Blown away by a 'cheap' CA cab from 2000...

Tonight Jen treated me to dinner at Stonehill Tavern, and it was incredible, thanks to Paul Coker’s ‘urging’ to the servers and staff, I’m sure. Amazing food, great wines (we brought a bottle of '02 Bollinger Grande Annee, the rest were ‘leftovers’ of other dinners the evening before, wink wink), but the tail end of the evening Paul poured some 2000 Robert Craig Mt. Veeder Cabernet Sauvignon (earlier some 2000 Ponsot Bourgogne (which was shot) and '01 Mongeard-Mugneret Vosne-Romanee which was quite good) and I was just BLOWN AWAY. Here I am, fresh from the incredible Bordeaux tastings in Atlanta, including '82 First Growths, about to try a glass of a cheap wine from a ‘shitty’ (as Bob Wood would say) vintage, and I was floored. Incredibly complex nose, crazy interesting and varied, no hint of the hotness of that vintage, and the fruit was fresh and the wine was amazingly structured. I went on and on about it and have searched the web for another bottle, to no avail.

A very pleasant surprise, to be sure…

Don’t underestimate Mt Veeder in any vintage.

+1

I totally respect this statement.

I am not Bordeaux-proficient, but I would always say that Mt Veeder has some serious stuff going on! Why do you think that I am always looking for a Mt Veeder Mourvedre?

Or Robert Craig.

The 98s and 00s were really good.

So were the 11s. (Seriously - Howell > Veeder IMHO)

So were the vintages that weren’t off.

Robert Craig makes good Napa wine.

Very nice and Happy Birthday!

Don’t underestimate CA cabernet, especially the mountain wines, in any of the “off” vintages. Good winemakers will get more varied and interesting expressions of the grape with age. I have had lots of these wines blossom in “shitty” vintages (ever get any 1999’s?..shhhh) Yes the big fruit bombs will hold fruit longer, but even in the less hallowed CA Napa years their fruit will look amazing compared to many other wine regions. The winemakers there are just used to near perfection year in and year out. Does not “perfection” year in and out ultimately lead to a kind of boredom? After you look at endless lines of CA blondes with high cheekbones, amped up bodies, and flawless tans, the occasional brunette starts to look damn attractive once in awhile!

(OK go ahead and whack me for the sexist comparison of wine to women, again.)

I’ll take the brunette over the blonde every day. (Yes my wife is brunette, yet there is zero chance she’ll ever read this thread)

Robert Craig is doing a great job, IMO. I had a 2007 HM this past weekend and it was hitting on all cylinders- wild berries, sour cherry, spice beautifully integrated with nice length. And, I would venture that the 13 HM was their best yet. And, they are expanding or at least solidifying their vineyard holdings-lost Pym Rae access but bought a neighboring Veeder property, and added HM Candlestick to their portfolio.

2000 is underrated in the hands of good winemakers. 2000 Monte Bello is drinking spectacularly right nowz

Jim Freeman wrote:
Robert Craig is doing a great job, IMO. I had a 2007 HM this past weekend and it was hitting on all cylinders- wild berries, sour cherry, spice beautifully integrated with nice length. And, I would venture that the 13 HM was their best yet. And, they are expanding or at least solidifying their vineyard holdings-lost Pym Rae access but bought a neighboring Veeder property, and added HM Candlestick to their portfolio.

Agree on both the '07 and '13 Howell Mountain vintages, Jim. The '13 was already showing really well when we tasted it last September.

Thanks,
Ed

2000 Monte Bello is drinking spectacularly right nowz

Same thing elsewhere. There’s no way to characterize a vintage for the entire state of California, any more than there is for the entire country of France or Spain. A lot of hail in one part that destroys vineyards may mean nothing at all elsewhere. The S. Rhone and Burgundy don’t mirror each other, so why should parts of California?

Right nowz I’m even liking 1998s and 2003s.

I have always been impressed with the Craig wines I’ve had, going back to the first wines I’ve tried from him from the 1995 vintage. I don’t know why I don’t continue to seek out his wines since they offer good value and I have never been disappointed with any of the wines (Mt. Veeder, Affinitiy).

Todd,
I don´t know the 2000 Robert Craig Mt. Veeder Cabernet Sauvignon - and most probably never will …
but a Mugnier Vosne-Romanee is also unknown to me …

Maybe it was his Chambolle-Musigny …?

+1

I have read more than once about how high altitude vineyard sites (above the fogline, maybe even the rain?) typically succeed in challenging vintages.

I don’t know if it’s true or not, but my own experiences with 98’s and 99’s from Mt Veeder and Howell Mountain (Beringer “Bancroft Ranch” Merlot, anyone?) testify to this theory. Perhaps it only applies to cooler, wetter years…

On a side note, I saw on Winex.com a $20 Robert Craig “Bob’s Cuvée”, composed of 50% Crowley Vineyard Spring Mountain Cabernet and 50% Black Sears Howell Mountain Zinfandel. Has anyone had this wine?

My apologies - it was MONGEARD-MUGNERET VOSNE-ROMANÉE

OK, you must now surrender your Burgundy man card. You have just insulted generations of Burgundy farmers and an entire central region of France!

Yeah, apparently #priorities

Ok! Got it!

Robert Craig has been making really solid wines for quite some time, and they’re not really that cheap. Recent releases are what, $80+? I guess all things are relative, but Robert Craig is a respectable producer. Worthwhile to look back and find some stuff from the early 2000s. Recent releases have been steady and really pretty nice.

BTW, I think this wine is $105 on the list at Stonehill Tavern