Montelena took there wines on tour across the US after the TCA fuss, ostensibly to show that they were clean. I was a club member at the time, and caught up with them in Philly. Free. Estate cab as well as whatever they called their entry level cab at the time, chard, zin and heavy hors d’oeuvres. Fun tasting and the wines, uncorked at the event, were all clean…
Jim was a friend. We would - up until recent years - get together for lunch once a year or so. Many others knew him better, but I was fortunate to know him well. — The movement to wine critic as celebrity didn’t suit Jim well. He was super one-on-one, but he really didn’t like crowds. That was difficult to him, but he persevered. He was an unabashed advocate of twist-off closures (he hated the words "screw cap). – He had been ill for some time, so perhaps it was too young - but I think it might have been a blessing in its own way. Having said that, I was more taken aback and sad than I thought I would have been. He meant a lot to CA wine - and to my growth in the wine world. I’ll miss Jim. -
Adam Lee
Clarice Wine Company
17 Likes
Same with Thomas’ comments. In my earlier years, I was a subscriber and I followed and engaged the scores and his reviews as helpful for those years. I stopped subscribing and found what I liked and learned to turn off with scores. But Jim did a lot to promote the CA wine world and was a great voice for it, at least to me. I will always appreciate him for that effort and ground he broke for us.
1 Like
I won a 6 bottle lot of 2001 Montelena Estate from a K&L auction and 5 of 6 were tainted by TCA. Relatively mild, to the point they were “drinkable.” The one that wasn’t tainted was spectacular. I have no doubt he called that right.
5 Likes
Jim was very sensitive to TCA - and Montelena tested those wines and they all had low levels of taint - so he was not ‘wrong’. Whether someone else could pick it up is a different story . . . and this was not the first time he called it out in a systemic way and he was correct.
Cheers
6 Likes
Yep - the bottles were actually tested at the time so it was not a matter of ‘oh I think they are so they must be’. He was incredibly sensitive to TCA - a blessing and a curse . . .
1 Like
I am pretty sensitive to it also - I get a whiff and whoa. Having said that I shared an 01 about 15 years ago with some solid palates and none of us picked up on it at least in that bottle. He did get some flak for it but not saying it wasn’t a problem for the estate.
I hear you - but he was picking it in VERY slightly TCA’d bottles consistently . . .
And just like many wines, some find it and others don’t . . . but again, in this case, they were actually tested so it was objectively confirmed.
Cheers
1 Like
Professionals can’t do that either.
1 Like
While our palates didn’t often align, Laube was certainly a major figure in California wine. He obviously contributed to its growth and becoming the behemoth it is today. A raised glass to him.
On the Montelena, I have tried the 01. It clearly had low level TCA to me. At the sort of level that has often created arguments at tables I’ve been at where people are perfectly happy to drink corked wine if it isn’t obvious and the label is desirable. Good on Jim for calling it. We’ve seen a quite recent example of a legendary CA winery passing off less that perfect wine as a regular release. We should be thankful for those willing to speak up when industry pressure is most often about ‘sell sell sell’.
6 Likes
They can’t?
Fortunately I’m not a professional, then! 
1 Like
Laube updated that book ten years later, with a second edition in 1999. I thought it was quite good and discussed it here.
What a loss for the California wine community, but as prior commentators suggest, at least he is no longer in discomfort.