Bulkin Is WRONG...1997 Harlan Estate Red Wine

WINE TALK
1

From an RMP article on a complete vertical tasting of Harlan:

"(100pts) I have never had a doubt about the 1997. Yet, I have read controversial comments about it, saying it tastes like Amarone, is overripe, volatile, with low acidity, etc., etc. These are simply false."

2

Did you post your notes in Cellatracker headbang

3

Simply false, people.

Simply false.

4

It was nice. I liked it.

5

Taking this comment at face value, he is essentially telling his paying members of TWA that they are wrong if their opinion varies from his on a wine. Amazing customer service and quite a nice way to treat your subscribers.

6

They don’t know, Bill.

He does.

‘You taste prunes? No you don’t! Cassis? There’s no cassis in there!’

7

Todd, all BS aside…I know several people that have had this wine specifically and I trust their collective knowledge as they drink a BUNCH of high end Napa Cabs, and the bottle variation on this wine is amazing. If people that have had it from mag and loved it, turn around and pour a 750 out, how does RMP account for that being false?

Yet another sign that he is the friend of the winemaker and not the consumer now. Just look at how many Harlans scored 100 pts in that article.

8

Yeah, it’s amazing to even consider because ‘taste’ is NOT an absolute - it’s completely subjective as it is always a brain’s interpretation of a sensory experience.

Bottle variation is a whole new ballgame, but I do wonder in this case if he was more adamant about the statement because it is Harlan…has he corrected every other ‘wrong’ tasting note on every bottle of wine?

9

I have been fortunate to have tried this wine twice, both times with folks that have tried it on multiple occassions . . .

The first time I tried it, it was stunning! No VA, no overripe flavors . . . . just delicious.

The second time, the VA was very present - too much for me to enjoy . . .

So just like with ALL wines, YMMV . . . .

And remember, we can ALL point to occassions where our pallates did NOT match those of ‘x’ critic -from Meadows to Laube to RMP to . . . .

Just another viewpoint this berserker morning!

Cheers!

10

Larry, thanks for you thoughts and impressions on two different tastings of the wine.

11

Bill,

No worries . . . just goes to show that any reviewer can be right/wrong at ANY time . . .

Reminds me when I went toe to toe with RMP about the 03 Pegau - the bottle I had was FULL of brett - so much so that me and the other 5 winemakers on site that night tried it and all poured out glasses . . . Now if I had the wine at the Chateau, or under perfect storage conditions, where the brett did not have a chance to bloom, my results would have been different . . .

Cheers!

12

I haven’t had the '97 Harlan in several years but I’ve had more than one bottle that definitely had VA. Definite variation to the wine with probably 4 or 5 out of the 6 or 7 bottles I’ve drank showing VA.
Additionally, I don’t see any similarities between '97 Harlan and '59, '61 or '89 Haut Brion.

13

I’ve included my note from a complete Harlan vertical arranged a few years ago by Brad England and Greg Gregory with many BB posters in attendance. Both bottles of 1997 Harlan were marred by VA on the nose. Without the VA I’m confident these would have rated very highly as they tasted excellent. This experience clearly places me in the “simply false” category.

  • 1997 Harlan Estate - USA, California, Napa Valley (10/14/2006)
    Harlan Estates Vertical w/ Brad England and Greg Gregory (WA Frost, St Paul, MN): Beautiful, viscous purple red color. An expressive nose of black cherry liquor that is unfortunately dominated by the smell of wet paint. Others called it marzipan, but to me it smelled like a freshly painted room. I tried to focus on the other aromas emerging from the glass, but found the wet paint smell too difficult to overcome. As Scott said – this is a flawed wine. None of this carried through to the taste, which was very nice. The fruit was big and concentrated and tasted a little hot. I wouldn’t call it port like though. Just beautiful concentrated fruit. The finish was long and complex. A new glass was poured from a fresh bottle for comparison, and was slightly better. However, the wet paint smell was still present in the second glass. Others marked this as a flawed wine, but since two bottles were similar I’m going to go ahead and score it 90 using Parker’s system (5, 10, 18, 7 = 90). (90 pts.)
14

I tend not to be a RP or WA basher on the boards, but what struck me as ridiculous was his “unable to think outside the box” comment. Seems as if RP should take a look in the mirror.

15

But how many critics tell those that disagree with them that their opinions are “simply false” or that they are “unable to think outside the box”?

16

Steve, it’s not ‘disagreeing’, it’s just wrong. They can’t ‘disagree’ with an opinion if they aren’t allowed to have one.

17

Steve et al,

Can’t speak for Parker or others, but it seems to me that oftentimes they must be ‘speaking’ to those that bash the wines for reasons other than bottle variation . . .

Also, just remember that RMP and others are just being their subjective bests - and his stating things like he states are no different, IMHO, than giving a wine 80 points or 100 points . . . he or she is simply ‘taking a stand’ . . .

Just another divergent viewpoing this morning!!!

Cheers!

18

Well,at least one…

JD

19

What gets me here is how little critics seem to care about or even acknowledge that bottle variation due to microbial instability is part of the equation. Some don’t even seem to grasp the concept that there is bottle variation, especially in older wines with imperfect provenance. It’s like some critics taste a barrel sample, and think that’s the whole story. It’s never occurred to certain critics that a high pH combined with residual sugar, high extract, oak carbs and bottling without sterile filtration just might lead to trouble down the road.

Fortunately, there’s cellar tracker. Critics seem more interested in fellating their chosen favorites, but when a large cross section of experienced drinkers notes a pattern, that’s usually a sign something is amiss.

20

False, obviously.