Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Last revision Both sides next revision
ramonet [2020/05/21 11:35]
jammywine
ramonet [2023/11/05 06:18]
rayner.cheung [2002]
Line 87: Line 87:
   * **Chassagne Ruchottes**(July 2007): no signs of oxidation, nice wine [ER]   * **Chassagne Ruchottes**(July 2007): no signs of oxidation, nice wine [ER]
   * **Chassagne Ruchottes** (23 Dec 2010): premoxed [Philip Robert]   * **Chassagne Ruchottes** (23 Dec 2010): premoxed [Philip Robert]
 +  * **Chassagne Les Caillerets** (Nov 2019): No premox but lean and slightly funky. [Jammy Wine]
 ===== 1995 ===== ===== 1995 =====
  
Line 327: Line 328:
   * **Montrachet**(August 2009): Not oxidised [WK Choy]   * **Montrachet**(August 2009): Not oxidised [WK Choy]
   * **Montrachet**(4 Mar 2010): Not oxidized but excessively minty on the palate. Hope this bottle is an aberration. See 2002 Tasting Notes, Night Three [Don Cornwell]   * **Montrachet**(4 Mar 2010): Not oxidized but excessively minty on the palate. Hope this bottle is an aberration. See 2002 Tasting Notes, Night Three [Don Cornwell]
 +  * **Montrachet** (Nov. 2023): Dark gold. Nose very ripe. Less advanced on the palate, saved by the wine's firm acid spine. Got better with air. Served by a close friend & fellow collector with impeccable sourcing. [Rayner Cheung]
   * **Puligny** **Enseignères** (Dec 2007) not oxidized. cork appears unbleached [David Klinger]   * **Puligny** **Enseignères** (Dec 2007) not oxidized. cork appears unbleached [David Klinger]
   * **Puligny Champs Canet** (Mar 2013): Not oxidised and drinking very well   * **Puligny Champs Canet** (Mar 2013): Not oxidised and drinking very well
  • ramonet.txt
  • Last modified: 2023/11/05 06:20
  • by rayner.cheung