Upfront I’d say I’m an infrequent sauv blanc drinker but have liked the New Zealand SBs that I’ve tried. This was too one dimensional. It was mostly grapefruit with some grass and a bit of minerality. I won’t buy this one again. It was OK with the food but bleh on its own.
Jeremy if you’re reading – your notes have been a great guide for buying the NZ sauvs. There are some that I’ve liked better than this one.
EDIT for spelling... ____________________________
Wine is beautiful - we came, we saw, we drank it all.
[This message was edited by Winetex on Nov 21, 2002 at 06:07 PM.]
Winetex, Your welcome, also just be aware that the 2002 NZ savs are very high in tartaric acids and need a little bottle age before they'll develop.
Normally I owuldn't recommend this but 2002 was a wierd vintage-not bad just wierd.
On a personal note I agree the Omaka Springs 2002 Sav seemed to lack any complexity of merit. And it just picked up silver in the Air NZ Show-what were those judges thinking.
Jeremy Ellis<br />Brown's Seriously Fine Wines<br />Auckland, NZ<br />mighty turnip hunter. The animals are just to damn fast.
Actually, I just drank this wine for the first time and found several things impressive about it. It has a heavier mouthfeel than most sbs I've tasted, and I felt that although the predominant fruit was grapefruit, there was a zesty lime current going through it. The wine had a firm mineral backbone and ample acids. I do agree that we are drinking it young and it has the possibility of future improvement.
Dick
Posts: 2027 | Location: Delaware | Registered: Jun 21, 2002
Hi Dick - I just was not getting any depth to this wine but am willing to give it a second chance. Especially since most of the NZ sauvs are sold out and this seems to be the one in constant supply. It could have been a food clash or as you both note a "too young" issue.
____________________________
Wine is beautiful - we came, we saw, we drank it all.
