2013 Thomas Pinot Noir Dundee Hills- USA, Oregon, Willamette Valley, Dundee Hills (2/8/2019)
This is not as good as these were initially at this stage in the wine’s life. There’s a spritz/tang on the palate that’s not what I’d hope for. However this is very floral on the nose at this stage in it’s progression. The palate is dominated by notes of strawberry, cranberry, and hibiscus tea. With 30-60 minutes in the glass the palate does soften and notes of clove, and raspberry dominate. The nose smells like a cross between a Kriek Geuze, Flintstones grape vitamins, and grape Big League Chew. It sounds quite “sugar-based” but to me it’s like walking back into childhood and I love it. However, I’m not sure everyone else would…and just like that it’s shifted to whips of rose and wild strawberries on the nose. Complex doesn’t even begin to describe this…
Thanks for the note Kirk. We had a recent vintage of this at an offline a few months back, i think the 13 or 14, and it was spritzy as well. Much like your experience, we gave a little shake and with time, it opened up nicely.
Thanks for the note, Kirk. There was a thread a while back where several people reported fizzy bottles of this vintage. This is actually a good reminder to me that I want to get my last few out of storage and open them soon. Your note sounds like this is heading in a bad direction and the wine was obviously flawed (sour beer). That doesn’t mean it can’t be enjoyable, but I don’t want to know what happens in several more years when the problem likely becomes worse.
This was “ok”…I’m not that happy with this and think I’ll blind some folks on it sometime in the future…but I have little expectation that it’s going to improve. It was enjoyable earlier on…I kind of regret not drinking more of these at the start.
Searching the Berserker site for mentions of Thomas Pinot, I saw this. I bought a case of the 2014 and interestingly I also noted the spritz/tang (not the usual nomenclature to describe wine, but apt!). I thought this made the wine very unique and that it actually had a positive contribution towards making it one of the best Willamette pinots I’ve had, so I wouldn’t want to shake it to eliminate the spritz, but wonder what effect this could have on cellaring?
Thomas has a reputation for inconsistent bottles. The phenomenon may or may not be vintage-wide. For a wine that traditionally doesn’t hit its stride until age 10+, this isn’t great news. One shouldn’t expect to need to polish them off by age 5 or 6. That would be almost tragically quick for a number of vintages. Most of my post-2010s are buried pretty deeply…but sounds like it’s time to dig one out for the sake of science.
I brought a 2004 Thomas to a WB offline last night. Everyone liked it, with comments of nice acidity and still plenty of life ahead of it. We averaged more than 1 bottle per person, so there were a lot of bottles that didn’t get entirely consumed. The Thomas was empty, along with an ‘09 Roulot Les Meix Chavaux and a ‘90 Comtes Lafon Volnay-Santenots.
2013 Thomas Pinot Noir
Mushrooms, parnips and subtle baking spice with abundant sour cherry aromas, the wood is balanced adding mild cedar and soft vanilla without too much distraction. I normally expect smoked meats with Thomas…but MIA in this one. There’s a sweetness to the palate suggesting RS. Nothing frizzante but a slight perception of tingling at the very front of the attack. The wine punches with purpose like a super welterweight more than the typical middleweight+. Plenty of bright red fruit and supportive acidity. Good length. This particular bottle had time ahead of it. No flaws. It’s drinking quite young/fresh at the moment…probably a good omen for patience. YMMV.
FWIW, a side note that the foil and top of the cork were in fine shape. No signs of leakage or cork movement. I used a rabbit and the cork slid out surprisingly easy…almost too easy, as if the edges were slightly lubricated. Some seepage was visible along the sides of cork, nothing too unusual. The staining didn’t extend the entire length of the cork.
Not necessarily so, and not even likely so.
As the good scientist Al Osterheid noted years ago;
A mild spritz is often just from dissolved CO2, which is more soluble at cellar temperature than room temperature. This seems to be particularly true with pinot noir which winemakers generally try to not move around too much (racking, etc) because pinot seems much more affected by exposure to oxygen.
Lots of California pinots have a mild spritz. Put your hand over the top and shake, then listen for the pffft when you remove your hand. If I can detect it when I taste, I just decant with a funnel that spreads the wine to the sides of the decanter and wait a bit.
But yes, as ITB’r Wes Barton also noted in the same thread from years ago;
In addition to what’s been said, it can also be produced by “bad” yeasts or bacteria, which would produce off odors. I gather this was historically more often the case. Cleanliness pretty much eliminated that issue.
Filtering can eliminate any living yeast and bacteria cells, preventing a secondary fermentation. (Though I’d generally prefer the unfiltered wine and accept the risk.)
For wines that are vulnerable to a secondary fermentation, proper storage is imperative. Temperature and time are the factors that can get it going. (I guess you could say with some wines the intent was to leave them vulnerable. That would make petillance in them a provenance flaw…)
So which is more likely in the case of John Thomas the man and John Thomas the wine? I’ve been buying Thomas every single year, no exceptions, since '04. I agree there is bottle variation and I have had some that were strangely dilute and lacking flavor. But I have never had one that had off-odors.
Flawed bottles are par for the Thomas course. The highs can put them near the top of the OR heap. On average, they’re on par with a fairly large group of producers that I consider to be the “usual suspects”. You’ll also encounter appreciably more duds. John Thomas is eccentric, fairly reclusive and runs a small artisan operation. You pay your money, take the good with the bad and hope the bad bottles aren’t predominant. I don’t believe for a moment that John bottles or sells wines that are flawed from the start. You place your bets and take your chances.
Mitch, like you, I also have a continuous vertical from 2004 - 2016. Greg Malcolm may have tasted every bottling he’s ever sold. I’ve missed a couple. I have encountered two bottles with off-odors (cabbage spectrum). It happens.
I think saying “par for the course” is overstating things. As I said before, there is bottle variation. I agree that it is higher than most top notch well regarded wineries by maybe something on the order of an additional 5%.
I have talked to Mr. Thomas three times that I recall on the phone and he did not sound the least bit eccentric. We have had an account or two of people on this Board having the privilege to meet him at the winery and walk the vineyard and “eccentric and reclusive” did not come close to the impression he reportedly gave. Don’t get me wrong-I have read the same reports but that does not make them true. I think there are some-no, unfortunately I know there are some, who think that describing a winemaker as “eccentric and reclusive” lends a positive sense of mystery and magic to what they do. Further, eccentricity is in no short supply in the winemaking business. John Paul of Cameron and Doug Nalle come to mind as love-able eccentrics. Have you ever met Peter Cargasacchi? Double-love-able eccentric. But wait, we are talking about pettilance in wine and not petulance in people, aren’t we. So what does eccentricity/reclusivity have to do with the topic at hand in the first place???
Mitch, my main point is mostly that Thomas is a small…let’s call it “niche” artisan producer. I’m not sure I know any small producers with long track records (making wines I prefer) who aren’t “eccentric”. I mentioned “fairly reclusive” because it’s a fair description. Try scheduling an appointment for a visit.
You’re not getting high production assembly line QA/QC here. To expect it would be unrealistic. And if the wines were all spit & polish, they’d be appreciably less interesting with fewer high points…which I guess is also kind of my point.
Slight thread drift as I have yet to crack a 2013 nor do I have the breadth of experience with Thomas wines as Greg, Mitch and Richard. But as someone who had an appointment at Thomas a few weeks ago and met the “eccentric and reclusive” John Thomas, I can report that he is none of those things despite the rumors. I found him very warm, affable and open, so much so that he preemptively answered almost all my questions during the course of our 1.5 hr appt. It was a great visit and reminded me much more of an old world wine appt than anything I’ve experienced in the US.
The reality is he is a one-man band who values his privacy and free time. Much like John Paul, he seems to prefer a model that minimizes consumer interaction to sell wine (admittedly JP does wine dinners and some trade events, but very rarely welcomes visitors to the winery), although JT has to deal with shipping and logistics Qs from his direct customers via phone or email. The freedom to focus primarily on production seemed to me a primary driver as to why he chose the 4 acre, one-man show business model. I’m sure many winemakers would love to have that model. I probably would if I chose winemaking as a career.
My only concern about Thomas the winery, of which I dare not ask JT, is what happens if/when he decides to move on from winemaking. Hopefully an entrepreneurial, younger winemaker could step up when that time comes.
Gentlemen…“reclusive” does not mean “antisocial”. It does not mean “socially inept”. It means (Merriam Webster definition): “seeking solitude”…i.e: privacy. Which sounds exactly as Scott describes and consistent with other encounters. How many OR wine producers with similar years of experience have not participated in IPNC (have zero interest), don’t offer wines for professional review and don’t hold/attend public tasting events?
“Eccentric” means “unconventional and slightly strange”. Would you describe a winemaker who designs, welds, builds and maintains his own winemaking equipment… on his own, from scratch…as “unconventional”? I have no doubt there are other examples. It might be rumor, but my understanding is that he personally planted his entire vineyard.
“If you’d like to pass on ordering this year but wish to remain on the mailing list for future vintages, please enclose a loincloth-clad photo (knife between teeth optional) in the return envelope.”
Personally, I see eccentric and fairly reclusive as interesting character traits and in John’s case…a positive. Others, apparently not.
Fair enough on the reclusive comment, but wanted to clarify my experience as, regardless of actual meaning, some interpret reclusive and eccentric as odd/weird in a bad way (Howard Hughes-like!). While his operation may be unconventional, in a positive way, he actually reminded me of a few other Oregon winemakers I’ve met (again, in a positive way).