The Auswine Forum

After reading a number of rave reviews of the 2010 Penfolds Bin 389 I managed to track down a bottle and opened it a few nights ago. I don't want to sound like a complete noob and actually drank a reasonable amount of 389 in the late 90's but I have rarely had an experience as unpleasant as the 2010. On the same night we also opened a 2010 Rockford BP, a 1998 Peter Lehmann Cab Sav and a 2008 Lenotti Le Crosare Ripasso which all drank as expected, so I don't think my taste buds were out of wack.
The 389 was decanted for 2 hours before tasting. There was very little on the nose. The palate was limited to very fine tannins with little fruit, certainly not the concentrated blackberry I was expecting but more a hint of sour raspberry - and not in a good way. On swallowing I experienced a burning I haven't had since my first Polish Vodka, followed by an eruption of gastric reflux.
I continued tasting at intervals over the next 5 hours and then again the following day (24 hours later.) The experience was similar each time with little to no fruit on the forward palate or aftertaste. I guess I would have to say it had good length - but it was impossible to distinguish any fruit from the overpowering acidity in the aftertaste.

Obviously this wine is not intended for drinking this early but in the past I have largely relied on the intensity and length of the fruit in the aftertaste to gauge cellaring potential. The 2010 BP is a perfect example in that it has such intense fruit on the aftertaste that it will easily cellar for 10 years or more (however, in contrast to the 389 it is also drinking quite nicely now.)

So here is my question: what markers do you use to decide whether a wine will improve with age? How much of a role does the balance between fruit, tannin and acidity play in your decision? what is it in the 2010 389 that other people are seeing and I am missing that has it marked as an outstanding wine?

Sounds very much like a bad bottle. 'Stripped', very possibly heat affected (I assume it was screwcap?). Have experienced this many times, never pleasant, where's the fruit?

and to deliberately create controversy

the "Naturally" stoppered wine was better than the "Synthetic" closure

cheers

TiggerK wrote:Sounds very much like a bad bottle. 'Stripped', very possibly heat affected (I assume it was screwcap?). Have experienced this many times, never pleasant, where's the fruit?

I wondered about it being heat affected. I'm assuming it won't recover with time so might try to get a refund on the remaining 5.
Yes it was screwcap, but I'm not sure we can draw any inference from that: the Basket Press was bought from CD so I can vouch for its condition whereas the 389 was bought from a chain store and had to be retrieved from 'out the back' - so I really don't know how it was stored.

crusty2 wrote:and to deliberately create controversy

the "Naturally" stoppered wine was better than the "Synthetic" closure

cheers

No controversy here I expect, just heat, cork or SC no difference. At least with cork you may have had a small clue with a bulging/leaking cork, but not necessarily, and it could still have been corked! I hate corks. Sure when they work, we don't complain, but it's the numerous times they don't that is the issue.

crusty2 wrote:and to deliberately create controversy

the "Naturally" stoppered wine was better than the "Synthetic" closure

cheers

Controversy?

Only in your own mind.

Roger

I'm far from being a Penfolds lover but the 2010 Bin 389 is a half decent wine. Not as Good as the Bin 169, but OK. Certainly not as described. I'd say you most probably have a dud bottle.

Cheers
Ian

People may be right, it might have been a dud bottle. A wine that young, even though it will last years, should have shown some primary fruit. I have to say though, that I had a 2002 Bin 389 last week and it was not a pleasurable drink, backward, closed and tannic. It either needed way more time or a thick, rare, barbequed steak.

As for the cork issue I am not as opposed to cork closures as people down under seem to be. It's almost like a religion.

Cheers...............................Mahmoud.

Your not alone Mahmoud. I cant see the fuss with this wine either. But hey different strokes for different folks

crusty2 wrote:and to deliberately create controversy

the "Naturally" stoppered wine was better than the "Synthetic" closure

cheers

Remind us who you work for again Phill?..

Amorim. one of several TWE suppliers. I am not an apologist for corks, just a realist where the the customers needs come first.

the original comment was meant tongue-in-cheek. I hate any level of TCA and any other cork related defect. I also avoid shopping at any retailer where, on a warm day, the shop temp is uncomfortably high.

The comment about heat affected screwcaped wines being hard to detect could be a reflection about the (large?) retailers who tend to keep the store airconditioning running at temperatures to suit the average customer, 25+C?. This may be OK for high turnover short shelf life product, but not so good for the stuff that we on this forum would tend to purchase.
I see many Cellar Release wines on offer and wonder if they are kept in "Store Like" conditions. one would hope not.

Whenever I purchase at retail I tend to pick the wines from the bottom, or back, of the display stack. I do not take any damaged capsules, or leakers when under cork/diam, or any faded labels.

cheers
Phill

Touch wood ha ha.
Have had a fairly good run with corks of late.

What are you missing with 389...not much lately.
Although the 1990 over Christmas was fab and paying $12 for it...even better.

Cheers
Craig.

Ahh.. we need to ask Gavin to update the emoticon range with a 'tongue in cheek' smiley

Totally agree with you on the variability of retail environments and the damage they can inflict, particularly on wines that are in store in the wrong conditions for an extended period of time. From my experience the size of the store doesn't always provide too much indication as I've seen fairly sad bottles from all over the place under both cork & stelvin. Having said that, there are any number of retailers who put the effort into ensuring wines are handled and transported in good condition and they should be applauded & supported.

Why it always pays to be aware of the path from cellar to table, particularly for premium cellaring wines..

crusty2 wrote:Amorim ... the original comment was meant tongue-in-cheek.

Was the 4 year old John Gilman rant against screwcaps you posted a couple of weeks back tongue in cheek too? May be a good idea to stay out of trying to stir up controversy, especially if it takes other people to prompt you to disclose your employer.

Classic.

Surely if you are going to start a thread bashing the opposition it is only appropriate to disclose any interests.

camw wrote:Was the 4 year old John Gilman rant against screwcaps you posted a couple of weeks back tongue in cheek too? May be a good idea to stay out of trying to stir up controversy, especially if it takes other people to prompt you to disclose your employer.

I did apologise for posting the Gilman rant later in the thread as i did not realise it's age. I went to a Dr. Vino article and followed the link, saw something I did not recognise, and posted. I did not delete the thread when I found out its age as another poster had already replied. They had also, I assume, not seen the original thread along with others who responded later.

Those who know me know I work for a cork company and I do not promote one type of closure over another. I have had dud wines under plastic cork/diam/natural cork and screwcap.

Sparky was kind enough to remind me to state my employer, as she did here viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13536&p=111591&hilit=leopold#p111591 with somebody else who she knew. I did not have to reply but chose to. I thought my signature said enough.

I could have joined this conversation viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13497 but chose not to. I purchased and read the published article. I also had other information from another MW applicant and did not wish to betray any trusts.

I enjoy a good discussion

I also enjoyed the ABC New Years coverage on TV. Micaleff is a brilliant satirist, and Mooney is not everybody's cup of tea but it was different and a welcome change to the other networks usual crap.

cheers
Phill

crusty2 wrote:

camw wrote:Was the 4 year old John Gilman rant against screwcaps you posted a couple of weeks back tongue in cheek too? May be a good idea to stay out of trying to stir up controversy, especially if it takes other people to prompt you to disclose your employer.

Those who know me know I work for a cork company and I do not promote one type of closure over another. I have had dud wines under plastic cork/diam/natural cork and screwcap.
When screwcaps were a new option with some Cellar Door releases I have chosen to purchase screwcap over cork.

Sparky was kind enough to remind me to state my employer, as she did here viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13536&p=111591&hilit=leopold#p111591 with somebody else who she knew. I did not have to reply but chose to. I thought my signature said enough.

The point is not a claim that you are here to promote one type of closure over another, the point is that if you post an article like the Gilman one, it is only fair that you either let people know that you work in that area or to tread lightly around controversial issues that you have an interest in - the same way I would absolutely expect someone working for Amcor to disclose that information especially if they were posting articles heavily critical of cork.

The post you linked where Sparky asked the person to identify themselves is in no way remotely similar. You are right that you did not have to respond to Sparky but it should not take them prompting you to do so in the first place.

I don't understand that "I work for the Dark Side" in your signature would mean that people world think you work for Amorim or another cork company. It is fine that people who know you are aware of who you work for, but there are plenty of people here that don't know you.

camw wrote: I don't understand that "I work for the Dark Side" in your signature would mean that people world think you work for Amorim or another cork company. It is fine that people who know you are aware of who you work for, but there are plenty of people here that don't know you.

I thought, given the sort of discussions here, that he meant he worked for Woolworths or Coles.

Let's go easy here, I've been posting since about 2006 and I didn't catch the reference to "the dark side" when I probably should have. Of course I may just be a little slow but there is no reason to expect a person to be constantly vigilant about who might or might not know what was being hinted at.

Happy New Year everybody...................Mahmoud.

And to update, re the original problem, the other dark side were very amicable about refunding the purchase price of the six bottles, including the one that had been consumed.
I enquired about what would happen to the wine, expecting that they would be tasted in-house to assess the damage, but surprisingly was told that all bottles would be thrown out. I find it hard to believe that they wouldn't open at least one.

TrickyH wrote:And to update, re the original problem, the other dark side were very amicable about refunding the purchase price of the six bottles, including the one that had been consumed.
I enquired about what would happen to the wine, expecting that they would be tasted in-house to assess the damage, but surprisingly was told that all bottles would be thrown out. I find it hard to believe that they wouldn't open at least one.

Or just put back on the shelf!

qwertt wrote:

camw wrote: I don't understand that "I work for the Dark Side" in your signature would mean that people world think you work for Amorim or another cork company. It is fine that people who know you are aware of who you work for, but there are plenty of people here that don't know you.

I thought, given the sort of discussions here, that he meant he worked for Woolworths or Coles.

Yes I often wondered what was meant by "I work for the Dark Side".
I too assumed Cole/Woolies

It may not be obvious to some but, given my name, it ought to be clear that I am also working "on the dark side".

Cheers..................Mahmoud.

I changed my signature based on a comment from a colleague at an offline about corks being from the dark ages and my recent change of employment would be like working for "the enemy of wine". ie. putting a potentially faulty natural cork into sound fermented grape juice. To my dry sense of humor my new signature "sounded like a good idea at the time"

I have now reverted to my original signature.

Thanks all for a robust discussion and look forward to many more

cheers
Phill