Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Next revision | Previous revision | ||
prieur [2018/03/14 12:41] 127.0.0.1 external edit |
prieur [2020/05/21 11:21] (current) jammywine [2002] |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
* **Puligny Combettes** (Feb 2010) Hollow, fading. [Kent M] | * **Puligny Combettes** (Feb 2010) Hollow, fading. [Kent M] | ||
* **Puligny Combettes** (August 2009): Disappointing - as a previous bottle drunk a year ago was very, very good. This one had golden colour. [Kent M] | * **Puligny Combettes** (August 2009): Disappointing - as a previous bottle drunk a year ago was very, very good. This one had golden colour. [Kent M] | ||
+ | * **Montrachet** (Jan 2020): Oxidised [Jammy Wine] | ||
\\ | \\ | ||
- | ===== **2004** ===== | + | ===== 2004 ===== |
* **Puligny Combettes** (Jan. 2010): dark and oxidised [JF Zarama] | * **Puligny Combettes** (Jan. 2010): dark and oxidised [JF Zarama] | ||
- | \\ **2005**\\ | + | ===== 2005===== |
- | * Beaune Premier Cru, Champs-Pimont (Apr 2015): nice color but oxidized. snif! | + | * **Beaune Premier Cru, Champs-Pimont** (Apr 2015): nice color but oxidized. snif! |
* **Corton Charlemagne** (April 2017): Totally oxidized. Sad. (D. Attick) | * **Corton Charlemagne** (April 2017): Totally oxidized. Sad. (D. Attick) | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== 2009===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * **Beaune Premier Cru, Champs-Pimont** (Nov. 2017 - May 2018): Three bottles - two were drinking well with the exuberant fruit of the vintage; one was oxidized and bordering on undrinkable (Joel Singer) |