subscribe: Posts | Comments      Facebook      Email Steve

2009 Cabernets could miss the boat

7 comments

With so many important Cabernet Sauvignons and Bordeaux blends yet to be released from the 2009 vintage, it may be premature to make pronouncements about it. Still, I’m beginning to have my doubts.

As early as December 1, 2009, I wrote (in my vintage assessment for Wine Enthusiast), “The fuller-bodied reds from the North Coast, especially Cabernet Sauvignon, could be problematic.” The main problem was a major rainstorm on Oct. 12-13 that soaked Napa. That led to the classic question, “Did you pick before or after the rains?” As one Diamond Mountain winemaker put it, in an official press release, “The rain will define the harvest depending on which side of it you were on.” She warned that fruit picked after the rain would have “slightly lower sugars,” but don’t be misled by that word “slightly.” We’re talking about the difference between perfectly ripened grapes and less [or more] than perfectly ripened grapes, which really is the key for Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon.

My hunch, given how cool 2009 was–and it was a very cool season, the start of our notorious trio of “little ice age” vintages of 2009, 2010 and 2011–is that most Cabernet was not picked before the rains came, because it wasn’t ripe.

It is true that the rain was followed by a period of warm, sunny weather, the kind that, in theory, can dry out the vines and canopies and restore the grapes to health. But having rain followed by sun at that precarious time of the harvest is never as good as having no rain at all, which is why I used the word “problematic.” The problems include having grapes swollen with water, which would reduce their power and make them thin. This problem would be compounded by the size of the 2009 harvest, which was a large one, the biggest since 2005, and the second biggest of the decade.

And mold is also a very serious threat, especially for wineries that lack the professional staff to hand-sort out bad berries before they reach the fermentation tanks. Almost all wineries go through the motions of sorting, but few are wealthy enough to have the deep bench necessary to deal with a vintage like 2009. This is another reason why the top houses (which is to say, the most expensive wines) will have a leg up in 2009.

Still, as one North Coast vintner told me, “Big harvest + rain soaked quality isn’t a good combination.” Another winemaker, whom I respect a great deal, told me, “I just think 2009 was too cool over all. When you look at the great vintages in CA they tend to be the warmer ones.” This vintner allowed as to how 2009 might be good for coastal Pinot Noir (although he noted, and so did I, the early hype that accompanied it). But we’re not talking about Pinot Noir here.

I have now reviewed about 125 2009 Cabernet Sauvignons and, sad to say, my scores have not been impressive. Only a handful of 90-plusses. Thankfully, most of these wines aren’t terribly expensive, ranging from $18-$30. A typical one, which I won’t identify because my review has not yet been published, read: “A little sharp and aggressive in texture, giving it a rustic feel, but pretty rich in blackberries, currants and cedar, making it an easy Cab to drink now.” It is that aggressiveness that worries me. You want a nice Cabernet to feel smooth in the mouth, with gentle, warming tannins that glide like velvet across the palate. The slightest hint of coarseness can be jarring. Given how strong Cabernet’s tannins are, if the fruit doesn’t match it, the wines will taste and feel astringent. That’s my fear for 2009.


Tuesday Twaddle: weird weather, a speaking engagement

4 comments

The 2011 growing conditions are starting out eerily like notorious 2010, when “summer never came.” Winter was long, wet and cold. We had a couple of warm days in April, but nothing out of the ordinary. Since then, it’s been nothing but cool, abnormally so. And now, rain.

Significant quantities of rain and hail and even snow at higher elevations (3,000 feet) fell overnight, particularly in the North Country, with rain expected to move south today. This is really crazy for the middle of May–and it’s not over. Rain will pick up in the Central Valley today, and move into L.A. on Wednesday, as a deep trough more typical of January cuts through the West. The National Weather Service yesterday said “winter-like weather will return to Northern California later this afternoon and tonight. Periods of heavy snow will likely redevelop across the northern Sierra Nevada this evening.”

By Thursday, fortunately, it should all be over. But what will the damage be to tender young grapeshoots?

And the extent of the April 8-10 freeze, when temperatures plunged as low as 24 degrees in the Central Coast, is becoming clearer. I was in Paso Robles last Friday, and it was the main topic of conversation. Paso Robles, southern Monterey and the Santa Ynez Valley were especially hard hit. The Western Farm Press reported that “Damage is unquestionably extensive”; several people told me that the Paso Robles crop has been wiped out by 50%. A local radio station reported that, of 25,000 planted acres in Paso Robles, “about 15 to 20,000 acres of those were affected at some level by the frost.” I can scarcely believe the quantity of blasted fruit is that high; maybe it is. There are reports that some wineries in Paso’s western hills will produce no crop this year. I asked a grower about secondary crop. He replied, in effect, don’t count on it.

I know nobody wants to hear about 2011 being as weird as last year, but why shouldn’t it be? Every vintage since 2005 has been cooler than the one before it. We thought 2008 was cool (despite the wildfires) and then came 2009. Then came 2010, the coldest year in memory. People are still freaked out by it. So far, 2011 is showing no sign of being any different.

* * *

I speak today at the International Special Events Society, which is meeting in Sonoma County. They asked me to talk about trends in the wine world. I plan on mentioning the different values and outlooks between Boomers, on the one hand, and Millennials and Gen Xers, on the other; the search for value; a movement toward lower alcohol levels in wine; new negociant models; a spate of M&As in California; social media, and a boom in the acreage of “alternative varieties.” Maybe one or two other things will occur to me. I don’t like to be too prepared when I speak to groups. I like things loosey-goosey. It’s more interesting when nobody, including me, knows what’s going to happen. I like to encourage questions and comments. Good feedback, even disagreement, from listeners inspires me; it makes me say things that surprise myself, things I didn’t even know I knew. Unfortunately, the drive up to Sonoma is likely to be a drag, with all the rain and fender benders. More tomorrow.


2010 Napa Cabs and how critics might review them

23 comments

I was having breakfast at Boon Fly with Sean Foster and Michael Cruse, the winemaker and assistant winemaker at Merryvale, and I asked them about the 2010 vintage. Both said (as many other winemakers have said) that it will probably result in wines that are lower in alcohol and not as rich as previous “classic” vintages. Then I asked them if they thought the critics would be cruel to the wines if they [the critics] think the wines lack a little stuffing.

Sean spoke first. “I could see that,” he acknowledged. “I do wonder how they’ll reconcile the expectation of what Napa Valley produces — big, rich, tannic wines — compared with the expectation that Bordeaux produces wines of more elegance and finesse. How do you reward or punish Napa in a year when it’s more like Bordeaux?”

Good question. As Sean noted, it’s all about expectations. If you’re used to the kinds of wine produced in years like 2004 and 2005, with Cabernets that were stunningly lush in fruit, then a leaner year might disappoint you. You would “punish” Napa for 2010′s failure to achieve alcoholic ripeness. If, on the other hand, you prefer more structured, earthier wines, you might “reward” Napa.

Michael Cruse, a thoughtful man, had been listening, and then he jumped in swinging. “If a critic is going to punish a winery for having something atypical, but according to the vintage” he said — “atypical” meaning in this case a leaner, less opulent Napa Cabernet, but one that’s a reflection of the cool weather — “it opens up the question of how much collusion there is.”

Excuse me, collusion? Michael explained. “I mean, how much understanding does a critic have of what’s proceeding in the vintage?” I took him to mean that a critic should understand that a cooler vintage in Napa might produce a leaner, more focused wine, but one that nonetheless may be very fine. True, but I said that Michael had introduced a slippery slope into the conversation. If he’s ready to exonerate the record cold 2010 vintage as resulting in more austere, but equally wonderful, Cabernets, then where do the excuses stop? When does a vintage turn into an unripe disaster?

“That’s exactly my point,” Michael said. “You should be able to say ‘This is a disaster’ if it is a disaster. That’s everyone’s right. The broader question, I think in my heart of hearts, is that any critic worth his salt is going to [i.e. should] recognize quality, regardless of what form it takes.” He paused for a moment, then continued. “It’s to recognize the fact that, yes, maybe there’s a mintiness to this Cab, and maybe there’s an herbalness to it. But these are still quality wines. I hope,” he concluded, looking at me square in the eye, “that that recognition is occurring.”

Well, I haven’t tasted anything of the 2010s yet, so I don’t know if Napa Cabs are going to be minty and herbal or not. But I do think the vintage is going to challenge critics. If the wines are leaner, earthier, drier, less exuberant, more herbaceous, minty (take your pick), then how do you distinguish between a very fine minty/herbaceous Cabernet and one that’s merely green and underripe? That was the slippery slope I was thinking about. It’s going to take some good and experienced palates to deal with 2010, but it’s also going to require an open-mindedness, and a willingness to switch course, to embrace a style of Napa Cabernet that hasn’t been around for a while.

All this raises another question, one that was thrown around on this blog last week about tasting blind: When we taste the 2010s, should we know they’re 2010s and make allowances? I will in all likelihood know that I’m tasting 2010s when I begin reviewing them, in two or three years. But I like to think that I won’t have to make allowances for the vintage. I have a tolerant palate that can appreciate the span from superripe to earthy without bias. I’m hopeful that we’re going to get Cabernets and Bordeaux blends out of Napa Valley (and especially from the mountains and hillsides) that truly do attain the holy grail of ripeness at lower brix, with no compromise of flavor or complexity. True elegance and finesse may be the silver lining around the cloud of this bizarre and stressful vintage.


Rethinking the 2006 Napa Valley Cabernets

8 comments

Around this time every year I go a little vintage crazy. My vintage diary, which I’ve kept annually for a long time, reaches a crescendo as the harvest draws to its inevitably dramatic close. (I strongly recommend budding wine writers to keep a vintage diary.) Then there’s my annual update on past vintages, due to my esteemed editor, Tim Moriarty, in mid-November. Once you assign a score to a vintage, you can’t just let it stand forever; rejiggering of vintage assessments is part of the wine critic’s job. Finally, I have to write my detailed analysis on the current, just-completed vintage, in this case the bizarre, memorable 2010. So I am thinking, obsessing, fixating on and about vintages.

In looking back, I see I haven’t been particularly kind to 2006 Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon, which I rated a respectable but not exciting 90 points. It kind of got lost between  the 2005 and 2007 vintages, both 95 points, and both of them so flashy right out of the gate. So I decided to re-review 2006 Napa Cabs, now that I’ve tasted about 750 of them. (By re-review, I mean re-review my notes, not retaste the wines.)

In my 2006 vintage diary I wrote “cool, dry and late,” the second such year in what has now become six consecutive years of cool, late harvests (although you wouldn’t describe 2010 as “dry”).

But “cool, dry and late” was a general assessment. Closer up, there was more detail. Spring had been rainy, so even though most of the growing season was dry, there was a lot of moisture in the soil that did not evaporate due to the cool temperatures. A potent July heat spell broke the pattern, the heat shutting the vines down and further pushing off the ripening process for Cabernet, in most cases well into October. But, except for light sprinkles around Oct. 1, the month finished dry; on Nov. 2 I wrote, “First real rain statewide of the season…the latest rain I can remember…”. By then, of course, the Cabernet had been picked.

As I look at my individual reviews now, four years later, they’re actually pretty good. I scored about 250 Cabernets 90 points or higher, roughly one-third of all I tasted, a high average for a vintage. By contrast, that was less than the 50% of all 2007 Pinot Noirs I scored at 90 points or higher, which is why I called 2007 the greatest Pinot Noir vintage ever. There’s no chance I’ll call 2006 the greatest Napa Cabernet vintage ever, but clearly, I underestimated it. I can see, over the course of several revisions, that I penalized the wines for not being flashy and opulent. I now realize that the ‘06s traded those qualities for elegance and, in many cases, ageworthiness — qualities that can be hard to recognize in a young Cabernet.

My highest scoring Napa Cabs came from all over the valley. They included blends (the 100-point Cardinale), single-vineyard wines (Krutz Stagecoach, Piña Buckeye), mountain wines (David Arthur Elevation 1147, Kendall-Jackson Highland Estates Napa Mountain, from Mount Veeder) and Cabs from the flats (Peju H.B. Vineyard, Lail J. Daniel). So it’s hard to generalize where in Napa Valley did best, except to say that all the vineyards were farmed as impeccably as any on earth.

Prices were high. My least expensive 95-point or higher wine was $40 for the Vinifera Cab, but costs rose quickly after that; 13 of 30 were in the triple digits, topping out at $225 for that Peju H.B. One other thing of note is the number of lesser known wineries with very high scores: Napa Angel, Krutz, Hestan, Baldacci, Pina, Parallel, Vinifera, Sabina, De Sante, Hunnicutt, Roy Estate. That’s an interesting development. Many people might not realize it, but Napa Valley is the most intensely fermentive (no pun intended) wine region in California. It has the most new brands turning up, doing exciting things and wowing more often than not.

Bottom line: I’m upgrading my rating for the Napa 2006 Cabs. It was a better vintage than I thought.


More on the 2010 vintage

6 comments

Assessing vintages is the hardest part of my wine writer’s job. It’s something we have to do because the public expects us to. This old practice comes to us, I suspect, via France, where in Burgundy, Bordeaux and Champagne the harvest varied radically from year to year, so that buyers sorely needed expert guidance.

It used to be said, “Every year is a vintage year in California.” Then, sometime in the 1980s as I recall, there was the reverse sentiment expressed. No, the pundits said, every year is not a vintage year in California. And so we had the critics pouncing on certain years (1989) while praising others (1985). There then set in a sort of counter-reaction to the counter-reaction, with vintners especially expressing frustration that an entire statewide vintage would be painted with a single numerical brush. Thus the politics of vintage assessment, as they confront a lonely wine writer who must, yet again, venture onto rough shoals.

Concerning 2010, I have been alarmed for the last eight months, ever since our miserably cold and wet winter lasted right through spring, and then, when summer came, while the wetness went away, the cold did not. In expressing my alarm, I spoke not only for myself — for I was grouchy that day after day from June through August was chilly enough for a sweater — but also on behalf of almost every winemaker I knew from Santa Barbara to Mendocino and inland. Nothing was ripening. Everything was green. And with the coming of September, the autumn rains were just a matter of time.

But then September did come, and a very pleasant one it was. Now here we are in mid-October, and the weather has been exquisite. If it feels good to a man the grapevines like it too. Since midnight, though, we have been, here in the Bay Area, under an official Red Flag Warning, one of only a handful this entire season. The temperature today will soar to the mid-90s in Napa city, and undoubtedly will break 100 degrees in the hotter parts upvalley. Ditto for Santa Rosa. What does it all mean? Has the warmth of fall un-done the damage caused by the cold of summer? Is this sudden burst of heat good or bad for the grapes that remain on the vines?

Once again I asked my winemaker friends on Facebook, true and loyal retainers all. Here’s a sampling of what they said — and you can see that the fact there is contradictory evidence doesn’t make the wine writer’s job any easier! (I am going to omit names this time. Spelling and punctuation mistakes are as originally written.)

From a vintner familiar with Napa, Sonoma and Paso Robles: “I am told…that the vines are shutting down. I was told that much of the Pinot in Russian River will not make it this year with vines shutting down and still hanging at 15 brix.”

From Paso Robles: “the heat means that Syrah, Viognier, and Marsanne all were ready at more or less the same time…I’m sure some people got caught without enough harvest crew, but if you got it off in good time, the quality looks excellent. Roussanne and Counoise (and most of the Mourvedre) still hanging, but with the excellent forecast for the next two weeks, things look good.”

From Los Olivos, in the Santa Ynez Valley: “the warm weather helps a lot, everything is ripening nicely as of this morning. Some of the Syrah is at 24 brix the cabernet is at 22.5, no sign of rot in our vineyard”

From a winemaker in Santa Barbara County: “there is the potential for some truly phenomenal wines to come out of this year…numbers and chemistry are all over the place.  I believe taste and intuition are the keys. No major rot or botrytis so far… keeping our fingers crossed.”

From Santa Ynez Valley: “The valley has dried out nice and we are looking at a nice warm week.”

From the Mendocino Coast: “Pinot Noir looks great! Average crop load of about two tons per acre.”

From inland Mendocino and Lake counties: “looking good….have brought in Grenache, Syrah and Roussane….mold was not and issue….a few raisins here and there but above average quality”

From Anderson Valley: “have picked pinot and chardonnay.  Hand sorted everything – limited rot. Still have another Chardonnay vineyard, might not make it”

From El Dorado: “nearly done for us.  Everything came in with great flavors, high acid and low sugar.”

From Russian River Valley: “pinot was a little scary going in the tank, heavy sorting of raisins really helping, once the tanks are dry I’m actually quite impressed!”

From North Coast sparkling wines: “The sparkling harvest continues, we have Chardonnay coming in on Wednesday, from Marin, in addition we still have a little bit of Napa Carneros Chardonnay out as well as Sonoma Coast Pinot Noir. it’s been a long sparking harvest, the young wines are tasting fantastic and we are extremely excited about the 2010 vintage so far!!!!!”

From the Santa Lucia Highlands: “Pinot Noir in perfect condition and optimal ripeness. The heat spiked the sugars but the fruit wasn’t ripe enough at the time to be damaged. The color, pH, acids and tannins look in perfect balance. It’s a big year.”

From Sonoma Valley: “I’m concerned that the heat – especially the warm nights – and dry offshore flow forecast for the next couple of days is going to really push our Rhone varieties. It would be difficult logistics if they all come in at once, but I’ll figure it out.”

[Steve again] Like I said, conflicting testimony. Doesn’t make vintage assessments any easier. The ultimate vintage assessment is the score I give to the individual bottle of wine.

And see my exclusive…

…on “Vertical,” Rex Pickett‘s followup novel to “Sideways,” on today’s Wine Enthusiast online.


The heat is on

15 comments

“Be careful what you wish for!” That’s what Rob Mondavi told me at lunch yesterday. He was referring, of course, to the heat — the baking, relentless heat that’s caused records to topple from the North Bay to L.A., which recorded its hottest day ever: 113.

I’d been complaining about the cold since last winter. Cold, wet Spring, cold, foggy summer, the vines weeks and weeks behind schedule. Then California had a few days of heat a month ago, and a lot of stuff got baked. Then it got chilly again. Everybody was worrying, especially in the North Coast, because just around the corner are the winter rains.

And now this!

My colleague, Joe Roberts, at 1WineDude, reported today on the heat. I had the same instinct yesterday, when I asked my winemaker friends on Facebook to report in from their regions and let me know what’s happening. Judging from some of the replies, things are looking up:

Jason Haas, Tablas Creek, Paso Robles: Things are accelerating a little, but the vineyard still looks in good shape…high temperatures at Tablas of 105 (today), 104 (yesterday), 101 (Sunday) and 97 (Saturday) aren’t really that unusual for late September. It’s cooled off nicely, into the 50s, each night. I’m more worried for places/grapes that don’t usually get hot. San Luis Obispo hit 110 yesterday (!).

Jeremy Kreck, Mill Creek, Russian River Valley: Sugars are really starting to move after stalling out for a couple weeks. We’re bringing in Sauvignon Blanc, and I expect to roll right into the Gewurz, followed by the Chard. Flavors are really starting to develop as well.

Eric Keating, Keating Wines: I think this heat helped overall. Took a berry sample of my Beckstoffer Georges III Rutherford valley floor Cabernet, 22.9 with pH of 3.40. Tasting nice, acid still high at the moment. Still a bit behind. With 1-2 days more of this heat… …followed by dry, moderate weather for a couple of weeks, it could be a great vintage. My mountain fruit (Rockpile and also Mayacamas on the Sonoma side) is a little different. Those vineyards were waaay behind and absolutely needed this heat. The previous two vintages, my Napa Cab was the last to come in, and this year it could possibly be the first. Short answer, in my opinion, this heat not only helped but was necessary in most cases.

Dan Tudor, Tudor Wines: we’ll be picking soon. The heat hasn’t been too bad in the Santa Lucia Highlands.

Karl Wente, Wente Bros., Livermore Valley: Moving things along quite nicely. Not too hot and a welcomed change from generally cooler weather. Chard all ready or close and merlot right behind.

Laura Zahtila, Zahtila Vineyards, Napa Valley: From Calistoga – it got to 107 degrees here today. We’ve been hydrating the vineyard for the past couple of days. Also walked our growers vineyard in Dry Creek this morning. The heat wave a couple of weeks ago really burned up some crop. Wish we could have some low 90′s to finish this off. Still about a week to 10 days before harvesting zinfandel.

John M. Kelly, Westwood Wines, Sonoma County: Might get young-vine Pinot up to 23 Brix by Friday. Soil profile is dry – we’re irrigating. Will be interesting to see if our earlier predictions for high natural acids pan out for the reds.

Stacy Vogel, Napa Valley: The heat helped our chardonnay with a nice final jump in ripeness. Bringing in all CH from Stagecoach Vineyard today and tomorrow, with most of Carneros not far behind. Finally!

Darek Trowbridge, Old World Winery, Sonoma County: First time I’ve ever picked Pinot Noir this late and the flavors are extraordinary! Zin and Chardonnay we have to remove the sunburn…

Karen Steinwachs, Buttonwood, Santa Ynez Valley: Well…we needed a little heat, but this is ridiculous. Next time you come to Santa Ynez, Steve, don’t bring 108 degrees! SRH is picking now (mine is all in), but Chard still ripening. Sauv Blanc in Happy Cyn mostly picked – I’m starting my pick in the LOD on Thursday. Sugars rising, but acids also still high. Weird. I agree with Darek – berries all taste amazing!

Richard Davis, Londer, Halleck and Calstar: ask me again in a week, trying to get stuff to ride it out and picking where it won’t

Gary Agajanian, Agajanian Vineyards, Central Valley: Temperatures in the high 80′s to low 90′s are the best. The extremes are difficult to manage. Grapes in the cool regios either got burned because of excessive leaf pulling , or benefitted if the canopy was intact. The grapes in the hot regions, said “what the f___!, you call this hot? This is normal.”. So, instead of 3 weeks behind, we are only two weeks. Overall quality will be good and clean, but you must be on top of it to get the best quality.

Mike Brown, Cantara Cellars, Lodi: Harvest has been great in Lodi. The heat is speeding up a slightly late harvest, with moderate alcohol levels and great acid.

[Steve again]
In non-Facebook conversations, vintners also weighed in to me:

Matthias Pippig, Grassini and Sanguis wineries, Santa Ynez Valley: The recent weather has everyone a little panicked now, but after touring all of my vineyards this morning, I have to say so far so good. The numbers haven’t jumped too dramatically but development has definitely been affected positively after the long cool (non-)summer.

Genevieve Janssens, Robert Mondavi Winery, Napa Valley: We have some baked fruit, 15-20% loss on Sauvignon Blanc. Pinot Noir is dehydrated a little, not too bad, finishing this week. Petit Verdot, 70-80% dehydration, lost it bigtime. Raisins. Cabernet Sauvignon is great, like nothing happened. Chardonnay is fine, too. Malbec dehydrated like the Petit Verdot. Merlot is okay, fine.


« Previous Entries Next Entries »

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Categories

Archives