Category: Knights of Burgundy
Posted by: vicpug
April 20th 2006 Matteo's.
At initiation, voices were circumspect, subdued; by quarter-time, the flow was definable, half time, more than perceptible; at three-quarter time, the volume was impenetrable; and at full time, rationality had left the building. However, sufficient sensibility was abroad to obtain (eleven) rankings, and exchanged shouts sufficient to establish a theme for the next meeting. As Ned Kelly memorably apostrophised, " Such is...".
On the whole, our first meeting was a success. Notwithstanding a few interjections ranging from the ludicrous to the absurd, an acclamation of sorts was achieved, and general encouragement to extend the experiment obtained. There was some disagreement as to desirable numbers at each meeting, this sentiment suggesting a cut-off point based on the first-in-best-dressed principle. However, most seemed happy to let the numbers reach their own equilibrium, the precise measuring of quantities not being regarded as too onerous. The suggestion to bring magnums or two bottles of each wine was little entertained as a) magnums were at a premium and nobody wanted to bring two bottles, and b) fewer wines would be tasted on the night. And almost everybody wanted to come back next time. On the matter of increasing the numbers on the list (there are at least two knowledgeable Burgundy drinkers interested), the feeling was to leave it as is, see how the numbers for each meeting go, and extend the list as necessary or have a guest night. After a bit of to-ing and fro-ing, it was decided that next time we will do a comparison of Premier Crus from Volnay and Vosne Romanee. Further details in the fullness of time.
For a first-night effort we had a splendid selection of wines, none of which on their own would have provided less than fine drinking. Therefore (to be self-evident), wines ranked near the bottom only deserved their place because of other wines which were slightly better. And you can quote me on that.
1. NV Reserve Brut Champagne ( Raymond Bollard) (two bottles): Light, fresh nose. Palate suffused with effervescence. A fairly substantial dosage for a Brut but a good wine. It looks like the 'growers champagne' is the way to go. (CL) Ranked 9th;
2. 1986 Chassange Montrachet Les Chaumees (Michel Colin Deleger): Some colour. Beautifully developed nose. Finely structured palate with fine acidity. Some thought drying a little but I think time to go. Lovely wine. (RC) Ranked eq. 7th;
3. 1995 Puligny Montrachet Les Folatieres (Chavy): Fresh, citrus nose. Palate fine and elegant, good acidity. Will last and improve. Very youthful for an eleven-year-old wine. (TJ). Ranked 16th;
At initiation, voices were circumspect, subdued; by quarter-time, the flow was definable, half time, more than perceptible; at three-quarter time, the volume was impenetrable; and at full time, rationality had left the building. However, sufficient sensibility was abroad to obtain (eleven) rankings, and exchanged shouts sufficient to establish a theme for the next meeting. As Ned Kelly memorably apostrophised, " Such is...".
On the whole, our first meeting was a success. Notwithstanding a few interjections ranging from the ludicrous to the absurd, an acclamation of sorts was achieved, and general encouragement to extend the experiment obtained. There was some disagreement as to desirable numbers at each meeting, this sentiment suggesting a cut-off point based on the first-in-best-dressed principle. However, most seemed happy to let the numbers reach their own equilibrium, the precise measuring of quantities not being regarded as too onerous. The suggestion to bring magnums or two bottles of each wine was little entertained as a) magnums were at a premium and nobody wanted to bring two bottles, and b) fewer wines would be tasted on the night. And almost everybody wanted to come back next time. On the matter of increasing the numbers on the list (there are at least two knowledgeable Burgundy drinkers interested), the feeling was to leave it as is, see how the numbers for each meeting go, and extend the list as necessary or have a guest night. After a bit of to-ing and fro-ing, it was decided that next time we will do a comparison of Premier Crus from Volnay and Vosne Romanee. Further details in the fullness of time.
For a first-night effort we had a splendid selection of wines, none of which on their own would have provided less than fine drinking. Therefore (to be self-evident), wines ranked near the bottom only deserved their place because of other wines which were slightly better. And you can quote me on that.
1. NV Reserve Brut Champagne ( Raymond Bollard) (two bottles): Light, fresh nose. Palate suffused with effervescence. A fairly substantial dosage for a Brut but a good wine. It looks like the 'growers champagne' is the way to go. (CL) Ranked 9th;
2. 1986 Chassange Montrachet Les Chaumees (Michel Colin Deleger): Some colour. Beautifully developed nose. Finely structured palate with fine acidity. Some thought drying a little but I think time to go. Lovely wine. (RC) Ranked eq. 7th;
3. 1995 Puligny Montrachet Les Folatieres (Chavy): Fresh, citrus nose. Palate fine and elegant, good acidity. Will last and improve. Very youthful for an eleven-year-old wine. (TJ). Ranked 16th;
Sidebar
