Rockford

Hacker · Post by **Hacker** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:03 pm

I am slowly and sadly growing out of love with the Basket Press. Some years seem in balance, for example 2005, but by comparison the 2004 is lacking acid, and tastes of ribena, stewed fruit and to me is quite underwhelming. I don't have many vintages, just the aforementioned years and 2009, 2010 and 2012. My memory of the 199x Rockfords is of a better balanced period, with both 1996, 98 and 99 all lovely.

Which in your opinion are the 'balanced' years, and the years to avoid.

JamieBahrain · Post by **JamieBahrain** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:19 pm

Yes, not sure what happened, but there's not the magic of the 80's and 90's and I'm seriously thinking of giving up on my Stonewallers.

phillisc · Post by **phillisc** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 3:06 pm

Gee Jamie, with Wendouree in question and Rockford on the skids...whats left to drink :wink:

Hope your doggies keep barking...I may be there the week after.
Cheers
Craig

bdellabosca · Post by **bdellabosca** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:07 pm

I guess it will depend on the individual bottles / vintages you drink, especially with cork variability, as well as personal taste in relation to style of wine. I've never tried a 80's or 90's BP so I'm not able to contribute to any comparison.

However, my experiences with the 4 bottles of BP I've contributed to consuming in my life:
- a 2001 BP bottle (drunk at about 8 years old) which was my first "wow I really love good wine" moments and I recall it being the bottle of wine that drove me to start collecting wine
- a 2006 BP bottle (also drunk at about 8 years old) which was one of my top 5 favourite wines drunk since I started collecting wine
- young 2010 and 2012 bottles, which I thought were both fantastic drinking now and I'm hoping will be brilliant after some time developing (as I have some more bottles).

I would recommend those vintages / bottles to anyone as they are definitely to my taste but I'm not sure if they meet what you are looking for in terms of "balance". I can only try to help based on what I've enjoyed drinking.

If you guys are saying any Rockford BP vintage over the past 15 years does not have the magic of the 80's and 90's I really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really (enough? nah, one more), really want to try BP from the 80's and 90's.

If anyone is thinking about giving up their Stonewaller membership (e.g. because the recent 2010 and 2012 vintages didn't have enough balance / magic for them), please do not delay posting about these thoughts online and please immediately contact Rockford to make it happen. I can only hope I will then move closer to becoming a Stonewaller...

brodie · Post by **brodie** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:26 pm

Hacker wrote:I am slowly and sadly growing out of love with the Basket Press. Some years seem in balance, for example 2005, but by comparison the 2004 is lacking acid, and tastes of ribena, stewed fruit and to me is quite underwhelming. I don't have many vintages, just the aforementioned years and 2009, 2010 and 2012. My memory of the 199x Rockfords is of a better balanced period, with both 1996, 98 and 99 all lovely.

Which in your opinion are the 'balanced' years, and the years to avoid.

So I am a bit of a "necrophiliac" as far as these wines are concerned- take my reply in context!

I would say the 1991, 1994, 1995 and 1996 and 1999 are all nice balanced vintages. The 1998 is a bit too big for my tastes, 1997 is ok but not as tasty as the others. I have not yet had a BP younger than 2001 and dropped off the Stonewaller list in after the 2004 BP was released. I was an original Stonewaller when they first introduced the idea and sent out the funny little tags.

I am drinking the 1995 tonight. A lovely mid weight (well for BP anyway). Nice chocolate and spicey fruit cake characteristics with those smooth fine grained tannins. It has enough acidity to keep it fresh and inviting. really lovely and very enjoyable. Considering that 1995 is not in the same class as 1994 or 1996, it has done very well indeed.

Brodie

Mike Hawkins · Post by **Mike Hawkins** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:16 pm

Your're on 2 winners with the 2010 and 2012. Great wines. I didn't mind the 2004 at release and don't recall a lack of acid. I'm not overly enamoured with 1999 to 2009 inclusive (ex 2004). That isn't to say these are poor wines, theyre just not at the top of the BP pyramid. And I still feel the apex is excellent.

The 1998 and 1996 are quite young for my tastes, but 1990 and 1991 are world class and perfectly balanced.

ticklenow1 · Post by **ticklenow1** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:25 pm

I still enjoy the Basket Press very much, but I've said many times that I quite often prefer the Rifle Range Cabernet once they get some age on them.

I agree with Mike in that the 2010 and 2012 were very good Basket Press's and the 2004 was my favourite of the 00's. As with any wine though, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The 2002 is a strange one and it reinforces my opinion that 2002 was a very overrated vintage in the Barossa.

I wonder if some prefer Chris Ringland's fingerprints on Rockford rather than Ben Radford's.

Cheers
Ian

Gary W · Post by **Gary W** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:25 am

With you. Sold all mine. I'm not sure if it's a case of them not being as good now, or just the rest catching up (and over-taking). I buy some for purposes of review each year now, but that's about it. Rifle Range very good in 2010. Better than the BP. And also probably in 2012. They do have a very solid marketing strategy which works well for them.

Redav · Post by **Redav** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:31 pm

Dang. I expected this thread to be about people looking forward to the new releases (which I expect will be soon in October?). Everyone's on their own journey so on a forum there's bound to be people getting into a label, enjoying / collecting a label, getting out of a label.

I can't add much to the discussion having only consumed one bottle of 2011 and a few glasses of an earlier vintage at a dinner. I have a 2010 as an anniversary bottle for our 10th (is that a good rest for it?) so I'm glad that people think good things of it. I too have been loving the RR over the last few years.

I remember my boss telling me to get on it when I started working for him 20 years ago (I remember cases of the stuff would turn up occasionally). I couldn't afford it then and wasn't into wine but over the last five years, cost and storage aside, I wished I'd had hahaha. We had a delicious Rod and Spur at the start of the year but I had another one recently and found the alcohol a little too pronounced. Maybe I should have cooled it beforehand? I'm still on the fence about the RS.

Anyway, nothing stays unchanged / popular forever and people's tastes change so it's good / interesting to hear honest thoughts on their wine one way or the other.

JamieBahrain · Post by **JamieBahrain** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:39 pm

Redav wrote:Spur at the start of the year but I had another one recently and found the alcohol a little too pronounced. Maybe I should have cooled it beforehand?

I find many people drink red wines in Australia too warm or in too warm environments. Fridge for 15 won't hurt in QLD. And then, pop it back again, and again as it comes up to room temp'. The gentlest approach is once the wine at a good temp in a warm environment, put the bottle back in your wine fridge.

JamieBahrain · Post by **JamieBahrain** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:41 pm

I suppose it's ( BP ) only 300 Aussie a case every year and a real crowd pleaser. And if I get the TRS back at the airport it becomes one of the few investment quality Aussie wines. :-)

rooman · Post by **rooman** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 2:45 pm

A bit like the Emperors Clothing I'm glad you're not blown away by the BP. I only have a half dozen in the cellar of the 04 and when I tried my first bottle out of the case earlier this year with a meal I was seriously underwhelmed. I had been hoping if I just leave them alone then one day next decade I might have the Eureka Moment but now I'm not so sure.

I also put Wendouree into the same camp but let's not go there now.

Redav · Post by **Redav** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 3:53 pm

JamieBahrain wrote:I find many people drink red wines in Australia too warm or in too warm environments. Fridge for 15 won't hurt in QLD. And then, pop it back again, and again as it comes up to room temp'. The gentlest approach is once the wine at a good temp in a warm environment, put the bottle back in your wine fridge.

I think I must have done this in summer because it's clearly going to be too warm but then figured in 'winter' it might have been okay but lesson learnt for for the next one.

Matt@5453 · Post by **Matt@5453** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:00 pm

I’ve had some good bottles of BP from 1995 & 1996, most recent was a 1995 a couple of years ago and it was sublime. I’ve enjoyed the 2002 and 2004. I’ve had a number of bottles of the 2010 over the last year and a bit, I think it is a reasonable wine with good pedigree to age.
I have purchased some of the 2010 and 2012 to put away for my kids to try to show them an aged Rockford in 10+ years time, but I am not a big buyer of the BP, every time I go to the Cellar Door in anticipation to buy the BP I end up buying the RR Cabernet instead.
I have enjoyed a Moppa Springs on occasions, but not a fan of the Rod and Spur.
The Alicante Bouche is a nice drink in summer, but pricey for what it is.

Overall I agree with Gary W:
1. Rockford have a good marketing strategy
2. The Rifle Range Cabernet in 2010 & 2012 in my view were better than the BP, I like the 2013 RR also.

Hacker · Post by **Hacker** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:01 pm

Redav wrote:Dang. I expected this thread to be about people looking forward to the new releases (which I expect will be soon in October?).

I believe this is a discussion we need to have based on many people's experiences. I still love the 'vibe' of Rockford, like their very successful Black Magnum Golf day and the other Rockford wines which still get a lot of support. But the BP seems to be struggling. Light at the end of the tunnel is the support of the 2010 and 2012 BP's given by some here so I will open one or more of them to see if I can be convinced of continuing the love.

bdellabosca · Post by **bdellabosca** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:17 pm

I've had enough of this naked emperor using marketing strategies to make us buy his crap wine!
Everyone, immediately contact Rockford to demand to be removed from the Stonewallers list!

Mike Hawkins · Post by **Mike Hawkins** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 7:55 pm

I'm convinced BP is a wine that excels with serious age..... 20+ in good years. And for that reason most people dont get to experience them at their absolute best. of course personal tastes differ and many like their wines on the younger side. But having shared a few bottles in the past year with mates who normally drink Barossa shiraz at 5-10 years of age, they were blown away with the 90 and 91, and we agreed the 96 seemed young and almost one dimensional.

rooman · Post by **rooman** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:51 pm

Mike Hawkins wrote:I'm convinced BP is a wine that excels with serious age..... 20+ in good years. And for that reason most people dont get to experience them at their absolute best. of course personal tastes differ and many like their wines on the younger side. But having shared a few bottles in the past year with mates who normally drink Barossa shiraz at 5-10 years of age, they were blown away with the 90 and 91, and we agreed the 96 seemed young and almost one dimensional.

So Mike you reckon open the 2004 around 2024? Sadly that's only 6 years away so I can wait that long.

michel · Post by **michel** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 7:29 am

I dont know if our palates have changed but for me the 91 was a brilliant mouthfeel wine
I am a Stonewaller but I havent tried a Rockford for over a decade
Too many other options out there

tarija · Post by **tarija** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 8:34 am

I am not experienced with Rockford, however I vaguely recall that they don't actually own their own vineyards - all grapes are purchased?

Great wine can only be made from great grapes. If Rockford only purchases their own grapes, then a plausible reason why the 80s and 90s wines might have been better than the current releases is that there was a lot less competition back then between wineries for top quality grapes. A lot of long-time growers also starting to make their own wine as well?

More competition in the market for top quality grapes, combined with (presumed) high quantities of wines being released = diminished quality?

deejay81 · Post by **deejay81** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 10:31 am

Hacker,

This thread brought to my mind our Wendouree vs Mt Ed vs Rockford tasting last year...
http://forum.auswine.com.au/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14578&hilit=rockford+wendouree+edelstone&start=90

A lot of the comments were about how Mt Ed was a clear winner, with polarising (generally disappointed) views of Wendouree. As for Rockford, the Riesling seems to have outshon the BP's and the commentary of them was fairly minimal compared to the other wines...
The Rockfords were 03, 05, 10 which are relatively young I guess...
Here are some quotes which reflect what you seem to be going through:
" I hate to say it, but I'm generally losing the BP vibe. I'll never say it's a bad wine, but I consistently find it quite monodimensional, lacking any real nuance or complexity."
"All of the Rockford BPs were nice and safe"
"The Rockfords were ok but they suffered from lack of maturation age."
"Basket Press was good, but not great. Again, wont go out of my way to purchase"

I haven't had 90's BPs but I've had none from any year that were special....

phillisc · Post by **phillisc** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 11:56 am

Must be enormous bottle variation or questionable cellaring history with BP. The 90 and 91 BPs that I had earlier in the year (particularly the 91) were very good.
There might be something in fruit selection that the other two don't have to consider with wholly owned vineyards.
Does price come into play that the Mt Ed is double the other two...so should be better?
Does cork influence BP... as its getting close to a decade with the others being screwcapped?

My 2c.

Cheers
Craig

Polymer · Post by **Polymer** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 8:03 pm

Well all of the Mount Eds and Wendourees that night were under cork...

Rockford BP, to me, is a safe choice...all of the bits seem to be in the right place...I don't think they lack acid (given the region) and I don't think they're super overripe like many wines can be from the region...They have fruit, have structure..they age...but they're just, well, a bit boring really...

They don't have a hair out of place but nothing interesting about them either...

Matt@5453 · Post by **Matt@5453** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 9:08 pm

Polymer wrote:Well all of the Mount Eds and Wendourees that night were under cork...

Rockford BP, to me, is a safe choice...all of the bits seem to be in the right place...I don't think they lack acid (given the region) and I don't think they're super overripe like many wines can be from the region...They have fruit, have structure..they age...but they're just, well, a bit boring really...

They don't have a hair out of place but nothing interesting about them either...

You raised the question a number of times in another thread about another winery; do you think you need to have a brilliantly aged Rockford to truly appreciate them?

Cactus · Post by **Cactus** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 10:00 pm

Im new to this game. But gee whiz that 2012 rifle range is good. I blitzed a lotof mine. Now trying to hide the rest.

Mike Hawkins · Post by **Mike Hawkins** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 10:00 pm

rooman wrote:
Mike Hawkins wrote:I'm convinced BP is a wine that excels with serious age..... 20+ in good years. And for that reason most people dont get to experience them at their absolute best. of course personal tastes differ and many like their wines on the younger side. But having shared a few bottles in the past year with mates who normally drink Barossa shiraz at 5-10 years of age, they were blown away with the 90 and 91, and we agreed the 96 seemed young and almost one dimensional.

So Mike you reckon open the 2004 around 2024? Sadly that's only 6 years away so I can wait that long.

Depressing isn't it. A quick calculation of my own age then means I need a drink

Gavin Trott · Post by **Gavin Trott** » Sat Sep 24, 2016 9:59 am

Mike Hawkins wrote:
rooman wrote:
Mike Hawkins wrote:I'm convinced BP is a wine that excels with serious age..... 20+ in good years. And for that reason most people dont get to experience them at their absolute best. of course personal tastes differ and many like their wines on the younger side. But having shared a few bottles in the past year with mates who normally drink Barossa shiraz at 5-10 years of age, they were blown away with the 90 and 91, and we agreed the 96 seemed young and almost one dimensional.

So Mike you reckon open the 2004 around 2024? Sadly that's only 6 years away so I can wait that long.

Depressing isn't it. A quick calculation of my own age then means I need a drink

Have faith Mike

I still buy Wendouree, and am planning to enjoy them in maturity! :roll:

.

Luke W · Post by **Luke W** » Sat Sep 24, 2016 11:59 am

2012 Rockford BP and Rifle Range are 2 of the best wines I've drunk this year - love the flavour profiles of both.

phillisc · Post by **phillisc** » Sat Sep 24, 2016 1:40 pm

Luke W wrote:2012 Rockford BP and Rifle Range are 2 of the best wines I've drunk this year - love the flavour profiles of both.

Agreed Luke, have a few of the 12 RR and R&S...went long on BP...think in the end they will be the goods.
cheers
Craig

Polymer · Post by **Polymer** » Sat Sep 24, 2016 5:53 pm

sch5252 wrote:You raised the question a number of times in another thread about another winery; do you think you need to have a brilliantly aged Rockford to truly appreciate them?

I've had aged Rockford BP and they do gain complexity but they're still very four square. For some this is great, for others it isn't what they're looking for. I still think it is a very good wine...I'm just not excited about it.

Aged Wendouree is different...when young they often seem out of place...all tannins and acid...for some this is an unenjoyable experience...Gives off a lot of acetic acid as well which is a put off for quite a few...The newer vintages aren't this way (which is unfortunate I think) but because they used to be so backwards, you just needed to age them...and then even with age some are still really awkward. Getting them when they're in the zone is actually not that common and one of the reasons why if you don't like them young and awkward, the number of times you're truly rewarded is not worth the trouble.....But to me they're still really interesting wines regardless...

The weird thing about my comments about Rockford is..Napa Cabs I'd put in that same very safe category..just everything in the right place..but they're just better...a bit more interest a bit more excitement...peaks in the right places..they're just a lot more interesting...

The Auswine Forum

Rockford

Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford

Re: Rockford