TN: Various Shiraz

Alan Rath · Post by **Alan Rath** » Mon Jan 12, 2004 9:55 am

Tasted over about 90 minutes at a local tasting bar, from newly opened bottles. No point in describing color, every one of these was the densest color of ripe blackberrys, impenetrable. My scores are on the hedonistic fruit-bomb Barossa scale, not meant to be comparable to any other wines.

2002 Kaesler Shiraz "Stonehorse"
Concentrated, ripe, tar, licorice, a bit of oak coming through; good finish. Relative to the wines below, this is excellent value. This is a massive, but conventional 500-pounder.

2002 Massena Shiraz "11th Hour"
Distinctive from the rest in its very high-toned nose: floral, lavendar, rose garden, perfume/face powder/sweet; dense, ripe, and concentrated, dominated by smoky tar and licorice. Use this 2000-lb Barossa bunker-buster to take out errant dictators, or impacted molars.

2001 Greenock Creek Shiraz "Alice's"
A peculiar nose, with something I couldn't place, not Eucalyptus, almost petrol; palate continues in the theme of the first two wines: dark, dense, ripe, licorice, good finish. Ahh, this is the dirty bomb, meant to cause mayhem but only minor physical damage.

2002 Amon-Ra Shiraz "Barossa"
OK, let's ratchet up the scale another notch: more tar, licorice, smoke, blueberry/blackberry, a powerhouse; fantastic, long finish, with noticable, but not intrusive, oak. If not for the Roenfeldt, this might have been the biggest, densest wine I have ever tasted. We're Atomic now, into the megatons.

2001 Torbreck Shiraz "Run Rig"
Gorgeous floral nose but without the perfumey sweetness of the Massena; incredible lush fruit, great depth and balance, lovely finish. We've moved a bit away from the ripe, porty, tarry style now, this wine seems almost tame in comparison to the monsters around it - but only in direct comparison, it is still huge. This is the Neutron Bomb of the bunch, exploding without the direct destruction but attacking in more subtle ways to overpower you nevertheless. Really a beautiful wine, and my favorite of the bunch for something I would want to drink more than once.

1998 Greenock Creek Shiraz "Roenfeldt Road"
Amazing nose, floral, almost port-like. On the palate, it starts out very nicely, then grows slowly in intensity over many seconds until it explodes in a crescendo of richness, tar, licorice, blackberry, raisin, prune, with moderate tannins in an attempt to reign in some kind of balance. The finish went on and on, easily 30 seconds, and I could still taste it clearly 5 minutes later. I have never had a wine like this. Never. Nothing even close. Well, maybe the 2000 Graham's or Noval Port? This is beyond Atomic, into Thermonuclear - you use this to take out an atol.

In all seriousness, these were all quite amazing wines. I would never try to drink one with a meal, but it would be fun to sip through a winter evening in front of the fire. Stylistically, all except for perhaps the Run Rig were nearly identical in style, varying only in the level of intensity. All had modest to at most moderate tannins. They may drink well for a number of years, but hard to imagine them improving or developing additional complexity.

FWIW, I did take a look at the available Parker notes for these wines (Kaesler, Massena, Amon-Ra) and have to say his descriptions were dead on in each case.

Regards,
Alan

Mike Hawkins · Post by **Mike Hawkins** » Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:10 pm

Thanks for the notes Alan. I like the good analogy and bit of imagery in your comments.

Stan · Post by **Stan** » Mon Jan 12, 2004 8:22 pm

Great notes!

Impressive line up of big wines!

The concluding comments cause some questons for me. As a drinker of table wines I love finishing a wonderful bottle feeling like another glass to satisfy and refresh my palate. Particluarly with some food. I do enjoy port wines at the end of a meal by themselves or with dried fruits and coffee.

Should I treat these super powerful 'table wines' as more sipping wines or post dinner tastes rather than my usual drinking type wines? I find a wine around 13% balanced and refreshing even if they are really intense and powerful and I certainly enjoy the better wines after many years of careful cellaring.

What do you think?

Alan Rath · Post by **Alan Rath** » Wed Jan 14, 2004 6:33 am

Stan,

Other than possibly the Run Rig, I believe I would find it very difficult to drink any of these wines with a meal. They are just so over-the-top they would completely dominate the flavors of just about any food you could have. Just my opinion, of course, others will probably disagree. In a world where we Californians get accused of making out-of-balance fruity wines (you don't want to know the bashing that goes on against ripe Cali pinot's vs the restrained, elegant Burgundies, for example) these super-Aussies are several notches beyond anything you could find here in Calif.

And some of these are SO big that I would be tempted to drink only small amounts at any one time, more like a port or liqueur.

Hopefully some others will chime in with supporting or contrasting opinions.

Regards,
Alan