Almost a year ago when I concocted my wine tasting plan (which eventually resulted in beginning this blog), I mostly noted various regions or appellations around the world that I wanted to try. I listed only a handful of very specific wines, but for the Santa Cruz Mountain region of California I wrote that I wanted to try the Ridge Monte Bello. I can guarantee you that I never considered the possibility of being invited to a wine blogger’s tasting and tasting a vertical of that very wine.

But that is exactly what happened, as last Friday I was invited to a private tasting at Ridge’s Monte Bello tasting room where I tasted three different Monte Bellos as well as several other fantastic Ridge wines. I’ve come a long way in the last 10 months in my wine education, as well as my collecting. I bought several bottles of Ridge (including a 2006 Monte Bello that I won’t be drinking anytime in the next decade!) last fall, as well as half a case of a special wine Ridge’s winemaker Paul Draper made for the Stanford Wine Program’s 30th anniversary. I had the opportunity to try the 1992 Montebello at my wine club’s holiday party last December. And well, needless to say, I was pretty excited as I wound up the mountain towards the tasting room.

On Thursday we’d had a pretty spectacular rainstorm, and things looked pretty rough around the edges on Monte Bello Road. The rain continued to fall as I went up and up. I hate driving, especially in the rain, on freeways, and mountain roads, but the wine beckoned.

I’ll gloss over the part of the afternoon where I felt a bit intimidated, surrounded as I was by people whose twitter following is more than two digits, who have wineries send them wine samples (samples! I’d be happy if they just sent me a coupon), and skip to the part of the afternoon where I settled in, sipped- and spat most of- the wine, ate delicious cheeses and thought to myself: perhaps I should seriously consider a full-on career change to the wine industry.

This is going to be a long post (!), but here was the afternoon’s lineup:

2009 Estate Chardonnay
A barrel-fermented, American oak aged, full malolactic fermented chardonnay with a creamy nose. Good acidity, very creamy with a pretty full body and- YUM! Outside of the white Burgundies I’ve been tasting lately, the most exciting chardonnays I’ve had are certainly coming from the Santa Cruz mountains. Shame on all the producers that made me shun the grape for years with all that awful over-oaking!

2008 Estate Cabernet Sauvignon
Red fruit on the nose, but soft. Again, good acid and certainly not as heavy as most CA cabs with soft tannins. A simple, and pleasurable, wine.

(At this point in the tasting it began to hail outside, which I recorded in my tasting notes).

2009 Geyserville
Besides the Monte Bello, I’d say Ridge’s specialty is zinfandel heavy “field blends”- I have several of these in my collection. This one was 58% zinfinadel, 16% carignane and 16% petit sirah. I got a little milk chocolate and some red fruit on the nose (I ♥ chocolatey zin). It was really tasty, smooth with raspberry fruit and wasn’t too heavy. I would be happy to drink this wine now, even though it clearly can, and probably should, age.

1999 Geyserville
The exact blend varies each year and this one was 74% zin, 17% carignane, 2% petit sirah and 1% each of two others that I missed and didn’t get down in my notes. It had a very earthy, perhaps a little funky, nose. But still had good acidity, tannins and the like. It seemed like it would go great with food, so this is when I started helping myself to the fresh bread and cheese on the table.

1985 Monte Bello
I missed jotting down the exact blend in this one (lesson learned for future tastings!). On the nose a little dried fruit, maybe cherries, and a bit of a soft herbal scent. The wine was very smooth with just a hint of tannins. Still had acid, some pepper and fruit. Also note, this ties for the oldest wine I’ve ever tried-thanks, Ridge!- and it was nice.

1995 Monte Bello
This one was 69% cabernet sauvignon, 18% merlot with the remainder petite verdot and cabernet franc. The color of the wine still looked pretty young. This was a strong wine (conversation amongst attendants commenced about what type of psychological therapy this brawny wine would seek versus the more supple 1985). On the nose, the wine was dense with pepper and spice. You could just tell it was going to be a powerful wine. And it was- strong tannins and structure, but balanced with acidity. The black pepper carried over and it had that chewy leather taste.

2005 Monte Bello
This wine, especially after the previous two, was obviously still young and fresh. It was a bit biting- strong and firm, but not overpowering. The tannins and acid struck a nice balance along with pepper and red fruit. I noted that the wine could obviously use more time, but was nice to drink now. Holding onto wine for a decade or two is still a concept I can’t quite grasp!

2004 Lytton Springs Syrah
This wine also contained 10% viognier and 8% grenache. After warning us that this wine is gone (literally the third and second to last bottles were poured into our glasses), many of us, myself included, found this to be a really fantastic wine. It had a much brighter nose than the Monte Bellos with lighter fruit. True to type it was peppery, but the viognier’s floral component was present as well. Really, really tasty- and went really well with the soft, stinky cheese I couldn’t stop eating.

2006 Lytton Spring Syrah
This was 92% syrah and 8% viognier. It had a richer nose than the ’04, more fruit and less pepper. The wine had lots of fruit and was very floral with a medium body. I also have in my notes “very sm”. I can’t figure out what that could possibly mean except that I must have again gotten distracted by eating cheese and gushing about this wine. This one hasn’t been released yet- it goes out to members next month. I can guarantee, however, that I will be reserving an allocation for our household. This was my favorite wine of the day!

One of the other bloggers (whose name I didn’t note, shame on me) brought two “mystery” wines for us to taste blind. Uh-oh, novice at the table! No way I was going to correctly guess these wines.

Wine 1
I couldn’t quite place the nose on this one and the color showed age. It still had tannins but not very strong fruit. No matter how many times I tried this wine though, it just tasted like pretzels.

Wine 2
This one smelled almost like it was fortified, with hints of dried or caramelized fruit. It was a brambly wine, with some fruit, soft tannins and more pepper than wine #1.

No one was able to correctly guess the wines (I think it helped that Ridge no longer makes it), though I still felt like a amateur. Wine 1 was the 1997 Dry Creek Sangiovese (which also used some merlot that year) and wine 2 was the 1998 Dry Creek Sangiovese. Have to say, these were my two least favorite wines of the afternoon, and I don’t think it was just because they reminded me that tasting is currently the weakest link of my wine aptitude.

By this point in the afternoon it had stopped raining. I was purple-toothed, full of cheese and “real life” summoned me back down the mountain. The day was fabulously educational and fun- can’t wait to do it again!


I only gathered the cards of my immediate table mates, but here are their blogs: Barton Orchard, NorCal Wine, Uncorked (the K&L Wine Blog), and Wine Maven in Training. I'll post links as I find them from other attendees.

I really took Kevin Zraly’s advice to heart when I decided to purchase a Mâcon-Villages ( ) rather than a Pouilly-Fuissé to taste a wine from this region. Though not pricey by any means, he said the most Mâcon-Villages is pretty good and that Pouilly-Fuissé isn’t really worth the extra money. But its so fun to say!

Fortunately, I had the opportunity to taste both at the K&L Burgundy tasting. And neither could hold a candle to the wine from Puligny-Montrachet that I really loved anyway!

Mâcon is a region that produces almost entirely white wine. It’s warmer there than the Côte d’Or, but the wines are fairly solid. Or maybe I just think so because I’m finding myself so enamored with white Burgundy and its acidic un-oakiness! Near the southern tip of the region, just north of Beaujolais, is the Roche de Solutré.

Nice rock! It marks the end of the great growing region of Burgundy (or rather the end of the limestone plateau in which great Burgundy is grown). It is within sight of this landmark that Pouilly-Fuissé is grown.

I picked up a half bottle of Louis Jadot Mâcon-Villages for my tasting. It was fairly clear and golden yellow. It smelled like oaky chardonnay. I thought uh-oh, should’ve sprung the few extra bucks for the Pouilly-Fuissé! But, on second smell, I could pick up the acid underneath. Sure enough, the wine had a biting acid, but was also creamy, with a fairly heavy body and lots of minerals (i.e. stones).

The Score: ★★★

This also seems an appropriate time to interject a quick lesson on negociants, given that Louis Jadot is very well known and often seen outside France (like in Target, for example). So, I mentioned in my previous post that Burgundy is not a land of glorious château, but mostly rural farmland. Until fairly recently, especially in Burgundy, most French wine was made by negociants. They were the ones who made, bottled and sold the wine, but did not grow the grapes.

As I’ve mentioned before, vineyards have been split into very small parcels (law of equal inheritance) and so it was often the case that growers didn’t have the quantity of grapes or the financial means necessary for the equipment to make wine. Negociants bought the grapes, or must, sometimes even juice, produced wine, often with a “house style”, and sold it.

They were dominant until about 25 years ago when more small growers began producing their own wines. And many negociants have since gotten into the grape-growing side of things too. How do you tell when looking at a French wine label if it was made by a negociant or not? The key word is “Domaine”. It functions very much like the word Estate on American wines. So, this Mâcon-Villages said simply “Louis Jadot”. This means they bought the grapes to make the wine. However, if it said “Domaine Louis Jadot” that would mean it was made from grapes grown on land Louis Jadot owns.

Next lesson- what does Maison on a label mean?

The day before I was planning to head to K&L to buy the rest of my Burgundy (having already visited Draeger’s the day before), I received my newsletter in the mail from K&L. Guess what they were holding the very next day? A Burgundy wine tasting! I cleared my schedule.

The tasting was hosted by their Burgundy buyer that goes to France and meets with the winemakers of many of the wines they sell. He was incredibly knowledgeable and pronounced all the French words with an American accent. Made them seem less out of reach for my non-French speaking self!

The tasting was of 13 wines (!!), 7 white and 6 red. What was interesting about this tasting was that many of the wines were labeled “Bourgogne Blanc” and “Bourgogne Rouge”. That means the grapes could come from anywhere in Burgundy (much like a bottle of wine that says “California” could come from anywhere in the state). But, many of the vintages we tasted (2008 & 2009) were years that the economy was struggling. Our host said that many of the winemakers declassified their grapes so they could still sell their wine, but since he had relationships with them, he knew for a fact that many of the wines were actually from specific villages. Read: Wine Bargains.

At any rate, the most interesting thing I took away from the tasting was a further lesson on malolactic fermentation. It seems that most (if not all) red wines go through this, and some whites, especially Chardonnay, do too. This process takes the malic acid (like the tartness of a green apple) and changes it into lactic acid (like in milk). This is what gives Chardonnay its creaminess.

As California Chardonnay has become a bit over the top lately, some producers have specifically chosen not to put their wines through malolactic at all, or they stop it before it finishes, in order to preserve the natural acidity in the wine. These are the California chards I prefer.

All of the white burgundies I tried at the tasting had good acidity and all were noticeably better to me (in that I don’t like super creamy, or oaky, chardonnay) than most domestic examples. I was surprised when our host told us that all seven of the wines had been through a complete malolactic fermentation. Because it’s a fairly cool climate in Burgundy, the natural acidity of chardonnay grapes is quite high. Incomplete malolactic would be the winemaker’s nightmare!

Of course, my two favorite wines of the tasting were the most expensive. The 2008 Maison Jacques Bavard Puligny-Montrachet 1er Cru “Champs Gains” was a five star wine. And at $54.99 would’ve been the most I’d ever paid for a white wine-- if I’d gotten it. I’m still thinking about it... The 2008 Maison Champy Chambolle-Musigny was my favorite red. A four star wine coming in at $46.99.

I also learned a bit more about reading French wine labels, and how to tell if the wine was made by a negociant or not- but this post is getting long. I’ll save that for a future lesson.

I was completely incorrect when I thought I was “punishing” myself with Bordeaux. Its hard, true, to remember all the appellations and especially all the various classifications systems. And there are more grape varieties allowed. But next up is Burgundy, and its complexities make Bordeaux seems like child’s play. I have a pretty good memory and a knack for memorization (at least in the short term), but there’s just simply no way I *need* to memorize everything about Burgundy. Not to mention learning how to pronounce everything!


So, I’m going to do the abbreviated version. Burgundy For Dummies, if you will. Luckily I’m far more excited about these wines. I think I’m really gonna like Burgundy.

So, first, the basics. Burgundy ( in French) makes both red and white wine and they one make one of each. Red Burgundy is Pinot Noir and White Burgundy is Chardonnay. (Ok, this isn’t entirely true. Beaujolais is part of Burgundy and they grow and make wine from the gamay grape. But, no one calls wine from Beaujolais Burgundy, they call it Beaujolais, so I doubt this will cause any confusion). Easy enough, right?

Burgundy is in Eastern Central France and made up of several sub-regions. Chablis is actually fairly removed from the rest of the region, closer to Paris, and makes only white wine. The Côte d’Or, the most famous area of Burgundy, which is actually divided into two regions, Côte de Nuits and Côte de Beaune, and makes a mix of red and white wine, Côte Châlonnaise which makes red and white wine, Mâconnais which makes almost all white wine and Beaujolais, 99% red wine, and I will not be covering it in this upcoming series. I have my limits.

Next big difference between Bordeaux and Burgundy is that in Bordeaux wines were always from “Château French-Word” and it was the château themselves that were classified in all the various systems. Burgundy is far less glamorous, there are no sprawling mansions. This is farmland. In Burgundy it is all about terroir, so naturally it is the vineyards that are classified. And thanks to our friend Napoleon, who after the French Revolution called for a law of equal inheritance for children, there are a TON of vineyards. In general, it seems that quality is highest from vineyards at the top of the hill, and it goes down from there to the base.

There are two classifications for Burgundy, Grand Cru and Premier Cru (often written 1er cru on labels). All Grand Cru Burgundies must say “Grand Cru” on the label and there are only 32 of them, so when you see one you know it’s the real thing. There are 400+ Premier Cru vineyards, so we won’t be discussing those in detail.


So, since there are more than 110 appellations and 1,000 vineyard names one must know in order to be an expert, I turned to my buddy Kevin Zraly and his book for my following “Graphique de Bourgogne” (that would be Chart of Burgundy). Memorize this and you may pass for a somewhat intelligent life-form when it comes to the wines of Burgundy. (Pronunciations provided when available).

Côte d’Or:

Côte de Beaune (70% red wines 30% white wines) 8 Grand Cru Vineyards
Important Red Villages:
Aloxe-Corton
Beaune
Pommard
Volnay

Important White Villages:
Aloxe-Corton
Beaune
Meursault
Puligny-Montrachet
Chassagne-Montrachet
Best recent white vintages: 1996*, 2000*, 2002*, 2005*, 2006*, 2007, 2008

Côte de Nuits (95% red wine) 24 Grand Cru Vineyards
Important Red Villages:
Gevrey-Chambertin
Morey-St-Denis
Chambolle-Musigny
Vougeot
Flagey-Échézeaux
Vosne-Romanée
Nuits-St-Georges

Best recent red vintages for Côte d’Or: 1999*, 2002*, 2003*, 2005**, 2006

Côte Châlonnaise
Important Villages:
Mercurey
Givry
Rully

Chablis (white wine)
Best recent vintages: 2002*, 2004, 2005*, 2006*, 2007, 2008

Mâconnais (white wine)
Quality levels, basic to best:
Mâcon Blanc
Mâcon Supérieur
Mâcon-Villages
St-Véran
Pouilly-Vinzelles
Pouilly-Fuissé
Best recent vintages: 2004*, 2005*, 2006*, 2007, 2008

And here’s what I picked up for this little jaunt through the ‘Gold Coast’ (Côte d’Or translated, by the way). I realize these following wine names may be largely unintelligible, I promise to get more detailed in each wine’s post!

From K&L:

2008 Domaine Delarche Corton-Renardes Grand Cru $54.99
2007 Louis Latour Meursault 1er Cru "Goutte d'Or" $39.95
2009 Château de Maligny Chablis 1er Cru "Montee de Tonnerre" $26.99
2007 Antonin Rodet Chateau de Mercey Mercurey Rouge $18.99
2008 Domaine Louis Jadot Côte de Nuits-Villages "Le Vaucrain" $23.99

And, since they have such a good selection, though not better prices, I also picked up a few things at Draeger’s, an upscale grocery store in downtown San Mateo with an amazing wine department.

2008 Louis Jadot Mâcon-Villages (half bottle) $8.99
2007 Hervé AZO Chablis (half bottle) $13.99
2006 Domaine Anne-Marie Gille Vosne-Romanée $37.99
2008 Vincent Girardin Les Vieilles Vignes Volnay $38.99 (wow click the link to see how much better prices are at K&L!