Over sweet Pinot Noirs (served blind)

2005 Beauregard Vineyards Pinot Noir Trout Gulch Vineyard - USA, California, San Francisco Bay, Santa Cruz Mountains (2/28/2019)
Served blind, this was completely dominated by a jarring sweetness on the palate. It was so sweet that it actually made me recoil from tasting it. It gave the impression of being picked at an extremely ripe level and then watered back to create some sort of wine-like beverage. Thankfully the other Beauregard Pinot served in the same blind flight was less sweet (only in comparison!), but the distinct palate sweetness seems to be a thing for this producer’s Pinot Noirs. I’ll stay away.

2014 Beauregard Vineyards Pinot Noir Coast Grade Vineyard - USA, California, San Francisco Bay, Ben Lomond Mountain (2/28/2019)
Served blind, and easily recognizable as Pinot Noir, this had some elegance, as well as good palate balance. My one concern was a notable palate sweetness that came dangerously close to candied. It didn’t fit with how the rest of the wine expressed itself. Maybe it’s just in an odd spot, but the more I drank of this, the more the sweetness stood out, and dominated the wine. Judgement reserved for this one.

Overall the 2014 was well served by being second in the flight, as the 2005 was horrific. I doubt my reaction would have been as favorable if I had tasted it first.

Trout Gulch is the source of some really lean, acidic, structured wines. Sweetness would be the last thing I would expect from there. Can Santa Cruz Mountian fruit even get ripe enough to get watered back?

Once the wine was revealed I wondered the same thing!

I was astounded that such a wine could be made from that site.

By the way, I was not the only one who called the Trout Gulch as unpleasantly sweet. Half the group rated it as undrinkable.

Bad bottle ? Wine too old?

‘15 too old?

2005

Sure didn’t seem “old.” Just seemed bad.

2012 Harrington Coast Grade has demonstrated how good this site can be.

I always thought of Ben Lomond in the Santa Cruz Mountains…perhaps the San Andreas Fault moved it bayside?

I wonder if the difference in the two is due to a change in style over the decade in between.

I’m curious what the marked alcohols were. That might give you a clue as to the ripeness level, though, as you said, it could have been watered back.

2005 seems like ancient history in California pinot making, doesn’t it?

It’s an AVA in the Santa Cruz Mountains. I assume the SF Bay designation is some CellarTracker regional category.

I did not enter the AVA/location info. That was just from copying a different vintage of the same wine in Cellar Tracker.

ahHA…Plagiarism will get you no where, my son!

Have you had this producer’s wines in the past? Interesting notes indeed.

2005 was certainly ‘a long time ago’ in the world of PN here in CA. I did a 2006 tasting a few months back where I brought a couple of KB’s and someone else brought a local PN from a respected producer. The KB’s were ‘ripe’ as one might expect, but the local producers’s were just as much so. 2005-7 were certainly years where many many pinots were made in that style - perhaps not by the likes of WS or ABC, but certainly by many others.

Cheers

And to think of the Olde World, 2005 is hard as nails in Burgundy

Yep, it’s not that long ago - but ‘general styles’ as it pertains to PN have changed a lot in CA since then. And not just PN - 2005 was a year that enabled folks to ripen stuff as long as they wanted as there was no adverse weather challenges to deal with an we had a nearly ideal winter and spring . . .

Cheers.

We also had two Syrahs that were both quite nice. Similar vintages.

It is true that 2001 to 2006 was the peak period pushing the limits on ripeness in California Pinot Noir.

I know nothing about this producer. It’s interesting to see how huge of a difference harvest time makes, though.

What was the ABV on the labels?