Wooden Wine Cases

Walter,

I understand your desire for durability, but it seems you're missing the point here--the reason is the wine, not the container. Buying a wine because it comes in a box simply doesn't make sense.

I don't think I've ever seen a California bottling come in wooden cases and not much German stuff either. Some French wines most assuredly do, but you'll be past the $45/bottle range for them in most instances.

Why not invest in some cellar shelving? There are some excellent modular systems that aren't very expensive and that offer strength, stability, visibility, organization and ease of access for not very much money. Check with IWA, for a catalog.

Consider your cellar with all those wooden cases. You'll be stacking, then unstacking, sorting then prying lids off with a crowbar. There won't be much order and there won't be any easy way to get to the bottle you want when you want it.

(And, if you do want to keep some wines in wooden cases, the modular systems even have a rack designed to do just that.) Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" "Phantom Flights, Bangkok Nights" Both from Smithsonian Books

I picked up a wooden case of 2000 Chateau Duluc; St. Julien (Bordeaux) for < $20 per bottle. Tastes good now (to this relative Bordeaux newbie) with a few hours decanting, but personally, I'll let it sit in the cellar for another year or so before trying another bottle. Here's what WS has to say about it:

Soft, plummy and chocolaty, with a lovely medium-bodied palate, with plenty of fruit and a delicious aftertaste. Second wine of Branaire-Ducru. Best from 2004 through 2008. 7,915 cases made. (JS) SCORE = 87

It is very rare for US wine to come in wood, and increasingly rare for even good French wines to do so.

I removed all of the case ends from my wood cases and used the cases for kindling. I screwed some of the case ends to a handy wall (not many of those left in my cellar not covered by full cases and racks

I agree completely. I have wine art (Seven Deadly Zins by Godard and Bordeaux by Namouri (or something like that), I will have a wine cellar, and I have a small, but ever growing collection of wine. I have a collection of [empty] wine bottles(my wife calls trash), of corks and of labels. In fact, the wine cellar is an integral part of the house. I would like the cases to be a part of the decor. Sure, I could go out to my local liquor store, pick up a [wooden] case of Paul Masson, but I would rather have a case of Penfolds Grange or Ch Ducru Beaucaillou (and the wine) (way over my budget for now). The case does not make the wine taste better, but I think the side of a wood case would look better on the outside of my cellar than a cardboard box.

If Paul Masson can does wooden cases for (IMHO) plonk, why cant Caymus, Cakebread do the same? or is this just one of Masson's sales gimmicks?

I did one better, I visited the Dallas showroom (I am 150 miles northeast of Dallas).

Right now I have a disipline problem. I like to drink the wine I am collecting. Stacking, unstacking, sorting and prying will serve as a deterrent. Just as some people enjoy pulling a real cork, I would enjoy a party I am planning more if I could pull out a wooden case of Michael~David Vineyards Seven Deadly Zins when I hang my painting. A zin party, complete with Gluttony, Sloth, Pride, Greed, (NO anger), envy, and later... some lust ;)

Walter

Walter,

I understand your desire, but also agree with those who say don't buy a wine for the case (or the bottle!).

If you have a relationship with a wine store, ask them if you could get some- most stores sell far more individual bottles than full cases, so they toss the cases.

If you do want to buy cases of wine in OWC (original wooden case, auction term), be warned that if you're having them shipped, the OWCs are shipped separately ,usually for a $10 surcharge. So might pay to check out local merchants where you can pick out.

Good bets for wooden cases w/o being too dear are 5th growth or cru bourgeois Bordeaux or Chateauneuf-du-Pape. IF they fit your tastes.

Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

Please explain this "5th growth" term. Does it mean there were 4 growths beforehand? If so, what happened to the grapes from the previous 4? Did they go to other Chateaus? I assume 1st growth is the best? Is that what the "1er" means (if not, how can I tell the growth number)? Believe it or not, I am trying to study all this, but I'm yet to find a book that explains all these terms before assuming the reader is already familiar with them. :)

And what is "TN" on some newsgroup subject headers?

Thanks

The largest wine warehouse in my area, Total Wines, sells empty wooden cases for $2 each. Every time that I have asked for a wooden case when I was checking out with $150 or more of wine, they would give me a couple. They only have so much storage room and when you see a lot of them against a wall, it is an excellent time to ask for a couple of freebies.

In 1855 the top Médoc (left bank of the Gironde estates) were classified into classes . The most prestigious were the 1st Growths -Ch. Margaux, Ch. Haut-Brion (not actually Médoc, but Graves ), Ch. Lafite-Rothschild, and Ch. Latour. Mouton-Rothschild was added in the 1970s. There are 2nd, 3rd, and 4th growths. Some of the better estates that didn't make the classification are classified as Cru Bourgeois.

St. Émilion has its own classification (there's none for Pomerol). While there are some underacheiving 2nd growths (Rauzan -Gassies) , and overachieving 5th growths (Lynch-Bages), the growth classification can still give one a clue (at least re price) today.

My suggestion to Walter was that a 5th growth (like du Tertre or Grand Puy Lacoste) or cru bourgeois (like Gloria or de Pez) would be fairly reasonable ($18-30 most vintages) and certainly come in wooden box (if getting from a local source).

As to 1er- while one can indeed refer to Haut-Brion as a 1er Classe (or 1er Grande Cru Classe), probably usually when one sees the 1er abbrievation it is for Burgundy, where vineyards (not producers!) are divided into regular village wines, Premier (1er) Crus, and Grand Crus.

Tasting Note, just an alert to folks who may want to especially read or avoid tasting notes. And a sorting aid for those of us using Googlegroups/Dejanews who might want to reread our own or others tasting notes.

Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

Ahh, Gloria... Something I have had (I believe it was you Dale that suggested Gloria instead of the Food & Wine Magazine suggestion for Thanksgiving dinner).

Is the growth associated with the grower/producer or to the wine itself? Like Ch Ducru Beaucaillou... its 2eme (second growth?) So is La Croix de Beaucaillou (the second wine from Ducru) also a 2nd growth?

Thanks,

Walter

La Croix is the second wine of Ducru, which is a 2nd growth, but only the estates's main wine is entitled to the classification.

Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

Someone just sent me an article from the Washington Post. Fit in with a couple of threads here.

Time to buy Bordeaux

Ben Giliberti Special to The Washington Post Aug. 12, 2004 12:00 AM

No one in Bordeaux seems terribly concerned about how the 2004 vintage will turn out. Perhaps it's too early to start worrying. The tiny flowers on the predominant Cabernet and Merlot vines only recently finished setting into grape clusters. The success of this process, called flowering, determines the quantity of wine produced. In September and October, the grapes will be harvested and put in temperature-controlled tanks to begin their frothy fermentation. That's when the quality of the vintage will be known. Too much rain at harvest will result in a watery washout and an ignoble rot; insufficient rain will prevent the grapes from ripening, leading to astringent, green flavors that even the winemaking magicians of Bordeaux will be unable to make disappear.

But the real reason for the casual attitude in Bordeaux is probably even simpler - in light of Bordeaux's recent success, 2004 hardly matters. Bordeaux has been on a tear. This renowned wine region of southwestern France has put together the longest string of consecutive successful vintages in more than a century and perhaps in its 400-plus-year recorded history. Some commentators would put the winning streak at nine years, from 1995 through 2003. My count is six, because the best I can award the 1997 vintage is a workaday B. However, six consecutive triumphs would be considered remarkable even in everybody-knows-it-never-rains-in California.

This is good news not only for the winemakers of Bordeaux but for wine lovers, especially those who think they can't afford great wine. Bordeaux has a reputation for being expensive, but the real Bordeaux story is that it is the champion low-cost producer of world- class wine. "Overpriced" applies only to the most famous 50 or 100 wines from the best years. On the other hand, the region is home to several thousand individual chbteaux, each producing anywhere from 2,000 cases to more than 100,000 cases of wine. Even if two-thirds of this production is nothing special, the remaining third is still a lot of wine. And most of it is outstanding.

I have no quarrel with lovers of Napa Valley Cabernet, red Burgundy, Rhones reds, the Nebbiolo-based wines of the Italian Piedmont and other premier wine regions who believe that the creme de la creme of their regions are on a par with the best wines of Bordeaux. But I'll drink them under the table every day of the week with moderately priced cru bourgeois and lower-ranked classified Bordeaux in the $15-to-$50 range. Guaranteed, for every good village-level Gevrey-Chambertin or delectably lush Crozes-Hermitage they can produce, I'll be able to find 10 grand cru Leovilles or Lynch's, and 25 lovely cru bourgeois like Chateau Gloria's. And I'll have enough spare change to cover a good piece of Camembert to enjoy with it.

Bordeaux's six-year winning streak has created an unprecedented buying opportunity for savvy consumers. Most vintages were purchased by importers and retail shops at favorable exchange rates, before the Euro's climb against the U.S. dollar. The flip side is that prices will be going up as the dollar weakens. The time to buy is now.

Here is an overview of recent Bordeaux vintages and buying recommendations to start. In upcoming weeks, I'll follow up with recommendations of the best available wines in various price categories.

Bordeaux 2003: A potentially great but highly unusual powerhouse of a vintage. Several area retailers have begun to offer 2003s on pre-order for future delivery. The five first growths (Lafite, Latour, Margaux, Mouton-Rothschild and Haut-Brion) opened at twice the price of the 2002s and are shockingly expensive. Pass on the first growths but give serious consideration to almost everything else. Futures buyers beware: Though 2003 produced some monumental wines, some great estates, such as L'Evangile in Pomerol, got burned by the freakish summer heat.

Don't you get burned. The safer course is to wait for the wines to arrive, so that you can taste them, even though it will mean paying a premium over the current pre-arrival price. The belle of the ball at the 2003 tasting I attended was the gorgeously rich Chateau Giscours ($45; Margaux).

Bordeaux 2002: Go for the first growths. They are attractively priced at around $120 a bottle on pre-order, and appear to have dramatically outperformed the rest of the pack in 2002. Among the first growths, I have tasted the opulent Mouton-Rothschild, but it was there with the best Moutons I've ever tasted.

Bordeaux 2001: Better than 2002 but totally overshadowed by 2000. A classic, mid-weight claret lovers' vintage, this crop is equally good for both the Left Bank (Medoc and Graves) and the Right Bank (Saint-Emilion and Pomerol). The wines are arriving now, and there are some very attractive values. Chbteau d'Issan ($40; Margaux) won my heart.

Bordeaux 2000: The vintage of the century? Old-timers say that 1900 was never eclipsed in that century. It may be happening again. The 2000s seem to be getting better with every tasting. Although the big names are grotesquely overpriced, gazillions of mid-tier chateaux have produced powerful, deeply fruity wines of Grand Cru Classe quality. For starters, I'd recommend looking for Haut-Medoc cru bourgeois and fifth growths in the $30 to $40 range, such as Clerc-Milon, d'Agassac, Cambon la Pelouse and Duhart-Milon.

Bordeaux 1999: Though similar to 2001, 1999 is a little bit softer, and favors the Left Bank slightly. Few great wines were made, but these wines are immensely charming and well priced. Leoville-Barton, which would go on to produced a landmark wine in 2000, is a perfect place to start.

Bordeaux 1998: Almost forgotten in the wake of the 2000 vintage is how grandly the Merlot-based Right Bank wines of Pomerol and Saint-Emilion performed in

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

in article snipped-for-privacy@mb-m05.aol.com, Dale Williams at snipped-for-privacy@aol.comdamnspam wrote on 8/13/04 2:38 PM:

I'm really learning something here. So........ is there a designation for what LeCroix IS, if it's not a 2nd Growth?

And next....... are you saying that these 'growth' designations have been attributed to the main wine of each house for over 150 years consistently? There seems to be an assumption in that to the effect that the wine is of the same quality every year for all that time. Am I wrong about that?

You are not necessarily wrong, but there is another reason - remember we are talking about the French. Elevating a chateau over another would be unthinkable (to the 'other')

The 1855 classification, which deals with only part of Bordeaux, BTW, was based on sale prices as an index of quality. Many chateaux have since lowered, and just as many have raised performance since then. The hierarchy would look quite a bit different today, if anyone could get them (the French producers) to accept it.

It's still a St-Julien, just not a classed growth. The vast majority of wines produced in Bordeaux aren't classified at all beyond their appelations. Out of sometime like 5,000 chateaux , there are I think 60 classed Médoc estates, maybe 80 cru bourgeois, maybe 60 St. Émilion Grand Cru Classés (and Premier GCC), amd 20-30 Sauternes/Barsacs. There's a few Graves/Pessac classed estates too (I'm just guessing on all these). Of course, some chateaux sell to co-ops. But in any case the vast majority of wines are classified.

This is complicated, but I'll do my best. The classification is for the estate. Each estate can only produce one wine, it's flagship, that is entitled to the classification. The second wines are usually grapes from young vines, or the grapes which did not fit in with the winemaker's vision of the best cepage for that vintage (if a estate is planted 50% CS, 25 % Merlot, 25% Cab Franc, and winemaker makes the main wine 60% CS, 20% Merlot, 20% CF, obviously there's a good chance the second will have less CS).

As to the classification, some of this is tied into the idea of terroir. The idea is the property is what matters the most, not the winemaker. And indeed there have been periods where various properties under(or over) performed their classification for long periods.

And Bill is correct that if the classification was done today, results would be different. Yet in a way it's amazing that the classifications have held us as well as they have. Sure, it would be hard to find a Bdx geek who maintained that 2nd growths like Rauzan-Segla, Rauzan-Gazzies, Durfort-Vivens (sp?), Lascombes, or ....(there's another well-known underachiever I'm blanking on) deserve to be ranked ahead of Palmer or Lynch-Bages. And there are years that super-seconds (no energy, use Googlegroups!) like LLC or Cos outdo Lafite. But you don't hear people agitating for major revisions for the most part, just shuffling. It's a favorite wine-geek game ("I'd make LLC a first, take Mouton back down to second, make Rauzan-Segla & Lascombes 3rd, Rauzan-Gazzies & Durfort-Vivens 5ths, make Palmer & Lynch-Bages seconds, GPL and Talbot 3rd," etc). Burg nuts on the other hand question why Chambolle Amoureuses is 1er when Charmes-Chambertin and Corton are GCs?!?! There it gets really complicated, as vineyards have more than one owner (sometimes dozens).

Whew. I think I'll have a glass of wine! Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

oops, are NOT classified Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

This upbeat tone of this article (or was it really a press release from the Bdx Chamber of Commerce?) contrasts sharply with the one on Bdx in Wednesday's New York Times. They don't necessarily contradict each other. This one deals primarily with the quality of the wines whereas the NYT article dealt with the economic situation in Bdx. Just an observation.

Vino To reply, add "x" between letters and numbers of e-mail address.

True. I think the big difference is that the NYT article was dealing mostly with the difficulties of the producers who make Bordeaux and Bordeaux Supérieur AC wines, as well as maybe Entre-Deaux-Mers and the like; while this was about classed growths and their ilk.

I had a few quibbles with this article:

A B is generous for 1997

"2000s seem to be getting better with every tasting" - well maybe, but as a journalist writing for a general audience I think pointing out that most bigger names are now closed, and need lots of time, would have been helpful.

And if he's talking about buying opportunites, he might have mentioned 1996- some still available, monumental wines on left bank, some good sales.

best, Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

snipped-for-privacy@aol.comdamnspam (Dale Williams) cited:

Bordeaux largest château, Larose-Trintaudon in St-Laurent (AOC Haut-Médoc), has 173 hectares. Even with a yield of

One of the largest cru classés, Gruaud-Larose, today typically makes around 25,000 cases of grand vin and 16,000 of second vin.

M.

Good catch, Michael.

One other line I had a question about: "Too much rain at harvest will result in a watery washout and an ignoble rot; insufficient rain will prevent the grapes from ripening, leading to astringent, green flavors that even the winemaking magicians of Bordeaux will be unable to make disappear"

Ok, the first part I understand. But my non-winemaker understanding was that green flavors usually came from lack of heat, not water. Can someone more knowledgable help out here? Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply