Tannats a world apart - Bouscasse and Arretxea

An interesting head to head tonight, a "Tannat-Fest" if you will, a Bouscasse Vielles Vignes from the South West of France vs. an Uruguayan discovery, the Pisano Arretexea.

The 2001 Pisano Arretxea has aged since I last opened a bottle - tobacco and dark cherry aromas lead, cooked fruit, mint and rose petals. A soft mouthfeel, cooked fruit and silky, substantial, tannins. A better sipping wine than the Bouscasse, at its prime now.
cork. 13.5% alcohol
Score: 17/20
Price: C$38.75 (SAQ)

The 2000 Chateau Bouscasse Vielles Vignes is one of my all time favourite wines - enticing aromas of medicinal sour cherries, tobacco, leather, cloves, and roses. Crisper on the palate, with sour cherries and a tremendously long finish - a delicious wine, and a better pairing for tonight's roast. One of my Top 50 Cellar Picks.
cork. 13.5% alcohol
Score: 17.5/20
Price: C$38.50 (SAQ)

1990 Montus Cuvee Prestige (Magnum)

About two years ago the SAQ received a special order of older vintage, large format bottles from Montus and Bouscasse. Old Madiran from M. Alain Brumont? Surely there would be a lineup for such a treasure! I dutifully made my way to the store well before opening time, but I soon realized that I was the only person there with similar intentions...surely there are Madiran fans out there, somewhere?

After this stunning 1990 Chateau Montus Cuvee Prestige (Madiran) Magnum, I don't care if nobody digs this stuff the way I do - more for me at better prices. New leather, oak embers, black earth, roses and crisp, spicy cherries - my guests were content simply basking in this bouquet. A deep sea of velvety tannins on the palate, omnipresent but well integrated, the most incredible interplay of ample tannins and fresh acidity I have ever tasted. Add to this earthy dark berries, impressive minerality and substantial length - my in-laws were VERY impressed.
cork. 12.5% alcohol
Score: 18/20
Price: ~C$217 (SAQ)

2004 Chateau Peyros Magenta

It's no secret that I have a soft spot for the tannat-based wines of Madiran, a small french appellation in Southwest France. But I have mainly tasted the pricier offerings, Chateau Montus and Chateau Bouscasse. Here's a great, inexpensive Madiran...

The 2004 Chateau Peyros Magenta (Madiran) had a pleasing mustiness on the nose and was very vegetal (garden herbs) - leather, black liquorice, and floral notes as well. Very smooth and balanced, a modest finish - easy drinking, but simple. A great value for my Ontario friends. 
cork. 13.8% alcohol
Score: 16/20
Price: C$14.85 (LCBO)

Note that this Madiran was 50:50 Tannat and Cabernet Franc (Montus is 80% Tannat/20% Cabernet Sauvignon), which explains the vegetal notes and Peyros' accessibility for such a young Madiran.

Brumont vs. Brumont

Part four of my South West France trilogy features some more wines showcasing the genius of Alain Brumont and my love of well-made tannat. I thought it would be an interesting exercise to compare two Brumont wines from the same vintage but different terroirs, as I did in my Montus vs. Montus and Perigee vs. Apogee experiments.

2003 Les Menhirs (VdP Cotes de Gascogne)
2003 Argile Rouge (Madiran)

The 2003 Les Menhirs is officially a Vin de Pays and not a Madiran, but it is made with the same grapes (tannat/merlot). A deep, dense purple liquid, it was rather closed just after it was decanted. Crisp and vegetal, the nose developed a subtle complexity over the evening, adding violet, blackberry, mint, musk, leather, butter, and even some nice liquorice and tea notes. Hot and peppery on the palate, very dry, but richer, juicier and more full-bodied than the Madiran below. While the fresh acidity and firm tannins were a little less balanced than the next wine, it was much more approachable and easier drinking at the same time - let's say Madiran meets Napa. A winner, and you won't have to wait as long to enjoy this one - probably another 3 years in the cellar should do fine, or a nice LONG decant today.
15% alcohol
Score: 17/20
Price: $33 (SAQ)

The 2003 Argile Rouge (i.e. Red Clay) is a Madiran, but unlike Brumont's top Bouscasse and Montus offerings which are all tannat, this was a tannat/cab sauv/cab franc blend. Unlike the merlot in the last wine, the presence of other grapes in the blend did not soften up this wine. Deep purple and very aromatic, it was violet, rose, butterscotch, pepper, tea, tobacco, coffee and wet stones, it smelled more like a Napa Merlot than a Madiran. If the "Menhirs" above was very dry, then this medium- to full-bodied offering was an "ultra dry", with powerful, copious, velvety, tongue-puckering tannins supported by nice leather and cocoa flavours. Despite the power it kept its poise. Very lengthy, and I found it just slightly more complex and interesting. Like the Montus Cuvee Prestige, this is a wine that really need some more cellar time, but I think you will be rewarded.
15% alcohol
Score: 17.5/20
Price: C$28.10 (SAQ)

So, a bit of a connundrum - the Argile Rouge is cheaper, and slightly better in my opinion, but you will have to be patient with this one. The Menhirs is an excellent wine, but more approachable today. You need to decide how long you want to wait! Both sported hefty alcohol levels, but neither was dominated by the alcohol. I have two more bottles for a rematch, let's say 2012. Stay tuned.

My last tannat post for a while...Cheers!

WBW#37 - Wines You Never Drink...

...From Places You've Never Been, Made From Grapes You've Never Heard Of
That's my alternate title for Dr. Vino's WBW#37 - "Go native!". After all, that is really the purpose of this week's WBW - Tyler wants us to break out of our ruts and try something REALLY different. With South West France on the mind and the Good Professor offering bonus points, I couldn't resist drinking two Tannat-based wines this evening:

2001 Chateau D'Aydie (Madiran, France)
2002 Bodegas Carrau "AMAT" (Uruguay)

Ok, so you heard it here first, Uruguay is an up and coming wine region. Overshadowed by Argentina and Chile, and unloved because of its bet on Tannat, I fearlessly predict that Tannat will do for Uruguay what Malbec has done for Argentina. Read on....

The 2002 Bodegas Carrau AMAT is a fabulous, interesting wine. A deep, cherry red in the glass, I put the glass to my nose and .... smiled, a big, fabulous, Cheshire cat grin. Cool and right out of the decanter, it smelled rich and chocolatey with dark cherry fruit. Then I let it warm up and oxygenate - leather, mushroom, earth, pepper, tobacco and smoke. On the palate this rich, full-bodied, wine presented powerful velvety tannins that danced across the tongue - omnipresent, but not overpowering. Brooding, complex, interesting, and only slighty rough around the edges, this wine is tempting now but should be cellared for a few more years. Long after the wine has gone I am still sniffing the glass and smiling...mmmm, THIS is Tannat.
14% alcohol
Score: 17.5/20
Price: C$21 (SAQ)

The 2001 Chateau D'Aydie comes from Madiran, a region in South West France and the "home" of the Tannat grape. A dense, dark purple in the glass, this wine has to be decanted carefully, as it threw off a mountain of sludge. More delicate on the nose and definitely showing the elevated alcohol, I thought this signfied that the wine was not 100% Tannat, but the label assured me that my nose deceived me. Bone dry and 'hotter' on the palate, this medium-bodied tannat was more off-balance than the AMAT, but the acidity and tannins were a nice match for the olive and pasta dinner. It may benefit from a few years in the cellar, but I am not sure it has enough "stuffing" to go the distance. Nice, but disappointing at this price - for a few bucks less you can have the AMAT above (or a Bouscasse), or for a few more you can enjoy the heavenly Montus.
14.5% alcohol
Score: 16/20
Price: C$29 (SAQ)

Given the price and score, I have to recommend the Uruguayan Tannat, which is growing up very well in its new home. Please do try one of these!

For Tyler: In lieu of Bonus Points for the new/old world presentation of a freaky grape, I humbly accept your attendance at a tasting with Brooklynguy and I on Nov. 4th...Cheers!

Adventures in the North of France

After two nights on the Normandy coast (and a quick stop in Honfleur), we left to spend a few days with friends in Lille.

Lille:
Our friends they were kind enough to book a babystter and make a reservation at a local wine bar called La Part des Anges. Located in beautiful Old Lille, this bar features a very nice selection of wines by the glass (all French, I recall) and a mid-priced menu of bistro fare. Despite my protests and numerous caveats, the group asked me to play sommelier and pair their dishes with a wine from the menu. Armed with little more than the appelation (I didn′t recognize the winemakers), I think I put everyone on the right track, and can now claim to have been a sommelier - if only for a few, brief, unpaid minutes.

To start we cleansed our palates with a Pierre Legras Champagne (Brut N.V.) - refreshing, slightly off dry, but rather uncomplex (14/20). I had a melon and prosciutto salad for an appetizer, which I paired with a 2005 Muscat Sec by the Vignerons de St. Paul - melon and white flowers, dry (but not bone dry), with some lemon and fresh acidity - a nice pairing (16/20). For dinner I ordered the Rognons d'Agneau, which I thought would pair very well with a Madiran. The 2005 Latreille Sounac had classic smoke, tobacco, and leather aromas with big tannins, dark cherry fruit and nice balance. Decent length and well made, an accessible Madiran (unlike those monsters from Montus!), 15.5/20. Overall, a nice restaurant, but a bit smokey at the bar out front. Great list of wines for those who wish to explore, and the location in old Lille made for a very nice evening.

Bruges:
This was an unplanned stop, as Belgium was never on our itinerary, but it was so close to Lille that a day trip was in order. There is nothing vinuous about Bruges - this is Belgium, and Belgium means beer. After a tour (on foot, and by boat) through this gorgeous medeival town, I stopped for some Moules et Frites (mussels and fries), which was washed down by the local beer called Brugse Zot - apparently a world medal winner in its class. I agree - an excellent pint, which I had the chance to compare to some other Belgian beers (but not my all-time favourite, Chimay - a rematch is in order), and this was the best. It may be hard to find, but definitely worth the effort for any beer types out there. A very beautiful town, and a must see - even if you do not care for Belgian styled beer.

WBW #32 - Montus vs. Montus

I will be travelling this week, so I had to post early.

This week's Wine Blogging Wednesday, hosted by Billy of The Wine Cask Blog, hit on a great theme - Regular vs. Reserve wines. Are we getting our money's worth?

WBW #32 called for: same winery, same vintage, different price point. To narrow my potential choices, I worked with an additional restraint - with my cellar bursting at the seams, I had to use something on hand. Diving into my trusty excel spreadsheet, I discovered three potential combos:

- 2001 Chateau Lagrezette vs. the pricey "Cuvee Dame Honneur"
- 2003 Domain Grand Veneur vs. the "Cuvee des Generations"
- 2001 Montus vs. the Cuvee Prestige

In the end, I decided the Montus option was less expensive than the Lagrezette option, and the Grand Veneur was just not ready.

To make this a true test, the wines were decanted an hour before I began scoring and tasted blind.

The plain vanilla 2001 Chateau Montus was started extremely well - on the nose it was wild and gamey, and backed up by leather, musk, cloves, cocoa, vanilla, with a hint of clover. Divine! Well balanced, rich, and chocolatey with velvety tannins. Ready now, but may yet improve with some more bottle age. This was an elegant with a VERY long finish. (Blind, I scored it a half point below my December review).
Score: 18/20
Price: C$32

A 1998 Cuvee Prestige was my first exposure to this esteemed Madiran house, and it has obviously had an impact on me. The 2001 Chateau Montus Cuvee Prestige was from a better vintage, so I had high hopes that this wine would trounce the basic Montus offering. On the nose the wines were very similar, both with gamey, earthy, cocoa aromas, with the Prestige also showing a more smokey and nutty nose. A tossup so far. The first taste of this wine was awkward and very tannic. It softened over the course of the evening, showing a similar richness and complexity to the regular Cuvee, but remained tannic and off balance. I scored it a half point below the basic Montus, but as it opened over the evening I noted that there is something about this wine that screams "come back in a few years!". I predict a future showdown...
Score: 17.5/20
Price: C$54

There was food, of course, and both of these wines were harmoniously matched to our first barbequed steak of the season.

So, to answer Billy's question, the answer is no - the pricier Cuvee Prestige was not worth the extra C$22 today. But I think the Prestige has some secrets yet to be revealed, so a future rematch is inevitable.

Note: For a different take on Montus, have a look at Nilay's review of the basic 2001 Montus.

Cheers!

2000 Chateau Bouscasse

Once again, my quirky interest in tannat and Alain Brumont takes me back to the French region of Madiran tonight, where Tannat is the leading grape varietal.

Chateau Bouscasse and Chateau Montus are both owned by Alain Brumont, and these wines are probably the stars of the appelation. Both Chateaux make an upscale wine (Bouscasse Vielles Vignes and Montus Cuvee Prestige - one of my all time favourite wines), but tonight's wine is the least expensive of Brumont's offerings.

The 2000 Bouscasse was a nice ruby red, that started with earthy, spicy, meaty scents, as well as some blackberries. Dry, velvety tannins and spicy fruit coated the tongue. Awkward at first, a few hours in the decanter softened this wine up nicely. Likely a terrific pairing with steak, it worked very well tonight with a Domino's Meat Lovers pizza.
Score: 16/20
Price: C$21

While above my C$20 "Value" limit, it is so close and so good that I had to add the value tag below.

2001 Chateau Montus

Ok, so I like Montus (1,2)! Not exactly a mainstream wine, Chateau Montus hails from the little known appelation of Madiran in the rather annonymous "Southwest France" winemaking region, and is made (mainly) from the very rare Tannat grape. Don't expect to find this on too many wine lists...

Anyway, there is something very extraordinary, in my opinion, about a well made Madiran. Leathery, gamey, tannic, but in the right hands balanced. Alain Brumont, proprietor of Chateau Montus, has "the right hands", both in the less expensive regular cuvee (which I drank tonight), the high end "Cuvee Prestige", and at his other Madiran estate, Chateau Bouscasse. All of those wines are fabulous.

The 2001 Chateau Montus has a wonderful, complex nose, hitting you with leather, cedar, rose, blackberry, mint, tea, nutmeg and some licorice. Awesome. On the palate there were dense, but velvety tannins. Full-bodied and very well balanced with good length. Excellent. This wine showed well with a one hour decant, and paired extremely well with Swedish meatballs and egg noodles. May improve, but very drinkable now (with some air).
Score 18.5/20
Cost C$32 (SAQ)

Buy! Buy! Buy! (easy for me to say, I bought every last bottle in town...)

1) Note that this is a wine that pairs very well with a grilled steak or any beef dish.
2) The key difference in my mind between this wine and the pricier Cuvee Prestige is length - the Cuvee Prestige is meant for aging, while the regular Montus is more accessible today.

Pizza Wine

I opened two simple wines to go with homemade pizzas:

2001 Nipozzana Riserva Chianti Rufina (Frescobaldi)
2001 Chateau d'Aydie Madiran

While the Nipozzana is an obvious choice (inexpensive, fruity, well structured - a perennial best buy for the price and a PERFECT match for pizza), the Chateau d'Adyie was a little, well, different. After all, who picks a Madiran to go with pizza?

For those of you who have read the posts below, you will see that I am a big fan of Madiran, and more specifically Chateau Montus (both the Cuvee Prestige and the regular). You will also see that Montus has done very well at our tastings (two second places). Even a South American Tannat (see Muy Macho tasting), the grape in Madiran, was a winner. So, while the d'Aydie was not an obvious choice for pizza, it was inevitable I would come up with an excuse to drink it and write about it.

I always think of Tannat as a fantastic steak wine - the big tannins, subtle fruit and gamey aromas complement and enhance a good steak. But pizza? I thought the tannins would complement the tomato sauce well? Anyway, while the Nipozzana was a perfect match the Madiran was a good match.

This was the first time I have tasted the d'Aydie. I bought this wine because I love the Montus so much that I wanted to find a good, but more reasonably priced, Madiran. The d'Aydie clearly displayed the lovely aromas (game, tobacco, undergrowth) of Montus, but was a little less balanced than the Montus, showing a little more acid and a little less fruit and that unbelievable tannin that only Madiran (ok, Barolos have this as well) has.

In summary, for pizza save the $$$ and buy the Nipozzana. For inexpensive Madiran, buy the regular Montus whenever you see it (it always sells out) and sock it away for a night when you have two to four hours for decanting and a lovely steak.

And for those days when you have too much money, buy the Montus Cuvee Prestige, cellar it for a hundred years, decant for four hours...

"Muy Macho", A South American Tasting

We decided to host a guys only tasting, but most of the "men" were unable to get the free pass. How appropriate, then, that the wines were "macho" wines from South America. We had an interesting selection of wines - no single varietal wines and three different countries were represented. However, the real surprise of the evening was not that Cam finally won a tasting, but HOW he won, with a shocking, unheralded, unranked, and unknown wine of dubious origin.

First: 2001 Pisano Arretxea
The Arretxea was ranked first by all three of us. Note that this wine was decanted up to 2 hours before we started tasting. Anyway, the score differential between the three wines was large, and this was a clear winner. This blend of Cab. Sauv., Merlot, and Tannat showed a very nice bouquet, with strong scents of chocolate, tobacco, leather - "beautiful and interesting". However, this wine was anything but a wallflower - a full-bodied red with firm tannins, I described it as "Powerful, hearty, interesting." A great wine that will get better. I bought up every last bottle in town.

Second: 1999 Casa Lapostolle Clos Apalta
I was so sure that the winner was my Clos Apalta. This celebrated, consistently highly ranked, expensive Chilean red, a blend of Carmenère (35%), Merlot (30%), Cab. Sauv. (22%) and Malbec (13%), should have been a winner. On the nose, it was more subtle than the first place wine, with very interesting smells. The taste was very nice, full-bodied and balanced, but to quote "Robust, flavorful, rough around the edges." This had a very long finish, and I suspect that this wine is set to improve over time. Note that after we had scored, the Clos Apalta continued to improve and the gap with the first wine became smaller and smaller. (RP-91, WS-92)

Third: 2002 Norton Privada
Always a favorite everyday wine of mine, this wine scored well with WS as well (91). A great value, but not in the league of the wines above. I described it as very drinkable, but not terribly interesting. Don't let these comments fool you - this wine was half price the mystery wine and less than a third of the price of the Clos Apalta. I still recommend it.

Cam's first victory proves that no one should let me help them choose a wine for a comeptitive tasting.

Smackdown!

On June 10th we held a blinded, all-comers “Smackdown” - no theme, bring any red wine you like. A fantastic evening for our tasting group, and our first tasting that was not structured around a theme.

The six wines were as follows:

First: 2000 Avignonesi Desiderio Merlot
The 2000 Avignonesi Desiderio Merlot. Seven first place and two third place rankings – impressive! While this was not the most expensive, it certainly wasn’t the cheapest – this cost me C$60 in March (LCBO). According to my notes (and my memory), this was an elegant wine with an incredible nose. While this wine may improve with time, I didn’t expect much improvement – this is very drinkable now! While I normally rush out and buy the winners from our tastings, I have the good fortune of having two more bottles of this gem in my cellar. (RP 90-91, WS 90)

Second: 1998 Chateau Montus Cuvée Prestige
My first experience with Tannat, the Montus was brought by Chris and Marie-Lise. It placed second, and was a little more polarizing – two first place rankings (hmmmm - Chris and Marie-Lise – maybe you have tasted this before?), five second place rankings, a fourth and a sixth. This reminds me a lot of the wine Chris brought to the Tuscan tasting – clearly a BIG, high quality wine, but with a few rustic edges that may have nudged it into second place for many. According to my notes, this seven year old wine still needed more time in the bottle and should get better. I loved it, and bought eight bottles of a different vintage as proof! According to Chris, this wine was only C$36, which makes it the best value. The key caveat is that other vintages of Chateau Montus Cuvee Prestige are much more expensive. Did you secretly switch price tags at the store, Chris? For shame…

Third: 1997 Camigliano Brunello di Montalcino Riserva
The overall ranking for Pramod and Sofia’s Brunello was very close to the Chateau Montus. The wine garnered one first place, four second place, a third, fourth, fifth and sixth place ranking. My notes were different from the rest of you, as many of you liked it but I thought it was light in the nose and a little unbalanced. I also recall it being atypical for a Brunello. We really should redo a Brunello tasting one of these days… Note that the price on this one was steep. (RP 85, WS 90)

Fourth: 2002 d’Arenberg “The Footbolt” Shiraz
Eden’s 2002 d’Arenberg “The Footbolt” is also a winner, in my mind, because it ranked so close to the second and third place wines. It was a very strong finish given the price (C$20!). Five tasters ranked it second or third, and none ranked it last! While the pros always rave about d’Arenberg wines, it was nice to see it in a blinded fashion against such illustrious competitors. Looking at my notes, I raved about the subtle but very interesting nose. I also noted that this wine has peaked – drink now. This outperformance in a strong crowd should send everyone running to buy a case. (RP 88, WS 88)

Fifth: 2001 Falesco Montiano
My other Merlot, the 2001 Falesco Montiano, did not perform as well as the pro ratings might have indicated. No one ranked it first or last, but very consistent third and fourth place rankings. This may have been a case of vinuous infanticide. My notes were very complimentary of the nose, but I commented that it should improve with more time in the bottle. WS agrees, and says to wait until after 2006 to drink. At C$51 (SAQ), it was a disappointment. (RP 93, WS 90)

Sixth: 1999 Yalumba “The Menzies”
Cam’s 1999 Yalumba “The Menzies” Coonawarra Cabernet Sauvignon was a great disappointment for me, personally. First, I suggested that Cam buy the wine. Second, I have three bottles in my cellar. Aargh. Five people ranked it dead last. At C$43.75, not a great deal. Could Parker have steered Cam and I so wrong? (RP 90, WS 87)

Editorial:
1) In case you were wondering why I entered two expensive Merlots, it was to teach a lesson to a friend who claimed he hates Merlot! My contrarian nature will now force me to buy Merlots while the rest of the wine world hunts down California Pinot Noir. Thank you, Sideways.
2) The key problem with this tasting, of course, was the comparison of very different grapes/regions/producers/vintages. It was meant to be fun, and I think our rankings should be taken with a grain of salt. All very nice wines.