Not an average tuesday dinner and all in a good cause...

A very generous customer and his wife (a very good cook) organise an annual charity dinner – For Christian Aid - each year. The wines come from their own wonderful cellar with one generous contribution each year from an American friend of theirs who flies over every year for the event. I was very lucky to be the Wine Trader asked along to comment on the wines...it was a lot of fun, any evening that has a mix of people, starts with Champagne and ends with a cigar is always good in my book and this was more than just good. I wont outline all the dishes we had with the below as there were six courses, all delicious, fish/seafood twice, duck then beef and pudding then cheese.

Canard Duchene 2004 - this was a first for me, it was good, well balanced neither Blanc de Blancs nor high in Pinot Noir I would say. I was surprised it was as generous as it was for a 2004.

Chevalier Montrachet 1992 Domaine Jean Chartron - this was the only wine with a remote condition issue, our host stated as much and said it was worth a last look, it was not dead but the initial glimmer of full maturity did give way to over maturity in a bit of time, you could still see the breeding but the poise, balance and tautness was a few years behind it.

Corton Charlemagne 1992 Domaine Bonneau du Martray - by contrast (beware of professional bias here) this Corton-Charlemagne was excellent, under stated as Bonneau du Martray often is and all the more drinkable for it. This had real tension and poise as well as great length, still going strong and arguably not quite as it's zenith, great stuff, more a drinkers wine than a tasters one, of which I approve.

And so we move from white Burgundy to Red Bordeaux, there was no mucking around here this was a classical dinner of "catholic" tastes. The Bordeaux, below, were all double decanted fairly near to serving.

Pichon Lalande 1982 - Previously a glaring omission from my Bordeaux experience and as a result of the hype this wine gets I was worried it would be underwhelming by comparison. I need not have worried at all. A tropical, high toned, exotic but beautifully elegant and balanced claret, very strange in behind youthful and rich but also light and ethereal...a real joy, I want to say it's a classical left bank bordeaux but it isn't really, just a great wine.

Cos d’Estournel 1982 - More than any other wine on the night this divided opinion, on the one hand over how good it was and on the other which stage of evolution it was at. I liked it's masculine classicism and savoury nature initially but it did lean towards iodine and a little bit of bovril over time. I think it is a wine that will hold well but a little like Cos 1986 it may never quite be a charmer. Next to the Pichon it was more weighty structured and masculine. This commentary does not really do it justice. A fine wine but more prop than backrower if that works for you?

Haut-Brion 1978 (double magnum) - This was just lovely, not showy, and not as "good" as the Pichon technically speaking but it has such balance and lightness of touch, a real "magnum between two" sort of wine, nothing forced about it, you could drink a lot of it, refreshing and digestible, very Pessac in style...lovely, no more need be said.

Rieussec 1990 - This great fun, quite flamboyant and rancio in style, lots of toffee apple and tarte tatin. I think I would think it a little older if served blind, I like the Rieussec style but I can see it not being everyones cup of tea. It does not, generally, have the poise and clinical freshness of Climens nor the outright balance and fresh, sweetness of Yquem, BUT given the mess the pricing of it is in these days, worth buying a case or two of the young vintages I recon. I am increasingly enjoying Sauternes.

Graham 1977 - A contentious vintage if ever there was one, some say "great" others say that "from 1971 to 1993 there wasn't much good port made" (a recent Noval Nacional 1983 would argue with that). I enjoyed this without being knocked over buy it, it had lovely fruit and soft structure and was really drinkable but there wasn't an added dimension lurking there with a savoury edge, good to very good but not great.

The cigar - a Montecristo No4 from DIC (the factory) 2003 (the year it was put in its box) - was delicious, mellow and aged wonderfully, I so rarely get to smoke inside these days that this was a joy, smelling cigar smoke as well as smoking a cigar is magic in my book. The ageing of the smoke makes so much difference, it was a terrific end to a very memorable evening.

And that, as they (who?) say, was that...wonderful...certainly not my average tuesday!

Movember - Team "La Tache"

At C&B we have created Team La Tache for the great movement that is MOVEMBER

Team page http://uk.movember.com/mospace/team/

We are very proud, as it stands, to have between the 15 of us, raised £7224 which ranks us 14th in the UK at present as a team. This is no token effort under the leadership of teamleader Hartley (below)! A few other photos below!

Robusto Sampler 2 - My first H.Upmann Connoisseur No 1

Second from my Robusto Sampler pack was a cigar I have never had before – H.Upmann Connoisseur No1 – I had always slightly dismissed Upmann when I first got in to cigars, ten or more years ago, as being beginners Cubans and not much more. I have been corrected on this recently by cigar friends and also by having a couple of cracking magnum 46’s – one from 2010 and one from 2001. This is a serious marque on great form at the moment.
This was a great smoke, fabulous rich colour with a lovely waxy texture, the draw was a touch tight but very consistent and with a good amount of smoke. The initial flavour was terrific and stayed well throughout the smoke there was no harshness at all even towards the end. This is not a heavy or rich cigar but is all the greater for it. This is all about balance and mellow (but not light) tea and leather characteristics, it reminded me of a bottle of wine that when tasted seems nothing spectacular but when actually drunk is just lovely, the bottle and this cigar both “slip down” a treat…90-92points and will be better with time too, I will be re-visiting this.

Robusto Sampler 1 - Por Larranaga

About a week ago a "sampler" of 12 different Robusto's, all Cubans, arrived. For my own benefit I have decided to do a brief blog of each so I can draw conclusions and decide what to buy more of.
First up was the Por Larranaga. Now this is the very first cigar I have from PL let alone the first PL Robusto. It was only made as a Regional Release hence the second band below with says "Exclusivio Asia Pacificio". Each region or market has different exclusive releases each year. This is different from the LE (Limitada Edicion) which is a cigar made for all markets but in a specific year and a specific amount, the band for these is black and gold.
I smoked this while we had a small and slightly underwhelming fireworks display at home. My overall impression was of an enjoyably mild, mellow smoke with hints of straw and hay. The flavour built a little but it stayed at the mild end of things. The construction and burn was good, this was a little under packed and had a slightly open draw but nothing severe. I had a glass of red (Roero 07, M.Corregio) whilst smoking it and that worked well. If I have this again I would be tempted to have it in the morning with coffee or on an afternoon walk (or golfing / horseracing) as it was slightly too mild for post dinner. If you want a score then 88-89 would be about it.
Background to the Marque: (from http://cigars.co.uk)

The name Por Larrañaga, which means “By Larrañaga”, was first registered in Havana by a certain Ignacio Larrañaga in 1834. It is the oldest brand of hand made Habanos still in production. For much of the 19th century and into the early part of 20th the brand was owned by the Rivero family, who built its reputation for the highest quality particularly amongst the royal houses, the rich and the famous of that time. Its golden ring attracted the attention of Rudyard Kipling who, in his 1890 poem “The Betrothed”, asserted that “There’s peace in a Larrañaga.” (This poem also contains the immortal, if obscure, line “And a woman is only a woman but a good cigar is a smoke”). In the 1950s and 1960s Por Larrañaga’s factory in Havana was a magnet for the finest cigar rollers in Cuba. It gained a standing for the unrivalled quality of it cigars and its reputation lives on today in the small range of standard Por Larrañaga sizes, which are now made at the La Corona factory in its new location at 520 Avenida 20 de Mayo.

Lunch @ Koffmann's

Today was a tale of two Burgundies at Koffmann's in the Berkeley Hotel. It was great chance to have a long overdue catch up one of my oldest and best mates in the trade (a clue? He shares his name with a character in some TV show called "The Simpsons" apparently). But also to try Koffmann's which I have heard good things about and been recommended on a few occasions. The service was good, attentive but relaxed and friendly with out being OTT.

Boringly, or sensibly, as it turned out we both went for the very same food Squid Bolognese - where every bit of the dish is made from the squid so what looks like pasta ribbons is not - and Goose...these were both excellent and went well with the two bottles we had. We had agreed I would do red and he would do white.

So white first Corton Charlemagne 2002 from Henri Boillot, I know Corton-Charlemagne well under the guise of Bonneau du Matray but do not know Boillot well. This was slightly how I would imagine a top Meursault producer making Corton would see things (and lets face it Mr Coche Dury does that just a bit well). The bottle was a good one with poise but also richness...very enjoyable and looking good when we revisited it with cheese at the end.

The red I took was Clos de Tart 2001, always nice to have two Grand Crus on a wednesday I find(!!). I have a real soft spot for this wine (and will admit professional bias too) as I think it is a marker for the return of the Domaine to its rightful quality level. Sylvain Pitiot took over running the Domain in 1996 and upped everything immediately but I feel the 2001 is from where you can really see the lift. I also love red 2001 Burgundies generally, they are so "Pinot", so fine and so fragrant and also so wonderfully different from the 2002's, which are more masculine, savoury and animal. This was really singing and all the better for being nicely cool. I am a big fan of Anthony Hanson's (MW) 20 minute Burgundy rule - reds in the fridge for 20 mins and whites come out for 20 mins...makes a great difference to getting everything out of the wine...

Anyway this wasn't meant to be a long post...if you get the chance go to Koffmann's (corkage £22 a bottle)...and I recommend both those wines!

2009 Sauternes...

Having just been at the UGC (Union de Grand Crus) Bordeaux 2009 tasting I thought I would quickly jot down my thoughts on the Sauternes. There were so many people crammed in around the "big" name reds that I only tasted a few of them that I have a little stock of before realising that it would be a great chance to taste a range Sauternes from one vintage and get a feel for house styles etc. 2009 is not by common agreement a stellar year (like say 2001 or 2007) for Sauternes but it is a good year and a rich one with lots of Botrytis. A few recent bottles of aged (and very high quality) Sauternes have really re-enforced my feeling that these are brilliant wines and in relative terms good value. I have scored them out of 20 to focus my mind.


Bastor Lamontagne - A rich nose but with a good floral edge too, honey and cream the prevalent notes. Fresh and not over the top, I would imagine a high proportion of Sauvignon. Impressive. (17.5)


Climens - Very high levels of Botrytis here, a combination of Crème Brulee and Orange rind on the nose a rich palate two with oak showing bt in a good way, rich and intense style. Opposite style to the Bastor and goes to show why Climens is so highly regarded.(18)


Coutet - Floral on the nose with a note or caramel too, a little simplistic as a whole but still good. (16.5)


de Fargues - Shortbread and honey on the nose, rich and fuller (up there with the Climens on that front) as I always de Fargues to be.a dash of orange rind again as well.(17.75)


Rayne Vigneau - Awful gold label (not that that matters of course). Nose a little subdues but then an uplifting palate with a dash of pineapple.(16)


Doisy Daene - A really sulphurous bottle that made it hard to assess so I will wait for another time, texture seemed good but unfair to score it.(?)


Doisy Vedrines - Very balanced nose with both honey and fruit (tropical and orchard), rich with good acidity there too, impressive, one of the stars.(18)


Guiraud - A serious and slightly closed nose with lots of Botrytis on the plate more than the nose. Very good although somehow I expected more.(17)


La Tour Blanche - Lovely delicately fruited nose, nothing like as bold as Climens or de Fargues, good texture. (16.75)


Nairac - Vanilla and Creme Brulee nose, very full-on, a more oxidative, rancio style, very full and quite old school, hits the ground running, not to be aged in the longer term I'd have thought (but may well be wrong).(16)


Sigalas Ribaud - Good relatively straight-forward nose, good depth, a little simple at this stage, would love to re-taste.(16)


Suduiraut - Very full-on rich creamy nose, lots of Botrytis vanilla notes along with hint of orange rind, sample was a little warmer than it might have been, good wine.(17)

As a range they were impressive and the high Botrytis probably masks the fact that there is also decent underlying acidity. As it is a vintage that will probably move very little in price over the years I look forward to trying them again.

Royal Hospital Road courtesy of "Newcastle"...

Given some of the truly memorable lunches and dinners that I have been lucky enough to go to and the fact that I am only 35 it may seem a little premature to say the below was one of the great lunches of my life but frankly it just was and I am confident it will remain that way. I have been trying to think of how to write it up. There was just so much good food and truly exceptional wine over the nearly 6 hours that it would become tedious or worse arrogant to write it as one great long meal. I think I will do the food then the wines. The menu was selected by "Newcastle" who had done a lot of work on it and provided all the wines. To say this meal was ALL down to him is totally correct and is something I am very grateful for. So the food:

To start Pressed foie gras with peppered Madeira jelly, smoked duck, Peach & almond crumble...you can see this with the Prums...simply delicious and in the best of proportions.
Up next was Stuffed pig’s trotter with veal sweetbread, parsley, Dijon mustard, warm apple sauce & ‘Waldorf salad’ with reds, don't panic we went back to whites which was a great tactic for a long meal, one for the note book. This was simply amazing, I am not going to describe it as I am too greedy with great food to make notes but it was spot on! Then back to whites we had one of the extreme highs - Fillet of turbot with truffle linguine, Scottish langoustine & cep - which for a bit of an Italianophile like me was stunning, a bit of everything in the dish...with the dry, and German, whites behind us we were into carnivore territory, Roasted grouse, foie gras, savoy cabbage, girolles, liver pâté & bread sauce the wines (two burgs and another wine as below) with this course were fascinatingly diverse and therefore I paid slightly less attention to the food...I can't say that for the next course which was brilliant, very traditional and simple, all the better for it, the sight of several of us gnawing on the bones must have been amusing, the full dish was - Côte de Boeuf, bone marrow, sauce choron and red wine jus from here it was - Selection of cheeses - to mop up the brilliant reds and get started on the Port. I have to say I am not always a fan of cheeses in the middle of a marathon meal but this worked. A brief interlude to wipe the palate came in the form of - Green apple, basil & lime sorbet & wild strawberries - before the Sauternes came along with a brilliant - Caramelised Tarte Tartin of apples with vanilla ice cream - that was the sort of pudding you could eat until you're ill.

So with the food described what about the wines? We started with a magnum of 1995 Comtes de Champagne Blanc de Blancs Tattinger, I had never had this vintage before, my only comparison is Salon 1995 that I know pretty well, I am a fan of the 1995's they aren't the 1996's in classicism but have a wonderful apply acidity and freshness, I really enjoyed this perfect apertif.

A pair of Prums followed - 1982 & 1983 Wehlener Sonnenuhr Riesling Auslese Goldkapsel - we had all the wines after the Champagne blind. Both of these two were in great condition and tasting younger than they are. I think my thoughts were that the 1983 was a Auslese GK and the 1982 was a straight Auslese or even Spatlese. In age I had the 1982 as being 5 years older than the 1983. I am happy with these guesses as it is, at least, logical. The 1982 was wonderful, slightly drier and a dash more tangy, but the 1983 was magnificent - the best Riesling I have ever had - everything you wanted from the Mosel and with decades ahead of it. There was a theme that happily went on through the whole meal here...all the bottles absolutely sang, a rarity.

We went to red now for the first time with a trio of wines in Burgundy glasses - 2002 Romanée-Saint-Vivant Grand Cru, DRC, 1990 Clos de la Roche Grand Cru, Dujac & 1955 Barolo Riserva Monfortino, Giacomo Conterno - The first two were clearly red Burgs and I was relieved to call the Monfortino as Barolo, I went for a second tier producer (wrong!) and a wine from the 1960's may be '64 or '67, good enough for me. In fairness if you have had old Nebbiolo then it was not hard to spot, it was also almost orange really really interesting, I loved it. The two Burgs were much harder, I had their ages way out thinking the 2002 was more like a 1990 and the 1990 more mature still. Also if I had to spot one of them as DRC wine then I would have gone with the 1990. They were both very good and clearly Grand Cru. I do find that 2002 reds in general are more prone to the farmyardy style and more "degraded" than many other vintages of 9 years old tend to be, this is not to say they have aged prematurely as the intensity is there they are just far more like that. The opposite of the less serious but brilliantly precise and youthful 2001's. The 1990 was a serious wine, impresive.

We are now staying with Burgundy but moving to the white side of things with - 1996 Meursault Perrières 1er cru, J-F Coche-Dury, 1996 Meursault Perrières 1er cru, Comtes Lafon & 1988 Montrachet Grand Cru, Domaine Ramonet - this was a fascinating trio. The best showing I have ever witnessed by a Lafon, I've just been a bit unlucky over the years. The Coche was brilliant, isn't it always (?), although it was suggested by others not to be as good a bottle as we'd had previously but only by a fraction if at all. The Montrachet had an amazing almost Botrytis nose that I've often found in my fairly limited Montrachet experience, it appears to come from the fact that Montrachet is often very late picked, a dash of overripeness. The acidity was good on it though and staggering to think it is 23 years old. We had these blind and my guess was that they were all Grand Cru, they certainly had the quality, - one Chevalier one Batard and one Bienvenues Batard - or such like, age wise I was early 1990's so 1990 or 1992 as they were clearly from a fine vintage. I kept my glass of Montrachet and it got better and better.
The next pair were Rhones and Guigal's at that - 1998 Côte Rôtie ‘La Turque’ &
1996 Côte Rôtie ‘La Landonne’ - These were on cracking form and I nearly made a mistake I have made before but stopped myself and said Rhone. The mistake is that there is something in the oak used by Guigal on these top wines that always makes me think of Haut Brion, anyway know that I know it can be quite helpful because when I think it is one or the other you can quickly tell which from the texture these are undeniably great and impressive wines, I am not sure if they are totally my thing but I have limited experience and there is (or should be) a place in every top cellar for this style and character. Very youthful even at 13 and 15 years of age, almost primary.

The next four wines I think have to have formed the best quad of mature Bordeaux I have ever had in one sitting - 1970 Château Petrus, 1966 Château Lafeur, 1964 Château Latour, & 1955 Château Mouton Rothschild - The Petrus was in some way the odd one out it was youthful, funky, almost tropical in character a truly remarkable bottle but somehow less Bordelais that the others. The Lafleur was exquisite in every way...perfect Pomerol at a perfect stage in its evolution. The Latour was just so Latour and I love it for it...very Pauillac, ultra classical and better than it should have been and then for the Mouton 1955. It was very well pointed out around the table that when Mouton was made a first growth (1973) this was the sort of wine that the decision would have been judged on and I can see why the upgrade came. It was vibrant, fresh, almost with that mint element still there, rich but not heavy a masterpiece. I have to mention the vintage now as I have has several 1955's recently - Trotanoy, Haut Brion amongst them - it is a seriously good and reliable vintage and the sort of year that makes me wonder what the Bordeaux of today will taste like in 56 years time.

A bottle port- 1983 Quinta do Noval Nacional - was an impromptu addition. I have never had Nacional before and as port was what first got me into wine, simple names and not many vintages, I was excited. With the taste buds waning a bit I made a strong mental note to remember this, it was supremely good, rich but balanced young but so ready as well as having years ahead of it...I must drink more port! It's a steal after all.

The final three wines were - 1947 Château Climens, 1938 Château d’Yquem & 1935 Château Filhot - a specialist subject of our host and a growing interest of mine hence next blog on 2009 Sauternes. I was a little past note making but loved them all. I made two mental observations. Firstly, that the Filhot was amazingly good and far bolder than I could imagine their wines now becoming as them seem to have gone for a lighter style now, not that this was heavy but it was intense. Secondly, that it was hard to tell which of the other two was Yquem which is normally relatively easy. Having had a few Climes now 1971 and 2001 amongst them there is no doubt that Climens is staggeringly good. All this has to be put in context though with '47 a great vintage and '35 less so and '38 even less so.

A truly exception lunch was over but not before we met the chef and saw the full line up in the Kitchen. The service and style of the whole team at Royal Hospital Road was superb. I am sure that I write for all the guests (Halifax and Suffolk featured her as before), we were 7 in total, when I say thank again to Newcastle for his generosity and organisation...the only problem now is whatever next?!?! A good problem...