TN: strange Nepenthe chard, tasty Fronsac

Feb 02, 2005 10 Replies

With Betsy gone for a week, I tired of eating leftovers alone. So I invited a couple of friends for dinner Sat (roasted chicken). For an apertif, we tried the 2001 Nepenthe Zoe's Chardonnay (Adelaide Hills). Funny wine- very tropical fruit (mango especially), with a definite musky (not musty!) aroma. I also got some canned peach flavors. Despite the ripe (almost overripe) tropical fruit, there's decent acidity. I confess to not being sure WHAT I thought about this- I liked one sip, then decided I didn't the next, then liked the next. My guests unequivocally liked it, but I don't think I'd buy again (though this was very cheap -$6 in a closeout bin). Over the next 2 days it got even less Chardonnayish, tasting like a fatter NZ SB by day 3. B-????



After reading a good note recently re the progress of the 1996 Potensac (Médoc), I popped one with the chicken. Now this one had some must, and after some air the TCA was clear. Too bad, one could see the underlying structure. But leftover Bachelet Bourgogne got us through dinner.



Last Friday I was in city, and had stopped by Garnet to pick up a couple more bottles of 1998 Fontenil (Fronsac) to add to my stash. I had opened one Friday night, and it had assailed me with wet cardboard. By sheer happenstance it turned out I had to be on the Upper East Side on Monday. With Garnet's "returns only within 7 days policy", I lucked out. Returned the Fontenil for another. So next bottle of 1998 Fontenil was NOT contaminated. Beautiful internationally styled Merlot, rich blackberry fruit, some integrating cedary oak, but with a distinct graphite/mineral note that sang Bordeaux. Long finish. Not a wine for the long haul (though the '90 was beautiful recently, I think that was before Rolland owned it) but I think this will hold for another 5 or 6 years, with maybe a little improvement- this was better than last non-corked bottle. I'll revisit again in couple years. A-/B+ (excellent QPR- I paid $14 originally, $20 for most recent bottles).



Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency Dale



Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply


This wouldn't be the Dale Williams who went to Evergreen, would it?

"This wouldn't be the Dale Williams who went to Evergreen, wo?uld it?"

Not unless you mean Henry's Evergreen, the vino-centric Chinese restaurant (now closed) on the Upper East side of Manhattan. Sorry!

Dale wrote: "Wit­h Garnet's "returns only within 7 days policy"..."

7 days??? Makes you want to avoid them for any wines that require *some* age! Talk about stingy...

ttyl,

Mark

"7 days??? Makes you want to avoid them for any wines that re­quire

*some* age! Talk about stingy... "

I don't shop at Garnet's that much. But the reality is that in general I seldom return corked bottles except to Westchester retailers- too much hassle. It was chance that I ended up on UES within a week.

But in general there are LOTS of wines that I wouldn't think of returning. I only return wines that I expect to be in current stock. I don't expect retailer to take reponsibilty for corked '93 Barolos or '96 Medocs. It's part of the game.

But, Dale, as I understand it, retailers don't take responsibility for it in any event. They are able to recoup their losses from the distributor who perhaps can also pass on their loss to the importer (?) I don't know how far back the chain it goes, but retailers have explained this to me as part of the system for dealing with corked wines. The problem with taking back a corked '96 Medoc or '93 Barolo is providing proof of purchase. Who's to say where you got that

10-year-old bottle and why should the retailer go through the hassle of dealing with it (other than being an ethical person)?

Mark Lipton

ah, the hazards of the abbreviated reply. My reason for not returning older bottles is that the retailer might not have recourse to the distributor. I realize that the retailer is seldom "eating" the loss, nor would I ask him/her to.

Dale Williams Wrote

Hi Dale This sounds very much like my notes for the Nepenthe Adelaide Hills Unwooded Chardonnay (no mention of Zoe's on the label, maybe an export only branding) Mangoes, musk sticks & peaches (I actually described it as "A tropical mess on the nose") I didn't like this wine by itself but it was improved by food, the acid structure is good and it helped out a bit. I paid $16 Oz for this wine and have 2 left so mine was an expensive lesson. (Dang, I can't even remember why I bought it, bet I was talked into by a Merchant. :) ) Cheers Andrew

Andrew, probably the same wine- backlabel called it exactly that, only front label said Zoe's. Tropical mess sounds pretty accurate! I probably made a mistake by serving as an apertif.

is the betsy stratmeyer, the bimbo who needs a tool to open a screw top? dale - you might want to speak with art s.

betsy may not to be too bright, but apparently she gets around.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required