This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

A defense for 'hedonistic' Napa Cabernets?

I had the great pleasure to attend a blind tasting of 36 Napa Cabernets yesterday in D.C..  I consider myself very fortunate to be in a position to attend events like this even though I'm relatively new to the industry.  I also consider myself very lucky to have tried some truly phenomenal wines over the past three years.  Tasting 36 wines is not uncommon for any given day at my shop, tasting 36 cabs turns into a bit of a challenge, and tasting 36 high end Napa Cabs becomes borderline cruel and unusual.  

As we neared the final dozen of the line-up yesterday I became increasingly frustrated with the variety and lack of individuality of the wines.  I'm not a big California Cab drinker typically but I try not to be biased based on my own personal tastes.  I'd really like to hear from anyone that has tasted older vintages of these wines, or sells them on their restaurant menu or who has any opinions on this particular formula and the breadth of style that can be achieved or how we have gotten here.  They were wonderful wines without question but they provided, to me, so little character or depth or complexity beyond rich dark fruit, a lot of savory soy quality, obvious new oak, and an incredibly ripe, rich quality on the palette.  I also know that none of these wines should be consumed at this age, some of them have yet to even be released.  But I know plenty of customers both in retail and at restaurants who would drink them exactly as they are, and for the price, I would be disappointed with the lack of expression in drinking these. 

Of the 12 - all were over 14.5% alcohol, 10 were 100% cabernet, 8 (that indicated oak usage) were over 20 months in oak, 6 of those indicated either new or 100% new, and 9 were from the Napa Valley AVA.

The final 12 wines were:

2012 Behrens Family 'Crowley Vineyard'

2013 Signorello 'Padrone'

2005 Axios (the only wine of the 36 older than 2012 which provided a much needed contract to the other wines as well as its 2012 example)

2014 Tuck Beckstoffer 'Mockingbird Red'

2015 Revana Estate

2012 The Mascot

2014 Vineyard 7&8 Estate

2014 Peter Michaels 'Les Pavots' (they did include a few signature Cabernets from outside of Napa)

2014 Lail 'J. Daniel Cuvee'

2013 Bond 'Quella' (one of the only wines that presented a more complex nose - cassis, graphite, tobacco and cigar box in addition to the usual dark fruits, vanilla and baking spice)

2013 Bond 'St. Eden'

2014 Harlan Estate

I'm not accusing these wines of anything or claiming that there is an undeserved hype around them,  I simply don't see the appeal or understand how we can provide so many options, at such a high price tier, of wines made in a wildly similar fashion from grapes in the 99th percentile of quality.  I'm really curious to hear thoughts from the community.