What's up with Chateaunuf du Pape?

Yep. Chateauneuf du Pape is almost as inconsistent as Burgundy. There are some good ones out there, but you need to do some research to find the good stuff. For openers, try Vieux Telegraphe (sp?). It's not cheap, but pretty reliably good.

Tom S

In truth, most every wine varies a lot year to year and winery to winery. The ones that don't are usually "industrial" wines that are made to a formula. Chateauneuf-du-Pape is a region that has a lot of very good wineries and even more that produce commercial crap. It also has a lot of vintage variation.

Here are some recommendations: Recent years: 1998-2001 Good wineries: Vieux Telegraphe, Le Vieux Donjon, Clos des Papes, Chateau de la Gardine, Domaine du Pegau, Clos du Caillou, Les Cailloux, Pierre Usseglio, Chateau La Nerthe, Bois de Boursan, Grand Tinel, Grand Veneur, Domaine de Mordoree and Font de Michelle.

Most of those wines will run you $25-50 these days. At $20, you'll have a tough time finding a really worthwhile example, but Guigal and Chapoutier make decent examples and can be found sometimes for near $20. It's also important to realize that these wines are best drunk young (up to 3 years after vintage) or after 8 years of age. Between 3 and 8 many of them go through a "dumb" phase where they're not very interesting. The most famous wine of the region, Chateau de Beaucastel, is also among the least typical and not a wine to be drunk in its youth.

Mark Lipton

Heh. Tonight I'm sipping a 2001 BV Rutherford Cab Sauv ($14 USD). I'm delighted to find yet another great Napa Valley Cab for a decent price. A superb QPR, actually.

Despite the TCA scare at BV, the Rutherford Cab remains a solid performer from year to year... and nothing like most industrial wines I think of.

Dana

Tom, like you I was going to point out the inconsistencies in Burgundy. Jeff, at least you were only expecting a $20 experience and got $5. With Burgundy you can be investing $100+ and have the same experience. I've cellared E Guigal CndP

John

I have always considered the BV Rutherford a bench mark for what a Napa Cab should taste like. They seem to capture the varietal character better than most other wineries of the region.

Totally agree. You can even taste the Rutherford dust often.

Down the street in Ruthorford going toward oakville is a Small producer called Sawyer Cellers.

This has become in my opinion the best of Napa.

Small producer and not highly commercial.

Dana, I'm a longtime fan of the BV Rutherford, but wasn't too impressed with the 2001 at a store tasting. But that's not best way to analyze (small pours, no knowledge of decanting or how long open, while tasting 40 or 50 wines). Based on your rec, I'll pick up couple.

I have to say that I'm hitting about 15-20% noticably corked bottles of BV's '97-'99 reds, with another 10% that seem to have enough muted fruit to make me wonder re low-level TCA. But from all reports by 2001 issues solved.

Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

This comes up every so often, as as a bit of a Burgophile I feel compelled to comment. It's very true that there is a lot of inconsistency in Burgundy. This is due to several factors:

1) At least with reds, the grape is the most tempermental and finicky there is probably. 2) Burgundy is more subject to weather issues than some (especially New World) regions 3)History and French inheritance laws have combined to lead to many many many tiny plots, making it hard to find a wine you might like year after year, so people are often comparing different wines as if they were one (just because you liked a Meo-Camuzet Clos de Vougeot doesn't mean you'll like Laboure-Roi's). 4) Like in many regions, there are many producers of very high quality, and many making plonk.

Does that mean give up on Burgundy? No, even though I drink more Bordeaux and some other regions than Burgundy, if I had to name my 20 most transcendent wines, Burgundy would probably have more than any other.

Burgundy isn't easy, but IMHO the effort is worth the effort. One should start by trying some regional and village level wines, from producers with a good reputation. Learn whose style appeals to you. Then start moving up the ladder of that producer if your pocketbook allows.

Sure,there are $100 Burgundies that I wouldn't want to spend $5 for. But with the exception of corked or obviously cooked bottles, I can't think of a single bottle -even from less-acclaimed years- over last few years from my favorite producers (Lafarge, Chevillon, Roumier,etc.) that I felt was really disappointing. I was going to add the negociant Drouhin to that list, but in modest vintages their base Bourgogne sucks.

Now, this obviously doesn't apply if you like your Pinot to taste like Syrah. But for those with tastes close to mine, after a little education Burgundy is not a minefield at all.

Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

You've gotten good responses. Remember, there are more than 100 domaines in CdP, some of which produce multiple cuvees. Some are fanatical re quality, others just want to make lots of wine to sell. Add in the facts of vintage variation (is anyone out there buying '02 CdP?). 13 different varieties are legal, so you might be comparing a mostly Grenache wine to one that is mostly Mouvedre and Syrah. Lastly, as someone (Mark?) mentioned, CdPs are notorious for "shutting" down a year or two after release, and not reawakening till their

10th or 12th birthday. With all those factors, it's not hard to have a disappointing CdP experience.

I'd be curious if you remember producer (and bottling ) and vintage of both the one you liked and the one you didn't/ Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

I try to always lay down a case or two of the BV Rutherford, except in years like 1998.

I had a couple of bad bottles of the 1998 GdL. No wonder Costco had it priced at just over $30. Too high even at that.

WS really panned the 2001 GdL. Gave it a score in the 60s - even lower than the Rutherford. I tasted it recently. It's a bit tannic, but I didn't think it merited less than mid-80s. WS seems to be going around the bend...

Tom S

I have a label here, and I *think* it was the one we liked. Chateau des Fines Roches 1999. I don't think it was very expensive. The one I can't appreciate is Chante Cigale 2000.

Thanks for all your comments. I understand the points about Burgundy, which is why I drink California Pinot Noir instead. However, I supposed that with the large range of grapes use to blend C d P, a consistent wine could be crafted - if not consistently the same, at least consistently a good wine.

"jeffc" wrote in news:Vnxjd.43840$ snipped-for-privacy@twister.southeast.rr.com:

Impressive property. Wines aren't bad, the chateau is a hotel restaurant with as Gault Millau put it servis which "Once you get past the chilly receptioin . . ." But that is a story for another time. I did buy a bottle a few years ago (to celebrate the troll at the castle, and I recall liking it though not as much as some others that we have had.

Wine geeks have tried wines from hundreds of wineries in CdP and reached the same conclusion, so congratulations on reaching this level of intelligence with only a couple under your belt! Dittos below and try also Domaine de Marcoux, Beaucastel, Domain St. Benoit Vaucluse - great examples. What happened to my test size?

PS; I meant "text size" but it seems normal when posted. Nevermind!