your friend, and the vintage is a combination of what we do and the climate.. There was an extraordinary window that opened in the beginning of September thanks to Mother Nature that made the 2002 vintage what it is today. On responding to technology and science, Aubert wisely commented that Science teaches us what we did in the past was right.. He also said that he preferred the Grands Echezeaux and Romanee St. Vivant most today, but that the La Tache had more expressive tannins. and that there was something larger in Romanee Conti.. He also said that the Domaine bottles by barrel or makes an assemblage depending on the vintage.

There is no doubt that the 2002 Romanee Contis are extraordinary wines.

Mt. Sinai Charity Dinner

A couple of nights later I found myself at Patroon for a charity wine dinner to benefit underprivileged patients at Mount Sinai hospital in New York City that raised over $185,000 that night. Notable attendees included Bruce Sanderson of the Wine Spectator and the masterful and always entertaining Kevin Zraly as auctioneer. The event was put together by Robin Solomon and Michael Abbott and resulted in a great time for a great cause. There was a serious wine dinner, and in between courses bottles of wine from the JFK cellar were auctioned off, courtesy of Nice Matin, the restaurant that recently purchased the remainder of the cellar. It was a great event.

There were three flights of wine and a port to be sampled this evening, and we started off with three whites, beginning with a 2002 Moreau Chablis Les Clos. The nose was smoky and stony with nice citrus and mineral overtones, semi-open and definitely on the smoky side of Chablis. There were also aromas of lemon, lime (with the peel and dust of both), and a rainwater freshness there. The palate was tart and tangy, a real mouth-puckerer, and a touch of noticeable wood marked the palate despite its decent acid and citrus flavors. There was no doubting the breed of the vineyard, though (89). Next up was an uninspiring 2001 Olivier Leflaive Puligny Montrachet Les Folatieres.. Ms. Casino Royale, secret agent of the wine world, complained that the wine was watery, and it was. The nose was very oaky with lots of wood, toast and not much more than a little butter. It was average at best, smoky and oaky on the palate with that watery edge (82). The last white, a 2002 Louis Latour Corton Charlemagne, was also milder than expected, with a lightly toasted nose and aromas of smoke and bread. The palate was shut down and muted, not complicated or well-bred, quite average and uninteresting (85).

The red Burgundy flight was thankfully better, although the first wine was again either in a shell or just not that good. The 1999 Louis Jadot Corton Greves was slightly alcoholic in the nose with some earth, game and a touch of barn. The oak was a little intrusive, and the nose was wound and rusty overall but not powerful. It was shut down like a lot of 99s at the moment, but the palate had no front, no middle and very little backside. It could develop I suppose, but it was average on this night (85). The 1999 Clos de Tart was next, and finally we had a real wine! The nose was more intense meaty with judicious oak and slight caramel. There was good spice and cedar, earth, forest and pine. The palate had great purity and balance with a nice, gritty finish. The wine was feminine and sexy, and the acids were long (93+). The last 1999 of the flight was the 1999 Clos des Lambrays. It was more herbal in the nose in a positive way, and gamy. It was a touch out of balance on the back side, very slaty and earthy. Ms. Royale noted its raspberry fruit, but the palate was overall earthy and dry, but still quality (90).

The final flight more than made up for the first two, as Bordeaux took charge with the great 1990 vintage and three of its finest wines from said vintage. First up was the 1990 Cos d.Estournel, which had a meaty nose with pencil, walnut, sweet black fruits and dry currant overtones. There was actually a pinch of cantaloupe that I got as well. The palate was smooth and easy, long in the belly with incredible acids but polished tannins, and fine ones at that. The wine was a bit in reserve but excellent with lots of potential (93+). The 1990 Margaux had a heavenly nose with fabulous purity and fruit, showing much better than it did in Vegas last month. The nose was still very subtle, but also meaty in a healthy supermodel kind of way. The fruit was meaty and yes, ripe as well, with cedar and pencil edges. You could smell the prime real estate here. There was a pinch of olive and incredible acids to its fine, long, silky and refined palate (95+). The 1990 Latour was no slouch either, and it was nice to see it perform well. I had actually been fed three shots from three different bottles earlier, served to me by Robin Kelley O.Connor of the Bordeaux Wine Bureau on my way to the men’s room, and it was interesting to see subtle bottle variation even from the same case. There may have been variation, very slight, but there was no doubting the quality of this case overall. So many of the great Bordeaux have been traded so frequently that bottle variation is an issue, even for wines from 1982 or 1990. You know who may be even guiltier than retailers or customers taking shipping or storage for granted? The answer is ignorant wholesalers that did not even have temperature-controlled storage in the 1970s and 1980s; you would be surprised to find out how many did NOT until as late as the 1990s. Anyway, enough of that rant. The 1990 Latour had a deep and rich nose with beautiful cedar aromas. The wine was fragrant and perfumed with a touch of benevolent green. It was long, pure, rich and classy, although the always controversial and opinionated Big Boy. RR thought that all 1990s are in a shell right now. and that the 1996 blows away the 1990.. The Latour was the wine of the night for me, and it will have a long future ahead of it (96).

We had a 1977 Fonseca, which was excellent, but I did expect more. It lacked the power I expected out of a 25-30 year-old port from this vintage (93). There was trouble to get into downtown at the Soho House, where our own rock star Wendy Agah was waiting, but everyone threw the towel in on me, and Wendy did not pick up her cell, so mercifully I stumbled home, ready to go to D.C. for a weekend with a close friend of mine, Robert Parker, and 12 of his ebob. followers that won a charity dinner with him. a close friend of mine and I were invited when two of the original bidders could not make it, and I was looking forward to my first dinner with the man/myth/legend himself. You.ll have to wait until next week for that one.