Comments on: When it comes to vintage huzzahs, Bordeaux still does it best

By: Kathy

Kathy — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 16:29:54 +0000

Well, Steve, ’09 really was a beautiful vintage season. No, I haven’t tasted it yet except at my biodynamic friend’s house (after all, I helped pick the grapes). Will see what pours at the UGC tastings. ’07 was a mess. ’08 has pockets of very good. Sorta like the pockets you talk about even in Napa.

California has a hype that everyone in the world believes: it never rains in California. It’s always beautiful. Same with San Francisco (ha). This may come as a shock but most people outside of wine haven’t heard of Napa Valley. And even wine lovers from Europe, Australia, New Zealand mostly haven’t tasted it. But pretty much everybody who likes wine has tasted Bordeaux.

By: steve

steve — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 14:39:20 +0000

David: Agree! Vineyard and winemaking more important than vintage. Of course, if the vintage gives bad grapes (for whatever reason), then
there’s little the winemaker can do except excessive sorting out, which can dangerously lower the crop’s value.

By: david

david — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 04:39:50 +0000

in our tasting room we never dwell on vintages.

YES, they do matter

However I (and hopefully others), still try to share the thoughts that:

the vineyard is most important
the winemaker second-most important
and the vintage is third….

heresy? lunacy?

By: steve

steve — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 03:04:37 +0000

Stephanie, just a play on words suggesting (a) un-affordable prices and (b) another over-hyped vintage.

By: Stephanie LaMonica

Stephanie LaMonica — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 02:26:54 +0000

curious: what’s the poke behind “bored dough”?