2008 Kongsgaard Chardonnay- USA, California, Napa Valley (12/1/2012) Cellar Raid (Extra Space, Singapore): Decent enough I guess, certainly well-made, but I was not a fan. This bottle had a very sweet, tropical nose, with nutty oak notes floating amongst lots of pineapple and sweet melon aromas, and then dried longan with a touch of candy and flower and spice to them. Pretty attractive, but a bit too in-your-face for me. I found the palate to be rather sweet as well, with fleshy, almost confected flavours of pineapples and rock melons couched in a good of sour-plummish acidity. This certainly had lots of depth, with a rich, mouth-coating texture. It was balanced enough though, just coming out a bit on the big side for me. The finish was not entirely pleasing either, with candied fruit and sweet oak swirling around with some glycerol. All in all, not a bad Chardonnay, but not a great one. I have a feeling it would have been much better a year or so after release. (89 pts.)
Interesting reading. I was tempted to try one of their “the Judge” after reading andrea robinsons review naming it the wine of the year (I actually enjoy her work), but due to the price, I didnt purchase a bottle.
We tried one shortly after release and had a similar experience. I’m not a fan of “heavy” chards and it was heavy and disjointed at first. It settled down some after 4 hours open, with much of what you describe, but with less pineapple and candied fruits. I thought it might need 3 to 5 years cellaring to come together, but it is also possible that this is what John wants to accomplish with these wines. One thing I did notice was that every sip seemed to bring on different flavors. I would have filled an entire page with tasting notes on the first glass over the 30 minutes it took to drink it.
Not liking fruit salad Chard (the only kind that gets high scores) is a plus, why obsess? It’s too easy to find unspoofilated Chard from virtually every region at every price point. (Not a Chard drinker myself as I’ve made clear on several occasions but I can appreciate it very occasionally.
Quite right, I tried the 09’ Judge at a retail tasting a couple months back and it was really nice, but then said to myself, “so that’s it?” It’s definitely not in a Burgundian style, there’s a couple more drops of honey/sugar where the extra acid/minerality would’ve been, but there’s still a decent amount and overall I’d give it 92-93+points. But there’s grand Cru Chablis out there for half the price.
Anyway, I was happy to pay the $30 in a nice CA lineup as opposed to spending/wasting $175 on a bottle. With these kind of wines, I definitely want to taste before buying even a single bottle.
The Kongsgaards get monster scores because they are hyper opulent, massive, rich and extracted chards that occasionally have some underlying cut. That’s the deal. They’re monsters. Same reason that Peter Michael’s chards repeatedly get huge scores. Layered complexity…but of the nutty, heavy tropical fruit, vanilla cream, etc. Robert’s statement of “there’s grand Cru Chablis out there for half the price” perfectly embodies the disconnect between many/most of this board’s members and the monster hunters that chase 97 point chards from Napa. I’ve had three or four vintages of the Kongsgaard, and there is certainly a level of complexity and intensity that puts it on the Peter Michael level…but that’s a style that is limited in appeal to all but the “hedonist” chasers.
I was guilty of lauding some earlier vintages of both this and the Judge. Once the over-oaked/over-made aversion hit I sold a ton of bottles. I think it is pretty much a love 'em or hate 'em scenario.
