I love that a 1998 Scherrer OMV Zinfandel was so impressive among some stiff competition. To me, they are such interesting wines and I enjoy them at all phases of their evolution. I had a 2013 last night.
I agree. I’m also a fan of his cabernet and certain of his pinots. Wish they were easier to come by on the east coast.
I think they ship to NY/NJ.
I did not schlep my real camera, and it was a tight fit so I had to leave out the corked bottles and two others, but here’s the lineup.
I think there was debate on whether the Copain was corked. I did not find it so. My favorite flight as a whole was the Sangiovese, which I thought were Sangiovese/Cabernet blends. My favorite single wine was the Bera 2000 Moscato bianchdùdùi because I love the bit of light sherry flavor adding complexity to wine. Rating Moscato as WOTN is a first for me. The Sandeman was also outstanding.
…wasn’t 1998 supposed to be a ‘weak’ vintage in CA? 
Jay, thanks for not being afraid.
F
I’ve heard the same thing. You obviously aren’t doing it right. ![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
Jay, at this point I’ll never get it right.
F
I served this same group (I do not know if Jay was at that dinner) a blind flight about 8 years ago with 1998 Araujo, 1998 Opus and 1999 [oops, typo, previously indicated 1991] Arrowwood Special Reserve to test the hypothesis that bad years make bad wine. The vote for WOTF was Opus 6, Araujo 5, Arrowwood 0. I did not vote because I knew which was which, but I slightly preferred the Araujo and both it and the Opus were outstanding with 12 years of age. The Arrowwood, not a bad wine from a better vintage, sucked in comparison.
Wouldn’t the real test have been 1991 Monte Bello? 
First, it was a typo. I should have said 1999 Arrowwood. The point was to get the ages about the same. As to 1991 Mone Bello, you miss the point, The idea was to compare two wines with supposed great terroir and a great pedigree, but from a bad vintage, and a wine with a much lesser reputation, but still well made, from a better vintage.
I didn’t miss the point. But it’s not surprising either.
In any case haven’t you heard? There are no more shitty vintages!
I agree…'99 is probably my single favorite Tuscan vintage. They have not only aged well, but have been consistently pleasurable since release.
Regarding the Fontalloro, I just had a delicious '94 the other night…I’m in the minority, but I’ve had great bottles of Felsina CCR, Fontalloro and Flaccianello, but NEVER a great bottle of Rancia. It makes no sense, as by all accounts Rancia should be on a par with, or better than Fontalloro (with the latter having a reputation of being a bit more modern/international in style). However, I just haven’t ever experienced an epiphany with Rancia. With every bottle opened, the apologists always say it “needs more time”. But if the '94, '95 and '99 Rancia (or even the '01) aren’t ready today, I’m missing something…
At least I’m not the only one. I stopped buying Rancia a long time ago.
My recollection is I’m in the same boat. I do have a few in the cellar still to test this further. Including ‘99.