Wolfblass Yellow Label Cabernet 200-and-doesn't-matter

Rawshack · Post by **Rawshack** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 11:11 am

oh dear oh dear.

Rawshack · Post by **Rawshack** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:40 pm

No honestly, it was delicious. Really. Come on folks, you're missing out here.

Wayno · Post by **Wayno** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 3:29 pm

harsh

ACG · Post by **ACG** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 4:37 pm

I wonder if Wolf himself knows this stuff is so bad these days...

Craig(NZ) · Post by **Craig(NZ)** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:17 pm

had a bottle of 05 in weekend...not too bad. the 04 was really good varietal stuff

its $11 what do you want for that sorta money??

AndrewCowley · Post by **AndrewCowley** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:36 pm

I tried a bottle once, would have been an 04 or 05. Not normally something I'd buy. Thought it was ok for the money.

winetastic · Post by **winetastic** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:48 pm

This reminds me of my favorite tasting note....

Wolf Blass Yellow Label Shiraz 2003
Initially after opening the wine exhibited aromas of oak and flavours of oak supported by varnish or paint thinner. I felt the wine could strip the enamel from my teeth. The following day the oak had died down somewhat and a fairly generic but drinkable red wine remained. It lacked any distinct Shiraz character and was saved from a ride down the sink by the fact I was out of drink-now wine. Wolf Blass do not have current vintage tasting notes available on their website, thus are missing the opportunity to retort.

Daryl Douglas · Post by **Daryl Douglas** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:53 pm

The chard 07's being flogged around the traps for $10 or $11 - apparently it won a couple of trophies at the Brisbane 08 show. Halliday rates it 86/100. Pass............

daz

Craig(NZ) · Post by **Craig(NZ)** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:47 am

Wolf Blass Yellow Label Shiraz 2003
Initially after opening the wine exhibited aromas of oak and flavours of oak supported by varnish or paint thinner. I felt the wine could strip the enamel from my teeth. The following day the oak had died down somewhat and a fairly generic but drinkable red wine remained. It lacked any distinct Shiraz character and was saved from a ride down the sink by the fact I was out of drink-now wine. Wolf Blass do not have current vintage tasting notes available on their website, thus are missing the opportunity to retort.

i dont like the shiraz or merlot. both are spirity (varnishy in the note is prob apt). The merlot as with most aussie merlot fails to capture any true merlot characters and is just 'dry red'. the shiraz also to me is charry+ (wynns shiraz way better option)

The cab though is quite varietal and for the price i dont mind it for a fri night bbq

Bick · Post by **Bick** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:14 am

Hmm, not sure I see the point of posting a thread to say (with some vitriol) that a cheap commercial wine isn't any good. Sometimes its good to vent your spleen, but why does this wine bother you so much?

Winetastic - the best negative note I ever read (not for this wine) described the palate as "sore throat in a bottle". Yet to read a more damning comment than that...

JJap · Post by **JJap** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 11:18 am

About a year ago I pulled my single bottle of '96 Cab Sav out of the cellar.

Really enjoyable aged Cab. Wish that I had brought more at the time.

Jay60A · Post by **Jay60A** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 11:52 am

96 was another era. The same grapes now prolly go into grey label.

Wayno · Post by **Wayno** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:45 pm

Jay60A wrote:96 was another era. The same grapes now prolly go into grey label.

Aye, the golden age.

Rawshack · Post by **Rawshack** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:40 pm

Bick wrote:Hmm, not sure I see the point of posting a thread to say (with some vitriol) that a cheap commercial wine isn't any good. Sometimes its good to vent your spleen, but why does this wine bother you so much?

Winetastic - the best negative note I ever read (not for this wine) described the palate as "sore throat in a bottle". Yet to read a more damning comment than that...

Because I felt like it? Is that OK for you? It doesn't actually bother me that much, it was just a flippant post on a poor wine.

There's plenty of good, commercial wine on the market, I live on the stuff. Hell, even my kids do, but this would make paint peel itself.

Go and make some tea, find a dictionary and look up 'humour' and 'vitriol', then decide which one this reply falls into.

As for the comments about $11 what do we expect, well, something you can drink would be start. Cheap doesn't have to mean crap, as I'm afraid this does.

winetastic · Post by **winetastic** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Rawshack wrote:Because I felt like it? Is that OK for you? It doesn't actually bother me that much, it was just a flippant post on a poor wine.

There's plenty of good, commercial wine on the market, I live on the stuff. Hell, even my kids do, but this would make paint peel itself.

Go and make some tea, find a dictionary and look up 'humour' and 'vitriol', then decide which one this reply falls into.

As for the comments about $11 what do we expect, well, something you can drink would be start. Cheap doesn't have to mean crap, as I'm afraid this does.

You go girl!

Rawshack · Post by **Rawshack** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:43 pm

winetastic wrote:
Rawshack wrote:Because I felt like it? Is that OK for you? It doesn't actually bother me that much, it was just a flippant post on a poor wine.

There's plenty of good, commercial wine on the market, I live on the stuff. Hell, even my kids do, but this would make paint peel itself.

Go and make some tea, find a dictionary and look up 'humour' and 'vitriol', then decide which one this reply falls into.

As for the comments about $11 what do we expect, well, something you can drink would be start. Cheap doesn't have to mean crap, as I'm afraid this does.

You go girl!

I really should learn not to post when I'm having a bad day at work... :oops:

Wayno · Post by **Wayno** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 6:28 pm

Of the Wolfblass Yellow Label Cabernet 200-and-doesn't-matter:

I thought that particular vintage was sublime.

Adair · Post by **Adair** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:10 pm

1990 was sublime at 12 years old. I still have some 1998 in the cellar. I think I had the 2002 as well and thought it good. I would not look at the Shiraz or Merlot though.

Humour.

Bagging crap wine is fun, at any price range. If you can't be a wine snob and delight in it on an Internet wine forum made for wine snobs, where can you do it.

Adair

Rawshack · Post by **Rawshack** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 3:54 pm

Adair wrote:1990 was sublime at 12 years old. I still have some 1998 in the cellar. I think I had the 2002 as well and thought it good. I would not look at the Shiraz or Merlot though.

Humour.

Bagging crap wine is fun, at any price range. If you can't be a wine snob and delight in it on an Internet wine forum made for wine snobs, where can you do it.

Adair

I've realised though Adair that posting on my UK soccer teams board, and then coming straight on here is perhaps not the best idea... the 'banter' on there tends to get *ahem* a little colourful

Mahmoud Ali · Post by **Mahmoud Ali** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 6:40 pm

I don't think "bagging" the recent vintages of Yellow Label is necessarily snobbish. Like many other "golden era" wine labels the Yellow Label no longer has the depth or quality. I think I've called these wines industrial swill in another post.

I still remember how good the 1983 Yellow Label was and recall buying up all I could get my hands on when it was discontinued by the local government retail store. Believe it or not I still have one more bottle of the '83 and I had been wondering if there would be any life left in it. However, the excellence of some older bottles that I have recently opened has given me hope.

Maybe I'll make a vertical tasting of the Yellow Label, the '83 together with my single bottles of '88 and '92, and a more recent vintage. I'm almost sure that the middle vintages will be better than any recent vintage.

The golden era, yes indeed.

Cheers..................Mahmoud.