Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
guffens_heynen [2018/03/14 12:41] |
guffens_heynen [2018/03/14 12:41] (current) |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | ===== 1995 ===== | ||
+ | * **Pouilly-Fuissé Premier Jus** (Nov 2005): Not oxidized, very bright, terrific wine [Frank Drew] | ||
+ | ===== 1996 ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * **Macon-Pierreclos Le Chavigne** (Sept 2005): Not oxidized, fresh, bright, some oak, still on the young side [Frank Drew] | ||
+ | * **Macon-Pierreclos Le Chavigne** (March 2008): Not oxidized, good bottle in spite of s.o.s. [Frank Drew] | ||
+ | * **Macon-Pierreclos Le Chavigne** (Sept 2008): Not oxidized, quite fresh and very good [Frank Drew] | ||
+ | * **Macon-Pierreclos Le Chavigne** (July 2009): Not oxidized, very good bottle, unbleached cork [Frank Drew] | ||
+ | * **Pouilly-Fuissé Les Croux** (Sept 2006): Not oxidized, probably good wine but, sadly, corked [Frank Drew] | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | ===== 1997 ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * **Macon-Pierreclos Le Chavigne** (March 2006). One bottle completely gone. Another bottle sampled several nights latter was fine. (S. Malanga) | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | ===== 2000 ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * **Macon-Pierreclos En Chavigne** (April 2008). Prematurely oxidized [Rico Chan] | ||
+ | * **Macon-Pierreclos En Chavigne** (Sept 2008). Not Oxidized [Rico Chan] | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | ===== 2002 ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * **Pouilly-Fuissé La Roche** (March 2009. Not oxidized, lovely, balanced, intense, precise, persistent [Steve Stearns] | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | ===== 2008 ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * **Macon-Pierreclos Le Chavigne** (14 Oct 2012): Not oxidized, fine [Gilles Huygen] | ||
+ | * Pouilly Fuissé "La Roche" (25 sept. 2015): Slightly oxidized, very golden in color, a lot of baked apple on the nose. Not very appealing overall. (François Rosenfeld) |