I'm wondering how the recent vintages have been rated generally.
So far Parker has rated: 2001 96, 2002 95, 2003 92 and 2004 88

I find this odd; although I've not tasted that many wines I thought 04 was a better vintage overall than 03.
What are the other published ratings? What are your thoughts? Any word from the winemakers on how 05 and 06 are looking?

Dave, I agree with you in that my experience has been that 04's are generally better than 03's. 04 was described as a year of temprature spikes, both high and low, that made it a very low yeilding crop and caused problems for some. Pine Ridge said they only made 4500 cases of 04 Rutherford cab when a normal crop is 11-15K cases. Remember, Laube blasted most 03's, while Parker rated them just below 01 and 02. However,
this link shows Parker rating 04 at 91 and 05 at 90.

I was at Neal Vineyards last Tuesday and had a chance to speak with Mark Neal. He was very excited about how the 07 vintage was setting up for Napa cab, saying the conditions had been nearly ideal and this could be a vintage along the lines of 97. We just have to wait another 3 years and hope nothing goes wrong in the next 6 weeks.

I think the WA was too aggressive with their rating for the California 2003 Cabernet vintage. I find many 2003 California Cabs dry, woody, with a thinner concentration of fruit. Buy 2002 or 2004, and skip the 2003; that is unless you like that style.----and there are always some exceptions.

In general, I have found 2003 a pass for the most part. Just too many other vintages of late that are far better imo.

RMP's current vintage rating has the following:

2001 96, 2002 95, 2003 92, 2004 91 and 2005 90


I don’t think you will see his real take on the vintage until after the annual CA issue at the end of the year. He has only rated 149 ‘04 CA Cabs and many were from barrel.

He has reviewed so far:
204 2002 CA Cabs
181 2003 CA Cabs
149 2004 CA Cabs

Parker likes extracted wines and many of the ‘03 CA Cabs fit this mold. Just look at some of his high ratings of the super-extracted and hot ‘03 Aussie Shraz’s as an example.

IMHO, the ‘03 Napa Cabs are spotty - some excellent ones and plenty of bad ones. You have to be selective.

'03 is definately the weakest of the bunch for Napa. I think Laube was too harsh in his assessment of the vintage, but most of the '03 wines seem to have a green, unripe streak that prevails and it turns a lot of people off. Hopefully, this will mellow over time and add to their character.

'04s seem to come on strong at first, but many lack a strong finish. In this respect, they trail both '02 & '01.

My preference of the four vintages is '02, '01, '04, with a gap down to '03. The '05 barrel samples I've had are a mixed bag, but some were exceptional (seems really hit or miss).