95+ tasting 2000
95+ tastings always are somewhat unpredictable, since every taster brings his own wine without co-ordinating with others. With some discreet hints from me, we formed a champagne flight of 4 wines and a huge red flight of 14 sturdy wines. Including in the red flight were 3 bonus wines offered for free by curious participants. Nothing were known about the bonus wines, they could even lack a Parker rating.
As so often happen when rating wines, the discussion were raised on which rules to apply. While tasting the first champagne some tasters claimed that a Champagne never come close to Bordeaux and consequently never reach the 90 level. Some other tasters did meet this by stating that the very best wine of each type must have 100 points, including things like Beaujolais.
Since I was the chairman I did settle the criteria of this tasting in the same way I think Robert Parker do. The points are a numerical system for sorting wines in order of preference. If You have a set of unknown wines (even of different types) in front of You, I can always ask which wine do You like to select if You may take only one with You. In almost all cases You can easily answer, I take this one. So, of all the wines in the world there are a few that You always prefere, these are then assigned 100 points. Of the remaining wines there are a set that You prefer better then the rest, these are assigned 99, etc., etc.
So, if You most often prefers top Bordeaux over top Champagne, then the top Bordeaux get considerable higher points from You. Many of the gathered 95+ tasters, but not all, came to the conclusion that top Champagne occur amongst their favourite top wines, so points in the upper 90 are fair for champagne. The few tasters that did not prefer the Champagne type, consequently rated these in the low 90, or high 80.
Also see my explanation of judging wine
The champagne flight
96 points - 1985 Dom Perignon
A good, yellow colour. Nutty, buttery smell, clean and well made. Smashing on the palate and a good, long after taste. Very elegant and just right. All tasters positive to Champagne agreed that it were worth 94 - 97 points. The negative tasters rated it around 90 points. Most of the tasters liked this best of the Champagnes.
95 points - 1982 Salon
Powerful yellow colour. Very much bread and yeast, giving a feeling of oxidation and sherry. A very clean taste with evident acidity making the after taste somewhat harsh. This style was too much for some tasters rating it around 92, the rest spreading upwards up to 97 points. A few negative tasters were below 90 points.
95 points - 1975 Bollinger RD 1989
Almost golden yellow. A rich smell of bread, yeast, chocolate and apricot. Thick, robust taste, intense and with long after taste. A minority dislike the wine for being clumsy and not more worth than 90 points, the rest like it a lot and agree with Parkers point.
96 points - 1985 Krug
A good yellow colour. Stylish, somewhat sweet, apple, citrus and grape. A great harmony in the taste, Long stylish after taste, beautiful. The majority rates this wine just over 95 points. A few negative tasters were below 90 points. Some of the tasters thought that this was the best of the Champagnes.
The red ordinary flight100 - 1991 Côte Rôtie la Mordorée, Chapoutier
Dark red, brick red. Mature harmonious smell, a bit of stable. Typical for Shiraz we found bacon, olives, black pepper and tar. Very smooth in the mouth with good maturness. A solid after taste. Most of us put around 95 points with some peaks at 97 - 98 points. But all agreed that this wasn't a 100 points wine. We have understood that Parker was a bit too positive to the revolution of the Chapoutier brothers at the end of 1980.
97 - 1987 Robert Mondavi Cabernet Sauvignon Reserve
Dark, brick red. Mature fruit, rather Bordeaux like with cedar and stable, more power than elegance. A very good wine but slightly high in its tannin content making the wine somewhat unyielding. All agreed that the wine had not developed as the Parker rating suggested, nevertheless the wine deserved 93 - 95 points.
96 - 1986 Ch Talbot
Dark, brick red. Lovely cedar and stable, a schoolbook sturdy Bordeaux. A very potent wine with a lot of power but managing to keep it self together. Here the tasters were even more positive than Robert Parker and did rate it as high as 98 points.
100 - 1991 Côte Rôtie la Mouline, Guigal
Dark, brick red colour. Spices and pepper are steaming from the glass. Inflated smell but without loosing style. Bacon and butchers shop as is proper for the grape. The taste is so dynamic and lively with a lovely and long after taste. This wine was obviously some points better than the Chapotier la Mordorée but 100 somewhat high, so 97 - 98 we found to be adequate.
95 - 1990 Hermitage le Greffiere, Vallouit
Dark, brick red colour. A stiff smell, powerful but somewhat green and earthy. A rich and fat taste but rather marked by a severe level of tannins and acidity. A sullen and unfriendly type of wine reducing the points to 93 - 94. maybe it might mature to something better, maybe not.
97 - 1997 Campoleone, Lamborghini
Extremely dark, ruby colour. A remarkable smell of dark berries, cardamom and smoked sausage. Rich and fruity but still subtle. Enormous levels of tannin and fruit in the taste. The concentration makes the wine feel sweet. We were all impressed and rated the wine 97 points, but will the wine ever come together.
96 - 1996 Dead Arm Shiraz, d'Arenberg
Very dark, ruby colour. A powerful smell of unmistakable Australian Shiraz. Blackberries and eucalyptus. A very good concentration with a long, long after taste. Two schools emerged how to judge this wine. The negative school, included myself, thought this wine to be too high in acidity or had even been artificially acidified and rated it 93 points. The positive school did not see any such problems and were on the same track as Parker - 96 points.
95 - 1995 Clos de l'Obac, Costers del Siurana
Dark, brick / ruby colour. A shy smell containing some spices but with a trace of bitter almond. Some tasters found a glue or solvent component, someone others found candle-grease. The taste contained considerable amounts of acidity and tannins. All together, today this wine does not merit more than 90 - 93 points and it is appropriate to worry for its future. (This was one of the wines I sold to those tasters not having any own wine of required calibre. Please don't blame me for this, someone must take the risk to also include odd wines to the 95+ tasting).
98 - 1998 Shiraz reserve, Fox Creek
Extremely dark, ruby colour. A knock out smell, not only on power but also on focus and sharpness. Black berries and mint. A top taste with rich plum fruit and evident round tannins. The fruit just manage to cover the huge tannins. For me and some other tasters this was one of the favourites and worth its 98 points, other tasters was a bit less impressed and said 95 points.
96 - 1994 Anniversary Cabernet Sauvignon, la Jota
Very dark, ruby colour. Exiting wine smelling sherry, dark berries and sweet. A very balanced thing with a splendid after taste. Evident tannins will be resolved by time, a good future lies ahead. All tasters agreed to 95 - 97 points.
99 - 1993 Shiraz, Three Rivers
Very dark, almost brick red. Archetypical and nearly excessive Australian Shiraz like eucalyptus, mint, plum, vanilla etc., etc. The taste is sweet from vanilla and fruit, super concentrated with a cool grip in the mouth. We were all more or less impressive and did rate the wine between 96 and 99 points.
The red bonus flight
1993 Hill of Grace, Henschke
Very dark, ruby colour. Black currant, and mint but also a little strange trace of cauliflower and preserved cucumber. The fruit smells jam. A complex taste, creamy and authoritarian, also with a hint of cauliflower. Most of the tasters, but not myself, did slate the wine to 90 points. Me and a few other rated this 95 and up, and estimated a good future. This cult wine was included to verify its greatness, however I don't think we did come to any final determination.
90 - 1990 Hermitage, Guigal
Dark, brick colour. Much of stable in the smell, nearly getting musty. Dry in the taste and lack the 95+ fatness. The tasters agreed with Parker. This wine was included, because in a recent tasting, it had won over many prominent Rhone wines.
96+ - 1996 Astralis, Clarendon Hills
Very dark, ruby colour. A complex smell of some eucalyptus and violet, a superb balance and focus. A powerful taste, but unfortunately a bit to dry from high tannins. The tasters were yet very positive and put 96 - 97 on this wine. A strong final on a long and laborious flight.
Conclusions from this tasting
This was the most difficult 95+ tasting so far. First of all, the attitude to champagne did vary a lot among the tasters, so the points assigned became very heterogeneous. Secondly, the red flight was too extensive, even for experienced tasters. There was too much to keep apart, and at the end of the flight we got somewhat tired, despite of the quality. For next 95+ I have to consider some changes :=).
The overall purpose of the 95+ is
In spite of the fact that we got a little tired, there are worse business then taste 14 of the best wines in the world. So number 3 may be ticket off.
Nr 1 I personally like very much. I think it is fantastic to verify that a 1998 Fox Creek Shiraz indeed match a 1986 Ch Talbot in quality, or that the so often praised 1991 Guigal la Moulin gets really hard competition with at least half of the diverse flight. This makes me very confident when I quite often collect wines outside secure wine regions or purchase wine in the exact opposite to advises from our mediocre Swedish wine critics.
However, the most trilling with this tasting is the genius of Robert Parker. Having the red wines side by side we all did agree (with few exceptions) within 3 points of Parker's rating. Consider this with the fact that Robert Parker has most likely not tasted anyone of them side by side, but in totally different context. His consistency is of another world ! So thank You Robert for letting me find so many extraordinary quality wines for reasonable money, that I should not have the ghost of a chance to find myself or by help from anyone else.
When it comes to Robert Parker's norm it is natural that this deviates from anyone else (but not so much from my own :=). The Champagne judgements are very typical in this respect. If your norm doesn't value champagne characteristics, then you don't set high point for them. This is entirely up to yourself, and neither You or Robert Parker may be blamed for that.
Apart from the champagne flight, it is remarkable that our group are so in agreement. Our individual norms do probably vary more than 3 points for the red flight, but I assume that many of the tasters are able to refer to many norms (e.g. Parker's and their own) at the same time. An example of this is when a tasters say "It is a very high quality wine but I don't like it". In this case he refers to an external quality norm of some kind by saying it is a high quality wine, but he refers to his own norm when adding that he don't like the wine.