2001 E. Guigal Côte-Rôtie La Landonne - France, Rhône, Northern Rhône, Côte-Rôtie (1/13/2023)
While the wine is very drinkable, and the fruit seems to be gorgeous, I seem to be overwhelmed by the perception of new oak, or raw/grainy oak. I seem to be in the minority as many trusted pallets really liked this wine. And I do not think it’s flawed. Maybe just on some cellular level, I’m in the minority, and I get an in your face overt, grainy, new oak that is off-putting. It is a very well stored bottle that I had for ages.
This general Guigal bashing is nonsense (imo) … there are so many fine wines and vintages … one may not like them but usually the oak integrates well …
However I’ve never been a fan of the 2001 vintage in Cote-Rotie, generally, and Jamet, Rostaing, Barge, Ogier … and Guigal … all were lacking charme and showed more structure ( acidity and tannins combined) than sweet fruit, no good sign …
ok, it’s been a while since I had a 2001 LaLa, but 2000 La Turque was outstanding last fall … so for me more a general vintage problem …
We have been through this a few times. It is not bashing. It is honest personal subjective opinions.
It does not matter what other think, or how many points they got from some reviewer. Taste is subjective. There is no wrong or right.
And as there is a lot of people on this board that seem to prefer less oak dominated styles i don’t get why you are suprised?
I had a full 1998 LaLa set that i did like (a 1995 i didn’t). But i certainly understand why it is a style some people just don’t feel is very attractive.
Lingering oak presence, in general, with the La Las I’ve had. This is not bashing, just as some of the others who had offered their assessment here. Certainly didn’t find their opinions nonsense, either.
Honest personal opinion is always ok, but sometimes I feel it’s kind of an attitude here (not to say politics) to be against Guigal (or Chapoutier, or whomever who uses oak) in general …
I could have an easier life here swimming with this flow or simply shutting up … but I prefer it differently …
When a bottle is not good … it’s not good … (this bottle simply might have been …)
and as I said the vintage 2001 never was my favorite … but David above liked the LT 01, I also liked the 98 Guigals more … also at young age.
Yes I think the 2001s will improve for another 5+years, or at least integrate the oak completely … I had a great LM 1987 … last year without any hint of new oak, just a deep seamless complex textbook Cote-Rotie …
My bottle was at a point where I would worry about losing more fruit if I waited much longer. I would drink in the next couple of years for optimal results.
Note that I do not find my recommendation to be at odds with Gerhard’s, as bottles that never go too far from home will often show younger.
I double decanted just prior to leaving for the restaurant. It was about 90 minutes later when we actually started drinking it. That seemed about right.
I just think we are a larger group of people here who prefer a different style. Some of us more vocal than others maybe (). On another forum they might “bash” Levet, who is a darling here .
Gerhard,
I’m not bashing Guigal or Chapoutier. They have a large audience of wine drinkers who love their wines. In my opinion Syrah, like Nebbiolo, does not handle oak well. I don’t like overtly oaky Nebbiolo or Syrah, no matter who makes them.
Gerhard, there’s no right or wrong, as I implied I believe. What I was trying to stress is that I believe I’m in the minority, and that there are many pallets who I trust and would drink wines on their recommendation that like this wine is it that is odd to me, or maybe very interesting. It’s an exercise, not bashing, to talk about a wine that many love but I do not. Plus it’s a tasting note, a reference point.
June 18, 2009 - This was absolutely stunning. I was immediately overwhelmed by aromas of eucalyptus and menthol. Then black olives, and dried aromatic bushes, dry black fruit and spices, and later even a whiff of chocolate cream pie and creme brule. The wine had a natural hazy red color. In the mouth the wine just enveloped- not exploded- to cover and coat all surfaces with first tart ripe cherry and blackberry. Then it got sweet, naturally sweet, and balanced and came through with a bright red fruit attack that just left me wanting more. It was awesome with an elk chop, olives, aged parmesan cheese, and chocolate gelato. Once again, this wine was pure, balanced, and mature, aged excellence. In cold damp cellars this wine will last for ten or more years.
I brought this bottle to Pao at Faena in Miami. What a great experience. This wine was dark, but clear. It exuded pretty aromas and perceptions of pepper and spice, and distinct grilled bacon and bacon fat, and a very pretty wild black cherry. There were also perceptions of brined olives, and aromatic shrubs/sage. Man did it drink nicely. Dark red cherry, spice, old and new tobacco, fruit wood, black olive, sandalwood, and a lovely earth/humus kicker.
Well, following this logic … is it a “democratic vote” who makes the better wine? The larger the group?
(I don´t take this totally serious … )
If you make a poll in the whole US who makes the better music, Mozart or Springsteen, who´ll win? (BTW: I like Springsteen) … you can also take Willie Nelson or Johnny Cash …
is this simply a question of opinion? … of personal taste?
(I asked “the better music” … not which is loved most …)
What I will never understand: why do many people think when they love something they have to hate (bash) the opposite? Really no need to …
Have I ever bashed Levet? Certainly not …
(and I do not say everybody here is bashing someone …)
). On another forum they might “bash” Levet, who is a darling here 
.