Irish goes into his 50th year

I am a few blogs behind at the moment but this one has jumped the queue so that I can write it up while things are fresh in my mind. The other reason is that it is Irish Pete's actual birthday today and the lunch that follows was to celebrate this a couple of days early. Irish is one of the select few with a nickname on this blog…I can't quite remember from where or when the name started but there we go, Halifax (aka Nobby) started it.

So an email came round 10 days ago, can you make a relaxed lunch at Kitchen W8? I was delighted to be able to say yes. Come the day we were 8 in total and a lovely line up had fallen into place. As an aside it now often seems easier to organise dinner 3-10 days in advance rather than with lots of notice.

The menu that Kitchen W8 put together, of 4 half main courses, was spot on and is listed below (with a few pics at the bottom). I must have been there four or five times now and will be actively looking for chances to go back, I think the food and service are both very well pitched, "relaxed attention to detail" may be. Sadly living North and working just south east of the city it is not as close as I'd like.

Croquettes of Mangalitza Pork with Smoked Yolk, Glazed Salsify and Black Pudding

-

Thinly Sliced Smoked Eel with Grilled Mackerel, Golden Beetroots and Sweet Mustard

-

Fillet of Cornish Brill, Delica Pumpkin, Chestnuts, Trompettes, Turnip Tops and Red Wine

-

Slow Cooked Short Rib of Beef, Parsley Potato, Heritage Carrots, Savoy Cabbage, Horseradish

And so to the wines:

Salon 2002, ok I am biased but Salon is never a bad way to start any meal, the 2002 is a teenager at best but a perfectly mannered and promising one at that. Brisk with great freshness, Chablis-esque possibly but not sharp, very moreish with a dash of saline, lovely and with such a bright future.   

Then as we sat down we had a pair of whites. Meursault 1er Cru Genevieres 2009 from A.Gambal and Chateau de Fonsalette Blanc 1997 from Rayas. The Meursult was exactly what you want of Meursault for drinking now, rich, opulent but with good warm minerality, really good length and a lovely rounded but not flabby texture, a very slight whiff or reduction essentially just a very good wine. The Fonsalette was a lovely contrast, more complex and academic for sure but not to such a degree that it was anything but delicious to drink. A little lanolin and chestnut, dry toffee and a burning butter as well a a long length and no lack of acidity, really rather splendid especially with the food. The wonderful contrast of the three whites already had me thinking this was a good tasting day.

Volnay 1er Cru Clos des Ducs 2002 from d’Angerville was up next as we sort of served the reds in a staggered, one wine at a time, order which worked well. I know Clos des Ducs pretty well, in the main thanks to this exception tasting. The 2002 was showing very well, saline and tight with focussed red fruit and elegant persistence, serious with the drinking window just opening…really lovely, coiled tight. We now shifted both to the Cote de Nuits for the next 3 reds…some big names.

Clos St Denis Grand Cru 2001 from Ponsot was some how less precise, soupier possibly than the d'Angerville but that worked as a nice contrast. The less defined, slightly degraded nose gave way to a good, more generous palate and a certain lush decadence.

Gevrey-Chambertin 1er Cr Clos St Jacques 2001 from Rousseau had a nose of sweet fruited density with a dash of bovril just adding a savoury side which just shows this wine to be moving into the second phase of a long life. It was very precise, with fruits that are hard to describe, red fruit on a core of something darker possibly, long and just so dam drinkable. Yet another bottle of Rousseau that just makes you wonder how they do what they do.

Romanee Saint Vivant Grand Cru 2001 from DRC followed, it can be dangerous with DRC and Rousseau for a winner to appear and then the sum of the parts is less than the individual loveliness should make it. On this occasion both were singing. This RSV was superb, focussed and red with primary fruits but in no way one dimensional the nose is so packed with life, an exceptional bottle in every way. I think this will age with grace and balance rather than going through the phases that the Rousseau before it, I would be equally excited to own both. The RSV for its guile and finesse with a core underneath (think Philippe Sella), the Rousseau for its grit and savoury decadence whilst still being charming (Richie McCaw).

And so to the Rhone next. Hermitage 1991 from Chave was an absolute masterclass in how this producer belongs at the top of any table of wine estates. Rich yet weightless, a little armpit and grunt with a sweet fruited then saline palate the sombinationof elegance and almost light texture with much flavour was staggering. This was followed by Barbaresco Rabaja 2000 from Giacosa, 2000 being warm it was a better vintage in Barbaresco than Barolo due to the cooling effect of the river. It had a degraded, flattering nose of sweet bruised nebbiolo fruit that made it easy to enjoy and decadent. Just a lovely wine for right now. 

Then after the diversion from Burgundy to Rhone and Piedmont we were back with a cracking pair of 1999's both of which had been decanted:

Richebourg Grand Cru 1999 from Anne Gros was very good, a rich fruited nose of mulled, almost Christmas, fruits, this had a darker more powerful side to it, a wine that shows massive promise. There is a balance about it that makes it appreciably enjoyable now, brooding is too crude a word but probably as close as I can get.

Musigny VV Grand Cru 1999 from de Vogue is a wine I know rather well and is also a wine that, when I last had it, was still firmly in a sulking phase. This was all about coiled minerality, saline, iron and a wonderful rich yet not heavy texture. I, sadly, had to taste rather than drink these last two (its not often work has to get in the way but sometimes), I can well imagine they both came out more and more in glass and strutted their stuff. From a tasting perspective they were just how I wanted them to be...

A splendid luncheon with a really good crowd of wine lovers, lots of good chats…at one point I overheard a good, if not directly relevant to this, quote about Martinis (or Negronis in my case)…"One martini is all right. Two are too many, and three are not enough." from James Thurber…too true.

Happy Birthday Irish Pete...

Croquettes of Mangalitza Pork with Smoked Yolk, Glazed Salsify and Black Pudding

Thinly Sliced Smoked Eel with Grilled Mackerel, Golden Beetroots and Sweet Mustard

Fillet of Cornish Brill, Delica Pumpkin, Chestnuts, Trompettes, Turnip Tops and Red Wine

All aboard the Cutty Sark

This was a very special evening however biased I may be. With Aubert de Villaine in town for a dinner at the Cutty Sark. We had a champagne reception on deck with access to the middle deck for those that might not have had a thick enough coat with them, or forgotten hat and gloves! Delamotte Blanc de Blancs NV from magnum is always a good option and drinks so well. For the actual dinner we moved downstairs to eat at tables of ten under the hull. Coated in copper it is a striking place for a dinner. Aubert amusingly noted it was also a wise choice given it was one of the few ships of note that had not fought the French. The menu was a good one that worked very well, the standard especially given it was for 100 people was superb.

Confit sea trout, sweet pea puree, roasted lobster oil

Wood pigeon, barley risotto, balsamic jus, lemon thyme

Thyme roasted guinea fowl, anna potato, salt baked carrots, cavelo nero

Sourdough toast, griddled mushrooms, parsley butter

To start the Domaines wines for the evening, all of which had been collected from the estate just 3 weeks before the dinner, we had the Bâtard Montrachet 2000. The Domaine have enough land, two ouvres which is 1/12th of a hectare, in Batard to produce about two barrels. From a conversation I had a few weeks before it appears that the harvest here is always done at the same time as the Montrachet. This was purchased with the Domaines Montrachet in 1966. The wine is never released for sale and in fact this was a very rare excursion outside the Domaine. There is a touch of the tropical about the nose but then there is a balancing saline edge, a lovely richness but it does have freshness. Aubert commented that, like Montrachet, you can really let this get fully ripe without worrying about a lack of energy. As less wine was left in the glass there was a phase when it was a little smokey like lapsang tea and then the empty glass had a lovely dash of butterscotch. A cracking start to the evening.

Échézeaux 2000 and Grands Échézeaux 2000 came next, It was a really good pair. The vintage is one that slightly gets overlooked given it falls in amongst '99, '01 and '02. Aubert made a very good point during the evening that to speak nowadays about "great" and "lesser" vintages is really a little pointless, it should be "easy" and "difficult" as there is so much that can be done in the vineyard and in selection. So how were these two wines? Without sounding silly there were both great, but in different ways. The Echezeaux had a delightful airy nose, stones and minerals then berries and raspberries, very bright and wonderfully accessible. The Grands Echezeaux was far more restrained and muted on the nose but then the palate comes alive with so much fruit, really impressive. I finally think after about 16 years I am starting to understand this Cru. It is never showy, always more restrained but serious.

For the main course it was another pair: Richebourg 1991 and La Tâche 1991. Aubert mentioned how 1991 was neither as spectacular or seductive as 1990 but has a long way to go, "the type of wines I really like to make". I have been lucky to have a fair few 1991's from the Domaine in the last few years and I love the vintage, elegance and focus tend to be the words I would use. These two both showed well. The Richebourg was the darker and richer of the two as you would expect but the focus of the wine and precision of the fruit was a massive, good, surprise for me, there was a moreish minerality behind the fruit, really lovely. The La Tache 1991 is always a star, very hard to write about, focussed with red fruit and some gentle spice, "complete" is the word.

From the 1991's we then went to a blind vintage of Romanée-Conti, not an everyday occurrence, this got all sorts of guessing games going. It was precise, elegant, not heavy but very persistent with some gentle red fruits and a tea-like purity, clearly not from a big warm vintage but a wine with refined texture and beautiful weightlessness. The reaction when it was revealed as 1965 was excellent. The fact that a 50 year old vintage that was not in anyway a showbiz vintage showed this well is wonderful.

There was one more "drink" to come Marc de Bourgogne 1979. I think most people were still re-tasting and wallowing in the wines so this may be didn't get a fair crack, I had a glass and liked it as usual, I was though past the stage of tasting notes.

The dinner worked so well as we had wines from 6 different Grand Cru sites and they all showed their characters very clearly...this is exactly what you, well certainly I do, want from Burgundy at the top level.

Clos des Ducs 1920-2002 @ La Trompette...

What a line-up

A Grande way to start!

This was an a unique opportunity, set up by the hard work of Jordi Orriols-Gil to taste so many different vintages of the Clos des Ducs a 1er Cru monopole belonging to Marquis d’Angerville. It was wonderful to have Guillaume d’Angerville there. Guillaume is the 6^th generation of the family to head the estate that by common consent is the pacesetter in Volnay. The Clos des Ducs itself is a 2.15 hectare site (Volnay 1er Cru is 110 hectares as a whole) and has a unique exposure in Volnay being the most northerly of the vineyards and facing East-South-East.

The dinner was held at La Trompette in Chiswick, the service and food really worked well. We started with Bollinger Grande Annee 1982 from Magnum – A little spritz on the attack then the wine gets quite mellow pretty quickly. Some toffee and richness, dry but nutty, quite a foody Champagne, very much Pinot based. Good.

Flight 1

Pot roast pheasant , root vegetables and chestnuts - A beautifully clean dish with just the right about of flavour, reminded me how much I love chestnuts in things.

Legend in the making?

2002 – A dash of cheesecloth, very red cherried purity, some lovely minerality to the palate, showing very well if dense and taut. Serious wine with really lovely balance. If you own it you’ll be best off being patient and excited!

2000 – A little darker in the fruit character than the 2002, with a little spice and black pepper, very typical of 2000 red burgundy in being balanced, easy and really quite accessible, there is a warmth. Nothing like the seriousness of the 2002 but a lovely bottle.

1999 – The last wine of the first flight. I often, almost always, prefer the 1999’s to the 2002’s. This had a very vibrant red fruit core with a little grip to the finish, serious for a 1999 when often they show less structure. Possibly not quite the potential of the 2002 but nicely different and very good.

Flight 2

Hand rolled macaroni with Vacherin mont d’or, ceps and burgundy truffle – A rich dish with flavours that complimented the age development the wines are starting to show.

1996 – Richness here and density but as with many 1996’s is there charm? I think the room was divided, I like the strictness of the wine but I think it is something of an acquired taste, may be my Nebbiolo obsession helps here. There is a nervous intensity, if it were a person it would be an academic.

1995 – This was a surprise package, balanced and approachable, really lovely actually, just easy to enjoy, there is structure but it has started to mellow.

1991 – This bottle had a little seepage and on tasting sadly it showed, not fair to comment really as there had been definite oxidation. Other reports on the wine from those who have tasted recently were glowing so a shame.

1990 – Deep colour and rich texture, the most savoury yet. I could see the 2002 developing this way. There is power but also hedonistic opulence, very impressive and very true to the vintage.

1993 – This was a late addition and a splendid one. I had the Taillepieds 1993 recently and really enjoyed it. This had a similarly, al be it more concentrated, feel to it, red currant fruit and crunchy freshness, really lovely right now, almost crisp which is amazing for a wine of 21 years old.

Flight 3

Fillet of John Dory with smoked lardo and creamed potato– A fish dish that didn’t really behave like one, delicious use of texture.

1989 – Quite savoury with an opulent texture, hazelnut, chocolate and mocha all appeared on the nose, amazingly different in style. There is fruit but it is secondary, a sexy vintage and a very impressive wine. The 1980 vintage flight as a whole was very strong.

1988 – To my mind this was not a perfect bottle, a dusty slightly metallic nose. With the flight being so good though, I just moved straight on…

1986 – A strange nose initially that reminded me of cucumber water, disappeared with a swirl. Thereafter the wine settled into a secondary aroma of cep and other mushrooms with an undertone of oyster shell, impressive.

1985 – Delicious even given the high expectation, lovely balance of fruit and a savoury sweetness, in a lovely phase right now…a little chestnut shows on the nose…special

1983 – Sweet leather and spice, brown slightly degraded fruit, good volume, very fine. A tricky vintage on the face of it but this really outperformed that…very complete, may be the pick of the flight for me but it had competition from ’89 and ’85 – a lovely problem to have…

Flight 4

Suckling pig belly with golden turnips – lovely dish with great fat that worked well…

1976 no1 – the first of two bottles of 1976, a crazily hot vintage, referred to as a “sauna” vintage by Guillaume (a phrase I plan to “steel”) who commented that Clos des Ducs never suffers hydric stress as there is a natural well in the Clos and when you combine this with there being woods above the site as well there is always a natural retention on moisture. This first of the two 1976’s was a little more subdued than…

1976 no2 – quite opulent and open, lovely now, just enough sweetness, slightly resinous, from all the chat around the table it would appear this has taken a while to open up.

1972 – Cocoa, mocha and a brown fruited nose, some people saw this as over-mature and on the palate I can see their point but on the nose is just very tertiary and a shade madeirised but fascinating, with ones eyes shut you could almost image this was old sauternes. I loved it.

1971 – Instantly good and enjoyable. Sweet and in impeccable condition manages to combine lightness of touch and a persistent brilliance of balance, very pure and with red fruit still there.

Flight 5

Pressed shoulder of Pyrenean lamb with Jerusalem artichokes

We then had 1953 Champans and Clos des Ducs served side by side – we were asked to guess which way around, amazingly it was fairly clear that we had Champans first and then Clos des Ducs.

1953 – Champans – Super, lightness of touch, a little dash of Soy which is just a slight sign of age but a good bottle.

1953 – Clos des Ducs -  Depth, even quite bold, my note says “becoming quite farmyard, delicious”, impressive definition. What struck me here was that the wines from this site age so well but never with a feeling that they needed to be big in youth to age, there is a balance at all times.

1920 - memorable to say the least

1947 – This didn’t quite show as well as expected by some, caramel, quite bold and opulent with decent concentration but it quite quickly started to tire.

1920 – This was served blind and comes with a fascinating story about how Guillaume acquired a “few” bottles of the 1920. The wine showed so well, full of life, the fruit was orange rather than red but that is as expected. The nose had an amazingly fresh aroma of tangerine rind but even the empty glass had a lovely sweetness and life…a truly memorable experience but not a novelty as these old bottle can be.

With some cheese we had the last wine of the evening – Meursault Santenots 1990– this was by far the oldest stage at which Guillaume has tasted his white wine. The nose was unctuous and nutty after a little air, it showed well and worked with the cheese.

And sadly a wonderful evening had to end, I think even those who came with high expectations, always dangerous, left very excited. There were many anecdotes and wonderful comments…exactly what these great evenings are all about! Bravo Guillaume and Bravo Jordi!

Monte Bello Dinner 1981-2005 at "you know where"

This was a really cracking dinner. A motley true of mostly die-hard Zucca-ites gathered to taste (drink!) through a lovely array of Ridge Monte Bello and one other treat all provided by our splendidly generous host - Mr Ross! I also have to say many of the facts and background on Ridge and the wines below was also courtesy of the very same man.

John, one of Sam's chefs at Zucca produced a great menu which included many old school Zucca (or Malting's for those that remember) classics.

Vitello Tonnato

Tropea Onions, Burrata, Hazelnuts & Basil

Mushroom and Castelmagno Frittata

Grilled Sirloin, Bagna Cauda & Celery

-

Spinach, Stichelton & Walnut Lasagna

Pappardelle, Pigs Cheek Ragu

-

Slow Roast Lamb Shoulder

Bobby beans, Anchovy and Tomato with Yellow Polenta and Salsa Verde

-

Marmalad Tart, Sourdough Ice Cream

Now to the wines:

Monte Bello is located in the Santa Cruz Mountains, at an elevation of 2300 feet, on the Monte Bello ridge. The first wines were grown here in 1892 but it was when a group of Stanford University students bought the land in 1959 that the serious winemaking started. 1962 was the first vintage of Monte Bello. Paul Draper, former Decanter "Man of the Year" and greatly respected winemaker, joined in 1969. The defining elements of the site/wine are that it is made at serious altitude, from Bordeaux grapes, on a limestone-based soil from low-yielding vines by one of the greatest wine-makers there is. It's the sort of combination that works.

We started the evening with 2009 Estate Chardonnay as an aperitif. There was no Monte Bello Chardonnay in 2009 so all the fruit went into Estate bottling. The main reason for this was that drought early during vintage then late spring rains so yields were just too low to make both Monte Bello and Estate Chardonnay. There is a savoury edge to the wine that doesn't entirely match the quite high octane Californian Chardonnay nose and slightly sweet palate. I didn't mind the wine but nor did it excited me. Better with food though. 15.5-16

Then onto the business of the reds which were served in pairs:

2005 Monte Bello - 70% Cab Sauv, 22% Merlot, 6% Petit Verdot, 2% Cab Fr. 13.4%. The Lowest yields in 10 years due to rain and wind. The vintage as a whole was saved by a warm summer. A mellow cassis nose with tannins on the palate that are a touch grainy. The fruit character is a little sharp but fresh and bright. Good to enjoy now and will keep. Given the trickiness of the vintage this is good. 16-16.5

2001 Monte Bello the 40th Anniversary Vintage - 56% Cab Sauv, 36% Merlot, 8% Petit Verdot. 14.2%. A cool and rainy vintage. Early spring gave moderate heat then hot spikes, which helped Merlot followed. Quite muted on the nose in a serious sort of way, lots of depth and complexity, multifaceted. It demands more time. Definitely black fruit but a very complex combination of different types. Long. 18  

Tropea Onions, Burrata, Hazelnuts & Basil

1997 Monte Bello - 85% Cab Sauv, 8% Merlot, 4% Petit Verdot, 3% Cabernet Franc. 12.9%. The growing season started badly with a very rainy winter, ultimately saved by long, mild spring. Overall the earliest vintage since 1962. All in all a tricky vintage. A slightly degraded wine in a sort of "Mitjavile" style. There is a opulence there but nicely counter balanced by the saline side. It has a quite lush texture, good to enjoy now. 17 

1996 Monte Bello - 80% Cab Sauv, 11% Merlot, 9% Petit Verdot. 13.2%. 

A very stormy year with 40% less production. Interestingly Paul Draper feels this is one of the best of the ‘90s. I was impressed, has a nice gritty grip, poised with good focus and more clarity than the 1997. A young wine even now but not overly tight. A little way to go to its peak, very promising. 18

1992 Monte Bello - 80% Cab Sauv, 11% Merlot, 9% Petit Verdot. 13.4%. Good weather and a quite rare "bumper" crop which therefore lead to a savage selection (40%). This caused quite a stir at the table as it was served with the 1991. Both wines are very impressive. There is a quite saline, seaweed "stink" that disappeared with one swirl of the glass…then there was a purity of fruit with a real lift, good acidity, very fine, something about it reminded me of the 1996. Serious but very easy to enjoy as well. 18.5

1991 Monte Bello - 85% Cab Sauv, 10% Merlot, 5% Petit Verdot. 13.1%. Pretty much "drought" which was then followed by lots of rain. Another large yield and an even more strict selection required (50%). Very fine. Where the 1992 reminded me of the 1996 this reminds me of the 2001. Just love the texture which is a way of saying it's bloody good but I don't quite have the words to say why. It just works and makes you smile. On the savoury side too may be. It's NOT a competition but just shaded the 1992 on this night. 18.75-19 

John and the Lamb Shoulder

1985 Monte Bello - Not totally sure of blend but very high Cab Sauv. 13.1%. A hot year with very ripe fruit so strict selection (45%) for different reasons than above. Merlot was little used as it was on the "flabby" side. There is fully maturity here, soy and asian spice, lean but lovely with herbs and cedar. Very good, very complete. 18.25

1981 Monte Bello - 92% Cabernet Sauvignon, 8% Merlot. 12%. A good vintage which Paul Draper says, even today, is one of the most ‘Bordeaux’ like wines made at Ridge. This bottle was good, fully mature, may be a tad over mature but with a saline quality and a precise acidity that kept it lively and enjoyable. 17

We did have one other Ridge wine which Mark kindly opened for us - Geyserville Zinfandel 1992 - which was very generous and fascinating. It was though, sadly, on the vegetal side and a little like jam that wasn't sweet. Colour still good and I am sure that there is  case for letting Zinfandel from this great team "mellow" but may be 22 years is beyond mellow? who knows?

We weren't, however, fully done for quality wines.

1905 Verdelho, d’Oliveira - This was stunning. I have always loved Madeira and I am going out there in September, this made me even more excited about that prospect. If I had to use three words for this (and I don't it's just that I don't have the words to describe Madeira fairly) they would be - Salty, dates, acidity - now for those that read my ramblings a bit they will realise why, for me that Combination really works…

I left, we all left, with smiles on faces and happily full bellies…can't ask more than that. Well done Zucca, well done Mr Draper and Thank you Mr Ross 

Legendary...

Now I've been lucky to have a few rather splendid meals and wine line-ups in my time (far more than I deserve if I am being honest). This was "right up there".
A 12.30 meet time and a seat at the "Experience" table at Royal Hospital Road was a good combo. Jan (Konetzski, Sommelier) looked after the wines brilliantly and as always Clare (Smyth, Chef) had orchestrated a brilliant menu. The food is at the bottom of this blog and was simply brilliant.
Proceedings kicked off with a magnum of Le Mesnil Blanc de Blancs Grand Cru 1989 from Bruno Paillard. I used to buy Bruno Paillard NV in France years ago and always loved it. I never knew he had any holdings in Le Mesnil this was a lovely magnum in great shape, at a lovely stage of it's evolution, a little bit of weight from the age but still the focused precision of Le Mesnil.

From here we went to Prum Wehlener Sonnenhur Auslese GK 1949, this was of course fully mature with a definite aroma of Lapsang Souchong and herbal tea, a slightly dry marmalade as well, it has become quite dry but the fruit was still there, fascinating. The partner to the Prum was Auslese 976 from Muller which was amazingly fresh for such a dry and hot vintage, it was soft, mellow lemon and lime with a little light honey edge to it. Really impressive, of the pair I found the Prum more intriguing but I think more of the group preferred the Muller by a shade.
White Burgundy now took centre stage with a Pair of Montrachet's. Montrachet 1992, Lafon had an almost lemon spritz and a lighter colour then there was a mocha note that weirdly I usually associate with older, late disgorged Champagne. I liked it. The Montrachet 1993, Ramonet was more evolved with a dry intensity at the same time as a little honeysuckle, it was good and very enjoyable but possibly not the very best showing of that wine.
Now we had a Red Burgundy extravaganza with three great wines both being represented by the 1991 and 1999 vintages. Two vintages that have a real purity of fruit focus. Each pair was done blind and each time the consensus (and certainly me) got it wrong.

Grands Echezeaux from Domaine de la Romanee Conti was up first. 1991 first, this caused me problems as I know this wine quite well and rave about it on a regular basis as being a (under the radar) gem. This was a looser, less poised and less precise showing, more savoury than "normal". The 1999 was weightier, more dense, just richer actually. This, may be, doesn't quite have the class of the 1991 (on usual showing) but would be great to try again in 3-5 years or so. May be it just wasn't a DRC day as the pair didn't quite sing as they have done.

The next pair was Clos de Beze from Rousseau. Not a wine I know very well but both were impeccable. The 1991 had staggering purity (in fact the clarity and colour of both Rousseau's was a delight in itself), real focus and a tight red fruit that made this a very exciting glass, there was the early signs of the tiniest bit of maturity but the character was still primary (if that makes sense). The 1999 was cracking, amazing depth and seriousness but at the same time had red fruit and clarity, if you own this you should be delighted.
And so the last Burgundy pair was upon us and with Rousseau and DRC drunk what would be the last name? Leroy and namely Richebourg. The 1991 was in "wine of the day" territory. My notes are contrasting in a way but it just goes to show how multi-faceted the wine was. Both savoury and sweet with depth and opulence also. Blackberry fruit , delicious with a little bite, stunning. Refined and with freshness, in a word "complete". Obviously the 1999 followed and was a little more forceful but also completely "left", cloudy and without any pretence whatsoever. There was menthol but also a herbal deliciousness, soft succulent and also young, a very splendid wine now with lots more to come.

What one now needed was Port! Quinta de Noval Nacional 1967 was the bottle in question and once Jan had used the Port tongs we were "in". It was simply staggering, a wine seven years older than me and still in many ways primary, if mellowing. I thought it was simply brilliant, so poised, so harmonious, a puppy in many respects but as with all great bottles it was showing well now. If I had a bottle when would I drink it? I genuinely have no idea, it has everything so drinking it would always and never be a mistake if that makes any sense.

Our host never lets a lunch go buy with one Sauternes and on this occasion it was two wines that I have had before Chateau Yquem 1976 & Chateau Climens 1971. The former is intense, rancio, rich and not over sweet, hedonistic and like liquid Tarte Tatin and Creme Brûlée combined. The Climens is more elegant, less rich, a lovely glass, they are a perfect foil for each other.
I must list the food as the dishes were glorious, I think we all might have picked different favourites but really there was no weak link.

Venison tartare with beetroot

Seared venison fillet on a Himalayan salt plate with English wasabi and Lapsang Souchong broth

Roast Mallard duck with lavender, honey, fennel and salade Landasise

Pheasant with Albufera sauce and white truffle

Ragout of Hare with pappardelle and chestnut

Roast Loin of Venison with shoulder sausage, polenta and Tasmanian mouton pepper

Vacherin fondue with Krug Champagne and white truffle

Cucumber sorbet, salad burnet, lemon verbena and mint

Lemonade parfait with Honey, bergamot and sheep's milk yoghurt sorbet

So there you have it a simply brilliant lunch with perfect food and exquisite wines. "Memorable" doesn't come close...

Zucca then Golf then...

A slightly chaotic blog this one but a few memorable wines have been drunk so here we go.

Starting with a delicious dinner at Zucca with a great wine lover. Two good bottles were opened. A very nice, if still simple due to its age, bottle of Bernkasteler Badstube Spatlese 2008 from Prum and then a serious bottle in the form of Grands Echezeaux 1991 from Rene Engel. The Prum was decanted which is necessary at this early stage, still simple it had lovely ripeness and vitality, really wakes up the taste buds. There is a long life ahead for this, I would probably next look at it again in 3 years time. The Grands Echezeaux was really something, nothing like a wine of 22 years old in honesty. I would say this was just starting to hit the second phase of it's life, vibrant and complex but still with forceful fruit really beautiful. 1991's along with 1993's really are lovely. The Truffle pasta and then Mallard went brilliantly with these wines.

The following morning it was off to the Wildernesse Golf club in Sevenoaks for a round with friends as their guest. We got lucky with the weather and after a good front nine things sort of fell apart for me this meant it was cigar time. I got out a nice mellow, easy, morning Robusto - Saint Luis Rey Regios from 2012. The round was really enjoyable and after a quick beer we then ventured off to The Vine, also in Sevenoaks for some lunch. The food was spot on, all the dishes tasting delicious and working well with the wines. We hadn't really co-ordinated much and ended up with four reds. They were an interesting selection starting with Charmes Chambertin 2005 from Tortochot, not a producer I know at all. The wine was primary but not closed, clear and clean red fruit with a tiny bit of tannin. Many of the 2005's do appear to be showing more than was the case 6-12 months ago. This is a wine that will age well but I don't see it being an epic. Lovely, relatively simple and a nice drink. Next up was the oldest bottle of the day and both the most unique as well as interesting. Troplong Mondot 1962 is not something you see everyday. I have to admit to having a real mental block over this estate. I am, in polite terms, not a fan. I find the wines they make now to be a little monstrous in character and extraction and just not the sort of thing I like to drink. This though was very different, elegant and with red/black fruit, poured straight from the bottle it drank well immediately and over the next 30 minutes, much longer and it might have faded but it was both fascinating and impressive for a vintage that is decent but not a patch on it's predecessor. The last two reds were both red Hermitage. The first Hermitage 2008 from Tardieu-Laurent, this was my offering and before you think why such a young Hermitage? I'll explain. In 2008 the plot that this wine was from was harvested even later than Chave and the elegance of the wine really impressed me recently so I thought it was time to re-visit and share it. It showed well, very primary but with a lovely feminine red fruit in amongst the more "butch" darkness, it was good but then I was somewhat trumped by the next wine! Hermitage 1998, Chave. Absolutely delicious, only really getting into 3rd gear but very easy to appreciate. I love the wine at this stage because it was mellow but is in now way either primary or older, just in a zone of loveliness, really superb. So two young wines that showed well and two more mature examples that were delicious, you can't ask for much more than that.

After a couple of days of normality it was time for another wine merchant friend to come over. This just means more bottles to open! We started with Hattenheimer Pfaffenberg Riesling Spatlese Jubilee Label 2009 from Schloss Schonborn which is a wine I have followed for some time as I think it offers stunning value and lovely richness. This showing did not disappoint. I am trying desperately to leave some for a little while but not managing it very well at the moment. The next bottle was infanticide, Chablis Grand Cru Les Preuses by Nathalie & Giles Fevre, even decanted it didn't give a way a great deal but did have a lovely texture and was very try to Chablis I just kind of wish I hadn't opened it. On to red and a wine I know very well, Barbera Cerretta 2008 from Giacomo Conterno which was great with Mrs H's brilliant, if labour intensive, chicken pie. It just has guts as well as elegance and fruit, tricky combination to pull off. We then went onto one last bottle and I have to say I was really impressed. The wine in question was Slowhand Pinot Noir 2009 from Muddy Water in Waipara, NZ. The clarity of the red - strawberry and raspberry but in no way bitter - was staggering, not far off the kind of character you get from Felton Road. I will certainly be having more of that!

Australian extravaganza...

Last thursday was a chance to say bye to one member of the team and to wish another well in a change of location. The chosen venue was Le Cafe Anglais in west London, near Queensway. After a couple of pints of Directors to calibrate things the nine of us moved to restaurant to get started.
With the exception of those wines below with an * all the wines were very generously supplied by "Mossy". He lived and worked in Australia which when you look at the line up will be no great surprise.
The "Kick-off" fizz was served blind and after brief guesses at Prosecco amongst other things it was revealed to be Sparkling St.Peray, Earl du Biguet from J.L et Francois Thiers* incredibly primary and soft. Given how good some of the still St.Perays are now you can see why still wine in more the thing in this commune now. The next wine was blind and served with an assortment of great starters. We all assumed that being from Mossy that it was Aussie but eventually he stopped stringing us along and revealed it was German, we got to Rheingau fairly swiftly from there...it was Rheingua Rudesheimer Berg Rottland 2000, Weingut G.H. von Mumm. I liked it, generous, waxy, mature with a complex gently fruited nose and well balanced.
We needed one more white next as Mossy's next wine was earmarked to accompany a rather good piece of Hake. I had a look at the list and settled on Reisling Trocken 2008, Sybille Kuntz* for a couple of reasons. Firstly I don't know I have ever had a wine made by a "Sybille" and secondly it would be nice to compare to the former wine. It was not as Interesting as the Mumm but was good, clean, fresh stone fruit and a mineral finish.
What came next, Tyrrell's Vat 47 Pinot Chardonnay 1996, is one of the best, most interesting and serious white wines I have had this year. Generous and almost Lafon-like in structure it had notes of coffee and mocha as well as being rich and unctuous but not without some lime like fruit and balancing acidity...delicious.
A long line of reds was ahead of us and most accompanied a choice of Lamb or Chicken, I went with the former and as the picture at the bottom shows it was both cooked to perfection and generous, a good combination! The first red was Cullen Pinot Noir 2001 from Margaret River which had a little sweetness, well integrated oak, a smooth slightly polished feel, then behind the soft berry fruit was a herbal side. Perfect now I don't think this will develop rather just fade, enjoyable warm climate Pinot.
Gaia 1996 from Grosset in Clare Valley was up next and did not disappoint. Rich and generous, black fruit concentration and a little fennel coming through, rich but not heavy, at a lovely stage in its evolution. A very classical "left bank" blend.
Cape Mentelle Cabernet Sauvignon 1992, that followed was charming as well, had a very traditional dusty element on the nose that moved away. The style was good it was not quite as balanced as the Grosset but was a lovely contrast. What followed, Jasper Hill Shiraz 1987, was one of the stars, with real white pepper and dark, almost black, fruit, good depth and not showing anything like the age it has.
If ever there was a contrast between cheap looking label and good wine then the next bottle is a major candidate, Lindemans Steven Vineyard 1991. There was a rich essence of cassis, a little stink initially which went, a leathery edge as well as cumin, really fascinating.
All the wines performed well with the exception of James Irvine Grand Merlot 1992 which was not corked but was very "high" it got progressively better on a few re-tastes but never quite settled.
Time for some sweeties and for possibly the most unique bottle of the night, Petaluma Botrytis Reisling 1982 in an amazingly sized 340ml it was unctuous, pure tarte tatin, with that lovely bruised apple acidity a really cracking experience. The next half of sweet was a little passed it. The Mitchelton Airstrip 1997 had a lovely nose but it just didn't follow through on the palate. One final wine followed blind and of course nobody got the grape variety as it was Cape Mentelle Zinfandel 1996. It was a really interesting curio. To be honest it did not show the age at all.
A cracking evening was over!

One of the stars.

Delicious Lamb.

Lunch time perfection at Koffman's

The last gathering of "The Gang" - Mr G, Irish Peat, Nobby, Chewy, Young Will, and the sadly absent this time Ronaldinho - was for a simply stunning Petrus Dinner back in February and up in the north so it was the turn of London to host, "Irish Peat" got us organised, no easy task, and the Venue was to be Koffmann's at the Berkeley - somewhere I have always enjoyed since first being introduced. The only sadness was that Ronaldinho could not make it as he was locking people up on jury service. We did have a new diner with us, as yet un-nicknamed.
As everyone gathered and after a little bottle of "grain" to focus the mind we were onto the grape! All wines were served blind and very well by the Koffmann's team who did us proud. I won't mention the food too much but all the courses were superb and worked very well with the wines.
The first bottle, or rather magnum, was Ruinart 1998, soft open and ready to go but with good balance, a little biscuit, a little yeast and some citrus fruit and white flower, very nice. As we received our Squid Bolognese-Style we were poured two whites that took us out of our comfort zone, although "Irish" was spot on with getting, St Peray 2010 from Domaine de Tunnel, as white Rhone. It was 100% Roussane and had depth, spice and a little toastiness, whilst a broad wine it had focus and was good not just interesting. We performed less well with the other white in the pairing, trying a few grape varieties before coming to unoaked Chardonnay, this one was Northern-Italian, Franco Toros Collio Chardonnay 2011, clean crisp and with soft but clear fruits, two good palate awakeners.
With the next course of Gascony-style black pudding croque monsieur with egg on the way we were off to more conventional climes - White Burgundy. Both blind as mentioned above these were two wines are of very good quality indeed. Between us we got pretty close without lingering too long. Our "newcomer" was definite on the first being Corton-Charlemagne and despite me trying to put him off he, rightly, stuck to his guns. It was Corton-Charlemagne 1990 from Bonneau du Martray this showed a lot of class, mature, widening out with a little yeasty complexity and a depth of creamy greek yoghurt and honey, a waxy texture and moreish finish, nice, very nice. However the second of these was whilst obviously younger even more exciting for it's potential. It had that trade mark Coche-Dury reduction, the classiest of "struck matches" and was the Meursault Perrieres 2002. A wine of incredible class and potential, taut and steely but at the same time showing the lurking intensity and depth you would only really expect to find from one of the very greatest domaines. The colour, particularly in comparison to the richer Corton-Charlemagne, gave no real suggestion of 11-12 years of age. A very great wine.

Burgundy was up again with a brilliant Langoustine tortellini with langoustine broth but this time of the red variety. Once we had established it was the same wine in two different vintages we set to work on guessing what and there was a sort of consensus that it was 1996 or 1998 and a 1990 but we were wrong (not massively but still wrong). The wine was Nuits-St-Georges "Boudots" from Leroy and the vintages were 1997 and 1993. The 1997 had a bit of bricky decay (I know what I mean and can never quite describe it) with the fruit in one place then the acidity and a little tannin at the end, it had a very particular texture too. The fruit was black but not too dark (light black?), I loved it despite how that note sounds, it was old school and evolved and just right now. The 1993 by contrast was at an altogether different, earlier, stage in its life. Primary almost, brooding, darker rich colour, long with black fruit, may be holding a little back for itself, brooding and then finally, as my note says, "bloody good". A great pairing.
With Turbot with Shellfish and fennel Puree we went Italian, Ugo Lequio Barbaresco 2007 from Gallina and Barolo Cannubi S.Lorenzo-Ravera 1996 from Guiseppe Rinaldi. Two very different wines and not just because of the 11 years between them. The Gallina was more delicate, red fruited with almost strawberry or cherry fruit, clean and pure (not always easy in 2007), it has finesse and elegance, will be fascinating to follow it over the coming years. The Rinaldi, my bottle and one of my favourite producers, was earthy with minerality, leather and bruised fruit, it is still a little young but showed well, it has the saline quality that I like just starting to appear, impressive.
On the food front a real signature dish was up next, Pig's trotter stuffed with sweetbreads and morels, and delicious it was too but I have to say the wines stole the show. It was one of those pairings that I write this blog for, I just don't want to forget it. The glass on the left was poised, gentle even, with pure and persistent beautiful fruit, red and a little black, amazing length for a wine of this finesse, the balance so good that you could have had in 10 years ago or in 20 years and get the same enjoyment. By contrast the glass on the right was a different animal altogether. More brooding and dense with deeper darker, black fruit, my notes says "brilliant, depth, depth". Whatever they were they were wonderful wines, contrasting so well. Preferring one is ultimately pointless. The left was La Tache 1991, DRC the right was Chambertin 1991, Rousseau. It all goes to show what a great vintage 1991 was (and 1993 from the previous wines as well), the charms of Burgundy seem to me to be too often missed as people focus in the, perceived to be, stellar vintages (90, 02, 05, 09 and 10). These wines just made me what to have more of them and in turn to look out for the likes of 2001 where the balance is superb but may be the volume is turned down a little, I'm starting (?) to waffle but what I am saying it look at balance not power.
There was still a red pairing to go before the last two sweet wines. And it was a pairing to give any a run for their money. The pair was, La Tache 1999, DRC and Clos de la Roche 1990 from Ponsot the La Tache was one of the purest expressions of Pinot Noir I think I have ever come across, poised, red fruited, delicate yet firm, this wine is balanced but still essentially primary, still in phase one of it's life but in no way is it unapproachable, amazing. The Ponsot had a rich, lavish almost hedonistic side to it, very 1990, fruit a little bruised (in a good way) there was a little spice as well, delicious.
It had been a brilliant set so far but there was one lesson still to learn Yquem 1975 and 

Yquem 1976. I have had both of these before both courtesy of the same source but there is no getting away from the fact that these two vintages in many ways, I think, show you what Yquem is all about. The 1975 has, to my mind, everything, perfect poise and balance, freshness, sweetness but also a savoury edge, it is precise, delicious but still in very much middle age, I absolutely love it and if I had (I don't!) case I would want to drink it every 5 years as it has a long and fascinating life ahead of it. The 1976 is an altogether different style, rich, almost toffeed, rancio, like the richest creme brulee in a glass, a slight leathery, almost tobacco edge, if you want an idea of what older Yquem is like and want the full on hedonism of the Chateau then go for 1976. Either way they go perfectly alongside each other.
I have said this after a few "gang" meals but really how do we carry on bettering these? But then actually it isn't about bigger or better just the very best bottles with the best of friends! Until next time...