Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.4

1989 vintage. Opened but not decanted. Just got a (generous) side sample of this as I was entrenched with the weekly wine rep tastings. Tasted after 30 mins and one hour after opening. Definitely bretty (as expected) for the first tastes but that mostly dissipated by the end of the glass. Light-medium body with mostly bowed tannins initially. Longer it remained in the glass, the more the tannins came out to frolic. Still plenty of structure, fruit and front-palate intrigue (usually hidden/buried by tannins). Not improving at this point but-depending on storage and/or bottle size-still more than viable and deserving of massive respect. 01.29.25. — 3 days ago

Adam Kincaid

9.2

Birthday year wine for me. So far, I’ve aged better than this bottle but it’s close! The ‘88 is slightly past its prime but still worth tasting. In the garden of earthly delights - dried figs, plums, dates, and mushrooms. Some peat and chocolate. Plenty of spice. Very fun. Happy birthday to me! — 5 months ago

with Jillian

LM Segal

9.4

Dark and brooding, plenty of wet earth and graphite. Dark red fruit on the nose and palate, more extracted than I’d guess from an HM, masculine with an alluring dark herbal streak. Kept going back to this. Will get better for 3-5 years still, lots of power to spare. — 4 months ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.5

2014 vintage. Last tasted 04.20.22 (9.5). Still tight but behind all the subterfuge, clouds, white lies, deception and smoke, there is a fantastic show slowly being assembled. All the performers are there and you've watched plenty of the rehearsals. Another 8-10 years will likely find this in the 9.6 and maybe 9.7 zone when the curtain finally rises. Built for future speed. If you've got the time and ca$hi$h, put a case aside and start tapping in 2035. This goes places wine doesn't have a right to. It's not asking for permission. 01.30.25. — 2 days ago

Bruce Dunbar

9.2

Beautiful: dark, quiet, powerful. Nothing extraneous. Lead with minerals, graphite, tobacco on top of a layer of dry black and red fruit. Tannins were mild. Fit the room (The Grill, NYC) and the meal (Thanksgiving) perfectly. — 2 months 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. — 4 months ago

Ron Siegel

9.3

Drinking well showing black fruits, graphite, leather, wet earth, savory spice & sweet tobacco. No rush with plenty of years ahead — a month ago

Adam Gäfvert

9.2

Full bodied, perfumed, good weight. Sports plenty of dark fruits, rooibos, baking spices, eucalyptus. — 2 months ago

Ed Chin

9.3

I think this has crest its peak. Very balanced with plenty of tertiary notes that dominate the palate. — 3 months ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.5

1996 vintage. Tasted most recently on 8.2.24 (9.6) and that bottle was slightly better. Tasted out of magnum in 2023 and that rated as highly as the previous mention (9.6). This had a really nice fill, good cork and was decanted (throwing pretty big sed). Tasted after an hour. Gorgeous and with plenty of power but just barely dialed down from 11 with this bottle. Has this exalted winery made a better bottle of red or white wine in their entire existence? Not in my experiences. 9.29.24. — 4 months ago