Inédito – Rioja – 2008

Red Rioja from Bodegas Lacus in the Rioja Baja area. Rioja Baja is the largest (and least prestigious) of the three Rioja areas (the other two being Rioja Alta and Rioja Alavesa). As the name (Rioja Baja, Low Rioja) implies, it is a low-lying and consequently hotter territory. As a result, Garnacha (Grenache) has been traditionally favoured here over Tempranillo, as it is better suited to the hotter, drier conditions. In the 80s many of these Garnacha vines were pulled out to be replaced by the better known Tempranillo, but recently there has been a move back to Garnacha together with a new marketing focus on the name Rioja Baja.

The Inédito exemplifies this Rioja Baja trend, since Tempranillo only makes up a small part of the total blend: 50% Graciano, 25% Garnacha and 25% Tempranillo. (Graciano is another classic Rioja variety, which thrives in arid conditions but tends not to be the dominant element in blends; but it ages very well and is usually an important component in Gran Reservas.)

Smells strongly of unbuttered (even slightly burnt) toast (as opposed to the buttered toast nose that so classically occurs in oaked Chardonnay). Pepper also comes over strongly (that’ll be the Garnacha) even before the black cherry fruit. A little bit gamey as well. Given time, a sweet bubblegum note comes through on the fruit, while the finish remains very peppery. Attractive if not deeply complex, I could never pin this down as Rioja in a blind tasting as it is unlike Tempranillo-driven Rioja; but it’s unfair to criticize wine from Rioja Baja for that. More in the style of new wave Rioja, even though it has been aged in American rather than French oak.

86/100

Fox Creek – Cabernet Reserve – 2002

A superb, cool, Cabernet friendly 2002 vintage from South Australia’s McLaren Vale.

Showing the first signs of a browning rim. A lovely, rich, maturing Cabernet nose; powerfully proportioned mint, cassis and liquorice (and definitely wine gums, too). Quite a chewy mouthfeel (sticky, even – those winegums again). Still tannic, but the acid comes through even more, and the first signs of secondary flavours. Quite a drying finish.

Big and alcoholic, not elegant but plenty of taste, and demands food.

86/100

Clarendon Hills – Grenache – 2003 – Blewitt Springs

South Australian Grenache with 95 Parker points.

A transparent rim, but no hint of browning yet. Still relatively tannic, and primary fruit. Sweet but not raisined, hot but not jammy. An opulent black fruit aroma does hide a slight leafy tartness, and a dry finish. No Grenache white pepper notes. In fact, I find it rather undistinguished in terms of taste: there is nothing more than that undistinct black fruit. Nevertheless, it has a beautiful mouthfeel, silken especially across the mid palate, and a long aftertaste. Probably needs more cellaring; I don’t feel it has fully opened out yet.
 
90/100

Bodegas Alfredo Maestro Tejero – 2008 – Castrillo de Duero

A monovarietal Tempranillo, which is relatively unusual in Spanish winemaking; Tempranillo is more usually the dominant variety in a blend. This is from Castilla y León, which has the classification of VT (Vino de la Tierra), a category with less restrictive rules than the more demanding DO (Denominación de Origen) category. That may have given the winemaker more flexibility; in any case, I find this wine very much in the style of (nearby) Ribera de Duero. 

Intensely dark rim suggests this is still rather youthful; there is a delightful aroma of oranges escaping the black fruit and the creamy oak. Still quite tannic, and relatively closed, if evidently complex, on the palate. May peak in 5-10 years.

88/100

La Ferme du Mont – 2008 – Châteauneuf-du-Pape – Côtes Capelan

High-toned, nail varnish remover, sweet port-like fruit, slightly raisined with a thyme honey note I associate with dessert wine; powerful, sweet and aromatically complex, I am surprised both by the ripeness (given that 2008 was if anything an underripe vintage) and by how expressive this relatively young wine is. I strongly suspect it may be having a sweet-spot swan-song before entering a dumb phase – I wouldn’t be surprised to return to it 2 years down the line and find a much more closed wine. Drink now, or leave till 2018.

93/100

Reichsrat von Buhl – 1996 – Jesuitengarden – Eiswein

Riesling eiswein. Liquid thyme honey.

Reichsrat von Buhl don’t make many Eisweins; the most recent was in 2001 – presumably it depends on propitiously cold vineyard conditions.

Reichsrat von Buhl – 2003 – Paradiesgarten – Riesling – Grosses Gewächs

N1 is wary of this, since it’s from the scorching summer of 2003 which produced many wines too full, flabby, and jammy for her tastes. The bouquet is remarkably different from the ’02; where that was fruit, this is candlewax and paraffin. I’m delighted; this is the only instance I’ve spotted a classic aged Riesling petroliferous note in the Reichsrat von Buhl stable, but perhaps petrol notes are more characteristic of the Mosel than the Pfalz. N1 remains sceptical; this is by no means flabby, in fact still has quite a good underlying kick of acid, but it does not have quite the lovely structure of the ’02 (although I still find it delightful). Palatewise, plasticine and pineapple.

91/100

Reichsrat von Buhl – 2002 – Paradiesgarten – Riesling – Grosses Gewächs

What a difference a decade of cellaring makes! The difference with the 2011 is stark: this is golden, and the bouquet has become as full as a truckful of melons (with nuts). I could have taken this for Bordeaux Blanc. 2002 was a really superb vintage, and this is a beautifully structured wine.

92/100

Reichsrat von Buhl – 2011 – Paradiesgarten – Riesling – Grosses Gewächs

Grosses Gewächs (Grand Cru) is a designation used for top quality dry wines in most German regions (but not the Mosel or Rheingau).

A light yellow-green, and a not very giving nose. Very closed; eventually hints at white flowers and white pepper, but it’s a stretch. Clearly a serious wine, but not much going on yet. Needs a decade to come round.

Château Haut-Brion – 1983

The only first growth from the Graves, not the Médoc.

1983 was a hot vintage, overshadowed by its great predecessor 1982.

A lot of bricking; the rim is quite brown. Predictably well-structured; length, balance and elegance. The tannins are resolved and the wine is drinking very well, but there is still a fleshy backbone and I have no sense of any need to drink up soon. Some sources say drinking at its peak, although I felt it might still be holding something back and I’d be inclined to keep.

Although the wine is renowned for its tobacco character (often described as the typical Graves character) I found at least this bottle quite different. It began redolent of brambles and hedgerow flowers; it moved on to a powerful cedar and herb character, but disappointed me by never showing tobacco. At first approach (before the cedar appeared) it could have been a sturdy, fragrant Burgundy. More sweet than meat, which surprised me. The result of a more mellow vintage?

94/100