TN: Elderton Barossa Shiraz 2002

KMP · Post by **KMP** » Thu Jun 03, 2004 12:36 pm

Elderton Barossa Shiraz 2002 $21.99US
Very deep cherry red. Unusual mix of flavors. Herbaceous, with a hint of barnyard and old dishwater (sulphur?). Ripe fruit (almost sweet), and port-like. Good mouthfeel with soft but persistent tannins. Clean acid finish. Prolonged flavors on retronasal. Hard to believe this wine has 15% alcohol. A day after opening the wine had developed ripe red fruit, floral and mushroom flavors. The midpalate had softened, but the finish was a little hard. The tannins and alcohol are not overpowering but seem to be holding each other in check. (Tasted May 25-26, 2004).

Mike

Chuck · Post by **Chuck** » Sat Jun 05, 2004 10:44 am

Quaffers in Melbourne have this at $17.45 pb in straight or mixed dozens. A real bargain compared to the usual $20+.

Chuck

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Jun 05, 2004 4:35 pm

Does Quaffers have a website? I can't find it anywhere.

guest · Post by **guest** » Sat Jun 05, 2004 4:43 pm

no they don't

try red bigots guide for all the best buys at kemenys, dan murphys, nicks and maybe quaffers

Chuck · Post by **Chuck** » Sun Jun 06, 2004 2:50 pm

Had my first bottle of this last night and was very disappointed. Whilst the fruit was reasonably good (but too sweet) it was lacking in complexity, tannin and acid. A real one dimensional fruit bomb and nothing else. The blurb on the bottle said the fruit was left on the vine for 3 weeks longer than normal. To my mind this was 3 weeks too long and the grapes probably more suited to the sweeter wine style.

Anyone for a half dozen at fire sale prices?

Apologies if I appear too harsh but I am getting very tired of wines in the Parker style. What ever happened to 13.0 - 14.0 alcohol with puckering tannins and acid to carry the wine for the long term.

Chuck

TORB · Post by **TORB** » Sun Jun 06, 2004 5:11 pm

Chuck,

I just checked my draft notes and had a look at Mikes note above. It might be worth trying another bottle. Your description is fairly different to Mikes and mine.

Chuck · Post by **Chuck** » Sun Jun 06, 2004 6:24 pm

Ric,

I will take up your suggestion. The wine has been well made with no recognisable faults. Maybe it's my dislike of of the super sweet syrupy style gaining popularity particularly evident in the hot year of 2001. One particular reserve shiraz from Padthaway was great until 2001 when it changed to the sweeter style. I tasted the stunning 1999 against the 2001 and it was chalk and cheese and guess what - the alcohol level was up a whopping 1%+.

My first introduction to this style was a decade or so ago with the then little known Noon's in McLaren Vale. Drew's style was at the other end of the spectrum to that of the day. The super sweet style with very high alcohol (16%) was a novelty however after 5 years the wine had so lost it the last 2 or 3 were poured down the sink. Noons now is now a cult wine following Parker raising its profile. Maybe it's just my taste buds however I do like the port style particularly very old VPs however they have much more complexity.

I would like to put forward a theory about why the yanks hail Parker. When we were in USA a few years ago we couldn't believe the high level of sugar in food. They seem to like everything sweet.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 11:30 am

Chuck wrote:Had my first bottle of this last night and was very disappointed. Whilst the fruit was reasonably good (but too sweet) it was lacking in complexity, tannin and acid. A real one dimensional fruit bomb and nothing else. The blurb on the bottle said the fruit was left on the vine for 3 weeks longer than normal. To my mind this was 3 weeks too long and the grapes probably more suited to the sweeter wine style.

Anyone for a half dozen at fire sale prices?

Apologies if I appear too harsh but I am getting very tired of wines in the Parker style. What ever happened to 13.0 - 14.0 alcohol with puckering tannins and acid to carry the wine for the long term.

Chuck

tried the 2001 version on the weekend and it has pretty much fallen over.
was great for the first year or so - a real fruit bomb - but already it is now turning into an oakbomb - not good. 2002 sounds like a similar result.

KMP · Post by **KMP** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 6:06 am

Hi Chuck:

I've chased around for some other opinions on the 2002 and came up with the following.

Wine Spectator says "Supple, fleshy style fills the mouth with classic black cherry, raspberry and licorice flavors, finishing smooth and remarkably generous. Drink now through 2008. 1,000 cases imported. 91 Points."

The Wine Buyer says "This wine is so extracted that the flavors just explode on your palate. Blackberry and other dark berry fruit flavors abound with a nice lash of spice and pepper plus a long, lingering finish. This is great juice. 93 Points."

I've left the pointscores in because some find them useful. I don't know if Parker has a description of the wine.

However on the other hand another tasting against a bunch of 2001 and 2002 Aussies puts it a fair way down the list in terms of preference! (However I don''t know too many folks who double decant over 24 hours before tasting!)

I tasted the wine by itself, from the bottle, so I knew what it was. As I noted I thought the smell very unusual and I'm not sure I would have picked it as an Aussie shiraz. I wouldn't rate it as anything extraordinary except that it does seem to hold together very well for a wine with 15% alcohol. Although judging by the comments above that doesn't seem to have surprised many others!

Mike