Splurge wines, holiday edition.

Looking at my Top 10 list yesterday, and I got to thinking... "what wines would I splurge on?"

Note that not all of these are wines I've had -- in fact, most, I haven't tried. But, if you had to get me a splurge-worthy wine, these would be the ones I'd love to see under the tree on Christmas... perhaps the wine geek on your Christmas list might enjoy one as well!

• 10: Andrew Will Ciel du Cheval 2006 ($55-ish). I've never had it, but a friend of mine at work got to taste it this past year, and said it was sublime, a wonderful Left Bank style blend from Washington. I like Washington wines, and I like the Left Bank, so I think this'd be excellent.
• 9: Pavillion Rouge de Ch. Margaux 2005 ($100-ish). I've always had good luck with second wines, and 2005 was -- as everyone has said -- an amazing year for Bordeaux. Pavillion Rouge is, traditionally, every bit as good as almost any other wine from the region.
• 8: Dr. Loosen Erdener Treppfchen Riesling Auslese 2007 ($55). Sublime Riesling, and the perfect antidote for the person who thinks that "sweet" = "bad" for wine. A perfect balance of sugar and acidity, that finishes for seemingly days. Truly an experience, and one I'll gladly repeat.
• 7: Dom de Perdrix Echezeaux 2005 ($150). A little young for drinking now, but... well, it's Grand Cru Burgundy. What more needs to be said?
• 6: Bodega Catena Zapata Catena Alta 2006 ($50). A big Argentine red, but well-balanced, easy to access, and most importantly incredibly tasty! Argentine wines offer some of the best value on the market right now, and a wine of similar quality from California would easily cost thrice as much.
• 5: Nickel & Nickel Chardonnay Searby Vineyard 2007 ($55). I loved Far Niente's charddonay... Nickel & Nickel is their single-vineyard line, and I'd love to see how it compares.
• 4: Bodegas LAN Culmen 2004 ($65). Powerful, deep, complex wine from a producer that's best-known for more value driven, mass market crianzas. The big, cult-wine bottle doesn't hurt the presentation either!
• 3: Titus Vineyards Reserve Cabernet 2006 ($60-ish). I've loved Titus' cabs for the last several vintages, and their '06 has amazing reviews (a better review than Screaming Eagle in Wine Spectator, if you can believe it!)... which I can say it's earned completely. A tasting pour is all I got to have, and I really, really want a bottle to cellar.
• 2: BV Georges de Latour 2006 ($105 list, but often on sale for less). Yeah, I know, you're wondering... "BV? Really?" And while their lower-end wines are pretty pedantic, their Georges de Latour is... well, amazing. I've had several vintages (2005, 2004, and 1990), and enjoyed them both old and young. '06 is the latest release, and it's one of those wines that wound up being a diamond in the rough -- '06 wasn't a great year in Napa, but BV did admirably.
• 1: Salon Champagne Brut Blanc de Blancs 1998 ($250-ish). Champagne Salon is arguably the best producer from Le Mesnil sur Orger, and 1998 (their latest release) is one of the better vintages available. It's pricy, but what better way to ring in the New Year than with cult Champagne! Only 6,000 cases per vintage are produced by Salon (they source only from the Le Mesnil vineyard, where Le Mesnil sur Orger gets it's name from), and they don't produce a wine every year, so it's really the definition of "cult wine."

Any one of these under the tree would be absolutely excellent! What would you like to find with a bow on it for Christmas?

Petit Verdot

In Bordeaux, there's 6 allowed varietals, of which there are 5 that you'll actually find -- Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Cabernet Franc, Malbec, and Petit Verdot (Carmenere is also allowed, but there are, to my knowledge, no significant plantings of it in Bordeaux. There's plenty in Chile, though...). These varietals are also planted in California, significantly in Napa, as a part of making Meritage wines (and, as a note, that's pronounced to rhyme with "heritage"), which are California's answer to Bordeaux blends. As a cool bit of trivia, Petit Verdot one of the most expensive varietals you'll find in California -- there's a high demand, but small supply, as only 300 or so acres are planted in California. It is also found in small quantities elsewhere in the US, mainly Virginia.

And that's what I had last night -- a Petit Verdot from Virginia. Specifically, Oakencroft Petit Verdot 2006, from the Monticello AVA. A couple of friends of mine were up that way in October for a wine and craft show, and picked this up as a gift for me. My thoughts?

Purple with a violet rim. Average-intensity nose of grape and pencil shavings. Quite grapey in the mouth, on the midpalate, with a distinct graphite note right at the front and overarching Red Delicious apple. Some green/floral happening here, too. Not the deepest wine I've ever had, but very enjoyable nonetheless. Balance is nearly perfect -- medium-body, a not-overpowering acidity, just enough tannin to be interesting. Finish is fairly long. 89 points.

As I note, not the most intense or deepest wine, but quite interesting. A fun thought for a tasting, pick up one of each Bordeaux varietal (bonus points for picking up a Carmenere!), and "blend" tastes to see how they interplay. I've never quite had a wine with the same coloring -- the brilliant purple rim is quite interesting -- or flavor characteristics. It's quite unique, and I can see why producers use it in their blends. So, if you see some, try it!

Drinking a classified Bordeaux

It's Friday, and that means it's free tasting at the local wine shop.  The theme today was "A tour of Bordeaux," so the wines were, as one would imagine, from Bordeaux.  One blanc, two right-bank (Merlot-based reds), and three left-bank (Cabernet Sauvignon-based reds).  In fact, one of the wines was the 3^em Cru Château Langoa Barton.  Admittedly, it was the 2004 -- not as good of a year as 2003 or 2005, both of which are excellent years -- but it was quite good nonetheless.

What's 3^em Cru?  Well, in 1855, Napoleon III basically asked the Bordealais "give me a list of the best wines of the Medoc peninsula in Bordeaux, ranked basically on price."  And they did -- the top 4 producers (a fifth was added in 1973) were called "first growth" (premier cru), the next 14 were "second growth" (deuxieme cru, or 2^em cru), et cetera.  People still to hold onto this list, sometimes doggedly so, and that pushes the prices up on the top of the food chain.

My tasting note for this "third class" wine:

Ruby-red. Highly aromatic nose of earth (truffle/loam), bing cherry, roses and cassis. Powerful flavor of intense, elegant cherry and cassis, with dark notes of cocoa, earth, coffee, and tobacco/cedar tannins. Very tasty. Perfectly balanced, with just enough acidity to counterpoint the medium body of the wine. Long finish.  Drink between 2011 and 2019.  90 points.

All in all, it's a very good wine.  This is the classic example of finding a good wine that doesn't cost a fortune... in comparison.

See, this is a $50 bottle of wine.  However, this is a third-tier wine, according to the 1855 classification, and that means that people who only shop "by the list" will ignore this in favor of the much more expensive Premier Cru and 2^em Cru wines, as they're more prestigious wines.  Now, will the Premier Cru wines be better?  Possibly.  But a Premier Cru wine will also set you back $300 to "hey, how much do you want to spend," depending on the vintage (and, unfortunately, the rating from Spectator/Advocate/etc.).  So, the real question is, "is this one-sixth the wine?"

No.

So, if we may presume that $300 for a top-tier Bordeaux is "reasonable," as some people do, then $50 for a wine that's most assuredly only marginally behind...  well, that's a bargain!