2001 Blackford Cabernet Sauvignon

Napa Valley, CA; 14.5% ABV
$9 at the Richmond, CA, store on 18 Dec

2001_Blackford_CabSauvThis vintage is part of a “vertical” – 2000 through 2004 – of Blackford Cabernets that are coming into some GOs as the main new attraction (in CA only, I believe) for the three-day sale starting tomorrow.  Apparently, quantities are quite limited and any store may get only a case or three of each vintage, if any.  I can’t drink all the interesting-looking wines coming in these days, so I got only this one that’s supposed to be from a good vintage.  Robert Parker’s vintage ratings (PDF, linked to in the lower right margin) for North Coast Cabernets are:

.

  • 2000 78 Caution, may be too old
  • 2001 96 Tannic, youthful, or slow to mature
  • 2002 95 Early maturing and accessible
  • 2003 92 Irregular, even among best producers
  • 2004 91 Ready to drink

Anyway, the 2001 is spectacular.  It opens with a wonderful and complex nose of red currant, black olive, cedar, and dusty earth, that is much the same on the palate.  However, it really needs an hour in a decanter, and continues to improve for another 1.5 hours, to add flavors of gently tangy blackberry and other black fruit, red cherry and a little blackcurrant, still with a lovely nose.  The fruit is quite ripe, but it is elegant and well balanced with acid and tannin.  There is a slight roasted character to the flavors that reminds me of some of the GO Syrahs we’ve been treated to lately.  There is still plenty of tannin in the finish, and I suspect this may well improve in cool storage for a few more years, but this is now IMO in its prime.  It is a steal for $9.  I very much doubt any of this bottle will survive to see the next day.  🙂

Although I’ve reprinted the vintage ratings to help guide your purchases, they are no substitute for tasting a particular wine, so please share in comments your experience(s) with any vintage(s) of this wine.

Advertisements

78 thoughts on “2001 Blackford Cabernet Sauvignon

  1. inthewinecountry

    Just wanted to let everyone know I had my last bottle of the 2004 last night for our anniversary. Wine was at its peak and drinking beautifully. The bottle had heavy sediment on the shoulders and in the glass and was velvety smooth. In one way sad its gone but on the other hand its my opinion its at its peak and needs to be drinking now so you are not disappointed later. Just my opinion. and I love aged cabs and my favorite saying is you have to kiss (drink) a lot of frogs to find a prince.

    Reply
    1. Darrell

      ITWC, I just had the 2004 recently and I am not too worried. It had a sweet entry with no drying out. Have held out on the 2001 and will have to get around to it.

      Reply
      1. inthewinecountry

        Oh I agree its tasting great right now Darrell and should last for a while longer. I was just commenting if you want to enjoy a well aged cab at its peak now is the time to drink this. I only have regrets when I drink a wine too soon and don’t have another in storage or I find I might have enjoyed the wine more if I had drunk it sooner.

        Reply
  2. Darrell

    If you didn’t get some 2002, 2003 or 2004, the SF store has case stacks of these at $1/ btl. more than the other stores.

    Reply
    1. inthewinecountry

      Thanks Darrell, My daughter lives around the corner on 7th and I asked my wife last weekend when she was visiting to stop in and the wine manager pointed them out to her so she got me 3 of the 2003. Wanted another bottle of the 2002 but she didn’t want to load up. The 2003 keeps getting better in the glass so I know its has a good one or two years left in it.

      Reply
      1. Darrell

        Rondo, I do believe you get to the SSF GO and I guess the manager there must read this blog because he charges a whopping $11 more than the other stores for the “2012 Sancerre “La Vigne aux Filles.” I try to steer away from this GO if I can patronize another.

        Reply
        1. Seedboy

          For the sancerre he is probably charging the original price, $15.99. That is probably the only store that still has this wine.

          Reply
          1. Darrell

            SB, true but he was made aware of the other stores’ concomitant price change to $4.99 via another store’s receipt. It kinda wrecks shopping. Can you imagine Safeway charging different prices for the same item?

            Reply
            1. flitcraft

              I’m wondering about the problems this must cause given the GO policy on exchanges. As I understand it, if I have the receipt and bring back an unsatisfactory bottle, I get my money back. If I return it without a receipt, I get store credit. (This policy is a common one in retail, I believe.)

              So, if I buy a bottle of wine from one GO where it is much cheaper than it is at another, differential pricing provides an incentive to return it without a receipt to the high priced store and get my higher store credit. (Not that I would! I’ve never returned any wine ever to GO, even when I thought it was terrible–I just chalk it up to the educational value of kissing a frog rather than a prince.)

              I hope that this pricing issue doesn’t end up costing customers the current liberal exchange policy–it probably encourages a lot more chance-taking on the part of the consumer, knowing that if the wine is bad you can easily get store credit for a replacement one.

            2. mrwino

              The return will not inconvenience the customer. If you do not have a receipt you will be credited the amount that store is charging. It will not affect that store inventory since the return is written off and accounted for. Each store has the option to take a mark down or not. If they are selling it at a higher point and it makes sense to keep the higher price they can. The 11 dollar difference is more than likely a markdown at one store that couldn’t sell that one wine and the other did sell it. Therefore the store with the higher priced wine more than likely sells more wine than the other and chose not to take a markdown here and there.

              I’ve been instructed to announce I am a GO employee when I make posts.

              Sorry for any typos I’m on a phone and felt an obligation to defend the store.

            3. BargainWhine Post author

              I suppose, but I’d guess Safeway operators are not given the independence that GO store owner / operators are. If the SSF O/O would rather not sell the wine as fast instead of reducing the price, it seems like that’s his or her choice. Certainly this wine is not in any danger of getting too old, but it does take up shelf space…

              Flitcraft, I don’t know if you’re allowed to return a wine to a different GO than the one from which you bought it. Obviously, what is needed to make this kind of arbitrage work is an electronic exchange for futures on GO wines that can be traded millions of times a second. 🙂

        2. BargainWhine Post author

          Maybe the price labels and even the price tags on the bottles were simply not changed even after the price change went through, i.e., the price scanned at the register would be the lower price even if the sticker on the bottle was the higher price. I saw this happen with a number of wines at the Berkeley and Oakland stores, although not with this Sancerre. Do you think that’s possible in this case?

          Reply
        3. Patrick

          I find the SSf store to be one of the best in that Dave gets a big quantities of the really good wines when they pop up but has a lot of competition from more favored stores, however I have noticed that he does not mark down the wines that others do. Try the Gilroy store that has signs in the window “No return on liquor” and “Look up you are being watched everywhere”

          Reply
          1. Darrell

            Signage in SSF doesn’t allow nature’s call for customers. I like GO stores that allow relief as it is difficult to shop otherwise. SF is fantastic as is Oakland and most others.

            Reply
            1. Rondo

              Of the stores that I shop or shopped (SSF,SF, Berkeley, Oakland, Redwood City, San Leandro) , I think that Bennie at the San Leandro store is the most wine savvy and is able to get some fantastic stuff in from time to time. I’ve known Bennie since he started working in Oakland over 20 years ago. Some corporate big wigs in Berkeley also are very wine savvy.

            2. Darrell

              Rondo, Bennie has drunk well and knows his stuff. Your statement “Some corporate big wigs in Berkeley also are very wine savvy,” much to my chagrin, is not a good thing if you know what I mean.

            3. inthewinecountry

              Thanks guys for all your input. Over the years I am sure we all have enjoyed some great bargains from GO as It seems during the Winter holidays the buyers and suppliers seem to have come up with some great deals over the years. This is one wine I will remember along with the Clos Du Val and the Burgess Cabs they had several years back. I don’t find fault with any of these stores as most are independently owned and they provide a service to some neighborhoods that wouldn’t have a decent store otherwise. Both Darrell and I have been to the store in Santa Rosa and it is the only store in walking distance for the large group of retirees in the neighborhood. Unfortunately this store owner has to also deal with the large population of homeless in the area by putting a employee on guard at the door to cut down on theft. I will continue to support these stores with my business no matter how much my friends say “you shop where!” and I hope GO continues to bring in some great bargains in wine!
              Charles

            4. BargainWhine Post author

              Hi Charles. I’ve encountered a number of people who pride themselves on knowing about wine who look aghast when I say I mostly shop for wine at the GO. I leave them to their contentedness.

            5. Rondo

              Charles,
              I drank a bottle of the Burgess Cab last year, and it was the best bottle yet; Mountain fruit just starting to hit it’s peak !?

    2. Darrell

      Fixed tomahawk lamb chops from a rack of lamb and so wanted to have a nice CS and chose the 2003 Blackford which is doing fine. It doesn’t have the sweet entry the 2004 has. The shoulder of the bottle is crusted and the cork firm.

      Reply
  3. Patrick

    I was returning from Monterey on Wednesday and stopped at the GO in Marina, I found 6 cases of these cabs, I bought one bottle each of the ’01 and ’04 and opened them for 2 hours as suggested. I was at the store this morning at opening and got the last 6 bottles of the ’01 and 9 bottles of the ’04 leaving 3. There is still cases of the of the ’02 ’03 and ’00.

    Reply
    1. Darrell

      Patrick, I think you scored on the Blackord, especially the ’04. I was surprised to see some Blackford at the Petaluma store which has improved in the wine dept. from the last time I visited a few years ago. They, too, had the same ’02, ’03, and ’00 vintages left.

      Reply
      1. inthewinecountry

        Thanks Darrell!, will be heading back to Petaluma today. Whats your take on the 03 as I haven’t opened the one bottle I bought.

        Reply
        1. Darrell

          Hi Inthewinecountry. While I have just one bottle, don’t let that put you off on the bottle. I should have bought more on the sale. I found the wine noticeably oaky which I am sensitive to if it covers up varietal character in the nose, but if you age the wine for years, the oak melds with the grape and isn’t as overt and might become a good, complex wine. All too often I think people mistake oak and wood plus some of the barrel toastiness for Cabernet, but for some reason I do not get this in Bordeaux wines and some of these chateaux use a high proportion of new oak to boot. From what I remember, the ’02 is fairly similar to the ’04 in character. I hope you got more ’04 and some ’01 and just let the ’03 age, if you can wait. Just had the ’04 the other night and it sure was easy drinking.

          Reply
          1. BargainWhine Post author

            I had a taste of the 2003, and my impression is that it is less ripe and more acid than the 2001 and 2002, but that, with age, I might actually prefer it to the 2002 as I might find it more balanced.

            Reply
            1. BargainWhine Post author

              Hi Eric. I really only got a brief taste. To answer that question, I’d have to see how a whole bottle evolved over time.

            2. Darrell

              Eric, I might assume you are in the East Bay and if you have a hillside, passive cellaring, that wine can age nicely. I have sampled wines from an East Bay hills, passive cellar at a preview tasting and some of the nigh 40 year old, cult pinots have held up, amazingly since some had ullaged badly. This small winery had started off with quality corks and subsequent vintages had cheaper corks so they ullaged severely. The older bottles are of neck fill while the younger bottles are down in the shoulder. Putting aside the content quality, I look for a lengthy, quality cork for long term aging. Remember, temperature of aging is paramount, more so than the cork quality. If I remember a chemistry rule correctly, a chemical reaction roughly doubles for every 10 degrees Centigrade or 18 degrees F. I wouldn’t worry a whole lot about when to drink unless you have cases of the ’03 and if you did, you could monitor development of the wine anyway.

            3. Seedboy

              Longer corks are better, but Louis Martini wines from the 60s aged beautifully with inch and a half corks.

            4. Darrell

              SB, funny that. In some of those 4 winery horizontal tastings of BV, Inglenook, Martini and Charles Krug, Martini never scored high. As the dinner or tasting progressed, the Martini wine level was usually lower than the rest though. Must have been a better food wine.

        2. Darrell

          Inthewinecountry, I finally opened a 2003 and evaluated it more thoroughly, i.e. I swallowed, and find it goes down well, just as easily as the ’04. It’s still oaky in the nose, but balanced enough for me nonetheless, both in the nose and flavor. I should have thought back to my formative CA CS wine buying days when I bought American oak vanillin smelling and tasting CS that now runs for 9-10 times as much as this Blackford CS does. Didn’t buy enough on the sale.

          Reply
        3. Darrell

          ITWC, I just opened a bottle of 2003 Blackford since I have more than the one bottle I first mentioned and so felt free to open one up for lunch with CO elk and Morchella spp. Will have the remainder of the bottle tonight with lamb chops cut at the loin, sirloin area where the lower spine meets the pelvis. The wine goes down easily and the nose is a nice blend of wood and Cabernet. There is a slight bitterness I hadn’t noticed before, just ever so slight though. I do wish this wine had some of the Stellenbosch Cab character others have been mentioning lately as I think that would make a fantastic Cab.

          Reply
        4. Darrell

          Just had the 2003 and it’s fine, but not as complex as the 2004 that was just had. Just a bit less color than the 2004. Noticeably more tannic and still sweet, but not as much as the 2004.

          Reply
          1. inthewinecountry

            Hi Darrell, I brought one of the 2002 or it might have been the 2004 to Thanksgiving and it was corked 😦
            Another person there asked how you can tell and I told him its that musty, moldy smell you get just as the glass passes your nose and you take the first sip. I think its best to drink most of these up now and enjoy! you always regret founding out a wine is past its peak and you wish you had drunk it sooner. Drinking a wine early and it just gets gets better in the glass, drinking it past its prime and it just gets worse in the glass.

            Reply
            1. Darrell

              ITWC, sorry to hear about your corked bottle, but it probably was bad from early on. I don’t expect any overaged bottles yet, but will be on the lookout for corked bottles. If I find a 2002, I ‘ll try it.

            2. seedboy

              Yes, corked is not a result of a cork failure over time, it is a result of TCA contamination, most likely of the cork. Sometimes the winery itself is the source but when that happens you have a much higher incidence of contaminated bottles than this wine has exhibited.

    2. Darrell

      Had the 2004 and it’s fine. Not drying out, legs had color. Didn’t notice change in nose. Haven’t had the 2001 since purchasing due to it being buried.

      Reply
  4. BargainWhine Post author

    I opened my bottle of the 2002 this evening. I thought it had heavy, ripe, jammy fruit of dark red cherry, blackberry and other black fruit, raisin, dark baking spice, roasted / charred oak, and at times dried rose hips, with good acid of strawberry / raspberry jam, and solid tannin on the finish. With a couple hours’ air, this was complex and elegant for such a full-bodied wine. However, despite similarities with the 2001, I found the 2002 clumsier and more cloying, and much too jammy for my taste. Nonetheless, everyone else liked it, and even I admit it was great for $9.

    Reply
    1. inthewinecountry

      I opened my bottle of the 2002 Sat. and it seemed to me it was well balanced between the fruit and tannins and it opened up after an hour leaving me wanting more. I feel it could age gracefully for another 6 months to a year. This bottling is more restrained than the 2004 which was quite big on the fruit. I guess I appreciated the 04 more as the winemaker had preserved the essence of the grape. As a friend of mine once said when he tried a 1929 French Pinot, it still has the “fragerance of the flower” I wish I colud try the 01 to compare

      Reply
    2. JoelA

      The wine is interesting and sumptuous but if I had it in a blind tasting I don’t think I would identify it as is a cabernet.

      The color is extremely dark, so much so that one wonders whether the winemaker included some syrah or petite sirah. The nose is quite nice, and jammy. In the mouth the wine is almost syrupy, very thick for a table wine, the texture akin to a lighter bodied port (but without the sugar and higher alcohol). It tastes much of raisins – not a bad taste – just to me an indication of a very late harvest and/or including raisiny grapes in the blend. Overall, I like it but, as I said, it doesn’t feel like a cabernet.

      Reply
      1. Darrell

        Agree with the description “sumptuous” as is the 2004. The 2003 less so with more tannin lurking. The 2001 is the most Cabernet like. I suppose there is Syrah or Durif Napa Valley acreage, but there should be much less available than before and giving Blackford the benefit of the doubt. Your description can be applied to Bordeaux from great years as I reread it, minus the raisins, which I haven’t noticed thus far.

        Reply
        1. JoelA

          Never have drunk a Bordeaux with such a thick texture. And yes, there is plenty of syrah and duriff in Napa Valley. The most opaque petite syrah I ever encountered was from the Mt. Veeder area. Black as ink, it was.. Anyway, far as i know, there is no more of any vintage of this wine available at GO in the Bay Area.

          Reply
    1. adlerpe

      At 7:30, they still had the case of 2001 and a bunch of 2000 (which Robaire mislabeled as 2002 – the numbers on the label are pretty hard to read). All of it was on the shelf; I didn’t buy any because I forgot which one was supposed to be the good one 😦

      Presumably, it’ll still be there tomorrow at the non-sale price.

      Reply
  5. Rick

    Central california -I bought 4 bottles of the 2001 tonight and they have a few left , they have a case left of the 2004 .

    Reply
    1. Darrell

      Tasted the bottles side by side except for the 2000. I find the level of quality to be fairly equivalent and very good especially given the QPR during this sale. Packaging has a nice touch with individual bottles wrapped in tissue and the bottle has a long, whole cork. The back label says handcrafted and is believable. The 2001 is more claret-like while the other 3 go down quite easily without so much bite from tannin, though there are tannins. The reason for replying here is that I noted the production of the vintages and they are:
      2001 580 cases
      2002 480 cases
      2003 360 cases
      2004 285 cases
      Everything being fairly equal, one might want to pick up some 2004 seeing that there is half the 2001 production. These are quality bottlings and I kinda feel like a vulture at these prices.

      Reply
      1. inthewinecountry

        Darrell,
        I got two of the 2001 and what I thought was one of the 2002 and had it Friday nite. Turns out it was the 2004 bad eyes I guess. Anyway it was amazing! perfect balance between fruit and tannins, ready to drink now and over the next several months. I went back to the store to get more but they were out 😦 I decided to exchange the 2001 for one each of the 2002 and 2003. I called the next GO and lucky they hade more so I drove the 12 miles there to get four more 2004. After your take on the 2001 glad I exchanged them. I value your opinion so what year would be your next choice after the 04? BTY I swear I tasted some Rutherford/Oakville in the 04

        Reply
        1. Darrell

          Inthewinecountry,
          I’m sorry you took my seemingly negative comment on the 2001 to heart as I prefer it to the others but only slightly. It has a more complex nose than the rest and longer retention also. Go back and get those 2001’s; don’t think you will be disappointed and consider yourself lucky to have the 2004’s. The SF store had some last night. As far as the Rutherford/Oakville character, I get more of it from the 2001 bottle. I found the 2002 slightly behind the 2004 and really didn’t stock up on the 2003 since it was overtly oaky, but that isn’t to say the 2003 won’t meld into something quite a bit nicer with bottle aging with what is called bottle bouquet that comes around 7-8 years or more. I’m not sure, but I think bottle bouquet is secondary and tertiary smells in the “cellar tracker” vernacular.

          It isn’t your eyes and it’s one negative about the packaging. It’s really plays havoc with presbyopic eyes, many of whom have this condition on this site. It was much, much easier to look at the case print code on the box where the code would start off 01CSNV, 02CSNV,etc. I found myself scratching windows or licking the tissue to view the vintage in some cases, hehe.

          I drove multiples of 12 miles for these Blackford bottles and hence, had to make it worth the gas per bottle if you get my drift. You could say I was driven. Anyway, I wouldn’t worry about the drinking timetable if cellared well. Some of mine will probably will be drunk when I go to that winery in the sky, heaven forbid.

          Reply
  6. QaySyrah

    Still some of all years 00, 01, 02, 03 and04 in Santa Rosa, although I had to take down the stack to get to the 01 in the bottom box. 😉

    Reply
  7. Paul M.

    Thanks so much for your great reviews! I really enjoy reading your posts, and your reviews are spot on. The Santa Rosa store (as of this morning) had 2001, 2003, and 2004 Blackford Cab — I’m making a great 3-year vertical tasting for a Christmas present

    Reply
    1. BargainWhine Post author

      Hi Paul and welcome. Glad to hear you enjoy the site and that you got what should be some good wine. Enjoy!

      Reply
    1. GOWineLover

      Concord has 2000, another full case of 2001, and plenty of 2002 and 2003 as of this morning. They got in 2 more cases of 2001 (unexpectedly) this morning and their DC screwed up their SKUs on the 2004 and thus they got nothing.

      There is also a 2007 Cab from Rutherford, Ames Estate “City Slicker.” From KL re: the 2006: “Winemaker and self-proclaimed city slicker (he was born and raised in the NYC area) Scott Ames is the winemaker at Ambullneo Vineyards and assistant winemaker at Tantara Winery. Ames Estates is his personal project, and the 2006 City Slicker Cab his first release. An homage to the Cabs and Cab blends of Napa and Bordeaux, his first vinous loves, this small production Cabernet made from Rutherford fruit.”

      Ralph in Concord liked it so I grabbed a few. Also grabbed 2 of the newer blends of the 2008 Beaver Creek Fairytale Red which is now something like 40% merlot, 30% zin, etc rather than Merlot-dominant with cab like the last one.

      Haven’t tried any yet (it’s still 10am) but look forward to all.

      Reply
  8. weinish

    Just some thoughts.

    There were a lot of people looking for the BLACKFORD Cabs today, which leads me to believe, this blog has more and more readers. Granted, I’m the guy in the store who always tells people about it, so I’m not surprised (Yes, the good looking guy with the gut, that’s been steadily gaining weight. Yes, that is me).

    I purchased 4 2002s, but am not going to open one just for the sake of it.

    However, I did purchase.the 2006 Poggio Salvi Montalcino for around $8, after the sale. The price has really dropped on these, so I took a swing and bought 2.

    Been gobbling up that very simple 2011 Riondo Soave Excelsa, which is normally $3.99. The lady has been drinking that for months.

    Also nabbed some new sparkling I saw, but haven’t had it yet. Whenever there’s a good GO sparking I’m all over it, like that Babot Cava they had going on for a bit.

    So…the reviews will come.

    Other than these wines, nothing jumped out at me.

    Reply
  9. Seedboy

    This wine is flying out of the Oakland store. They had a few cases of the 02 on the floor, the 01 is in the back, you need to ask for it, but it might be gone.

    Reply
  10. edbear55

    Tasted the 04, and bought all that Jason in Pleasant Hill had. Even though the wine was just opened I knew that I couldn’t go wrong. Yum Ed

    Reply
  11. Babs

    Thank you for the wonderful reviews.

    Happy Holidays to you and all your readers!
    To peace and glorious drinking and eating in 2014!

    Reply
  12. Seedboy

    I like the 2001 and 2002. I’m pretty tough on cabs because I’m pretty pissed off at what has happened to No Cal cab after about 1994 or so. Both wines are pretty tasty. If you see a bottle of this on the shelf buy it.

    Reply
    1. inthewinecountry

      Lim,
      Did a quick check online and found the winemaker for Blackford is also the winemaker for Buelher Estate my best value under the radar Napa Cab for aging. Wish you could try the 2004 in my opinion its at its peak with the leathery, bramble tobacco of soft tannins married with the cassis and chocolate cherries of the fruit.

      Reply
  13. Mr. Wino

    Thank Your BargainWhine. I am fairly new to the archive and would like to one day leave posts with pictures as I have read and seen from several users. My reviews for the 2001 and 2004 are as follows.

    2001 Blackford Napa Valley Cab. – The nose was warm and welcoming with bright cherry, cedar, tobacco, olive notes and exotic spice. The legs moved briskly but not fast hinting at a medium bodied wine. On first taste I got what was expected bright cherry, cedar, tobacco, olive notes and exotic spice However I could taste a hint of rose haw and hibiscus as well.. This is what I like to call a no BS wine. This wine had an elegant finish with firm tannins and ripe fruit. I assumed day two it would improve. On day two my expectations were met. The ripeness of the fruit had settled, as fruit was now the center of the glass, and the tannins had remained firm. Overall a great wine for $8.99 I have 2 cases saved for myself at my store.

    2004 Blackford Napa Valley Cab. – The nose was full of earth, cocoa, rusty copper, cedar and tobacco. The legs moved slower and thicker, hinting at a medium to full bodied wine. My first glass showed mushroom, Szechuan pepper, cocoa and cherry with firm tannins. This wine was much more complex than the 2001 but somewhat unbalanced in my opinion. The earthiness overpowered the fruit, and left me wanting more of the 2001. I figured I’d save the rest of the bottle for day two. On day two, the mushroom and earthiness still overpowered the fruit. This may be something some may like but it’s not my cup of tea. Still, it’s a great wine. However, I will be buying more of the the 2001.

    Cheers!!

    [Ed. note: Mr. Wino is a GO owner / operator in training, currently in Chico, CA, who may soon get his own store.]

    Reply
  14. Mr. Wino

    Thank you BargainWhine. I have tried the 2001 and 2004 and have never posted before other than comments. How do I post my reviews?

    Reply
    1. BargainWhine Post author

      Hi Mr. Wino. Normally, I would ask you to leave your reviews of wines that have not yet been reviewed on the main page in the Guest Contributions section:
      https://grossoutwine.wordpress.com/gc3/
      However, since I’ve reviewed this here, and in an unusual step, asked readers to leave their thoughts on the other vintages here, please leave your reviews and thoughts of both vintages you’ve tasted as a comment or comments on this post.
      Thank you!

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s