Right now, in terms of what is available in wine shops, 2003 for France though the Rhone (Chateauneuf Du Pape especially), did better than Bordeaux and Burgundy, because of the incredibley hot summer they had. The heat made the Bordeaux wines end up in a jammy, California syle, if that is what you like. Burgundy’s Pinot Noir really doesn’t usually stand up as well to that much heat. Staying in France, ’95 and ’96 were great years for Champagne and are the years you are most likely to see on the shelves right now. Nothing on the market is better than the outsanding 1999 and 2001 vintages for Brunello. California and Australia tend to have much less variation from year to year, since their weather is much more consistant, though I would avoid 2000 for California; they had a cool season that didn’t allow for full ripening. Other than Champagne, the only white wines for which vintage matters (to me, anyway) is Montrachet (2002 is what you want most) and Sauternes (2001- amazingly good).
I’m speaking of 2003 vintage in France.The ’03 harvest has been the best of the last 5 yrs.True there have been a few good 2000 vintages, but overall, the ’03 harvest is better.Some French appellations: Bordeaux, St Emilion, Cotes du Rhone,St Estephe & even Languedoc.
ahi_tuna_extra_rare // Apr 16, 2011 at 3:02 pm
Right now, in terms of what is available in wine shops, 2003 for France though the Rhone (Chateauneuf Du Pape especially), did better than Bordeaux and Burgundy, because of the incredibley hot summer they had. The heat made the Bordeaux wines end up in a jammy, California syle, if that is what you like. Burgundy’s Pinot Noir really doesn’t usually stand up as well to that much heat. Staying in France, ’95 and ’96 were great years for Champagne and are the years you are most likely to see on the shelves right now. Nothing on the market is better than the outsanding 1999 and 2001 vintages for Brunello. California and Australia tend to have much less variation from year to year, since their weather is much more consistant, though I would avoid 2000 for California; they had a cool season that didn’t allow for full ripening. Other than Champagne, the only white wines for which vintage matters (to me, anyway) is Montrachet (2002 is what you want most) and Sauternes (2001- amazingly good).
amace020 // Apr 16, 2011 at 3:02 pm
2005
Planet Earth
Ford // Apr 16, 2011 at 3:02 pm
1988, France, 1986 Italy, both years are great and any resgion was good. Also 1993, was good, incuding the Spanish wines
ssavage23 // Apr 16, 2011 at 3:02 pm
Any 96 cabernet california you can get your hands on buy it asap
2000 Pouilly Fusse (white)
Opus one red blend 2000 – 2003 (expensive but totally worth it)
Conundrum – great blended white that brings out the flavor of the food you are eating…. its the bomb
frith25 // Apr 16, 2011 at 3:02 pm
A good vintage ? how about right now !
I’m speaking of 2003 vintage in France.The ’03 harvest has been the best of the last 5 yrs.True there have been a few good 2000 vintages, but overall, the ’03 harvest is better.Some French appellations: Bordeaux, St Emilion, Cotes du Rhone,St Estephe & even Languedoc.
eddy g // Apr 16, 2011 at 3:02 pm
1937 1939 France Chateu Latour
jen // Apr 16, 2011 at 3:02 pm
96 california cabernet
yelly // Apr 16, 2011 at 3:02 pm
any and all