The 2013s run from $39 to $45.
I’ve been buying these wines since at least 2004 and have never had a bad bottle, much less multiple bad wines in a single vintage. To the contrary, they are consistently excellent. I let them age awhile and currently am working through the 2010s. I’ve got cases of the 2011s, 2012s, and 2013s waiting, and have no doubt whatsoever that they will be fabulous. No matter how much one may dislike the style (lighter, red fruited, aromatic), a review like Parker’s is simply incomprehensible. The lowest posted score of any wine reviewed in the issue? Puh-leeze.
My sentiments exactly!!!
I was really disappointed that they stopped making Zin. I believe '07 was the last year and talk about a great zin experience without the weight.
This Fall, when they release their 2014s, there will be a chardonnay in the mix.
Can’t wait for the chardonnay. Maybe these RP scores will make it easier to get since someone apparently bought the entire barrel of the 2013.
Also, the price is very suspect. I dont have an ERP subscription, but why list an $85 price? Can anyone take a screenshot/photo? I also find it odd that RP would be rating a magnum vs the 750 (which would likely be more “ready to go” upon review)
Either way, these scores reek of some kind of agenda.
Again, this is why RP and IMO “scores” are quickly becoming irrelevant. Especially when it comes to pinot or chardonnay. His 1-100 scale clearly only rewards concentration in wines, and not what pinot is all about.
My guess is that RP shits all over most CA pinot in order to keep the market’s focus on the $150+ bottles of cabernet that need to be sold from Napa. Im trends like IPOB and other youthful wine movements scare him and the industry as a whole.
/rant
I think I’ll open a 2009 Wesmar today and give it a spin. I will report back with a TN.
I noticed this and after reading the note, not just the 58 asked if they meant 88, which indeed it was and has been changed according to LPB.
I’ll be buying a selection to decide for myself as the press has me interested vs. alienated.
Would someone mind posting the tasting notes on some of these? This might give me and others insights into why they were scored so low.
When Parker scored my wines in the low 80’s (and lower) back with my 07 vintage, he gave some ‘insight’ in his notes . . . and the same can be said when Jeb reviewed one of my later vintages . . .
Cheers
Haven’t had WesMar in a few years, but we’re going to taste through the 2012’s in a week or so at our bar. A low RP Pinot score likely means I’ll love them.
I’ve never tried a Wesmar before, but after this thread, I am adding them to the list of wineries I plan to visit when I go to sonoma this summer.
Just brought some 05s home from the locker. Will report back.
I haven’t bought recently based on general wine cutbacks but I also was less fond of some of the vineyards they added. Still a great producer. Man that Zin they made was darn tasty too.
Jason
We poured the 2012’s last week, Sonoma Coast and RRV and they were very good, similar to other vintages I’ve had. I think most (myself included) preferred the Sonoma over RRV by a slight margin.
-
2007 WesMar Pinot Noir Oehlman Vineyard - USA, California, Sonoma County, Russian River Valley (4/10/2016)
Blind. Guessed Pinot but struggled with aged California or burgundy. The nose really screams burg but the fruit says California. I decided older Santa Cruz or Anderson Valley because of the balance of tart red fruit.
What? Russian River? Well done, this is an excellent. Not overblown highly concentrated. Elegant.
Posted from CellarTracker