OK, I admit that very few Sauvignon Blancs do it for me, but this is horrible beyond my powers of description. I'll give being rude a go, though.

Sauvignon Blanc "Selection 94" 2006, Dog Point Vineyard
The nose is completely confected and contrived, clearly made from over-ripe fruit that has been cold-fermented. It is not all that clean, either. Utterly disgusting filth would be a fair description of the nose; it revolts in so many ways. I've had two mouthfuls and that is enough. It is blowsy and distinctly sweet, with truly horrible rotting fruit flavours. It lacks any balance, harmony, or even any nice flavours that would make one want even sip this wine gingerly. This wine is a slur on the good name of wine. How could anyone make this and, even more incredibly, expect people to pay money and drink it? I have been drinking so well recently that this wine is personally offensive; the winemaker generated this filth specifically to revolt those who like nice wine and I bet the bastard was targetting me in particular. I am eternally grateful that I didn't pay for this, but my bad mood at having tried it will last until someone punches the winemaker on my behalf.

After the 'Egly-Ouriet being nice' shocker it is good to get back to some reliably crap producers. The 'sub-interest' status of Santa Duc wines is forever assured. Of course, Robert Parker gave it 93 points (whatever the hell that means) and said it will age until 2018.

Gigondas "Prestige des Hautes Garrigues" 1998, Domaine Santa Duc
The nose smells of raw booze, strawberry jam and horrible, horrible rancid dirtiness. This is unbalanced and simply repulsive. The palate has a hot, booze-tastic burn and sweetness to it, soupy tannins (if they can even be called tannins) and a nasty flavour of rotting jam. Is it possible anyone could enjoy this monstrous horror? It has aged really badly and (let us be honest) was bloody dire when it was released, so please, let us drink something else and use this for burning grease stains off the garage floor.

There is a bit more to this than simply oak, but not that much more.

Chardonnay Santa Rita Hills "Sanford and Benedict Vineyard" 2004, Au Bon Climat
The nose is hellishly oaky, with hints of off milk, which isn't terribly attractive. The ripe lemon fruit is nice, though. A lot of toasty, vanilla oak on the palate, with reasonable acidity and just hints of fruit showing past the wood. This is quite a simple wine, and it doesn't have much in the way of a finish. Vinous wallpaper.

This is raw booze. Sometimes that is nice, but this is just a bit too fiery and far too dull.

Lirac "La Reine des Bois" 2005, Domaine de la Mordoree
Incredibly dark. A hot nose of stewed fruit, not fresh in the slightest. It has some spiciness, too, but is mostly characterised by a shit-load of alcohol. I suppose my anaesthetised nose can just detect a bit of earthiness, but I wouldn't go as far as calling this complex, oh no. The palate is very hot and sweet with alcohol, with big, gum-busting tannins and some stewed fruit. And that, I am afraid to say, is very much it. No excitement here, move along please.

I have to say I've rarely got very much pleasure out of Mordoree wines, and yet I recommended this be purchased. I may be in touch with the deep message of wine but clearly I don't always pay attention when that message is "I'm a bloody awful bottle of lighter-fluid". I blame the beast of my Id, it just wants me drunk so I behave outrageously.

I was given this bottle to prove that 'Claret can be very good'. Now, as I have said before, I hate Claret. This makes me wonder why someone would give me something they know I'll hate. Do they, perhaps, hate me? Do they want me to suffer? It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't so bad.

Chateau Gloria 1971
The nose is quite Cabernet flavoured, it also smells quite a lot of cabbage. It has quite a pronounced vinegar aroma, which is a tad distracting. That being said, the nose is not so bad; there is some fruit, a degree of cedar-wood complexity. Not so bad. The palate, on the other hand, is bloody awful. It is dried-out and tough, with a really nasty vinegary finish. It tastes absolutely disgusting. This demonstrates all I hate about old Claret; it is dry, fruitless, acetic, and downright nasty. I hate it. Sorry, anonymous donor, but this is really horrible. The finish is worth torrents of abuse I am not capable of spewing. No. And I really mean No.

'Oh fancy!'-grade Beaujolais. I know some people who have raved about this wine, I hope it is nice.

Moulin-a-Vent "Chateau des Jacques" 2005, Louis Jadot
I'm surprised by how dark it is. It has quite a lot of cherry fruit on the nose, and is surprisingly oaky too. It seems quite big. The palate has some fruit, but is oddly heavy and dull. There is not enough acidity and there is really not enough tannin to make this anything over than an overblown tart of a wine. Yesterday's Tandem was better.

I only own one bottle of Claret, I hate the stuff. Red Bordeaux is simply dull unless it is fabulously expensive, and most of them are still crap. After this I am not going to buy another bottle of red Bordeaux.

Domaine de Chevalier 1995
Oh god, I fucking hate crappy fucking Claret. Yeah, yeah, it smells of blackcurrant and cedarwood, bit dirty. Piss boring. Palate dry and austere, not much fruit. Just what is the point? I really don't see it. I find this stuff actively unpleasant, and I feel ashamed of myself for having purchased it at a knock-down price eight-odd years ago.

Hell'ś bells. What the hell is this beast in my glass? Made by the old Cape Mentelle winemaker.

3 Amigos Shiraz, Grenache, Mourvedre 2005, McHenry Hohnen Vintners

This is a booze-tastic horror of christmas pudding fruit and alcoholic craziness. It has a very fruity nose, a very soapy, soupy, fruity palate. Of all of the hideous, dull, wallpapery, boring powerhouse wines I've had, this is perhaps the most hideous, dull, wallpapery and boring.

Another day, another Savennières. This seems a lot less extreme than the Eric Morgat.

Savennières Chateau de Chamboureau "Cuvée d'Avant" 2004, Pierre Soulez
This has classic Savennières aromas, dampness, hair, dogs and it is moderately mineral. There is a hint of apple and raisin fruit, but mainly this smells of slightly weird things. It is not a thrilling nose, by any means. The palate has some good weight, and good acidity, but the weird flavours are neither nice nor weird enough to make this terribly interesting. If such a thing is possible, this is quite dull Savennières; wall-paper wine. It might be his most basic cuvée, but I expect more from Soulez.

I am back drinking again. Hooray for wine! I was hoping for my first wine to be good, but I am very disappointed with this.

Savennières Trie Spéciale 1997, Domaine des Baumard
This smells rather big and powerful. A heavy nose laden with the decayed sweetness of a ripe blue cheese. There is a degree of botrytic apricot fruit on the nose as well, but it largely smells damp and rotten. I am concerned by the lack of minerality here. The palate is very full bodied, with some acidity and minerality, but it is terribly flat. There is no real dimension or excitement here, it is just a big mouthful of simple flavours. It also doesn't taste that nice, if I am honest. Doesn't taste nice seems a pretty damning quality comment to me.

Normally an excellent wine, even if it is getting a bit pricey these days. This bottle would have been a lot nicer a few years ago.

Pouilly-Fuissé Vieilles Vignes 2001, Château-Fuissé
Quite a dark yellow colour; this makes me worried as soon as I see it. Yes, it is really rather oxidised on the nose. Oh dear. There is some weight and fatness to it, but it is basically pushing up the daisies. The palate is quite weighty, but is also totally shot. There is also a nasty, harsh acidity to it. Like an aged, corpulent harlot this repels with its sickening stench, yet it tries to tempt me to dip in just one more time, knowing that if I do the only result will be to feel violently ill.

Today marks six years since my partner moved to England. I wanted to open something good, but I fear I have fallen slightly below par.

Champagne Brut Chardonnay 1998, Pol Roger
This has a very pure nose of lemon fruit with a hint of minerality. That, sadly, is pretty much it; it really lacks complexity. The palate also has good lemon fruit, some minerality and a hint of weight, but is really quite linear and direct. The acid is too fierce and there is not enough of anything else to balance it out. The mousse is also not as fine as one might hope for from a Pol Roger wine. It is a refreshing drink, with enough fruit and minerality to help one plough through the bottle, but it is sadly not up to the Pol standard. At least it is better than the straight vintage 1998, but I think the Gratien NV Blanc des Blancs I had recently is considerably better than this. It was a lot cheaper, too.

A few days ago I tried a bottle of Van Volxem Riesling Scharzhofberger 2005 with a friend; I was terribly disappointed by it. The winemaker, Roman Niewodniczanski, has made some great wines in the past, real models of harmony and elegance, but he just seemed to fail with this wine in this vintage. Normally he picks grapes at Auslese ripeness levels and ferments them to about 11.5% alcohol, which means they are off-dry. This wine was 12.5% and pretty god-damned dry. Like a lot of German trocken wines from the more Northerly wine regions, this resulted it it being extremely taut and linear, with nothing to balance the searing acidity. Indeed, it was actively unpleasant and we couldn't bring ourselves to finish the bottle. I had really hoped for great things, 2005 is such a good vintage in Germany after all, but with this I felt so let down I couldn't bring myself to write a note about it immediately.

Today marks five years since my partner and I moved in together; a bottle of Champagne seems in order. The wine merchant I got this from claimed on their website and shelf-sticker that this was was an old vines cuvée, yet there is no mention of this on the bottle. Perhaps they are trying to over-sell it. I was not terribly worried when I looked at the bottle as I have had plenty of Legras fizz before and they have generally been acceptable drinks for the money.

Champagne Brut Grand Cru Chouilly Blanc des Blancs 1998, R et L Legras
This smells of lemonade and bread, and that is it. Is there any complexity here? Any style? Any interest? No, it seems incredibly dull. The palate has some harsh acidity and a bit of citrus fruit, but it too is stunningly dull. No minerality, not much fruit, nothing nice, really. I'd be hard-pressed to guess this was Champagne if I were presented it blind so lacking in character is it. This really is wallpaper wine, there is nothing here to grab one's attention and put a smile on one's face. Yawn-a-rama. This merits a 'piss-boring' quality comment. And to think I opened this for a celebration. Oh how I have failed. But not as much as Legras has failed.

Jean-Michel Deiss used to make really good, single-varietal wines in Alsace. Then he appeared to go quite mad and started making blends of different grape varieties; I've hated every one of them I've tried. This is one of the last vintages he made named-vineyard vendanges tardives (late harvest wines), so I hope it is a pleasing view into the past of someone who used to be one of my favourite Alsace producers. This is only 11.5% alcohol.

Riesling Grand Cru Altenberg de Bergheim Vendanges Tardives 1994, Domaine Marcel Deiss
This looks really quite orange and mature. It smells of baked apples, with candied citrus and petrol hints. There is a rich earthiness to it. The nose suggests this is really rather mature. The palate tastes surprisingly dry, but is obviously ripe and powerful even though it seems to lack fruit. There is some good acidity there and minerals show on the finish, but this really isn't terribly complex or long. Simple and short are not features I would have expected from this, but sadly that is what the wine is like. Alas, this just tastes a bit over-mature; not oxidised, but on its way out certainly. How disappointing! I had hoped for an excellent Deiss wine of old and all I got was an old Deiss wine. At least it is not one of his filth blends; one of them would be completely dead by now and taste awful.

I really like Cyprien Arlaud's wines normally, but this is remarkably dull.

Morey-St-Denis Premier Cru les Ruchots 2000, Domaine Arlaud
This smells reasonably rich and fruity; ripe, dark fruit. There is a seasoning of oak but it is not intrusive. This is a pleasing nose. Sadly the palate is really quite dull, it is bland and doesn't taste of much. It has quite high acidity and some soft tannins, but merely hints of the fruit that show on the nose. There is no finish to speak of. I am terribly disappointed by this wine, Arlaud makes some really good wines, but this is as dull as dish-water. You can drink it, but it would probably put you to sleep rather than leave you chortling with pleasure; I like to chortle with pleasure. I wonder what went wrong with it.

This afternoon I am drinking with a past captain of the Oxford blind tasting team. He lost when he was captain, I won. We finished off the Spätlese from last night then obviously needed to move on to red wine. Sadly, the bottle we popped is not entirely satisfactory.

Chambolle-Musigny 2000, Ghislaine Barthod
The nose of this is quite woody and strangely chocolaty, it doesn't really smell like my idea of Chambolle. It is also distractingly alcoholic and lacking any fresh, charming fruit. The palate is reasonably balanced, with good acidity, but fruit is really lacking. It is quite tannic. What I find disappointing about this wine is that it really lacks the charm and pleasure of good Burgundy, my colleague suggests it even lacks the charm and pleasure of average Burgundy. I find this wine boring and depressing; I want racy, hedonistic excitement and this just delivers an extra-large helping of dullness.

This is the first time I've tried Bandol from Château Lafran-Veyrolles. Perhaps it was a bit of a mistake to buy a 2003, even though it does claim to be only 13.5% alcohol. It is 80% Mourvedre and most of the rest is Grenache with a bit of Cinsaut.

Bandol 2003, Château Lafran-Veyrolles
This has plenty of Mourvedre character on the nose: grilled meat and rich, dark fruit. It is quite earthy, too, but doesn't seem especially complex. At least it is not overpoweringly ripe and alcoholic. The palate is very dry and has really bitter tannins. Eeergh, I don't fancy this much. What fruit is present is completely dominated by the nasty, bitter character. The tannins go far beyond 'rigour' and arrive quite easily at the 'not very nice' platform. Give me Pibarnon or Tempier any day.

At the very disappointing Restaurant Etxebarri we didn't drink too well.

Albarino 2005, Pazo de Senorans
Very fruity, light bodied and refreshing. It was a passable drink but no great excitement here.

Rioja Roda I Reserva 2002, Bodegas Roda
Piss boring.

At Restaurant Alameda we had an Albarino worthy of mention and a bottle of a typically styled, big, modern wine; a 'dull wine' as I like to call them.

Albarino Seleccion de Anada 2001, Pazo de Senorans
This has been aged in large inert tanks for several years, which supposedly allows the wine to last longer than most Albarinos (which die after a couple of years). The nose has real density of good, Viognier-like fruit. The palate has real density too, and very good fruit. The finish is very pleasing. A very good wine.

Ribera del Duero 2003, AALTO
Too oaky, over-extracted. Much too butch with no harmony or elegance. No thanks.

The two Australian wines I had planned to have with dinner bored the tits off me.

Chardonnay 2003, Cullen
Soft melon fruit on the nose, some wood too. It smells quite dull; I've had so many similar wines in the past. The palate has fruit, acidity and oak, but is frighteningly boring. I am not impressed.

'Joseph' Nebbiolo 2002, Primo Estate
Oh no, I am not really sure I can be bothered. Yeah, there is cherry fruit and there is a hint of bitterness, but it is just another ripe Australian wine, really. I think it is well made, with plenty of fruit and tannin, but it is just wall-paper in the realm of fine wines.  

I first tried this at the London wine and spirit trade fair. I thought it seemed a nice enough drink. It is an adequate, but slightly dull, aperitif.

Riesling 2004, Plantagenet
This has but hints of fly-spray on the nose, a common problem, I find, with Australian Riesling. It is obviously ripe, but has some pure grapefruit notes on the nose. It is quite weighty on the palate, with good, but not excessive acidity. It is a perfectly nice drink, but doesn't really engage me.

I used to travel from Oxford to London just to buy Rockford's Basket Press Shiraz. If only I hadn't wasted my time and money ageing them. This wine is a bit more junior in Rockford's range than the Shiraz. It is 56% Cabernet Sauvignon, 44% Shiraz.

Barossa Valley Rod and Spur 2002, Rockford Wines
A very Porty, stewed nose of blackcurrants, blueberries and leather. It is really quite hot and alcoholic. The palate is really dense and heavy, quite tannic too. There is plenty of over ripe fruit on the palate, and alcohol sweetness, but it is all a bit one-dimensional. I suppose there is a degree of severity to the tannins, but the lack of acidity and over-ripe fruit suggest this is not for ageing. It is certainly well made, and a reasonable drink, shame it is quite dull.

Dugat-Py are quite well thought of, on my occasional tastings of their wines I have often wondered why they are so popular and so expensive. They are not really beautiful, lovely Burgundies.

Gevrey-Chambertin Tres Vieilles Vignes Coeur de Roy 2000, Bernard Dugat-Py
This is a very dark wine. It smells more like an oaky Syrah or Cabernet than lovely Pinot. The nose is certainly that of a big wine. The palate certainly has big tannins, but it doesn't have much for to balance this out. It is very drying, not terribly complex and certainly not lovely. As I've thought with previous wines of theirs that I have had, they are just far too extracted and lacking any real charm. I won't be buying more of their wines, far too expensive.

Purchased for a laugh, to remind ageing memories of what wine used to be like. All I can say is: By arse, this is disgusting.

Blue Nun Original 2005, H. Sichel Sohne
Has some odd, confected, artificial fruit on the nose. It also reeks of wet animal hair. In the name of all that is evil, this tastes disgusting. It is like sucking on an incontinent, diabetic rat. I can manage two tastes of this for the purpose of writing this note, no more will pass my lips.

I have no idea what grapes this wine is made from, if indeed it is made from grapes. The partner has been given a six pack, what will we do with them all I wonder.

Natural Sweet 2002, Buitenverwachting
It is quite orange. The nose has a lot of botrytis, acetone and vinegar smells. It also smells quite filthy. This is not a good start. The palate has a lot of sugar, a bit of acidity, but also some really dirty, off flavours. It tastes quite oxidised. It is utterly grim. Why do people people make such evil filth? No way, I am sure there is tastier diabetic piss than this wine.

I've popped my last bottle of Verset Cornas 1996. Just as with the bottle reviewed earlier this has painfully high acid levels, it is seriously unbalanced and not very nice. The levels of Brett are really distracting, too. No thanks.

More evidence of the super-ripeness of 2003 grapes. This doesn't really make for a refreshing drink on a hot afternoon.

Riesling Kanzemer Altenberg Alte Reben 2003, van Volxem
A very dense nose of ripe fruit, it smells quite Muscatty so overt is it. There is a bit of citric fruit as well, but it could hardly be described as a fine, elegant nose. The palate is pretty dense and concentrated as well. It is really quite rich. It has a bit of acid, but not very much. There is a touch of minerality on the finish, but I think all of the fine Riesling and terroir flavours have been baked out of this. Ultimately this is a bit heavy and ponderous, lacking the exciting, vivacious characteristics one hopes for in Saar Riesling. Sadly, I don't really like it.

Zind-Humbrecht do not hold back when it comes to making large-scale wines. Even in moderate vintages they can be real behemoths. 2003 was incredibly hot all over Europe, so some very ripe wines have been produced. Z-H produced some wines that have been quite terrifying in terms of ripeness.

Riesling Grand Cru Rangen Clos Saint-Urbain 2003, Domaine Zind-Humbrecht
The nose smells very strongly of tropical fruit-flavour chews, really confected. It smells quite hot and alcoholic too, despite only being a claimed 13.5%. Much to my surprise the palate is pretty much dry, lots of sweetness from the alcohol and confected fruit, but not so much sugar there. It is really confected, though, and I found it hard to discern any real terroir characteristics. Most of the class has been roasted out of this. I suppose it is quite a crowd-pleasing drink, but hardly fine Riesling. The price was pretty steep.

I've really hated every Egly-Ouriet Champagne I've had. This was recommended to me by someone reliable who claimed it was nice and fruity; niceness and fruitiness are characters lacking in their other fizzes I've tried. As it is their most basic cuvée it should have been fooled around with less. It is pure Pinot Meunier.

Brut "Les Vignes de Vrigny", Egly-Ouriet
The nose is bready with some fruit, but it smells pretty confected to me. The palate is short and lacking any form of complexity of favour. It is really one-dimensional and bland. What fruit there is there is strange and confected, nothing nice to report at all. It is very thin and what flavours it has are really actively unpleasant. The finish is seriously disgusting. No way, this is vile to the extent that even my first glass will not be finished.

One of the problems with Zind-Humbrecht wine is that you can never really know before you taste them what they are going to be like. Olivier Humbrecht has stated putting an indication of sweetness on the labels, but so far this seems to be quite a fanciful scale with little grounding in reality. The wines are usually incredibly alcoholic and this, clocking in at 15%, is no different. I've had some very good Zind-Humbrecht wines and I do own a few bottles that are in my cellar, but they can just be a bit tiresome.

Pinot Gris Clos Windsbuhl 2002, Domaine Zind-Humbrecht
Quite a dark yellow colour. The nose has some Pinot Gris spice and white fruit, but it is largely dominated by alcohol. It does smell very hot and cooked. The palate is largely dry, ignoring the sweetness that comes from the alcohol, and does have some Pinot Gris roundness on the palate. However, the finish is simply terrible. It is really hot with alcohol and leaves a lingering burning sensation which is just dreadful. When I first tasted this I thought it was quite a good Zind-Humbrecht wine, but when I swallowed I realised that finishing my glass would be a difficult and draining experience; it was also likely to leave me as 'tired and emotional' as a newt. The finish and balance were woefully poor in this wine, not a good Z-H wine. 

2003 was a crazy year in Europe, so hot. This wine demonstrates the problems with that.

Gewurztraminer Grand Cru Hengst 2003, Domaine Zind-Humbrecht
This honks of raw booze. An incredibly hot and alcoholic nose. What fruit there is is so confected it smells of foam banana sweets. There is no acidity to speak of. The palate has a huge alcohol sweetness which turns to a burn on the finish. It is quite sweet. All of the spice and fruit has been roasted out of the palate. This is hugely out of balance and is not fun to drink. No. To think Olivier Humbrecht made a more alcoholic Gewurztraminer in 2003, the mind boggles.

Another bottle popped before taking around to my neighbours tonight. After the heroism of the 2001 this is an almost moderate fourteen and a half percent. It also really stinks of arseholes.

Bandol Cuvée Spéciale 2000, Domaine Tempier
The nose really stinks of arseholes, farm yards and other less-than-clean things. There is a bit of dark, ripe fruit underneath. With extended swirling in my glass it becomes a bit less filthy, but this is not a clean wine. The palate is very alcoholic, it seems more so than the 2001. It is moderately tannic, but whilst there is some fruit on the palate, it doesn't live up to the filth and booze levels. It is not a harmonious wine and it is a very long way away from being elegant or refined. I am not sure ageing it will do any favours, the low tannin and fruit levels seem slightly over-evolved already. Much as it pains me to say this about a Tempier wine, this is decidedly sub-interest.

Noel "The Gnome" Verset used to craft some wonderful Cornas from his steeply-sloped vineyards. Sadly, it appears this one suffers a bit from 1996 Rhône-syndrome.

Cornas 1996, Noel Verset
A very animal nose, meaty, sweaty and hairy. It is quite Brett-y. There is a bit of dark fruit underneath that. The palate has really rather high acidity levels that begin to hurt my stomach. What fruit there is on the palate is over-whelmed by this acidity and it is definitely out of balance. This is a bit strange as only a couple of months ago I had a bottle that was much nicer. Could it be that the obvious Brett in this wine has led to bottle-variation? Quite possibly; bottle variation is an oft-reported symptom of high Brett levels. Whatever has caused it, this is dirty, painfully acidic and sadly sub-interest.

It's the first time I've tried wine from this producer. I met him in a restaurant on my last trip to Burgundy, he was very loud.

Mazis-Chambertin Grand Cru 1999, Domaine Christophe Newman
A pure and elegant nose of red fruit, it is not especially complex. The alcohol stands out a bit. The palate is similarly hot and the tannins seem a bit dry. It is not especially complex or refined. It is a nice drink but hardly Grand Cru quality; it is a bit big and lacks finesse.

A shame. He seemed keen on making fine wine and has some good vineyards. I was disappointed.

This was quite disappointing, not up to the required standard for here.

Cornas 1997, Clape
A nice nose of dark fruit and earth, but very dirty and bretty. The palate is angular and really filthy. Incredible levels of brett in this wine, it is very dirty indeed. There is not much else on the palate, hardly any fruit, and not much length. The nose promised some goodies, but the box was just empty. Very disappointing.

This is not going to be a tasting note, it is going to be a rant. Partly because I feel so personally offended by this wine, but largely because I have been obliged to drink half a bottle of the booze-tastic horror.

Macon Villages Cuvée Tradition E. J. Thévenet Domaine de la Bongran, Jean Thévenet
By arse, what am I doing drinking this lighter-fluid? It is 14% at the very least, in the name of all that is evil! Now, I am all for wines of heroism, but I like them to have some form of balance. The only balance this has is a large amount of alcohol to balance out the large amount of alcohol. Honestly! Where is the elegance? Where is the refinement? It is just a big glass of booze. I know Australians who'd be floored by this monster. I like my wines to have harmony, to speak of something more interesting than a mere glass of tart-fuel. This cannot speak because its speech is too slurred. I see no pleasure in drinking what is effectively a large glass of raw booze. There may be some acidity there, but it hardly competes with the whacked-out, crazy, booze-tastic monster that is this alcohol-fuelled frenzy of a wine. I am whammed even slagging it off. But, far, far worse than that, I am bored by having to drink it. No thanks.

The worst thing is, I've bought bottles of this before and hated them just as much. I am such a fool buying another bottle of bloody awful, completely atypical Macon. Cuvée 'Tradition'? Tradition my arse.

I welcome comments on this entry as I know everyone in the entire world has consumed this wine. This must be why the world is in such a state; everyone is pissed.

A bottle of wine from a producer that has rarely compelled me. I like their Riesling and their Cabernet. They are most famous for their chardonnay, which I find has the same problems as this.

Leeuwin Estate Art Series Shiraz 2001
Quite a ripe, alcoholic, chocolaty nose. The palate is fiercely acidic, along with being quite heavy and ponderous. This is one of those wines that 'strives for balance', but ends up being out of balance and lacking any real niceness. The harsh acidity hides the essential ripeness of the wine and ends up making it taste rather thin. Poor show, Mr Leeuwin.

... Is that people purchase shit wine and expect you to enjoy it. Last night I had the woeful experience of opening my aunt's christmas present to me: Staton Hills Cabernet Sauvignon 1994 from Washington State. By arse it was disgusting. Very much a style of wine that one found at the four-to-six pound price bracket in the UK during the early to mid-nineties; it was especially noticeable with wines from South-Africa, but also many wines from New Zealand. I had really hoped never to try such a thing again. Mostly it was made with unripe grapes, that had spectacular yields, and the the wine was chapitalised to buggery. Enough sugar had been added to allow it to get to 13.5% rather than its natural 11%-ish. Because of this it had the strange, green-yet-chocolaty nose than this kind of filth always had. Age had done it no favours and, to be honest, I'd only opened it to make gravy from it. I must stand up for my lovely aunt, though, as she rang me the day after christmas and said she had opened two bottles on christmas day and they were both undrinkable. She was right.