The Auswine Forum

Hi All

Well after the delights of the 389's and Old Blocks (see below) this brought me down to earth with a bump.

Definitely a product of a poor vintage. This wine wasn't obviously flawed it's just a very poor wine. Thin, weedy and harsh, really most unpleasant. Left half a bottle in a 375ml to see if it might improve a bit, it didn't. This is not overly descriptive (even for a TV) but there wasn't much to commend about this.

Ended up not finishing the bottle (which happens very rarely!) I have 2 left and it's 2 too many. If I could auction it here I would, but I can't..so into the Spag Bol it goes. If you have any these my advice is drink em or flog em on this showing. Poor purchase on my part.

Martin

Unusual to hear this Martin, as while 1997 wasn't a great vintage the St. Henri wasn't bad at all on release.

I suspect you may have either struck a bad bottle or it's still in its sleeping mode, and I'd give your remaining two bottles a few years rest before trying again.

I remember writing off the 1995 St Henri as "thin, acidic raspberry cordial", and by the time I finished my last bottle a few years later it had bloomed into something very nice indeed - not the strongest of wines mind you, but a very marked change from undrinkable to very good.

Martin,

I wonder if the 97 gets a bit of a disservice for being sandwiched in between the 96 and 98 & 99 vintages of both the St Henri and Grange.
I had a 97 St Henri about a month ago and it was a much better wine than expected and it was indeed a very nice drop albeit not as good as the other vintages around it.
The 97 Grange is somewhat similar in that it is itself a fantastic wine but not in the class of the 96, 98 & 99 Grange.
Again, on the bottle I had, I would be happy to have a few more in the cellar but that was my last bottle.

Cheers
Popov

OK Gents

I'll keep them in a corner and forget about them and see if something blossoms. Certainly your experience of the 1995 sounds similar.

M

I tried the 97 Grange at a tasting in the US recently, and I have had it upon release. Don't be too worried about the so called vintage charts, as I think this is a really good (albeit not great) Grange. Definitely underrated.

Mike

I would suspect a bad bottle. I also thought the 97 St H was a pretty good wine on release, certainly mid weight and savoury, but not malnourished. Keep it on faith, I am.

I am surprised by a lot of wines from 97. I had written off the vintage largely on the advice of others, without really forming my own opinion. More often than not I am surprised, and sometimes bloody rapt at how some 97's have turned out. In fact many 97's seem to be faring better then the uber-hyped 98's.

LL

Lennie,

Agree that many Victorian 97's are fairing well but I have not had many 97's from SA that have outshone either their 96 or 98 counterparts.

I have had a lot of 97 St Henri over the past few years. There is certainly a bit of a green character through it but I think it is a very nice drink nonetheless. I actually like many of the 97 South Australians - just because they are not overwhelming and they drink well...and they have a bit of grip too.

GW


http://www.winorama.com.au

My unpadded notes I just found in the notebook I took to Te Mata tasting:

1997 St Henri: More aged colour, ruby, bricking rim. Nose very complex. Great texture, unctious and rich, more developed and complex. qpr not really there, later looked a lot better richer

Seemed a wine that was going to develop reasonably early. Not great St Henri.

Ive really enjoyed the 1993 also which is a wine that was trashed by ROP. probably more substantial than the Grange of the same year and still humming in the cellar!