I’ve had the 2002 Dominus a couple of times. It’s certainly not a candidate for perfection in my book, but it is really pretty damn good. Shocking that he’d say a Dominus can age well, since that’s their MO, even in lush vintages like 2002. All that aside, 2002s can age 10 years. I’d be horrified if any 14.5% Napa cab that’s been sitting in new oak for 24 months soaking up big tannins couldn’t survive a mere decade just because it had big fruit.
Then again, 1997 happened, so what the hell do I know.
Count this as a Parker bash I guess, but I don’t find these kind of pronouncements very helpful. Uncle Bob likes to paint with a very broad brush and then use small sample sizes as his evidence.
confuse me as well…i don’t follow cabernet closely…but i assume that the better estates should just be finished with baby fat at 10 years…and should continue to be great for another 2 decades…
and to his actual tweet…are there a lot of people that are actually saying these won’t age?
In 2002, maybe it was a belief early on. Always compared to 2001 and much fatter/plusher/redder in style, but they have come a long way. 2003s have come twice as far.
I always find the 2001 versus 2002 discussions very interesting. My own wine shows super elegance with the 2001, and huge tannin/baby fat and far less approach-ability early on with the 2002. But they were barreled very differently, and I had some changes I made to the vineyard, so I continue to not be in synch with many of the vintage reports. It just gives me pause and makes me realize that it is not always the vintage - it is how the vintage is treated. If there is a template in place, cool. But if there is not (as with mine), it certainly makes an interesting study.
I wish I had cases and cases of my 2001. Right now not so sad about not having cases and cases of 2002.
I’ve had the recent pleasure of consuming a plethora of old Napa from the 70s, 80s and early 90s from all price points and brand hype - and virtually all of them have been very nice at a minimum.
2002 produced a lot of OTT wines - but it pales in comparison to what’s been released since. 2002 is already 10 years old - and they are drinking fine - but I fear they will not continue to age as gracefully as their predecessors.
Another area in which I have little expertise, but my sense of the CA cab scene is that while there are any number of wines built for the long haul, the more predominant style is meant to be appreciated earlier rather than later. I would think 10 years is well-aged for this style of wine.
I think the comments were made in response to criticism on release that the 2002s were OTT and wouldn’t age well. I don’t buy a lot of Cabs these days so I’m out of the loop a little. I do remember some similar discussions going on 10-15 years ago with some of the early 90s wines. Drank a bottle of 1994 Dalla Valle Napa last week that was excellent.