I haven’t had the 2016, but have tried the 2014. It wasn’t thin or herbaceous, but rather it was forward and a bit extracted with a little more oak than it needs. Did have some tobacco, but that doesn’t change the overall assessment. Okay at the price I paid ($20).
-Al
Sounds like a good idea, you’ll have fun - but watch out - RA will nab your suitcase and fill it with bottles of Cuvée Jean Gautreau!
Heads up Neil, the current TW coupon is for 6 bottles. The online/in-store code is 2702.
James
Thanks, I noticed that!
Typo in your original comment Neal? Or you prefer 8 bottle minimum?
No, I said I have no particular use of an 8 bottle deal.
I am mortified by this note. I just came around to try a second bottle, it’s marred by the overt presence of oak. So odd, as according to everything that I have read, only 15%-25% new oak is used.
This second bottle tastes nothing like what I describe above, or my recollection of this wine. This is oaky, drying fruit and reminiscent of a Starbucks roasted black coffee with a healthy dollop of cream. You would think that I would like this from the Larry Coffee Thread debacle, but not for my wine.
(80 pts.)
Wow - what an unpleasant surprise! Sorry to read that.
Bummer.
You’re not the first to experience too much oak in a wine that’s seen little or none of it. Varying sensitivities can explain some cases, though not here - same taster, same wine, different result 3 years later. Something else masquerading as oak that showed up over time?
Who knows, the exuberance of the fresh fruit of this vintage masking some of the oak? It’s definitely matured in oak, unlike some of the examples in that article. Perhaps as the fruit has receded - note that made a “drying” comment - exposed more of the oak? Here it was palpable. I know this estate produces a lot of wine, any chance some lots saw more oak than others? That could explain the variances between bottles. And of course, in my post-2x Covid universe, perhaps some things are just difference. All I know is that I did not like this bottle, it got poured down the sink.
Simplest explanation for your bottle is that the oak outlasted the fruit. Fifteen to 25% new oak is not that much. Maybe says something about the (lack of) fruit?
I mean, you did mention this in your OP which I found a little odd…
Hmmm. Good point.
You made me open one up last nite and mine was nothing like you described. Are your sure the Mrs didn’t switch bottles on you? 
Lol. I could be off my rocker for all I know.
But, check this recent CT notes:
Blockquote WILLI VINOTTI WROTE:82 points
December 29, 2020 - This wine is totally massacred by the oak. The decent floral haut medoc notes are just blown away by the vain effort to elevate this wine to a category it just is not at home in. Overpriced at this level of raw oakiness.
I tasted this during the primeurs back in 2017, and liked it, but I liked it less by the time it was in bottle at the end of 2018 (ahhh, pre-Covid times, when it was easy to travel and taste…). I never got any excessive oak off it, but I did think tasting it in 2018 it seemed a little dried out and excessively tannic. It doesn’t see any more new oak than most in the region, as the élevage utilises the usual 1/3 each new/second-fill/third-fill barrels. In the end it’s not one I would rush to buy - not when there are so many good value 2016s out there.