Blog

Let’s get to the juice. We started with a 1982 Krug Collection, which was finally showing some mature aromas. My knock on all the recently released Krug Collections is that they are tough to drink upon release, delivering more rocket fuel and razors than fruit and flavor. This bottle was toasty and tasty with a balanced, nutty finish. ‘Great’ was written once, and the ’82 was finally starting to come into its own, although it still seemed young forever (95).

We began a fine flight of whites with a 1995 Coche-Dury Corton Charlemagne. It had a gamy, yeasty nose, a blend of yellow stew and waterfall. There was a touch of suntan to its nose, with the oil. The Coche was very forward, starting to turn the corner of its drinkability window. The palate was round and rich, tropical and smoky, still meaty. There was a rival mogul in the crowd, Jay G, who noted it had ‘a nose like the jungle.’ It did stay a touch gamy for me, too. A Chaperon from Dom Perignon noted, ‘sweet, spicy curry’ (94).

The 1998 DRC Montrachet was initially not at all like the bottle I had had six weeks prior in San Francisco, at least in the nose. This was less extroverted, possessing aromas of mint, smoke, waterfall, musk, citrus and butter. However, the palate was super sweet again; it was practically dessert wine. The sea urchin and caviar dish cut the sweetness of the wine a bit. Even though it seemed more mature in San Fran, I liked that bottle better, although this bottle wasn’t what I would call one of 99 problems (93).

It was time for some reds, and we began with a bang and a zoom, aka a 1990 Roumier Musigny. At first, this wine blew me away, showing 1990 at its best with a meaty nose full of iron, blood, rose, red fruits, musk and divine spice. Big Boy found it ‘tight as hell,’ and it was, but so tight never felt so right. It was a wow wine, just so thick and extraordinary. Black fruits came all over its palate, and someone hailed it as ‘nails.’ Licorice emerged after time. Big Boy debated its six-star status, and wasn’t as enamored with it as I was. I must confess, while this wine was in 97 point territory at first, after the Chambertins that followed, it seemed to lose a step, and I wasn’t as blown away twenty minutes later as I was at first bite. It was still pretty special, I think Bonnie and Clyde would have robbed a bank for this one (96).

The 1985 Rousseau Chambertin Clos de Beze was shy for 1985 at first sniff. Slowly, red fruits, iron, menthol and blood crept out of my glass. There was a citrusy intensity on top of its strawberry goodness, and its spine was erect and noteworthy. Its palate was rich, saucy and thick, especially given the usual style of the vintage. Flavors of beef, blood and iron combined with decadently taut red fruits to deliver a six-star experience (97).

It was turning into a La Tache kind of night, so we continued on with some 1985. This was the second time that I had this wine in this given week, which is by default the definition of a good week. It also reinforced the ‘first is always better than second’ theory, as this bottle didn’t live up to the previous one. Its nose was intensely complicated, led by the dirt first and the perfume second, although I’m not sure which quality I would put first. It had a sexy nose, with a touch of pungent, almost shellfish, along with oil, blood and a caramel glaze. There was a hint of dirty birdie there, but I think we all like that at some point or another, at least I do lol (94).

The 1990 DRC La Tache was an exceptional bottle, make that magnum, courtesy of our rival moguls in attendance. The Chaperon noted ‘cocoa and dark chocolate.’ It was clearly much younger than its two siblings, with blacker and pungent purple fruits. Its core was intense, so deep and so brooding, with a midnight-like complexity. There was also a hint of good dirty to go with its enormously long palate. Its acid uncoiled like a beast, and its brick flavors were thick and long. Jigga what? This was one of the better bottles of this that I have had in recent memory, make that magnum (97M).

Italy was the next destination, but the 1978 Giacosa Barolo Collina Rionda Riserva didn’t quite deliver the usual Giacosa experience. If a gun were to my head, Giacosa would be atop my list of Italy’s greatest, as in the greatest, but this particular bottle was a bit watery and marred by a touch of cardboard. The palate was easy and smooth, and its finish leathery, but this was the first 1978 Giacosa that I’ve had in a while that wasn’t staggering (92).

A 1978 Bartolo Mascarello Barolo was back in the right direction, delivering in classic fashion out of magnum. It had rich fruit in its black nose, was long and balanced, and had a dry and leathery finish. Yes, this is the part of the evening where the notes start to get shorter (95M).

The 1974 Bartolo Mascarello Barolo was not as good as the ’78. It was much more forward and mature, with more gamy fruit. It was great in a forward and ready to go kind of way, and it had the advantage of being served out of jeroboam (94J).

The 1955 La Mission Haut Brion double magnum was corked, but it was ok, as The Punisher brought a backup. The second didn’t have much time to breathe, so it was a bit tight, showing youthfully but with signature gravel and chocolate edges. It was pungent in the nose, but the palate was fresh and classy, smooth and sexy, with great lingering acidity (96D).

Magnums of 1974 Heitz Martha’s Vineyard were one of the least impressive experiences of this usually stellar wine. The nose was mint city with loads of eucalyptus, reminding me of 1947 Mouton but with more mint. The palate was even more minty, too much so, and although there was great structure here, the flavors came across a bit sickly for me (92M).

Oh, what a night. It’s a hard knock life.