http://www.victorpugatschew.com/ Wine Blog en-us Nucleus CMS v3.24 Weblog http://backend.userland.com/rss http://www.victorpugatschew.com//nucleus/nucleus2.gif http://www.victorpugatschew.com/ http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=55 Meeting No: 27

Date: June 19th, 2008.

Theme: The 2005 Vintage, Premier or Grand Cru, Red or White.

Present: Sir David of Kardinia, Sir Philip of Trevall, Sir Ian of Palatte, Sir Samuel of Pontifico, Sir Russell of Epicure, Sir Colin of Chambers, Sir Ralph of Plenty, Sir Thomas of Stocks, Sir Philip of Oporto, Sir Philip of Politico, Sir Paul of Rousseau.

Food:

First Course – Paillard of Petuna ocean trout, ‘toasted’ with shiso-spiced Japanese breadcrumbs, herb veloute sauce. Just delicious.
Second Course – Crumbed pork terrine, sweet and sour eggplant, Chinese BBQ sauce. Lovely.
Third Course – Seared, peppered venison loin. Peking cabbage and bamboo shoot ‘okonomiyaki’, teriyaki glazed field mushroom, pickled red radish. To die for!
Fourth Course – Dolce latte Gorgonzola creamed with mascarpone, beurre bosc pear. Requested by Russell to accompany the Sauternes, the combination bringing rather mixed comments.
Fifth Course – Honey-glazed quince clafouti tart, Yoghurt sorbet. Very sweet, and had to be to accommodate Pedro Ximinez.

Wines:
(In addition to the group ranking, I give the highest and lowest ranking the wine achieved, together with those who ranked it as such; you get some idea of how much we can differ in our appreciation. I also give the total ranking points after the overall ranking)

1996 Lanson Brut Champagne (CL): Light gold. Fine nose showing development, meaty and yeasty. Palate a full mouthful of bubbles, good acidity and aftertaste. Good wine. RG picked the maker unassisted. Not Ranked.
1990 Bollinger Grand Annee Brut Champagne (CL): Medium-deep gold. Quite developed nose showing some maderisation, meaty. Palate rich with an initial trace of bitterness. Came up to show better but perhaps a little too old. Not ranked.
1. 2005 Meursault Santenots (d’Angerville) (PM): Bright, light yellow. Rich, young, mineral-scented nose. Palate rich with great structure and extract, long and lovely. Beautiful wine. Ranked 7th (68). High – 2nd (SC); Low 9th (RC, DA, PA);
2. 2005 Chassagne Montrachet La Boudriotte (Bachelet) (SC): Brilliant, light yellow. Fine, soft, understated nose. Palate soft at front with good structure and long aftertaste. First class wine on its own and perhaps more typical of the Cote de Beaune, but slightly outclassed by the Meursault. Ranked 6th (57). High – 3rd (TJ, PhS); Low – 8th (CL);
3. 2005 Volnay Taillepieds (Bouchard) (RG): Beautiful, open, flowery nose. Palate soft and luscious. Fine wine, if perhaps with less weight and power than some others. Ranked 8th (80). High – 5th (RC, CL); Low – 10th (SC);
4. 2005 Chambolle Musigny Les Noirets (Sigaut) (IB): Nose more dense and profound, understated (some detected an ‘off’ character). Palate fine and substantial, touch of tarriness, long and lovely. Ranked 4th (52). High – 3rd (IB, PS, SC); Low – 7th (DA, RC);
5. 2005 Gevrey Chambertin Les Cazetiers (Rousseau) (PhS): Rich, dense nose. Palate rich, long and tannic, tarry with long aftertaste. Impressive wine still at least partly open. Ranked 2nd (20). High – 1st (CL, RC, DA); Low – 3rd (SC);
6. 2005 Mazoyeres Chambertin (Richard) (SC): Fine, perfumed nose. Palate very big and rich, tannic, long with long aftertaste, although may suffer from a lack of finesse. Fairly closed and needs lots of time. Many found a problem with this wine and comments ranged from Brettanomyces to medicinal to lactic, although I saw none of this. Ranked 9th (94); High – 5th (DA, SC); Low – 10th (RG, IB, CL, PA, TJ);
7. 2005 Vosne Romanee Les Beaumonts (Desauney Bissey) (TJ): Fine, understated, perfumed nose. Palate soft, medium-weight with good balance, tannic. Ranked 3rd (51). High – 2nd (RC); Low – 8th (SC);
8. 2005 Chambertin Clos de Beze (Duroche) (PS): Rich, dense, understated nose, perfumed. Palate very rich, long and tarry with long aftertaste, sumptuous. Terrific wine and a new level achievement for Duroche. Ranked 1st (16). High – 1st (RG, PM, IB, PA, TJ, PhS, PS, SC); Low – 4th (RC);
9. 2005 Morey St. Denis Aux Charmes (Amiot) (PA): Fine, perfumed nose. Palate soft and attractive but quite tannic on finish. Ranked 5th (50). High – 3rd (RG, RC, DA, TJ); Low – 7th (CL, PM, IB, PhS);
10. 2005 Morey St. Denis Aux Charmes (Amiot) (DA): Nose less fine, rather blunt. Palate lush at front, very tannic on finish. Most detected a corked character on the nose, and it was clear that the wine had been flattened by comparison with the previous, and identical, wine. Ranked 10th (103). High – 8th (PA); Low – 10th (PM, RC, DA, PhS, PS);
2005 Ch La Tour Blanche (RC): Light yellow. Nose fresh and young, much botrytis. Palate sweet with fine weight, long, very good acidity and aftertaste. Still a baby but should mature well. Not ranked.
2002 Pedro Ximinez (Montilla Moriles) (RC): Deep, brown on edge. Nose fine and rich. Palate very, very rich and sweet, very concentrated, long aftertaste. I find these wines too sweet and viscous for my taste, especially with a lack of balancing acidity. In the past, I have added Brandy to bring the alcohol content up to about 20-22%. I find this makes it a much more attractive and less cloying drink. Not ranked.
1977 Croft Vintage Port (TJ): Quite coloured, medium-light depth. Fine, high-toned, almond-like nose. Palate medium-weight, long and searing with a long aftertaste. Drinking well. Like many other ‘77’s, this wine has matured into a lighter style and reflects little of the promise it appeared to show as a young wine. Not ranked.
]]> Knights of Burgundy http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=55 Fri, 20 Jun 2008 22:46:40 +1000 http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=54 Meeting No: 26

Date: May 15th, 2008.

Theme: Echezeaux, Corton Charlemagne.

Present: Sir Ian of Palatte, Sir Samuel of Pontifico, Sir Russell of Epicure, Sir Steven of Grammar, Sir Peter of Heathcote, Sir Ralph of Plenty, Sir Thomas of Stocks, Sir Philip of Oporto, Sir Philip of Politico, Sir Paul of Rousseau.

Food:

First Course – Scallop tortelone and seared scallops, sweet ginger and carrot sauce, shredded vegetable salad.
Second Course – Crisp-fried, master-stock ‘spatchcock’ chicken, steamed coconut rice, cucumber and mint salad, red curry laksa sauce.
Third Course – Brendan’s corned beef ‘girello’. Parsnip puree, baby leeks, seeded mustard sauce.
Fourth Course – Twice-baked gorgonzola blue cheese soufflι, ‘Waldorf’ apple and celery salad with toasted walnuts.

The food was just splendid. I don’t know how Brendan and his staff consistently come up with such original, yet very tasty, dishes, but we are the beneficiaries. Bravo Brendan, long may you reign.

Wines:
(In addition to the group ranking, I give the highest and lowest ranking the wine achieved, together with those who ranked it as such; you get some idea of how much we can differ in our appreciation. I also give the total ranking points after the overall ranking)

NV Philipponnat Royal Reserve Brut Champagne (CL): Pale yellow. Attractive, light yeasty nose. Supple palate, good mouthful, just enough dosage, maybe a little short but good aftertaste. Good drinking. Not ranked.
1. 1995 Corton Charlemagne (Domaine Thomas Moillard) (SC): Deepish gold. Soft, matured nose which most thought corked. Palate with good weight, good acidity, a bit short initially but came up to show better with swingeing acidity. For the life of me, I could not see any corked character, nor could IB, or maderisation, which some also found. However, the wine was not distinguished and was much inferior to the next Corton. Ranked 10th (98) (High – 9th (RC, SC); Low – 10th (TJ, IB, PS, PhS, CL, RG, PD, SD);
2. 2001 Corton Charlemagne (Rapet) (CL): Light gold. Fresh, crisp nose, spicy. Palate softish but steely, good acidity and aftertaste, fine. Lovely wine, aristocratic. Ranked 2nd (27). High – 1st (IB, CL, SD); Low – 4th (TJ, PS, RC, PD, SC);
3. 2001 Echezeaux (Naudin Ferrand) (RC): A little colour. Quite young nose with a spicy overtone. Palate with good weight and aftertaste but tannic. Needs time now but should be good. Ranked eq 6th (55). High – 2nd (IB); Low – 7th (PS, SC);
4. 1982 Echezeaux (Mongeard Mugneret) (SC): Fairly coloured, medium depth. Soft, fairly matured nose. Palate soft, round and supple, good fruit-acidity and aftertaste. Nicely matured Burgundy, drinking well. Ranked 1st (24). High – 1st (TJ, PhS, SC); Low – 5th (IB);
5. 2003 Echezeaux (Rene Engel) (PhS): Young colour. Nose rich and fine succulent. Palate also rich and fine, very attractive, long aftertaste, tannic. Still open and quite elegant for an ’03. Should mature well. RG authoritatively picked the maker without any options. Ranked 3rd (28). High – 1st (PS, RG, PD, SC); Low – 6th (TJ);
6. 2004 Echezeaux (Dujac) (RG): Trace of colour. Nose quite similar to the Engel, lovely. Palate very attractive with fine aftertaste. Impressive ’04. One or two detected a little herbaceousness. Ranked 5th (49). High – 1st (SC); Low – 8th (IB);
7. 1985 Echezeaux (Mongeard Mugneret) (SD): Cloudy, quite coloured. Strange, sweet nose, lolly-like, high-toned. Palate better but very tannic. Badly defective wine. This must have been just a bad bottle because RG recently drank the wine and it was very good. The nature of the defect aroused some discussion. To me, it reeks of malo-lactic fermentation in the bottle but others, notably PD, suggested other possible bacterial causes. The group of malo-lactic bacteria encompasses a wide range, some good, some bad, and the lack of any petillance in the wine does not rule out these bacteria as the cause. The first time I saw this in wine was in the ‘70’s when I consulted Bryce Rankin at the wine institute in Adelaide and he concurred that malo-lactic was the likely cause. Since then, it has appeared less frequently, but I remember, not at all fondly, Cliff Booth’s wines of the mid-‘70’s which were terrific at the winery, execrable after a year in bottle. Ranked 8th (82). High – 6th (IB); Low – 10th (SC);
8. 1997 Echezeaux (Desauney Bissey) (PD): Some colour, medium-light. Soft nose but, unfortunately, a bit corked. Palate better, silky and elegant, but the wine is spoiled by the cork character. Ranked 9th (88). High – 8th (PhS, RG, SC); Low – 10th (RC);
9. 1998 Echezeaux (Desauney Bissey) (TJ): Some colour. Fine, elegant nose, some maturity. Lovely palate with good fruit-acidity and aftertaste, delicious. Ranked 4th (36). High – 1st (RC); Low – 6th (SD);
10. 1984 Echezeaux (Mongeard Mugneret) (PS): Some colour, deeper than above. Nose richer, more profound. Palate also rich and tannic but came up a little too acidic as it breathed. Still, very impressive for an ’84. Ranked eq 6th (55). High – 2nd (TJ, RC); Low – 7th (IB, CL, PD, SD);
1979 Ch Climens IB): Deepish gold. Rich, botrytis nose. Palate lush, lovely balancing acidity, elegant. Beautiful wine, drinking well. Must be near the top in ’79. Not ranked.
1970 Feist Vintage Port (IB): Some colour. Nose fine and very almond-like. Palate medium-weight, very long and searing, long aftertaste, drinking beautifully. Not ranked.
]]> Knights of Burgundy http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=54 Fri, 20 Jun 2008 22:42:55 +1000 http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=53 Meeting No: 25

Date: April 17th, 2008.

Theme: Chambolle Musigny, Meursault, Premier Cru.

Present: Sir David of Kardinia, Sir Philip of Travelle, Sir Ian of Palatte, Sir Samuel of Pontifico, Sir Leon of Romanee, Sir Ralph of Plenty, Sir Thomas of Stocks, Sir Philip of Oporto, Sir Philip of Politico, Sir Paul of Rousseau.

Food:

First Course – Chevre goats cheese royale tart, sweet and sour glazed beetroot, roasted shallot ‘soubise’ sauce.
Second Course – Pork kakuni: master stock braised pork belly, zucchini, crushed soya bean and shiso paper cannelloni.
Third Course – Seared wagyu skirt steak, potato mash with parmesan, ratatouille of Mediterranean vegetables, chicken liver parfait.
Fourth Course – Five-spiced quince custard crumble, rhubarb sorbet.

Excellent food again, although some thought that the combination was too rich and requested that next time we might start with a lighter fish dish and build to a rich main course.

Wines:
(In addition to the group ranking, I give the highest and lowest ranking the wine achieved, together with those who ranked it as such; you get some idea of how much we can differ in our appreciation.

2000 Drappier Grande Sendree Brut Champagne (PM): Light yellow. Fine, fresh, yeasty nose. Palate with good weight, acidity and aftertaste, a little sweet. Lovely mouthful, drinking well.
1. 2005 Meursault Les Charmes (Bouzereau) (PA): Pale yellow. Fine, young, spicy nose, elegant. Palate very youthful, fine, bit citrusy, good acidity and balance. Very good wine with a fine future. Ranked 3rd. High – 1st (PM, PhS); Low – eq 8th (SC);
2. 2000 Meursault Porozot (Jobard) (PS): Fairly coloured. Soft, but still unstructured, nose. Palate softish, nice acidity, rather undefined initially but comes up somewhat to show weight and structure. Overall, however, rather flat. Ranked 10th. High – 8th (PM, IB); Low – 10th (RG, LC, PA, PS, SC) (I had thought that Jobard had avoided the plague which has afflicted White Burgundy in recent years causing premature aging, but this wine looks like another candidate. His 2001 Poruzot shows a similar problem. On past experience, the character of this wine represents a precursor to maderisation);
3. 2004 Chambolle Musigny aux Beau Bruns (Barthod) (DA): Good colour. Nose sappy, slightly stalky, high-toned. Palate rich, touch stalky and bitter, good fruit-acidity. Ranked 7th. High – 5th (TJ, PA); Low – 8th (DA, SC);
4. 2001 Chambolle Musigny Les Gruncheres (Fourrier) (IB): Good colour. Nose finer than above, pure. Palate soft, good fruit-acidity, tannic, good aftertaste. Still young and needs time. Ranked 4th. High – 1st (PS); Low – 6th (PA);
5. 1994 Chambolle Musigny Veroilles (Barthod) (LC): Fine, pure, elegant nose. Palate fine, supple, fairly long, good wine. A very good ’94, drinking well. Ranked 1st. High – 1st (TJ, IB, RG, LC, PA, DA); Low – 4th (PS);
6. 2005 Chambolle Musigny Les Sentiers (Sigaut) (SC): Quite deep. Nose rich and spicy, very attractive. Large-scaled palate , fine and tannic, luscious, touch tar. Looks promising. Ranked 6th. High – 2nd (SC); Low – 7th (TJ, LC, PA, PS);
7. 1995 Chambolle Musigny aux Beau Bruns (Barthod) (RG): A little colour. Nose fine and elegant. Palate very rich and long. A fine, supple wine, drinking well. Ranked 2nd. High – 1st (PM, SC); Low – 5th (PhS);
8. 2000 Chambolle Musigny Charmes (Magien) (TJ): Nose spicy, more forthcoming than above. Palate full, rich and tannic but still fairly open, tends to fade a little. Needs time. Ranked 5th. High – 3rd (PS, SC); Low – 9th (LC);
9. 1994 Musigny (Magnier) (PS): Some colour. Nose a bit off, sour, like a very old wine. Breathes up well, however, to be perfectly sound. Palate very rich, searing, very tannic, powerful, seemingly needing time, but nose may be a concern. Ranked 8th. High – eq 3rd (SC); Low – 9th (PM, IB, PA, PS) (The wine may be controversial but I am impressed by Sir Paul’s definition of Premier Cru. Long may he so define.);
10. 2003 Chambolle Musigny Les Cras (Meo Camuzet) (PhS): Very rich nose which some thought to be defective (I seem to recall Bretannomyces making yet another cameo appearance). Not as fine or searing on the palate as the Musigny but with big weight and good aftertaste. Another controversial ’03. Ranked 9th. High – eq 3rd (SC); Low – 10th (PM, TJ, IB, PhS, DA);
1983 Ch Siglas Rabaud (RG): Quite coloured. Aged, Botrytis nose. Palate very lush and sweet with a long aftertaste. A trace of bitterness suggests that the wine may be just past its best. However, it must have been one of the best ‘83’s which, to me, have often been disappointing.
1988 Smith Woodhouse Madelena Vintage Port (SC): Fine, elegant, high-toned nose. Palate medium-weight, fine, lovely fruit, long and searing. Delicious wine, drinking beautifully.
]]> Knights of Burgundy http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=53 Mon, 5 May 2008 14:09:00 +1000 http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=52 Meeting No: 24

Date: March 20th, 2008.

Theme: Grand Crus, red or white, excluding Chablis.

Present: Sir David of Kardinia, Sir Philip of Travelle, Sir Ian of Palatte, Sir Samuel of Pontifico, Sir Russell of Epicure, Sir Stephen of Grammar, Sir Ralph of Plenty, Sir Thomas of Stocks, Sir Colin of Chambers, Sir Philip of Oporto, Sir Paul of Rousseau.

Food:

First Course – Blue swimmer crab ravioli, warm iceberg lettuce, taro straw chips, crustacean ‘bisque’ sauce.
Second Course – Toasted brioche, mushroom ‘charlotte’, poached quail egg, wilted water spinach, porcini mushroom ‘fumet’ sauce.
Third Course – ‘Aiguillette’ of five-spiced duck breast, pan-fried rice-noodle roll, stir-fried choi sum, Chinese BBQ duck sauce.
Fourth Course – Warm honey fig, aged ‘Chevre’ goats cheese, candied prosciutto.

Wines:
(In addition to the group ranking, I give the highest and lowest ranking the wine achieved, together with those who ranked it as such; you get some idea of how much we can differ in our appreciation.

NV Raymond Boulard Reserve Brut Champagne (CL): Medium-yellow. Fine nose, a little meatiness, showing development. Palate a full mouthful, fine acidity, good aftertaste. Lovely drink. Not ranked.
1. 2001 Corton Charlemagne (Rapet) (IB): Young, bright, yellow-green colour. Fine, elegant, Burgundian nose, spicy. Very good palate with good acidity and aftertaste. Lightish now, but very young and should fill out with age. Ranked 5th. High – 3rd (PS, IB); Low – 8th (SD);
2. 1997 Batard Montrachet (Blain Gagnard) (SC): Quite coloured. Some maderisation on nose, breathes off a little. Palate better with good weight and aftertaste but a bit chalky and acidic. Prematurely aged and disappointing. Ranked 12th. High – 10th (RG); Low – 12th (PS, CL, DA, IB, SD, SC);
3. 2005 Corton Charlemagne (Follin Arbelet) (IB): Fine, light, minerally nose, some spice. Palate light but with full aftertaste, good acidity. Should fill out with age. Ranked 8th. High – 2nd (SD); Low – 10th (RC);
4. 2004 Batard Montrachet (Blain Gagnard) (CL): Some colour. Nose restrained, young. Palate with very good weight and structure, good acidity, rich, good length and aftertaste. Should mature well. Ranked 7th. High – 1st (SD); Low – 9th (RC);
5. 1990 Mazis Chambertin (Frederic Esmonin) (PA): A little colour. Fine aromatic nose, maybe sous bois, lovely. Palate fairly closed still but with good fruit, acidity and tannin. Top wine which needs time. Ranked 4th; High – 1st (RC, SC); Low – 9th (PS); Allen Meadows of Burghound fame seems to use ‘sous bois’ pejoratively, but to me it’s a positive feature.
6. 1998 Clos des Lambrays (Domaine des Lambrays) (DA): A little colour. Fresh, fine, young nose, plain compared with 5. but some thought a bit corked. Palate more expressive, however, softer, some tarriness, tannic, good aftertaste. Needs time. Ranked 9th. High – 5th (SC); Low – 10th (CL, TJ);
7. 1988 Clos de la Roche (Dujac) (SC): Quite coloured, light density. Nose obscure to me, a trace metallic, but others found it attractive and strawberry-like. Palate supple although still fairly tannic. Not bad but not great, drinking well (I think). Ranked 1st. High – 1st (PM, PA, DA, TJ); Low – 5th (SC);
8. 1998 Charmes Chambertin (Perrot Minot) (RC): Trace colour, fairly deep. Lifted nose but most saw some volatility and some saw cork, came up somewhat with breathing. Palate with good fruit but also showed some volatility. Tannic, bit acidic and a little blunt. Ranked 11th. High – 9th (SC); Low – 12th (PM, PA, RC, TJ);
9. 1994 Romanee St. Vivant (Domaine Thomas Moillard) (RG): A little colour. Nose fresh, some spice, little development. Palate soft at front, quite tannic on finish, undefined. Showing none of the grace and finesse of this vineyard as yet, but Thomas Moillard wines need lots of time, five to ten years in this case. Ranked 10th. High – 8th (RC, SC); Low – 12th (RG);
10. 1985 Charmes Chambertin (Rousseau) (SD): Quite coloured. Fine, perfumed, elegant nose. Palate a bit light and very tannic, bit watery. If I were so inclined, I might suggest ‘drying out’, but who knows, it might improve? Ranked 3rd. High – 2nd (CL); Low – 11th (SC);
11. 2000 Mazis Chambertin (Frederic Esmonin) (TJ): Some colour. Spicy, young nose. Palate lush at front but very tannic on finish. Closed up now and needs time. Ranked 6th. High – 3rd (TJ, RG, SC); Low – 8th (CL);
12. 2001 Chambertin (Rousseau) (PS): Some colour. Very fine, perfumed nose. Palate fine and supple at front, silky, quite tannic on finish. Very elegant wine. Ranked 2nd. High – 1st (PS, CL, IB, RG, SC); Low – 5th (SD);
1983 Ch Broustet (RC): Deep orange, slightly green on edge. Developed, orange-peel nose. Palate smooth, fully mature with a trace of bitterness suggesting a little over-development. Not ranked.
1966 Taylor Vintage Port (RG): Very light colour. Fine, light nose. Palate fully developed, long, fine but light. Seems to have lost much of its fruit and, while still quite good, not at its best. Improved somewhat with breathing. Not ranked.
1983 Taylor Vintage Port (Silvio): Attractive, lightish Port, still with good fruit. Quite long and searing, ready. Not ranked
]]> Knights of Burgundy http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=52 Mon, 5 May 2008 14:05:33 +1000 http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=51 Meeting No: 23

Date: February 21st, 2008.

Theme: Vosne Romanee and Chablis, Premier Cru

Present: Sir David of Kardinia, Sir David of Cirro, Sir Ian of Palatte, Sir Samuel of Pontifico, Sir Russell of Epicure, Sir Stephen of Grammar, Sir Leon of Romanee, Sir Ralph of Plenty, Sir Thomas of Stocks, Sir Colin of Chambers, Sir Philip of Oporto, Sir Paul of Rousseau.

Food:

First Course – Japanese seafood plate: Petuna ocean trout tataki, Yuzu miso sauce and salmon roe; ‘shiso-cured’ Hiramasa kingfish, prawn remoulade sauce; seared scallop, sweet ginger and carrot sauce.
Second Course – Poached rabbit saddle roulade with a roasted shitake mushroom mousse, teriyaki glazed field mushroom, snake bean salad.
Third Course – Crumbed braised beef rib, spinach and parmesan frittata, bell pepper piperade, red wine sauce.
Fourth Course – Chilled mango and raspberry ripple parfait, black sesame ice cream.

Wines:
(In addition to the group ranking, I give the highest and lowest ranking the wine achieved, together with those who ranked it as such; you get some idea of how much we can differ in our appreciation.

NV Raymond Boulard Cuvee Rose Brut Champagne (CL): Deepish pink, no browning. Fresh, light Pinot nose. Palate with good flavour, fizz, good mouthful, good acidity, dry. Lovely drink. Not ranked.
1. 1999 Chablis Voulignot (Louis Moreau) (LC): Bright, light gold. Fresh, light, well-defined, minerally nose. Palate fine, crisp, good mineral backbone, good acidity on aftertaste. Excellent wine, quintessentially Chablis. Ranked 9th. High – 4th (RC); Low – 11th (PS);
2. 1996 Chablis Fourchaume (Domaine de la Maladiere) (CL): Quite coloured, deepish gold. Mature nose, meaty, somewhat maderised. Palate with some weight, acidity on finish. Initially rather short, it breathed up to show better. Ranked 12th. High – 10th (PM, LC); Low – 13th (DA, RG, PS, SC);
3. 1998 Vosne Romanee Les Beaumonts (Desauney Bissey) (DB): A little colour. Fine, rich, spicy nose. Palate soft, fine, fruit-acidity, perhaps a little light but attractive, good aftertaste. Ranked 5th. High – 2nd (RC); Low – 11th (SC);
4. 2002 Vosne Romanee Les Rouges (Desauney Bissey) (DA): Deep, young, purple. Fine, young, spicy nose. Palate with lovely weight, some tannin, a touch of bitter-young. Still open but should mature well. Very good wine. Ranked eq 3rd. High – 2nd (CL, IB); Low – 6th (DB, TJ, PS, SC);
5. 2003 Vosne Romanee Les Rouges (Desauney Bissey) (IB): Deep, young colour. Nose fine and high-toned, very Vosne, notwithstanding the year. Palate rich, tannic and flavourful, sumptuous, good aftertaste. Still open. Ranked eq 3rd. High – 1st (RC, SC); Low – 9th (CL, DB, PS);
6. 1994 Vosne Romanee Malconsorts (Domaine Thomas Moillard) (SC): Some colour, deep. Nose restrained, initially flattened, came up later (some said it was slightly corked). Palate rich and tannic, good aftertaste. Old style Burgundy which still needs time. Ranked 13th. High – 11th (RC); Low – 13th (PM, SD, LC, DB, IB, TJ);
7. 1999 Vosne Romanee La Croix Rameau (Cacheux) (RC): Some colour, deep. Aromatic nose, fine and penetrating. Palate with weight, fine fruit-acidity, tannic, good aftertaste. Seemed a little short initially but the wine is fairly closed. Will be great. Ranked 1st. High – 1st (PM, SD, LC, DB, IB, DA, TJ, RG, PS, SC); Low – 5th (CL);
8. 1999 Vosne Romanee Les Chaumes (Arnoux): (SD): Some colour. Rich, spicy, perfumed nose, bit high-toned. Palate with good weight, good aftertaste, tannic and acidic. Closed up and needs plenty of time. Ranked 7th. High – 1st (CL); Low – 10th (DB).
9. 1999 Vosne Romanee Les Brulees (Engel) (RG): Some colour. Fine nose. Palate with substance, quite long, good aftertaste, good wine. Ranked 8th. High – 2nd (TJ); Low – 12th (RC);
10. 1999 Vosne Romanee Les Chaumes (Faiveley) (TJ): Some colour. Nose fine but restrained. Palate with good weight, acidity, tannin and aftertaste. Closed up and needs plenty of time. Ranked 11th. High – 9th (TJ); Low – 13th (CL);
11. 2004 Vosne Romanee Les Rouges (Desauney Bissey) (PM): Red, faint colour. Fine nose, no herbaceousness that I could see. Palate luscious , finely tannic, lovely drinking, still open. Ranked 10th. High – 4th (DB, TJ); Low – 12th (PM);
12. 1999 Vosne Romanee Les Brulees (Engel) (PS): Red. Lovely, fine nose. Palate quite rich, supple, luscious, finely tannic. Closing and needs time. Ranked 2nd. High – eq 1st (SC); Low – 9th (RC) (When identical wines, 9 and 12, are ranked 8th and 2nd, what hope do we have! We can only assume, I suppose, that one was more closed than the other);
13. 1993 Vosne Romanee Les Suchots (Hudelot Noellat) (RG): Fairly coloured. Good nose, showing maturation. Palate supple at front, good weight, quite tannic, good aftertaste. Very good wine but still needs time. Ranked 6th. High – 3rd (DB, PS); Low – 10th (RG);
1970 Ch Guiraud (SD): Very deep gold. Very developed, creamy, apricot nose. Palate fully developed, sweet, good acidity, but some bitterness suggests the wine is past its best. Not ranked;
1980 Croft Quinta do Roeda (SC): Medium-light, some colour. Good almond-like nose but not penetrating. Palate light-medium-weight, seems attenuated. Quite long and searing but lacks authority. Light-on and disappointing. Not ranked.
]]> Knights of Burgundy http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=51 Mon, 5 May 2008 13:59:02 +1000 http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=50

1. Jacquesson Extra Brut 2002 Terres Rouge.
Good cherry pink color, smoke and spice aromas leading onto a similar palate with just a hint of tannins. Very balanced and great with food.

2. Laherte Les Beaudiers 2004 Pinot Meunier.
Lovely spice and finesse here. Oak is gentle but obvious. Rich and luxurious - quite a standout wine.

3.Vouette et Sorbee.
Smoke and weight in a more richer over ripe style. Has some hardness and tannins and definitely needs food. Interesting but a little too ripe for me.

4. Moutard.
Appears a little coarse and unbalanced. Strange.

5. Bereche.
Lovely cherries and red fruits on the nose, almost glace cherry in style, hint of oak, finesse and elegance. Very good.

6. Laherte Les Beaudiers 2005.
More serious style, red fruits, smoke, spice, very structured and great balance and tannins. Superb!

7. Eric Rodez.
Orange salmon in color, subtle, elegant, great smoke and spice, hint of oak. Lovely.

8. Boulard 2005.
Great structure and weight, cherries, spice, cedar, hint of tannin. Needs food.

9. Alan Siret Vertus 2004.
Medium orange color, very spicey with quite a rich, intense palate. Very powerfull, almost too much.

10. Benoit-Lahaye.
Cherry red color, more a fresh fruit, early drinking style. Hint of tannin on the finish. Good.

11. Jean Vesselle.
Cherry red color, very dumb nose, lots of red fruits on the palate, very structured and needs time in the cellar.

]]> Tasting Notes http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=50 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:10:11 +1000 http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=49
Wines were:

1996 Salon Champagne. After a heavy week of visiting small producers in Champagne - we expected a lot of the 1996 Salon - but we were disappointed. It is nice in a commercial sense but lacks the real terroir typicity that we were looking for. Shame. Food was spectacular as usual.

2005 Clos Vougeot Musigni Gros Frere et Soeur - gorgeous wine that drinks rather well now.
2005 Charmes Chambertin - Jacky Truchot - a lighter style - elegant and great with the food.

]]> Restaurants http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=49 Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:35:36 +1000 http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=48

]]> Restaurants http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=48 Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:46:21 +0900 http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=47

]]> Restaurants http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=47 Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:26:11 +0900 http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=44 Meeting No: 22

Date: January 17th, 2008.

Theme: Cote de Beaune, Premier Cru, Red and White.

Present: Sir David of Kardinia, Sir Philip of Travelle, Sir Ian of Palatte, Sir Samuel of Pontifico, Sir Leon of Romanee, Sir Ralph of Plenty, Sir Thomas of Stocks, Sir Colin of Chambers, Sir Philip of Oporto, Sir Paul of Rousseau.

Food:

First Course – Steamed Spring Bay mussels, herb veloute ‘broth’, linguini with shredded vegetables.
Second Course – Red roast baby chicken, stir-fried shitake mushrooms and Asian greens, oyster sauce dressing.
Third Course – Seared marinated venison loin, soft polenta with cotechino sausage, zucchini and eggplant cannelloni, red wine jus.
Fourth Course – Caramelized apple confit and calvados slice, traditional marsala zabaglione, cashew nut wafer.

Beautiful food again. I am not a great seafood aficionado, but those who are proclaimed the mussels the best they had ever eaten! I exulted (not a pretty sight) in the chicken and venison, and the dessert went perfectly with the Sauternes.

Wines:
(In addition to the group ranking, I give the highest and lowest ranking the wine achieved, together with those who ranked it as such; you get some idea of how much we can differ in our appreciation.

NV D. Henriot Bazin Blanc de Noirs Grand Cru Champagne (CL): Light yellow. Lovely, rich nose, almost meaty. Palate also rich, a full mouthful of bubbles, young, with a trace of bitterness, good acidity. Could be left a little. Not ranked.
1. 1992 Chassagne Montrachet Morgeot (Henri Germain) (RG): Medium-gold. Lovely, developed nose, suggestion of complexed sulphur, intensity diminished as it breathed. Palate lush at the front but dry and not greatly structured at the finish. Good flavour, some acidity, but rather short. Ranked 8th. High – 4th (RC); Low – 9th (DA, SC);
2. 2002 Meursault Les Charmes (Domaine Bouzereau) (PM): Light gold. Good nose, some development. Palate with good weight and acidity, longish aftertaste. Not much structure but the wine is young and this may develop. Elegant wine. Ranked 4th. High – 2nd (PM, LC, CL, PA); Low – 8th (RG);
3. 2002 Volnay Clos de Ducs (d’Angerville) (PS): Young, medium depth, purple. Nose young and fresh. Palate medium weight, some tannin, not long. I found this wine a little light-on, especially for d’Angerville’s premium vineyard, but it is undeniably fine and elegant. Ranked 6th. High – 3rd (IB, RG); Low – 9th (CL);
4. 2004 Beaune Cent Vignes (Morot) (IB): Young, fairly deep, purple. Nose fresh Pinot, touch feral, sous bois (some said slightly corked or herbaceous). Palate rich, complete, fairly tannic, needs time. A very good ’04. Ranked 7th. High – 1st (PA); Low – 8th (PM, PS);
5. 2005 Aloxe Corton Les Vercots (Follin Arbelet) (DA): Very young colour. Fresh, rich, Pinot nose, as yet undifferentiated. Palate lush, good weight, balanced, quite tannic, still open. Lovely wine. Ranked 3rd. High – eq 1st (SC); Low – 7th (LC);
6. 1993 Chassagne Montrachet Clos St. Jean (Ramonet) (TJ): Some colour. Fine nose, showing development. Palate lush, good flavour, quite tannic, nice aftertaste. Not a bad wine but I felt it was slightly lacking compared with the other reds. Ranked 5th. High – 2nd (TJ, DA); Low – 8th (LC);
7. 1999 Savigny Les Beaune Les Peuillets (Ecard) (LC): Some colour, deepish. Nose a little blunt at first but came up showing development, aromatic, silky. Palate with good weight, vinous, quite tannic. Very good wine but needs time now. Ranked 1st. High – 1st (DA, TJ, PM, LC, IB, PS); Low – 8th (PA);
8. 1996 Volnay Taillepieds (Bitouzet Prieur) (PA): Some colour, quite deep. Nose reserved at first (many thought oxidized) but breathed up well, became aromatic and, to me, lost any oxidized character. Palate rich, with great weight, very tannic with long aftertaste. Notwithstanding the putative oxidized nose, I thought a very good wine which needed time. Ranked 9th. High – eq 1st (SC); Low – 9th (TJ, PM, LC, IB, PS, PA, RG);
9. 1985 Pommard Rugiens (Madam de Courcel) (CL): Some colour, quite deep. Nose showing development, comes up fine and attractive. Palate supple at front, good fruit-acidity, tannic on finish. Good wine which will still go on. Ranked 2nd. High – 1st (CL, SC, RG); Low – 8th (IB);
2005 Ch Filhot (SC): Pale yellow. Nose very young, fine, high toned, good botrytis (although some couldn’t see it). Palate very sweet, young, some acidity, good aftertaste. Needs ten years but should be very good. Not ranked.
1970 Dow Vintage Port (SC): Not a lot of colour, considering its age. Fine nose, but not penetrating. Palate quite long, fairly searing but not fully mature. Some were disappointed with the wine but I think it’s not yet old enough to show its best. Needs five years anyway. Not ranked.

]]> Knights of Burgundy http://www.victorpugatschew.com/index.php?itemid=44 Sat, 26 Jan 2008 22:46:00 +0900