Hi,
Went across to Craiglee yesterday afternoon with Neville and met Pau there too. the 1984, 1986, 1990, 1996, 1999, nd current release 2002 shiraz available for tasting and Current release 2002 cab and SauBlanc and Chardonnay.
Brief opinion.
The best wine was 1990 without a doubt. Amazing concentration and ripeness without being heavy. Excellent length. Will improve further and will live for yonks. I did buy two bottles of the Museum stock (max limit/person) ans so did Neville and Pau. At $55 its terific value.
The 1984 and 1986 appeared tired. I do like old wines but some how these wines had just lost their majic. OK.
1999 was surprisingly not bad. A more forward wine. For current consumption its not a bad drop.
2002 was a bit tricky to judge. The inherent temp (cold+++) wasn't helping any. Decent palate - very cool climate. Its an article of faith but I think it will look much better in a few years. It will not rise to the heights of the marvellous 2000 but will be good within its own rights (and better than 2001).
Whites were OK.
Pat does deserve a 'pat' on his back for organising such a wonderful 'open day'.
sanjay
craiglee
For mine ...
1984 didn't look at all tired to me, although I got there pretty early, and I think I may have even had the first swig ...
1986 was a bit of a disaster.
1990 was nice.
1996 was OK
1999 was surprisingly good considering the lack of reputation
2002 will be the pick of the bunch given time.
In order: 2002, 1984, 1990, 1999, 1996, then a long gap to 1986. First 3 could have been in any order to be honest.
I think there may have been something wrong with the 1986 though as last week's participants rated it quite higly.
Liked the 2002 Cabernet as well.
1984 didn't look at all tired to me, although I got there pretty early, and I think I may have even had the first swig ...
1986 was a bit of a disaster.
1990 was nice.
1996 was OK
1999 was surprisingly good considering the lack of reputation
2002 will be the pick of the bunch given time.
In order: 2002, 1984, 1990, 1999, 1996, then a long gap to 1986. First 3 could have been in any order to be honest.
I think there may have been something wrong with the 1986 though as last week's participants rated it quite higly.
Liked the 2002 Cabernet as well.
-
JamieBahrain
- Posts: 3754
- Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 7:40 am
- Location: Fragrant Harbour.
-
JamieBahrain
- Posts: 3754
- Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 7:40 am
- Location: Fragrant Harbour.
The 86 has fallen off quickly.
Was drinking well a few years ago.
The Craiglee tasting the most generous on the wine calender for regular punters. Every year Pat presents an opportunity for his mailing list customers to try the current vintages, aswell as experiencing the cellaring qualities of his range.
I can not think of another winery that offers similar.
I never hesitate buying the cabernet from good vintages-97 etc.
The problem of serving temperature of the wines has been around for a long time. A Transtherm fridge in the cellar would help. The old wines would go up a notch if served at "room temperature".
Was drinking well a few years ago.
The Craiglee tasting the most generous on the wine calender for regular punters. Every year Pat presents an opportunity for his mailing list customers to try the current vintages, aswell as experiencing the cellaring qualities of his range.
I can not think of another winery that offers similar.
I never hesitate buying the cabernet from good vintages-97 etc.
The problem of serving temperature of the wines has been around for a long time. A Transtherm fridge in the cellar would help. The old wines would go up a notch if served at "room temperature".
Hi,
Looks like some of you rated the '84 much higher. One reason could have been bottle variation. The other may have been that the wine is not a keeper and hence may be going down hill quickly after exposure to air. Or a combinationof of both. I would favour the latter explanation.
At any rate, the 1990 stole the show for me and I think the 2000 will follow suit.
I had the 1994 shiraz couple of months ago at it looked pretty good at 10 years of age.
I am holding back on the 1997s, a friend just tasted his 1997 and reported that while they were decent they were going through a difficult patch right now and with the reputation of the vintage behind them, they will come out of their shell and blossom in a few years. Has any one else tried their 1997's in the past 6 months?
sanjay
Looks like some of you rated the '84 much higher. One reason could have been bottle variation. The other may have been that the wine is not a keeper and hence may be going down hill quickly after exposure to air. Or a combinationof of both. I would favour the latter explanation.
At any rate, the 1990 stole the show for me and I think the 2000 will follow suit.
I had the 1994 shiraz couple of months ago at it looked pretty good at 10 years of age.
I am holding back on the 1997s, a friend just tasted his 1997 and reported that while they were decent they were going through a difficult patch right now and with the reputation of the vintage behind them, they will come out of their shell and blossom in a few years. Has any one else tried their 1997's in the past 6 months?
sanjay
-
JamieBahrain
- Posts: 3754
- Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 7:40 am
- Location: Fragrant Harbour.
Great bottles, no great wines Sanjay. Had a few different friends go to the tasting ( I missed it again ) and on differing days differing shiraz vintages favoured.
Personally, going back a few years, I found the 86 blew all out of the water with regularity. Halliday, in his by now out of date Great Wines book, sang the praises of either the 84 or 86?
Out of your time frame for my last tasting of the 97 shiraz, but 12 months ago startled by it's fruit purity and power.
I recall talking to Pat a while ago, the 97 release was when he found his regular customers ( myself included ) doubling up on their annual purchases. He felt some where taking a punt on the investment potential of Craiglee- I think it was just excellent and undervalued shiraz on release.
Craiglee getting a lot more attention on the forums this year.
Personally, going back a few years, I found the 86 blew all out of the water with regularity. Halliday, in his by now out of date Great Wines book, sang the praises of either the 84 or 86?
Out of your time frame for my last tasting of the 97 shiraz, but 12 months ago startled by it's fruit purity and power.
I recall talking to Pat a while ago, the 97 release was when he found his regular customers ( myself included ) doubling up on their annual purchases. He felt some where taking a punt on the investment potential of Craiglee- I think it was just excellent and undervalued shiraz on release.
Craiglee getting a lot more attention on the forums this year.
Hi,
I agree Craiglee has been undervalued in the past. The price has gone up to $40 ($38 case) at CD. I don't know what proportion of their sales occur via CD/direct mailing compared to to distributor outlets. Thee are a very few that do alomot exclusive CD sales (MM, Giaconda) which help putting money directly into the winemakers pocket. If Craiglee has a significant % covered through direct sale then although on paper the wine looks less expensive it is equal to a $60 bottle, otherwise with markups.
Sunbury isn't the "hottest" proprty on the market. And Pat is a lone flag bearer for that region which doesn't help to increase the profile of the region. if he had been in Heathcoate his chances of getting attractiive prices would have been significantly more. Its like the housing market to some degree.....
sanjay
I agree Craiglee has been undervalued in the past. The price has gone up to $40 ($38 case) at CD. I don't know what proportion of their sales occur via CD/direct mailing compared to to distributor outlets. Thee are a very few that do alomot exclusive CD sales (MM, Giaconda) which help putting money directly into the winemakers pocket. If Craiglee has a significant % covered through direct sale then although on paper the wine looks less expensive it is equal to a $60 bottle, otherwise with markups.
Sunbury isn't the "hottest" proprty on the market. And Pat is a lone flag bearer for that region which doesn't help to increase the profile of the region. if he had been in Heathcoate his chances of getting attractiive prices would have been significantly more. Its like the housing market to some degree.....
sanjay