Petaluma Merlot

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:20 pm

Has anyone on this forum tried the 2001 yet?If so how was it?It seems to be getting good reviews.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:59 pm

where have the good reviews been? I have heard some dodgy things about it, at dinner tables, but I have not tasted it or read anything written on it. Info?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:29 am

Not going to post a link to an opposition Forum but there is one that rates it 96 points.
Jeremy Oliver has it at 96 points in his 2005 wine annual.Remember 96 is high for him.
It got 5 stars and great value in my local newspaper not long ago.

Mark G · Post by **Mark G** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:48 am

Had the 2001 a couple of weeks ago and it was fantastic. Excellent wine with great mouth feel and weight. Pleased I'd bought a case on the recommendation from Muz.

Only other merlot I've had to match this for quality in the past year was Craggy Range's Sophia which is also an exceptional drink.

Cheers

Mark G

TORB · Post by **TORB** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:01 pm

From Chapter Two of the 2005 SA Tour Diary which goes live tommorow, Tuesday.

Petaluma 2001 Merlot sells for $45 at cellar door. The open bottle was clearly badly oxidised although it had only been opened late the previous day. When I pointed out there was a problem with it, the young lady on the counter said "we have had some funny corks on this wine.Ãƒâ€šÃ¢â‚¬Â And yet Croser is still an ardent supporter of corks; one can only wonder why when his wines are just as susceptible to cork problems as anybody else's. A second, fresh bottle showed bright, spicy fruit with an earthy, peaty nose. Powdery tannins and obvious fruit delivered spice, bitter chocolate, plum and more chocolate that finished with good persistence. Ample-weight, the wine is still tight and has an agreeable, harmonious complexity and a supple consistency. Whilst it finishes with good length, and is a good wine, it is still boring. Rated as Recommended with ** for value, the rating may improve as the wine matures around 2007.

Chow Chow · Post by **Chow Chow** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:08 pm

Ric,
Did u try their Shiraz 2001 with a dash of Viogner?
My local retailer is trying v.hard hawking it saying it's everybit as good as the Clonakiller.

TORB · Post by **TORB** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:12 pm

Martin,

Having tried (previous vintages) of it in the past and not thinking much of it, I decided to give it a miss, but John did have a shot at it. He didn't tell me I was smoking dope for missing it, or even pass comment that I should change my mind as it was worth trying.

Was the retailer the same one as you mentioned a couple of days ago. :wink:

Chow Chow · Post by **Chow Chow** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:21 pm

Differnt one Ric, this one is a retailer.
The previous one was a distributor.

Clonakiller is the best thing that ever happened in ur own backyard. Surprised u travelled hundreds of miles on ur wine holy-grail but no coverage on this superd winery.

Lincoln · Post by **Lincoln** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:15 pm

TORB wrote:From Chapter Two of the 2005 SA Tour Diary which goes live tommorow, Tuesday.

Petaluma 2001 Merlot sells for $45 at cellar door. The open bottle was clearly badly oxidised although it had only been opened late the previous day. When I pointed out there was a problem with it, the young lady on the counter said "we have had some funny corks on this wine.Ãƒâ€šÃ¢â‚¬Â And yet Croser is still an ardent supporter of corks; one can only wonder why when his wines are just as susceptible to cork problems as anybody else's. The wine showed bright, spicy fruit with an earthy, peaty nose. Powdery tannins and obvious fruit delivered spice, bitter chocolate, plum and more chocolate that finished with good persistence. Ample-weight, the wine is still tight and has an agreeable, harmonious complexity and a supple consistency. Whilst it finishes with good length, and is a good wine, it is still boring. Rated as Recommended with ** for value, the rating may improve as the wine matures around 2007.

Was it the oxidised wine you've rated here?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 10:59 pm

Seeing that Ric detected it, pointed it out, and had the lady admit that the corks were not performing well, I'm guessing it is a no-brainer that she opened a fresh bottle for him. Yes Ric?

TORB · Post by **TORB** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:18 am

Anonymous wrote:Seeing that Ric detected it, pointed it out, and had the lady admit that the corks were not performing well, I'm guessing it is a no-brainer that she opened a fresh bottle for him. Yes Ric?

You got it in one, a second bottle was opened. No point in rating an oxidised or corked wine. I have edited the text of the TN to stop any further confusion.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:43 am

TORB wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Seeing that Ric detected it, pointed it out, and had the lady admit that the corks were not performing well, I'm guessing it is a no-brainer that she opened a fresh bottle for him. Yes Ric?

You got it in one, a second bottle was opened. No point in rating an oxidised or corked wine. I have edited the text of the TN to stop any further confusion.

Freshly opened, minimal airing, you're not really giving the wine much of a go.

TORB, from his Drops & Dregs Section wrote:If you ever wondered why, when you have a read a tasting note, it had differed so much from what you fond in the glass, you should now have appreciation of how a bottle of wine can and does change in a relatively short space of time.

indeed.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 11:04 am

In rough terms, there are about 8800 hours in each year.

In rough terms, there are about 20,000 australian wines released each year. Give each of them 2 hours, and it would take 40,000 hours each year to give them all proper regard. Minus, say, 10,000 white wines, and your average red bigot (not that any of them are average of course) and that is 20,000 hours required.

20,000 hours required. 8800 hours available.

Result: some wines have to be assessed quickly. Fact of life for all of us.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 12:16 pm

Anonymous wrote:In rough terms, there are about 8800 hours in each year.

In rough terms, there are about 20,000 australian wines released each year. Give each of them 2 hours, and it would take 40,000 hours each year to give them all proper regard. Minus, say, 10,000 white wines, and your average red bigot (not that any of them are average of course) and that is 20,000 hours required.

20,000 hours required. 8800 hours available.

Result: some wines have to be assessed quickly. Fact of life for all of us.

Stick to tasting wine then cause your maths and logic are horrible. Theory question-Couldn't you open more than one bottle every two hours?

Buzz

Nother guest · Post by **Nother guest** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 12:28 pm

Scene opens: Ric on Phone to winery

Ric: Hi, I'm going to be visiting you about 11 am on Feb 27th. Can you please check that all your open bottles of red wine are not corked and are no more than 1 day open and if necessary open a fresh bottle and pour some into a glass by 9:30 so it will be nicely aerated when I arrive?

Winery: %#%@#^%* Click!

Ric: (Puzzled expression on face). Was it something I said? (hangs up phone, shaking head, picks up phone, dials next winery to make a similar request)

TORB · Post by **TORB** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 12:30 pm

Anonymous wrote:
Freshly opened, minimal airing, you're not really giving the wine much of a go.

So, what do you suggest I do when I walk into a cellar door and a fresh bottle of wine is opened? Say, "Oooh, I am sorry, I am not able to review that wine, it would not be fair as the wine has just been opened and has not had the benefit of optimal air time."

Sheeshhh..... :roll:

Anyone who thinks that tasting wine is an exact, perfect science that will yield the same results everytime needs a serious reality check.

TORB, from his Drops & Dregs Section wrote:If you ever wondered why, when you have a read a tasting note, it had differed so much from what you fond in the glass, you should now have appreciation of how a bottle of wine can and does change in a relatively short space of time.

And there are a huge number of other reasons too. Temperature, storage, what you have eaten prior, other wines tasted in the line up, quality of the cork, your general health, atmosphere of the tasting situation etc.... all these and more contribute to the result.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 1:04 pm

Theory: taster could open more than one bottle. Sure could.

But taster would have to sleep too.

Factors could cancel themselves out.

Possible.

Maths is fine. Maybe your logic is more horribler than mine?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:03 pm

Anonymous wrote:Theory: taster could open more than one bottle. Sure could.

But taster would have to sleep too.

Factors could cancel themselves out.

Possible.

Maths is fine. Maybe your logic is more horribler than mine?

Err no I don't think so. Show me where in your original argument you made an allowance for sleeping.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:36 pm

I didn't. I was being generous.

Are you?