Question

[Grinners]

I recently opened a bottle of Wynns Cab Sauv 03 - disastrous decision.

While I'm not one to make respectable tasting notes, words like green, closed and tight sprung to mind. The wine hadn't "done anything" (very confident the wine wasn't corked).

The poor decision resulted from a combination of factors:
1). Poor disposable income levels
2). The want to impress the girl friends old man and
3). Lack of experience with drinking windows

The question I pose is: Are high scoring wines that are quoated by the "experts" (e.g. JO) as having very long maturing periods before they reach their peak, going to taste good on release?

Ignore the fact that the Wynns is possibly crap full stop. Lets say the question is in light of a 2002 Penfolds Bin 707 Cab Sauv.

If the answer to the question is: "No, a 2002 Penfolds 707 Cab Sauv isn't likely to taste remarkable on release," then I pose another question: Where is the validity in releasing scores like 96/100 for it in 2006? Can you just tell it's gonna be a ripper even though it's nothing crash now? Is this something that comes with experience?

I realise that scores are only indications and that there is a whole spectrum of tasting palates, I'm just trying to gauge if a wine can taste poorly ("aw yuk!") on release but at the same time indicate tremendous quality later on in life?

Cheers!

[Bill]

There was actually quite a good report (and tasting note) for this wine on the other forum. I haven't tried it myself though so I can't comment. Are you sure it wasn't a faulty bottle? And did you decant it? Some young wines such as this often need several hours in a decanter (or even left until the next day) to open up to show their best.

Even though I haven't tried it, I'm quite surprised that you thought the wine was as bad as you did. Wynns is generally pretty reliable, and 2003 was a reasonably good vintage in Coonawarra, certainly better than 2002.


Bill

[Grinners]

Yeh I decanted it but probably no where near long enough, maybe 1 & 1/2 hour (I didn't know it could take a day!).

We did a blind test, me the her old man and the mum against a $9 bottle of Sandalford Cab Element 2004 and we all thought the element was the Wynns ! Worst thing is I've had that particular element a few times and opted to have no more because I didn't really like it. The element had been opened with the cork back in it for a day - maybe it was all about breathing?

Anyway, so if it was a top drop, can it taste bad on release but still clearly suggest that it is actually going be a cracker in many years to come, i.e. the suggested drinking window?!?

Quite sure it wasn't a faulty bottle, I worked in a bar for a while so managed to train myself to identify corked wine pretty well.

[Red Bigot]

Alex, you've been here 2 minutes and already asking the hard questions!

You are just embarking on the journey to find out which wines you like and the challenge of picking young wines that will cellar well and/or drink well while young.

I haven't tried the 2003 Black Label yet, I have a bottle to try, but young Coonawarra cabernets with cellaring prospects can be a little daunting when released. Sometimes a vigorous decant a few hours before drinking helps, sometimes not. In cabernets there are "good" green characters such as mint, touches of green leaf or grean bean, as long as there is also some nice ripe berry/blackcurrant fruit, but anything too much like a lot of green capsicum, too much herbaceousness or hard unripe green characters are not a good sign as they will often stay with the wine or dominate it as it matures.

The key thing the "experts" look for in young wines that have long cellaring prospects are the adequacy and quality of the fruit, oak, tannins, acid, the alcohol level and the balance of all the components. If a wine is inherently balanced (no one component has too much dominance) it should be reasonably drinkable when young, especially if (like me) you don't mind fairly aggressive tannins and a bit of oak.

With your example of the 2002 Bin 707 Cabernet, I would happily drink that now, I think it tastes fine and has good balance, but having some experience with 707 I know it will be much more enjoyable in 10 or 15 years time. It's also not great value at $100+. Most of the wines I buy to cellar are attractive enough to drink on release, I don't buy wines that I couldn't drink young, sometimes you may only want a glass or two though if they are big wines or pair with a chunk of rare beef to cut the tannins.

Some writers score based on "what's currently in the glass", others, including I think JO, also use their experience to score a wine on potential as well and allocate a drinking window based on their perception of when it will taste best.

Unfortunately it's a matter of trial and error to find which writer(s) you agree with and over time as you palate develops your taste preferences may change, so don't buy up too big on the first big pay packet after you graduate. I find myself agreeing quite often with JO on his ratings and his drinking windows are often spot-on for my palate preferences, although I tend to take a year or two off the longer ones.

To be fair, take some of my comments with a grain of salt, my palate doesn't suit a lot of people, for example I'm happy to scoff a young 2002 Durif from Warrabilla (over 17%a/v) with authentic Thai food, it is a brilliant pairing, as are many shiraz that don't have too much oak or tannin, such as a lot of the better Barossa Shiraz.

Stick at it, it's worth the effort. And when you have Shiraz, Cabernet and a few other varieties sussed out, you can start the search for a decent Pinot that you can still afford, that should be good for a few frustrating years.

[GraemeG]

If the answer to the question is: "No, a 2002 Penfolds 707 Cab Sauv isn't likely to taste remarkable on release," then I pose another question: Where is the validity in releasing scores like 96/100 for it in 2006? Can you just tell it's gonna be a ripper even though it's nothing crash now? Is this something that comes with experience?

I realise that scores are only indications and that there is a whole spectrum of tasting palates, I'm just trying to gauge if a wine can taste poorly ("aw yuk!") on release but at the same time indicate tremendous quality later on in life?

Cheers!

Several things here. In the case of the Wynns, 'tight' and 'closed' don't seem to me a problem for a three year old cabernet. 'Green' might signal a bit of a warning, but I'm not sure if you're suggesting the wine was made from unripe grapes, or whether you just found it a bit herbal. Previous exposure to the label may indicate how it failed to meet your expectations. I know 2003 wasn't so flash in Coonawarra, but I'm sure I'd read something in the past about Wynns trying to make wines that don't need long cellaring before tasting good (or was that only referring to the John Riddoch? I forget).

Can a wine taste 'yuk' and improve? Well, yes, but it's a special sort of 'yuk'. In the case of 707, I find nothing enjoyable about it in it's 3 year old state. Ripe black fruit is normally buried by a massive wall of astringent tannins; although there might be great balance across the palate all the components arrive separately, there's no integration of flavours, and of course everything is very young and primary and clunky; 'arms and legs' critics often write. At 3 years old it's like looking at an MRI scan of Elle McPherson aged 18; all the structure is there; the hints of what is to come, but it's just blurry features with great potential. Only when 707 hits 15-20 years, does it resemble the photo of the 25 year-old Elle on the Sports Illustrated cover... (apologies to all for the sexist nature of this illustration.)

I often think people who try and buy pricey, new-release wines direct from the bottle shop to drink now are gambling in a big way. Many of those wines carry the price premium precisely because of the aging potential. To drink that night, you're probably better off getting something much cheaper that's likely to offer more pleasure now. Having said that, it's clear that expensive, new, pleasurable wines do exist; the write-ups around the place suggest that 2004 Godolphin appears to fall into that category. But it's a tough ask to find something like that at the local bottle-shop with a day's notice...

As for the pointscore thing, well, that's why I pay little attention to them. And why I think they are fairly useless (combined with a host of other reasons). Defenders say they represent an measure of the intrinsic quality of the wine; which avoids the question of 'when to drink'; but that then leads to the silly situation where you could apparently argue that this 90 point wine is better to drink now than that 92 point wine. All the more reason to ignore the points and read the tasting note.

I should point out I've not tasted the 03 Wynns, the 04 Godolphin, or the 02 Bin 707!

cheers,
Graeme

[Gary W]

I like the 03 BL. Nice wine. Enjoyable now but a good cellaring bet. Most Australian red wines drink well from the outset in my opinion - there are very few exceptions. Actually ...most of them are better younger for my tastes. If you did not like the Wynns BL 03 then these are the likely options
1) Your bottle was scalped - low level TCA or
2) You just don't like the wine - which is fine too.

GW

Winorama

[Grinners]

Cheers Lads

Thats all really helpful stuff which will help me understand my experiences.

Probably should point out it didn't taste like capsicum, I meant green in the context of it tasting undeveloped.

I have 2 more, I had to go halves with a mate in a 6 pack (Woolies was doing them for $17.60ea in a six pack, which I think was a good special ??) anyway will hold onto them and when I have them try and recall what it was like years before!!

Bill mentioned another forum with a tasting note, that might also be worthwhile me reading to make some comparisons, is there a link somewhere?

Cheers

[Gary W]

It would be more valuable for the purposes of comparison if you drank another one now (not this minute mind) but in the next week or so. Should not be too hard...I would be suprised if it was not a LOT better than the first bottle.
GW

[GraemeG]

Most Australian red wines drink well from the outset in my opinion - there are very few exceptions. Actually ...most of them are better younger for my tastes.

I think most decent red wines (these days broadly meaning $15+) generally drink better after a year to two, largely because nearly everything red is sold too young to begin with. (Although winery technology is getting better at making 'young wines'.) But after that, while plenty of them hang together perfectly well for up to 10 years, they don't develop much complexity or interest. They just become sort of sepia-toned. There's a small core of wines that are better beyond 5 years than before, but most are just different.
cheers,
Graeme

[simm]

Really do think you should try another bottle now Grinners old chap. No point in keeping even one bottle if you don't like it. It might be that you prefer the Sandleford Element early drinking style at this point of your life, and there will always be great vintages around the corner for you to catch up if your tastes change, as most do. Nothing wrong with that.

[Grinners]

Hmm, your almost comvincing me to, today is Wednesay - family night (everyone gets on it!) at mine so I'd have justification enough to open it.

Only thing holding me back is the thought that I'm opening a wine up way before its reached its potential?

What to do?!? Can anyone shed any light on whether or not the 03 Wynns Cab Sauv will get much better?


Cheers

[Grinners]

Ah never mind, I need to act now because of decanting time so ill just bite the bullet and go for it......least dad will be happy.