Daniel M

9.2

You're not 40 every day and I wanted a special wine to celebrate that special day. Fortunately the wine bar / open kitchen restaurant we went to had that special wine, amongst 400 references, that I had been desperate to taste for a long while. I didn't take notes so it's all from memory, but the nose is what I liked the most. Coconut notes, leather, cherries, coffee... I spent probably 15 minutes in total smelling that wine. The palate was great with some acid drive, some matter but not in an overwhelming way, some gentle, well integrated tannins in the rear, before a long finish with savoury notes, red fruits, coconut and that gentle grainy tannic layer. A great experience to top up a day to remember.
Oh and if you happen to be in Warsaw, Poland and be looking for a great wine place, make sure to check our Kontakt - wino & bistro. — 7 days ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.4

2000 vintage. Last tasted 9.25.23 (9.2) after 1.5 hours decanted. Popped and decanted this for lunch. Great fill and solid cork. Throwing a bit of sed but less than anticipated. Meh nose. Medium body initially. Started off on the rich side of the ledger but not plush. Had some smoothness afoot. Tasted after 45 mins open, 1.75 hours open and 8 hours open. First two were unspectacular. After lounging in the decanter 8 hours, wine had firmed up, thinned out, picked up plenty of secondary flavors and had that previously missing grip. If you're gonna open this during the holidays or anytime soon, do it very very early...otherwise, it'll be a total waste. Wine has miles to go. No rush to crush but just air it out in advance properly. 10.16.24. — 2 months ago

Jan de Weerd

9.2

Okay. Again the same dilemma. If a wine does not meet expectation is it basically bad (for me)? 🤔 because in life everything is relative, right? Any thoughts on puzzling matter??The wine was well balanced, dark red fruit flavors, polished, smooth tannins, good intensity and concentration, but limited length and lacking any meaningful complexity… Eight year old left bank Bordeaux. A fourth or fifth growth winery, maybe not, can’t remember for sure. Do remember what I paid though, $120. Definitely too much for what we experienced this evening…. as to our expectations. — 3 months ago

with Tammy

Mary H

9.3

Great follow up to other sparkling wines - if you’re drinking this all night you don’t get the full contrast of the depth of flavor and long finish of vintage Dom. Elegant and bright. Classic Champagne. — 13 days ago

Anthony James Marr

9.5

Supremely elegant with plenty of life left, but likely peaking (if it hasn’t already) - loamy soils, dried tobacco, interesting and subtle spice and chocolate on the palate. — 2 months ago

Nathan Renfro

9.3

An enjoyable vintage, even if it’s not a top vintage, it still portrays typical P-C. Always enjoyable. Drinking very well with just a short decant. — 2 months ago

Victor Hsu

9.0

A good, solid California Cab but what’s all the fuss about? I’m seeing ratings of 98, 99, even 100 from JS. Really? No way. This is a clear case of praise crossing over into hype. Granted, still a bit young and not at its peak but after five years in the bottle and an hour of decanting it needs to be more than just fine if it wants to justify stratospheric scores. This wine compares unfavorably to Ridge Monte Bello, Stags Leap Cask 23 and other peers. It lacked sophistication and poise—where’s the promised minerality, graphite, cedar shavings, oak, leather, blackcurrant, cherry, and complex balance of fine grained tannins, fruit, acid and alcohol? Where? We chose this wine for a birthday dinner at Lawry’s Prime Rib in Beverly Hills. Not a disaster but a disappointment given our high expectations (and the high price).
— 3 months ago

Ming L

9.3

Quite approachable at this young age. 30 minutes decant and it’s open for business. Aromas of dark cherry, blackberry, sweet spices, cocoa, and lightly roasted nuts. The depth of flavors and elegant medium to full body show the pedigree. If blinded, I would not be able to tell this is a Sangiovese dominant blend. Would prefer a bit more acidity. But who am I to complain. — a month ago

Andrew Cullimore

9.1

Medium ruby , garnet rim, touch of terracotta rim . Slightly dusty , animal touch , with leather , spicy and herbal , soy , iodine . On the palate quite strict , grafite , slightly more red fruit , cranberry , then blackcurrant and grafite . Slightly dusty dry tannins , balanced acidity . Slightly spicy , mineral , grafite tinged finish . This needs a bit of time to open but shows quite well , slightly herbal , and perhaps lacks a little charm , but is quite classic in style if not a great 1985. From now and over the next 10 years . On the night this was probably only ahead of the 1977 , and my least favourite of the 1980s vintages . — 2 months ago

Joe DAscoli

9.5

Decanted for 2 hours before we touched it

2nd sip was better than the first. As if you needed the first sip to prepare yourself for this wine

Overall great structure and solid fruit. Improved with airtime. Delicious wine. — 3 months ago