|
|
|
|
In June of 2003 I conducted a blind tasting for The Wine Workshop in New York City in which some of California’s top chardonnays were matched against white Burgundies of similar age. As these tastings invariably turn out to be, the event was quite fascinating, and full of surprises. In a nutshell, the California chardonnays acquitted themselves very well. It would not be an exaggeration to say that they were preferred by the group that night. At the time, we essentially tasted wines going back about nine years, to vintage 2004. The California wines featured in that tasting were still hanging in there quite nicely, and the 1990 Marcassin Lorenzo Vineyard, a treat served at the end of the event (next to a partly oxidized bottle of 1990 Domaine Leflaive Batard-Montrachet), was simply one of the greatest California chardonnays I’ve ever tasted—as it had been since its release. Not only did the California wines do well, but it was difficult for a number of the participants to tell whether certain wines were Old World or New. But it must be noted that at many high-visibility tasteoffs like this, some set in France and involving highly experienced tasters, the results have often been similar: the California chardonnays have done well, and the tasters have had a great deal of difficulty distinguishing between the California wines and the Burgundies. (At some of these events, some of the French tasters have embarrassed themselves by saying “Wine #3 is wonderfully rich, complex and full of life so it must be a grand cru Burgundy.” Wrong!) When I posted the results of the 2003 tasting on the IWC forum at the time, there were two criticisms voiced by a few subscribers. First, a couple of people felt that my list of California chardonnays was stronger, on paper, than my list of white Burgundies. And they were right. I was working within a budget for the tasting—after all, the attendees were paying for the privilege of tasting these wines—and we had cost constraints on the Burgundies. A couple other posters noted that if our wines had gone back more than nine years or so, the California chardonnays would probably have begun to fade, while the Burgundies would just be kicking into third gear. Possibly. In any event, The Wine Workshop decided to repeat this tasting again last month (mid-June). This time, the group of California wines would be equally strong, while the list of Burgundies would be significantly upgraded. And this year we would go back 12 or 13 years, not just 9. (For the sake of continuity, we even decided to include a few wines that had been featured in the 2003 tasting.) By the way, when I was in Burgundy in late May, I mentioned this upcoming tasting to several of the growers I visited in the Côte d’Or. They all said the same thing: see what happens to the wines as they open in the glass, or even the next day in the recorked bottle. To a man (and one woman), they all maintained that the Burgundies would be better than the California wines after extended aeration, but unfortunately we were not really able to do this experiment, as each bottle had to serve 16 tasters. And of course the confidence of the Burgundians did not take into account the serious issue of premature oxidation. The greatest Burgundies may indeed blossom with long bottle aging, and a good aeration, but too many wines from the 1995 through 2000 period have died an early death in bottle. In the event, the results of our recent tasting once again were surprising. For starters, on this particular night the overwhelming majority of tasters had relatively little trouble identifying the source of each wine. (One hopes that experienced tasters in France could have done as well!) Even the less experienced tasters in the group did a very good job telling which wine was from California and which from Burgundy. Go figure. Wine is alive and is always unpredictable—and so are tasters. And on this occasion, there was no clear preference for one region over the other. Not only that, but the tasters’ votes for their favorite wines in each of the three flights were unusually evenly distributed, with no runaway winner in any flight, and only two or three wines being more or less ignored by the group. Here are the wines we tasted, and the results. Following my brief summary of this recent event, I have republished my original report on the 2003 tasting for relatively recent IWC subscribers who may not be aware that this article is buried in the IWC discussion forum archives. JUNE 2008 TASTING **** Flight One **** 2002 Domaine Leflaive Batard-Montrachet 2002 Aubert Wines Chardonnay Ritchie Vineyard Sonoma Coast 2001 Ramey Wine Cellars Chardonnay Hyde Vineyard Carneros 2000 Domaine Coche-Dury Meursault Perrieres THE RESULTS: Group favorites: The Aubert Ritchie by a narrow margin over the Leflaive and Ramey wines, with the Coche-Dury Meursault in fourth place but with numerous votes. My favorite: the Coche-Dury. WHERE IN THE WORLD? Aubert: 80% of the tasters said it was from California Leflaive: every taster but one said Burgundy! Ramey: 80% of the tasters guessed California Coche-Dury: two-thirds of the tasters said Burgundy MY SCORES: Coche-Dury (95), Leflaive (94), Ramey (93), Aubert (92). COMMENTS: The group had very little trouble identifying the source of each wine. The Aubert wine garnered the most first-place votes, but I found the fruit a bit mirabelle-like, and the alcohol somewhat elevated. The Leflaive wine was pure, steely and penetrating, finishing with grip of steel, and was the least evolved wine of the night. The superrich Ramey, which still had a green cast to its bright yellow color, showed wonderfully sweet fruit and a very long, tactile finish. And the Meursault Perrières displayed the classic musky, truffley, leesy nose that lovers of Coche wines crave, as well as a great mineral spine and an uncompromisingly dry finish. Numerous tasters didn’t know quite what to make of this style. **** Flight Two **** 1999 Domaine des Comtes Lafon Meursault Charmes 1999 Domaine Ramonet Chassagne-Montrachet Les Ruchottes 1999 Marcassin Chardonnay Marcassin Vineyard Sonoma Coast 1998 Kistler Vineyards Chardonnay Hudson Vineyard Carneros THE RESULTS: Group favorites: The Marcassin ’99, by a single second-place vote over the Ramonet Ruchottes. In fact, the Lafon Charmes received as many first place votes as either the Marcassin or Ramonet but fewer seconds. The Kistler wine was a distant fourth. My favorite: the Ramonet, with the Marcassin a hair behind. WHERE IN THE WORLD? Ramonet: Three out of four tasters identified the wine correctly as Burgundy. Kistler: Two out of three tasters picked this as California chardonnay. Marcassin: The tasters were split 50/50 on whether this was from Burgundy or California Lafon: Ditto: half said California and half said Burgundy. MY SCORES: Ramonet (94+?), Marcassin (94), Lafon (92), Kistler (89 and fading). COMMENTS: The Ramonet wine, though not a big boy, showed wonderful complexity to its lime, mineral and toasted bread flavors, as well as superb precision and grip, and would appear to be built for a long and glorious evolution in bottle. I thought the Marcassin wine was Burgundy, which caused me to guess California for the Lafon Charmes (these were the only two wines I missed during the course of the tasting). The Marcassin was big, rich and fat with pear and stone fruit flavors complemented by spicy oak, marzipan and cherry-almond. The Lafon wine still had a green-tinged color, and featured a compelling iodiney, smoky minerality followed by a distinctly saline finish, but I was slightly put off by a hint of maderization—a fascinating wine but not as good as the bottles served at the 2003 tasting or the last bottle of this wine I tasted six months ago. And the Kistler wine, with its wild aromas of petrol, apricot liqueur, marzipan and butterscotch, was definitely past its best, even if a few tasters loved it. I was reminded of Steve Kistler’s comment to me several years ago that his chardonnays should generally be consumed within four to six years after release. Certainly his best vintages have given great pleasure for longer than that, but this 1998 was in decline. **** Flight Three **** 1997 Peter Michael Winery Chardonnay Point Rouge Sonoma County 1997 Mount Eden Vineyards Estate Chardonnay Santa Cruz 1996 Domaine Vincent Dauvissat Chablis Les Clos 1996 Bouchard Corton-Charlemagne 1995 Leeuwin Estate Art Series Chardonnay Margaret River THE RESULTS: Group favorites: The Leeuwin Estate wine (the ringer) was the group favorite, followed by the Bouchard Corton-Charlemagne, which clearly split the group. The Mount Eden and the Peter Michael wines each received three firsts and three seconds, while the Dauvissat Clos finished fifth. My favorite: the Bouchard Corton-Charlemagne followed by the Leeuwin Estate wine. WHERE IN THE WORLD? Dauvissat: Two-thirds of the tasters said Burgundy Mount Eden: More than 80% said Burgundy! Peter Michael: Every taster but one guessed California. Leeuwin: This ringer split the tasters, with half saying California and half Burgundy. Bouchard: 80% of the tasters guessed Burgundy. MY SCORES: Dauvissat (89 but not a good bottle), Mount Eden (90?), Peter Michael (92), Leeuwin (94), Bouchard (95). COMMENTS: Wines #1 and #5 in this blind flight immediately stood out for their rather ferocious acidity, and were clearly the two 1996 Burgundies. The Dauvissat Clos, despite its terrific intensity, had a slight tokaj-like quality (think of the humid smell at the mossy bottom of a flight of stone steps) and was not up to past bottles of this grand cru. On the other hand, the Bouchard Corton-Charlemagne, with its powerful spine. outstanding structure and resounding aftertaste, was an acid head’s dream. But this was a love-it-or-hate-it wine: six tasters picked it as their favorite of the flight, but only one chose it as second-best. The Leeuwin wine, as it had been in 2003, was a beauty—a magical and apparently ageless Australian chardonnay that can stand up to the best from Burgundy. I thought the Mount Eden wine, with its musky, wild notes of pineapple, truffle and smoke, was less fresh than the fabulous bottle included in the 2003 tasting. My guess is that the wine should still be in fine shape, but that this particular cork was less than perfect. Finally, the Peter Michael wine was easily identifiable by its note of coconut (from the Louis Latour barrels). This big, rich, wonderfully sweet and slightly exotic bottle of chardonnay was at its perfect peak, and even a taster without a nose would have guessed California.
******************************* JUNE 2003 TASTING **** Flight One **** 1998 Domaine Ramonet Bienvenue-Batard-Montrachet. 1999 Domaine des Comtes Lafon Meursault Charmes. 1999 Ramey Wine Cellars Chardonnay Hyde Vineyard Carneros. 1998 Kongsgaard Wine Chardonnay Napa Valley. Ringer: 1999 Landmark Lorenzo Vineyard Russian River Valley. THE RESULTS: Group favorites: 1999 Landmark Lorenzo Vineyard, with the 1999 Ramey Hyde Vineyard a near second; the Kongsgaard wine also scored well My favorites: 1998 Kongsgaard, followed by the 1998 Ramey WHERE IN THE WORLD? Ramonet: a narrow majority thought this was French. Landmark: a narrow majority thought this was French. Lafon: most people thought this was from California. Ramey: virtually everyone picked this as Californian. Kongsgaard: a narrow majority thought this was from California; several tasters thought this was a ringer, and from neither California nor Burgundy. MY SCORES: Ramonet: 91(+?), Landmark: 92, Lafon: 93(+?), Ramey: 94, Kongsgaard: 94(+?). COMMENTS: The group loved the explosive, truffley, tropical Landmark and was thrilled to find out it was the least expensive wine of the entire tasting. The two Burgundies were extremely tightly wound, with much stronger apparent acidity than the Landmark and Ramey wines. For me, the hazelnutty, meaty but very dry and impressively structured Kongsgaard wine combined the best traits of California and Burgundy. **** Flight Two **** 1996 Domaine Etienne Sauzet Puligny-Montrachet Champs-Canet. 1997 Domaine Jean-François Coche-Dury Meursault Rougeot. 1996 Marcassin Chardonnay Lorenzo Vineyard Russian River Valley. 1997 Mount Eden Vineyards Estate Chardonnay Santa Cruz Mountains. THE RESULTS: Group favorites: 1996 Marcassin Lorenzo Vineyard and 1997 Mount Eden Estate in a virtual tie for first My favorites: 1997 Mount Eden Estate, followed by the 1997 Coche-Dury Rougeot WHERE IN THE WORLD? Sauzet: half the group guessed California, the other half said Burgundy. Coche: a solid two-thirds majority nailed this as French. Marcassin: a solid two-thirds majority guessed this was from California. Mount Eden: a solid two-thirds majority said this was from Burgundy. MY SCORES: Sauzet (not a representative sample and thus not rated), Coche: 93, Marcassin: 92, Mount Eden: 94(+?). COMMENTS: The Sauzet wine showed incipient hints of maderization, and it is impossible to know whether this is the wine itself (the two bottles were virtually identical) or due to problems with shipping. The group loved the wonderfully rich, leesy, nutty Marcassin wine but I found it too obviously alcoholic to rate higher than 92 points. The extremely youthful, impressively structured Mount Eden wine was a knockout. In my tastings through the years, across numerous vintages, this has been the California chardonnay I am most likely to mistake for Burgundy, and I did it again on this night. I also thought the Ramonet wine was from California and the Kongsgaard wine was French, but identified the rest of the California and French wines correctly. **** Flight Three **** 1995 Peter Michael Winery Chardonnay Cuvée Indigène Sonoma County. 1994 Verget Corton-Charlemagne. 1994 Kistler Vineyards Chardonnay Durell Vineyard Sonoma Valley. 1995 Domaine Michel Colin-Deleger Puligny-Montrachet Truffières. Ringer: 1995 Leeuwin Estate Art Series Chardonnay Margaret River. THE RESULTS: Group favorites: 1995 Leeuwin Estate, with the Peter Michael drawing many votes but finishing well back in second place My favorites: the Peter Michael first, followed by the Leeuwin Estate WHERE IN THE WORLD? Peter Michael: Virtually everyone picked this as a California chardonnay. Verget: A two-thirds majority thought this was from Burgundy. Kistler: A two-thirds majority thought this was from Burgundy. Colin-Deleger: No one thought this was from California, numerous tasters thought it was from Burgundy, and an even larger number were convinced it was a ringer from outside both areas. Leeuwin Estate: A narrow majority thought this was from France. MY SCORES: Peter Michael: 95, Verget: 90(+?), Kistler: 93, Colin-Deleger: 92(+?), Leeuwin Estate: 94. COMMENTS: The Leeuwin Estate and Peter Michael wines were outstanding, among the top five of the tasting. The Leeuwin Estate wine had great acidity and grip and made a perfect ringer, while the Peter Michael wine may have been the most concentrated and tactile chardonnay of the night. The Kistler wine was wonderfully ripe, nutty and layered. But even though I often mistake Kistler's chardonnays for Burgundies, I'm not sure why the group largely thought this bottle was from France. The two Burgundies in the flight were comparatively reserved, and perhaps both still short of their peaks. **** Flight Four **** 1990 Marcassin Chardonnay Lorenzo Vineyard Russian River Valley. 1990 Domaine Leflaive Batard-Montrachet. THE RESULTS: The favorite: no contest, as the Leflaive wine, though concentrated and still tightly wound, also showed hints of oxidation (again, whether from natural development or careless handling, it's impossible to say) while the Marcassin wine was flat-out brilliant. WHERE IN THE WORLD? Leflaive Batard: a narrow majority thought this was from California. Marcassin: a narrow majority thought this was from Burgundy. COMMENTS: The wonderfully vibrant, complex, minerally Marcassin wine, which I described ten years ago as the best California chardonnay I had tasted to that point, may still be the best. These most recent bottles were both shockingly fresh, possibly more vibrant than the last bottle I tasted, about three years ago. SOME OVERALL CONCLUSIONS (and not just from this tasting): Top white Burgundies from the best producers develop more slowly than even the strongest chardonnays from California. They are normally dryer, more taut and more minerally, and will rarely taste as opulent or seductive as the best California examples. Although I have enjoyed many outstanding old red Burgundies through the years, as time goes by I find myself drinking my red Burgundies younger (normally within their first 10 or 12 years and often sooner), while routinely holding my better white Burgundies for at least 8 or 10 years. The greatest California chardonnays can more than hold their own against top white Burgundies. Both the group as a whole and this taster picked many more California favorites than French on this night. I am convinced that French tasters would have selected the same wines as the best (with the possible exception of the 1996 Marcassin example), and would have been disappointed to find that they weren't from Burgundy. (Ripe, opulent wines, when they also have freshness, delineation and structure, will invariably be preferred over more austere examples by blind tasters. This is why aromatically complex but subtle and restrained wines like Soldera's Brunello di Montalcino and Château Lafite-Rothschild rarely do well in blind tastings.) While I have no doubt that most of the white Burgundies in this tasting will outlast the California examples, even the California wines with six to ten years of bottle age showed wonderful structure and firmness. On the other hand, the California chardonnays we tasted number among the handful of truly exceptional examples of this category. There are probably more mediocre California chardonnays on the market today than ever before, and spending $30 or more is no guarantee of getting a wine with any sort of concentration or character. And the overwhelming majority of California chardonnays should be consumed within their first 12 to 18 months in bottle, as they do not evolve positively in the bottle. On the contrary: they tend to lose their primary fruit character quickly, and one is too often simply left with a bottle of oak and alcohol. And, finally, many of the tasters at this event did a very good job distinguishing between California and Burgundy. Numerous tasters picked at least a dozen correctly out of 17. |