After my week in Europe, I went straight to San Francisco. La Paulee was in town, and a bunch of Burgundy lovers were bouncing off the best restaurants’ walls all week long. There were three distinctively noteworthy dinners I was fortunate enough to attend, beginning with an evening at Saison, which The Jackal had bought out for his clandestine operations. Our most generous host organized a spectacular dinner made all the more spectacular by the generosity he commanded from all of his guests.

The 2004 Coche-Dury Meursault Perrieres was in a much better spot, much fleshier and open for business. There was delightful spice and a touch of glue to this wintry mix, along with sweet, bright, yellow Coche fruit. A touch of kernel and benevolent dust rounded out this rich and vimful white. This was luscious and great, right in its sweet spot (96).

The third wine was brought by me, and supposed to be a 2001. Well it was a 2001, just a 2001 Coche-Dury Corton Charlemagne instead. Surprise, surprise. I love those $5000 picking errors. To make matters worse, one of the bottles was corked; of course, it was the bottle I got. Kill me now. I did have a sip of the other bottle, which was fantastic, but not enough to fully depict (DQ).

The 2005 Ramonet Montrachet was unfortunately oxidized (DQ). The 2002 Ramonet Montrachet was not. It had a smokehouse nose with corny, sweeter fruit. It was quite oily in its aromas, showing white ice and more smoke. There was a big anise streak and lots of structure to this intense wine. It was almost as if a twist of vodka was in there! It was almost too young, more intense than the 2007 for sure (96+).

A magnum of 1999 Ramonet Bienvenues Batard Montrachet was a last second substitute, I think, and it didn’t stack up to the Montrachets being served last in the flight. It just wasn’t in the same league, more waterfall and alley, and lighter for a 1999 in general. Jetski found it ‘thin, and its finish is clipped.’ Tell us how you really feel, Jetski : ) It got better when I ran out of Montrachet lol (93M).

The 2001 DRC Richebourg that followed showed spectacularly well, making up for the last time I had this wine. Bottle variation, it happens. There was great perfume and lots of red fruit to this rich and oily red. It was very concentrated with lots of rose and oil components. Rich, long and tasty, I noted it was even better than the ’01 La Tache I just had in Miami. I don’t say Riche is better than LT often; again, it could just be a bottle thing. Rich and saucy, everyone was a fan of the 2001. The topic of aging wine too long came up as a compliment to drinking this ’01 now; let’s just leave it at that (96).

The 1991 DRC Richebourg that followed had more celery soda action, along with cherry oil and ‘olive’ per Dr. Love. It was brothy and full of bouillon. Jetski thought it was a touch advanced, but The Jackal thought it was the wine of the night. There was a touch of kink to its flavors on the red side, and it became a bit jammy on the palate. I wanted more from it, given how great the 1991 vintage can be (95).

We continued onwards with a magnum of 1979 DRC Richebourg. Its nose was a bit balmy with a stewy and tea-like personality. Someone noted its ‘third stage of evolution.’ There was definitely soil and wet forest to go with its blacker fruits. However, its palate was delicious, showing great sweetness and balance. There was flesh and medium grit to this lip smacking wine. While the nose was all about the mushroom and tree bark, the palate was all about the delicious. A tale of two wines, indeed (96M).

The 1966 DRC Richebourg was a tale of two bottles. Well, that may not be entirely fair. I got the dregs of one bottle, so I couldn’t even deal thanks to the mismanaged pour. The second bottle was super tasty, with loads of red oil and a touch of mint. I only had a small sip or two, however (96).

Next up was a flight for lovers, especially those of Roumier and Mugnier. The 2009 Roumier Chambolle Musigny Les Amoureuses was ‘so primal’ per Dr. Love. It was a monster, one that wasn’t ready. It was black as hell, so much so it was tough to enjoy. Jetski observed, ‘it doesn’t mean anything,’ as it was tough to evaluate the wine at this age. Roumiers need more time than most. It was so concentrated and so young, clearly in need of more time (95+).

Even though it was about 5am on my internal clock on that day, I had one good note left in me for a 2002 Mugnier Chambolle Musigny Les Amoureuses. The Mugnier was sweet and delicious, clearly a lighter style than the Roumier. This wasn’t a negative as the Mugnier went down so easy. Another concurred it was showing much better. Its elegance and style seduced, combining with gorgeous purple flowers and an oh so tasty finish (96).

My internal alarm clock failed to go off, so the last three (yes three!) flights saw me abridging my notes significantly. The first was a flight of rare Fourrier Griottes Chambertin, and we were joined by Jean-Marie Fourrier for dinner, by the way.

The 2012 was purple and primary, ‘pretty and beautiful’ per the Somm. It was tasty, and I liked it, but a bit young. The 2011 really impressed, quite drinkable already, and showing that early ’11 approachability. It had some nice zip, however. The 2010 was the best of the flight and a superb wine. It had so much acidity and length. It got a, ‘Great!!!’ It was also my highest rated wine of the night. The 2009, on the other hand, was a bit disappointing. It had the least fire in its soul, and it was heavy and a bit cloying. Its flavors were also a touch dirty.

The signature, deep, dark spice of Leroy was evident immediately. Brian hailed it as ‘the best flight.’ The 2001 was solid but lost a step in the glass. The 2000 outboxed its weight class; this was so rich for a 2000. It also outclassed the 2001 with its deep, heavy, rich and pleasing fruit. The 1996 was classic. It has always been a great vintage for Leroy as her style plays well into the highly acidic profile of 1996. The 1990 got another ‘solid’ from me, but the Richebourg seized hold off the flight immediately. It was just better than all the rest.

There was also one last flight of Krug. I had thrown in the towel already, but here are some scores.

It was kind of late, and if it wasn’t 7AM for me, I might have rallied. But tomorrow was another day, and the legendary Martine Saunier was waiting in the wings with some Jayer from her cellar…

My recent trip to Europe saw me in London twice on consecutive days, but I didn’t stay the first night. I did stay the second. Despite the epicenter of the wine universe shifting from London to New York and Hong Kong in fairly equal shares over the past two decades, there still is a lot of fine wine in London, or in England, if you want to get technical. Somehow, I managed to find the Americans. Well, it wasn’t just all Americans, I think there were four of us. We definitely had at least three Brits, and we even threw in a Swede and a Frenchman. These nations were most certainly united by one noble and common cause: a love for fine wine.

I was a few minutes late to dinner due to a spontaneous meeting, so I had to catch up quickly on the bubblies and whites. A 1988 Ruinart Blanc de Blancs was oaky and full-bodied, rich but one-dimensional with its flavor profile (90).

There were two more whites, the first being a 2010 Ente Meursault. Their wines are getting quite expensive, and a taste of this village Meursault made me believe the hype. It had nice fruit in a sweet, friendly way and was simply delicious, a straight shot of the classic 2010 vintage (93). The last white of this night, well at least Burgundy, was a 2010 Marc Colin Montrachet. All I can say is that terroir matters. The clarity of the 2010 vintage once again came through, and the terroir was clearly better than the three prior Meursaults (95).

The reds started with our most mature wine of the evening, a 1964 Noellat Romanee St. Vivant. It was clearly older but still fresh with lovely, earthy qualities (91).

The younger reds began with a 1999 Roumier Chambolle Musigny Les Cras. It was deep aromatically, with a fleshy and peanutty character, but light in its mid-palate. It felt heavy handed by the usual Roumier standards, and while possessing nice earth flavors, I was disappointed (90).

There was a Roumier Musigny sighting, always a special occasion. This 1999 Roumier Musigny had a similar thread with the Cras with its peanutty edge, but its body had ‘all-time energy’ from the crowd. It was clearly thicker and deeper than the Mugnier, with much more POWER I wrote in capital letters. There was zip and impetus to this majestic wine, and while still too young, it was oh so strong. Wait if you have some (97+)!

That was the end of our Burgundy programming, but the beginning of our Northern Rhone. The first wine that came out was a 1988 Guigal Cote Rotie La Landonne, and it was a good start. This was a clear left turn from our Burgundy flight, but we weren’t lost. This deep, dark wine had a bit more noticeable wood, with rich bacon and violet aromas underneath. This was much more of a bodybuilder compared to the Musignys, more square yet still outstanding. One guest noted a ‘vegetal stem’ (95).

The 1990 Guigal Cote Rotie La Turque was zippy and full-bodied, long and vimful displaying a backside that would make a peacock proud. Its acidity dominated its first sip, but it smoothed out in the glass. It came back with a fury, snapping and crackling again on its finish (96).

The 1991 Guigal Cote Rotie La Landonne followed suit with its deep, decadent and dense core. There was lots of creamy black fruit in this distinguished red. La Landonne is definitely the square that fits the circle in Cote-Rotie. Guigal plus Cote Rotie equals great (95).

One last wine was served, a delicious 1962 Yquem. It was rich and decadent with candle wax aromas and brown sugar flavors. It was all brulee without the cream (95).

Here’s a brief recap paragraph: The Selosse was very apple juicy and tasty but a NV Champagne better served in its youth. The Chevalier Blanc remains one of the best kept secrets in fine white wine that can age. Honey, nut, oak, glue, baked fruit and coconuts. Austere yet super stimulating. The 1981 Sauzet was a revelation. A forgotten vintage for Burgundy, this Chardonnay delivered an outstanding experience. ‘Better than 1983,’ the Keymaster resonated. The 1959 Montrose was affected, but the 1955 was solid. Nice, buttery and with tension are some of my observations. I am not a big fan of young Comte Armands, but perhaps the older ones are just what I needed. Deep, dark and delicious, it even had one of our distinguished guests guessing Griottes. All wines were served blind btw. What else is new, the DRC proved to be the best wine on the table. It was classic mint with red Christmas fruits and beef satay action. The LHB was all about the cassis and chocolate, and it delivered a great drinking experience. 1971 Bordeaux are definitely under investigated.

I am off to Hong Kong tomorrow, cheers to more excellent wines in store this week, for each and every one of us.

From Oslo to London to Lyon back to London…it was a tough couple days of travel. However, it was made easier by my first ever trip to the Rhone Valley. I had only one destination, the Domaine of Jean-Louis Chave, and it would end up being a memory of a lifetime.

It’s funny, as I always thought Cote-Rotie and Hermitage were neighbors. It couldn’t be further from the truth; well, it is about one hour further. After being taken on a tour by Jean-Louis of the hill of Hermitage, I can safely say that for the first time in my life, I understand Hermitage. Knowledge does come from the vineyards, and come from being there, I will be the first to admit, and none more so than Hermitage.

We first sat the the foot of the hill, looking from the ground up. The giant signs of Jaboulet and Chapoutier are the first things that stand out. Each producer now makes millions of bottles a year (not of Hermitage, of course), but their significance and contribution to the appellation and the entire region cannot be ignored. Jean-Louis was the first one to say it very respectfully. I asked Jean-Louis why he didn’t have a Chave sign up on the hill, but that is not his style. He just lives on it LOL. After that, I just listened.

When we started driving in the vineyards, let’s just say there weren’t always paved roads. We came awfully close to some steep declines with an awful amount of big bumps in the road next to them. Don’t worry, I told myself, Jean-Louis drives these paths every day, you aren’t going to fall and roll over and wipe out 5% of the production of Hermitage in the process, don’t worry. Well, I didn’t die, but I did come away with a true understanding of the magical place called Hermitage.

For the whites, we first tasted from ‘Les Rocules,’ which is where the oldest vines for the whites reside. Chave told us that the vines were so old, he couldn’t even tell which ones were Marsanne and which were Roussanne, but he estimated that his Blanc is about 80% Marsanne. The Rocules was delicious, deserving of a bottling on its own, so decadent, so rich, so plump and succulent with its sweet fruit, with lots of old vine character. When we tasted L’Ermite, the vineyard in back of his home way up high on the hill, the contrast was amazing. This was a dry and spiny white, with lots of backside and a meaner personality compared to the seductive, life of the party that Rocules was. The yin and the yang were immediately obvious. The last vineyard from where he gets white grapes I forget the name exactly, but that showed a bit of each of the other vineyards’ character, but in a more reserved, fill in the blanks kind of way.

After the barrel tasting, Chave popped a few bottles of white, beginning with the 2015 Chave Hermitage Blanc, which had been bottled about four months ago. What a delicious wine. 2015 was a hotter vintage, and the sweetness of the fruit came through immediately. Loads of yellow fruits and sunshine, with exotic pineapple and mango aromas, and a delectable spice behind it. It was rich, balanced and still elegant. I questioned its immediate approachability, and Chave told us that there is this window after bottling where the wines are just delightful, before they start to close up and go into hibernation. Everyone knows the age worthiness of his Blancs; sometimes they can be downright screechy in their intensity. However, this 2015 was ready, willing and able. I think I might be popping a few more corks of his Blancs earlier and immediately upon release based on this 2015 (95+).

Next up was a 2009 Chave Hermitage Blanc. This was an immediate left turn from the 2015, showing off a gamy and waxy personality, full of anise and wild flavors. It was almost a bit peculiar compared to the seductive 2015; of course, the French Paradox as loving it. Its texture was intense, and with a little air, it started to settle down in the stable, so to speak. It still had this pungent character, but less with time. There were a lot more minerals and stones on the finish of this gamy 2009 (93).

We moved on to the reds, with a quick journey to Saint Joseph. If you have a chance to buy any of Chave’s Saint Josephs, do yourself a favor and do it. The wines of Saint Joseph are not expensive, but they are very good, excellent drinking wines that are affordable. The work Chave is doing in St. Joseph is no small task, either. He calls it ‘a generation of work,’ meaning it is one of his life’s significant projects to find great terroirs, replant the vineyards and make a true ‘Domaine’ wine, as opposed to the Negociant bottlings he releases now. We tasted one of these more special terroirs, and I could see the difference in intensity and quality. He feels he is getting close to releasing a Domaine wine from St. Joseph, but that he is not there yet. Keep your eye on Chave in St. Joseph!

I started talking about the 2003 that we had in November in New York at the Reboule du Rhone, and how despite the huge rating it had, that I just didn’t get it. It was too sweet, not as complicated as usual etc. He immediately went to get a 2003 Chave Hermitage Rouge. Fuck! I just had it damnit LOL. Of all the vintages I could have tried, that was probably the last one I would have asked for, but when in Rhone…while I did like the bottle fresh from the cellar a touch more than the one I had in November (when would a bottle from his cellar not be better?), I still found it a touch Zinfandel-like with its sweet, jammy fruit, and it lacked the acidity that his wines normally possess. It was very good but not a truly great wine, and certainly not 100 points, even though I only give 99+ myself : ) There are just so many other vintages of his wine that I would prefer to drink, personally (91).

However, mentioning the 2003 would be quite fortuitous, as out came a 2003 Chave Ermitage Cuvee Cathelin. I forgot to ask him why he drops the ‘H’ on the Cathelin, oops! I wanted to find out, now I have to go back again soon! The ’03 Cathelin was amazing and literally one of the most concentrated wines that I have ever tasted. Somehow it didn’t feel heavy or cloying despite me wanting to test if I could stand a spoon in it. Chunky, chocolaty and oily, the 2003 was rich like a billionaire and while it had excellent sweetness to its fruit, it was in no way too sweet for me like the ‘regular’ blend. Sebastien and I were both stunned; this was a 100 year wine, for sure. Its palate was as black as night, and the party was definitely in my mouth with each sip. Yeah, yeah, I know, you’re coming, too, lol. I vacillated between 98+ and 99 points, only worried that it would never mature enough for me to see secondary development over the next forty years. I hope to find out. This was a freak of nature that was 100% natural (98+).

It was now that I learned for the first time what Cuvee Cathelin was all about. I assumed that it was always some barrel selection, some super juice bottled on its own in exceptional vintages. I think he has made Cathelin in 1990, 1991, 1995, 1998, 2000, 2003 and 2010. Did he make a 2005 or 2009? Tell me if I am missing any! Back to my point, however, the Cathelin is not just some barrel selection; it is a wine made when Chave feels that the vintage has something more to say. It is a different wine, a different expression, a sibling rather than a best selection, and a wine only made when he feels making it will not take away from the normal blend. He said the 2003 Cathelin would get lost in the 2003 regular Hermitage and not add more to it, but it had so much to say on its own. I understood his point right away. Chave’s Cuvee Cathelins are the true work of a genius/artist, one who has given his heart and soul to the hill of Hermitage.

It was unfortunately time to go, as we had dinner in five hours in London. I couldn’t feel my feet for half the day thanks to the freezing weather, but the wines of Jean-Louis Chave warmed my soul as much as any other. The day I spent with him is one I will never forget; it was a master class in Hermitage given by the Master himself. I can’t believe it took me this long to visit, but I know it won’t take me that long to come back.

Ok so my attempt to write three notes a day has been an epic fail so far in 2018, but there is still hope. If I can combo my first week in Hong Kong with my next in March and somehow get current with the massively insane Grande Fete de Bourgogne, I might actually be able to catch up and start flying, so to speak.

There was an unimpressive 2009 Pape Clement Blanc next. I have had excellent bottles of other vintages of this wine in the past, but I was very under-impressed with the 2009. It was pungent and sweaty in the nose, with some grapefruit and other yellow fruits, but I found its palate very one dimensional and unexciting. (87)

The 1996 Haut Brion Blanc was ‘the best white’ per the Ringmaster, and he was right. It had a fantastic nose of glue city, with intense, rich and twisted flavors that were dry with apricot and lanolin hints. Its structure and density were ‘wow’ and ‘wow.’ HBB is always a bit of an S&M wine, and sometimes it’s good to be a masochist when on the drinking end. (96).

The 1989 DRC La Tache that followed had more vim and vigor, perhaps more discoverable as my palate recovered. There were more rubber, leather and citrus aromas and flavors. Its palate was zippy with great citrus smack to its finish. (95+).

The 1988 DRC La Tache was also vimful, on the spicier side but definitely not with the fruit of the 2001. This was more on the whips and chains side of the fence, characteristic of the vintage. Baby definitely had back, similarly zippy and zoomy to the 1989, although more so. It had excellent leather and citrus flavors. (96+).

We finished with a 1962 Quinto do Noval Nacional. I always find it tough to gather enough energy for tasting notes of dessert wines, and this was no exception. It was smoother than I expected but, of course, great. (96).

Europe, on the other hand, is fucking cold in February. I am now in the middle of six days and five cities in Europe (hello from Oslo), and my first stop was one of my favorite tasting companions in the world, the Keymaster.

It was a quiet night by usual standards, but a welcome one, nonetheless. In fact, the theme would be ‘one’, which I found quite appropriate, since I like being number one, in case you haven’t heard ; )

Everything was served blind, and we were joined by the French Paradox, always a welcome guest at the dinner table. The first wine was Champagne, and a mature one with a light, dusty petillance. There were dry flavors of orange and rust with a dollop of honey at its core. It was smooth and tasty with cream soda flavors and inching towards outstanding with each sip. The Paradox noted, ‘pamplemousse’ on its finish, aka grapefruit. I noted hay flavors, and the Keymaster ‘caramel apple.’ It was an ultimately outstanding and original bottle of 1971 Lanson Red Label Champagne. (95).

The second wine had me guessing white Burgundy or Rhone at first, but ultimately it was white Bordeaux! The three hours of decanting definitely threw me off the scent at first, but once I knew, it was, of course, more obvious! Glue permeated its nose, and this was a mature and tasty white with amber flavors and that classic taste of Graves. Its finish was long like a red. ‘Well balanced and mature’ and ‘good minerals’ came from the crowd. I was stunned to find out this was a 1981 Haut Brion Blanc, and even more stunned when I learned it was open for three hours. Impressive for the off vintage and the air time. (93)!

The third wine had a superb and seductive nose, pure fruit and pure cherry, or ‘griottes’ as the Paradox noted. Olives and spice played their way into the game, and this was a fresh and lovely red. Its sweet fruit and game were delicious at first, but the wine waned a bit in the glass. It got a little sweet, and some bath soap emerged, but that was a heck of a first glass of 1991 Claude Dugat Gevrey Chambertin 1er Cru. (92).

I bought something off the list to round out our evening and put my friends to the test. The Keymaster noted a ‘bloody taste,’ and there was much more power and breed here in this delightfully (relatively) open 2011 Rousseau Chambertin. Even after tasting 87 vintages of Rousseau wines a couple weeks ago (yes, trying to get to that one), I am always ready for more! There was a lot of Asian spice here, and the Keymaster ntoed, ‘dim sum.’ Black fruits and meat off the bone sizzled in my mouth in this open, rich and approachable Chambertin that still had a lot of life left in it, of course (95).

Ok, twelve more notes on the books, I think I can, I think I can…