Interesting article by Ric on torbwine.com summarising thoughts of a number of SA winemakers on recent vintages.
Worries that the 98s may not turn out to be long term wines but confidence about the strength of the 99s.
It will be interesting to see results of back to back tastings of these two in the next few years.
I am at odds with Ric about the 2003s though as I've bought a number of them from small makers after blind tastings of these better 2003s with a control 2002 or two in the lineup has shown these 2003s are right up there.
SA vintage ratings
SA vintage ratings
Cheers - Steve
If you can see through it, it's not worth drinking!
If you can see through it, it's not worth drinking!
Hi Steve,
Happy to be at odds with you anytime mate.
Re 2003, there are some very good wines out there but I believe if you want to cellar them caution is required. My reasons are as follows:-
1. Many of the wines from 2003 have tannins that are so firm they are on the point of being hard.
2. Many of the 2003's have sappy green mid palates that are never going to go away and could become more pronounced as time goes on.
3. Many of the 03's, whilst very enjoyable are far more forward than their 02 counterparts.
4. There is one other other important point related to the vintage conditions which may have had a major influence, but I need to get my facts straight before i launch into the technicalities.
Coonowarra looks very good.
Happy to be at odds with you anytime mate.
Re 2003, there are some very good wines out there but I believe if you want to cellar them caution is required. My reasons are as follows:-
1. Many of the wines from 2003 have tannins that are so firm they are on the point of being hard.
2. Many of the 2003's have sappy green mid palates that are never going to go away and could become more pronounced as time goes on.
3. Many of the 03's, whilst very enjoyable are far more forward than their 02 counterparts.
4. There is one other other important point related to the vintage conditions which may have had a major influence, but I need to get my facts straight before i launch into the technicalities.
Coonowarra looks very good.
"At Odds" that'd be a good name for a cleanskin I reckon!
Yep, agree caution is needed and there's a need to pick very carefully. I've only bought quite small producers, all ones that have viticulture under good control. I've used blind lineups extensively to test the best of the 2003s.
Looking forward to your tour diaries.
Yep, agree caution is needed and there's a need to pick very carefully. I've only bought quite small producers, all ones that have viticulture under good control. I've used blind lineups extensively to test the best of the 2003s.
Looking forward to your tour diaries.
Cheers - Steve
If you can see through it, it's not worth drinking!
If you can see through it, it's not worth drinking!
-
Guest
The main thing that needs to be conisdered when talking about these vintage ratings is that they are huge generalities and there will always be many exceptions.
As far as 01 and 03 being under rated, a few comments. Yes there are some good wines from 01 and many wines that are very enjoyable now, no arguement about that but, and its a big but; 01 was the hottest vintage on record. Many of the wines have stewed fruit characters and will go hard and leathery if cellared for long periods. So if that makes a vintage "under rated" so be it.
As far as 03 being under rated, that comment has got to be a wind up. It was one of the most difficult on record in SA and comments from wine makers range from "difficult" to "a pig" come to mind; not one winemaker I have spoken to has thought it was "under rated."
As far as 01 and 03 being under rated, a few comments. Yes there are some good wines from 01 and many wines that are very enjoyable now, no arguement about that but, and its a big but; 01 was the hottest vintage on record. Many of the wines have stewed fruit characters and will go hard and leathery if cellared for long periods. So if that makes a vintage "under rated" so be it.
As far as 03 being under rated, that comment has got to be a wind up. It was one of the most difficult on record in SA and comments from wine makers range from "difficult" to "a pig" come to mind; not one winemaker I have spoken to has thought it was "under rated."
03 South Australia
In my experience it seems that the barossa wines from the north in particular look great in 03, the mid (around Tanunda) and South are less impressive. Obviously yet to see the real big guns
TORB wrote:The main thing that needs to be conisdered when talking about these vintage ratings is that they are huge generalities and there will always be many exceptions.
As far as 01 and 03 being under rated, a few comments. Yes there are some good wines from 01 and many wines that are very enjoyable now, no arguement about that but, and its a big but; 01 was the hottest vintage on record. Many of the wines have stewed fruit characters and will go hard and leathery if cellared for long periods. So if that makes a vintage "under rated" so be it.
As far as 03 being under rated, that comment has got to be a wind up. It was one of the most difficult on record in SA and comments from wine makers range from "difficult" to "a pig" come to mind; not one winemaker I have spoken to has thought it was "under rated."
I think last year Ric you made the comment that 2003 could produce many wines at two extremes (exceptionally good or very poor) with relatively few in the middle ground. While I haven't tried that many to date, what I've struck seems to mirror this comment.
Cheers
Ian
Forget about goodness and mercy, they're gone.
Re: 03 South Australia
Brett wrote:In my experience it seems that the barossa wines from the north in particular look great in 03, the mid (around Tanunda) and South are less impressive. Obviously yet to see the real big guns
Brett,
The wineries I spoke to in the middle and south were definately less positive about 03 than those further north, but even some of the guys down south have made good wines like Winter Creek and Burge Family. 03 will be a years to try before you buy.
Re: 03 South Australia
TORB wrote:03 will be a year to try before you buy.
Interesting......I didn't realise that 03 was so inconsistant. Good warning...thanks. A few 03's that I have seen or tried have equalled or outshon the 02's. Kalleske grenache and shiraz have both done a great job, and I notice in Wayne Dutschke's newsletter he writes of the 03 St Jak, "In my view a better structured and balanced wine than 2002 with ageing potential to match the 01 and 98, which both seem to be improving and becoming more complex every day." I'm sure Wayne tells it as it is for his patch.
However the 03 Mamre Brook Cab Sauv has had some wary comments, and I'm sure other alert forumites will guide us through the 03 maze.
cheers,
David M.