Love the 01, very disappointed in the 98. The 98 is mostly grenache and doesn’t excite me - too bad as it held so much promise when it came out.
A contrasting view, I’ve had the 1989 and 1990 regular and Hommage together at least four times and have never failed to prefer the regulars to the Hommages. These tastings included pretty much every Châteauneuf of note from 1989 and 1990 and I’ve never found the Hommages to be any more than middle of the pack for my taste. The 1990 Brunel Centennaire was consistently a star, as were the 1989 and 1990 Rayas (even though three of the four years the 1990 Rayas was corked), and I also preferred most of the Bonneau cuvées to the Hommages. The Hommages were impressive but not nearly as fun or interesting as were the regular Beaucastels.
Mouvedre is not everyone’s cup of tea.
Peter - interesting. Wouldn’t expect that much difference in 6 months but I suppose at 18 years there can be some variation. I do prefer the 2001 to the 2000.
Barry - the 1998 was excellent to my taste young but didn’t develop the level of complexity I was hoping for as it aged. Haven’t had one in a long time.
Mike - I like Beaucastel in part I think because of the presumably relatively high percentage of Mourvèdre. I’ve never had the regular and Hommage side by side. The 1989 was the only Hommage I’ve ever had. Non-blind from magnum in a party atmosphere with knowledge of the higher Mourvèdre percentage, I can’t claim my experience with it was anything close to objective, but it did knock my socks off.
Thank you for the note, Kevin. Most appreciated. Might be a Super Bowl wine.