After my week in Europe, I went straight to San Francisco. La Paulee was in town, and a bunch of Burgundy lovers were bouncing off the best restaurants’ walls all week long. There were three distinctively noteworthy dinners I was fortunate enough to attend, beginning with an evening at Saison, which The Jackal had bought out for his clandestine operations. Our most generous host organized a spectacular dinner made all the more spectacular by the generosity he commanded from all of his guests.

The 2004 Coche-Dury Meursault Perrieres was in a much better spot, much fleshier and open for business. There was delightful spice and a touch of glue to this wintry mix, along with sweet, bright, yellow Coche fruit. A touch of kernel and benevolent dust rounded out this rich and vimful white. This was luscious and great, right in its sweet spot (96).

The third wine was brought by me, and supposed to be a 2001. Well it was a 2001, just a 2001 Coche-Dury Corton Charlemagne instead. Surprise, surprise. I love those $5000 picking errors. To make matters worse, one of the bottles was corked; of course, it was the bottle I got. Kill me now. I did have a sip of the other bottle, which was fantastic, but not enough to fully depict (DQ).

The 2005 Ramonet Montrachet was unfortunately oxidized (DQ). The 2002 Ramonet Montrachet was not. It had a smokehouse nose with corny, sweeter fruit. It was quite oily in its aromas, showing white ice and more smoke. There was a big anise streak and lots of structure to this intense wine. It was almost as if a twist of vodka was in there! It was almost too young, more intense than the 2007 for sure (96+).

A magnum of 1999 Ramonet Bienvenues Batard Montrachet was a last second substitute, I think, and it didn’t stack up to the Montrachets being served last in the flight. It just wasn’t in the same league, more waterfall and alley, and lighter for a 1999 in general. Jetski found it ‘thin, and its finish is clipped.’ Tell us how you really feel, Jetski : ) It got better when I ran out of Montrachet lol (93M).

The 2001 DRC Richebourg that followed showed spectacularly well, making up for the last time I had this wine. Bottle variation, it happens. There was great perfume and lots of red fruit to this rich and oily red. It was very concentrated with lots of rose and oil components. Rich, long and tasty, I noted it was even better than the ’01 La Tache I just had in Miami. I don’t say Riche is better than LT often; again, it could just be a bottle thing. Rich and saucy, everyone was a fan of the 2001. The topic of aging wine too long came up as a compliment to drinking this ’01 now; let’s just leave it at that (96).

The 1991 DRC Richebourg that followed had more celery soda action, along with cherry oil and ‘olive’ per Dr. Love. It was brothy and full of bouillon. Jetski thought it was a touch advanced, but The Jackal thought it was the wine of the night. There was a touch of kink to its flavors on the red side, and it became a bit jammy on the palate. I wanted more from it, given how great the 1991 vintage can be (95).

We continued onwards with a magnum of 1979 DRC Richebourg. Its nose was a bit balmy with a stewy and tea-like personality. Someone noted its ‘third stage of evolution.’ There was definitely soil and wet forest to go with its blacker fruits. However, its palate was delicious, showing great sweetness and balance. There was flesh and medium grit to this lip smacking wine. While the nose was all about the mushroom and tree bark, the palate was all about the delicious. A tale of two wines, indeed (96M).

The 1966 DRC Richebourg was a tale of two bottles. Well, that may not be entirely fair. I got the dregs of one bottle, so I couldn’t even deal thanks to the mismanaged pour. The second bottle was super tasty, with loads of red oil and a touch of mint. I only had a small sip or two, however (96).

Next up was a flight for lovers, especially those of Roumier and Mugnier. The 2009 Roumier Chambolle Musigny Les Amoureuses was ‘so primal’ per Dr. Love. It was a monster, one that wasn’t ready. It was black as hell, so much so it was tough to enjoy. Jetski observed, ‘it doesn’t mean anything,’ as it was tough to evaluate the wine at this age. Roumiers need more time than most. It was so concentrated and so young, clearly in need of more time (95+).

Even though it was about 5am on my internal clock on that day, I had one good note left in me for a 2002 Mugnier Chambolle Musigny Les Amoureuses. The Mugnier was sweet and delicious, clearly a lighter style than the Roumier. This wasn’t a negative as the Mugnier went down so easy. Another concurred it was showing much better. Its elegance and style seduced, combining with gorgeous purple flowers and an oh so tasty finish (96).

My internal alarm clock failed to go off, so the last three (yes three!) flights saw me abridging my notes significantly. The first was a flight of rare Fourrier Griottes Chambertin, and we were joined by Jean-Marie Fourrier for dinner, by the way.

The 2012 was purple and primary, ‘pretty and beautiful’ per the Somm. It was tasty, and I liked it, but a bit young. The 2011 really impressed, quite drinkable already, and showing that early ’11 approachability. It had some nice zip, however. The 2010 was the best of the flight and a superb wine. It had so much acidity and length. It got a, ‘Great!!!’ It was also my highest rated wine of the night. The 2009, on the other hand, was a bit disappointing. It had the least fire in its soul, and it was heavy and a bit cloying. Its flavors were also a touch dirty.

The signature, deep, dark spice of Leroy was evident immediately. Brian hailed it as ‘the best flight.’ The 2001 was solid but lost a step in the glass. The 2000 outboxed its weight class; this was so rich for a 2000. It also outclassed the 2001 with its deep, heavy, rich and pleasing fruit. The 1996 was classic. It has always been a great vintage for Leroy as her style plays well into the highly acidic profile of 1996. The 1990 got another ‘solid’ from me, but the Richebourg seized hold off the flight immediately. It was just better than all the rest.

There was also one last flight of Krug. I had thrown in the towel already, but here are some scores.

It was kind of late, and if it wasn’t 7AM for me, I might have rallied. But tomorrow was another day, and the legendary Martine Saunier was waiting in the wings with some Jayer from her cellar…

My recent trip to Europe saw me in London twice on consecutive days, but I didn’t stay the first night. I did stay the second. Despite the epicenter of the wine universe shifting from London to New York and Hong Kong in fairly equal shares over the past two decades, there still is a lot of fine wine in London, or in England, if you want to get technical. Somehow, I managed to find the Americans. Well, it wasn’t just all Americans, I think there were four of us. We definitely had at least three Brits, and we even threw in a Swede and a Frenchman. These nations were most certainly united by one noble and common cause: a love for fine wine.

I was a few minutes late to dinner due to a spontaneous meeting, so I had to catch up quickly on the bubblies and whites. A 1988 Ruinart Blanc de Blancs was oaky and full-bodied, rich but one-dimensional with its flavor profile (90).

There were two more whites, the first being a 2010 Ente Meursault. Their wines are getting quite expensive, and a taste of this village Meursault made me believe the hype. It had nice fruit in a sweet, friendly way and was simply delicious, a straight shot of the classic 2010 vintage (93). The last white of this night, well at least Burgundy, was a 2010 Marc Colin Montrachet. All I can say is that terroir matters. The clarity of the 2010 vintage once again came through, and the terroir was clearly better than the three prior Meursaults (95).

The reds started with our most mature wine of the evening, a 1964 Noellat Romanee St. Vivant. It was clearly older but still fresh with lovely, earthy qualities (91).

The younger reds began with a 1999 Roumier Chambolle Musigny Les Cras. It was deep aromatically, with a fleshy and peanutty character, but light in its mid-palate. It felt heavy handed by the usual Roumier standards, and while possessing nice earth flavors, I was disappointed (90).

There was a Roumier Musigny sighting, always a special occasion. This 1999 Roumier Musigny had a similar thread with the Cras with its peanutty edge, but its body had ‘all-time energy’ from the crowd. It was clearly thicker and deeper than the Mugnier, with much more POWER I wrote in capital letters. There was zip and impetus to this majestic wine, and while still too young, it was oh so strong. Wait if you have some (97+)!

That was the end of our Burgundy programming, but the beginning of our Northern Rhone. The first wine that came out was a 1988 Guigal Cote Rotie La Landonne, and it was a good start. This was a clear left turn from our Burgundy flight, but we weren’t lost. This deep, dark wine had a bit more noticeable wood, with rich bacon and violet aromas underneath. This was much more of a bodybuilder compared to the Musignys, more square yet still outstanding. One guest noted a ‘vegetal stem’ (95).

The 1990 Guigal Cote Rotie La Turque was zippy and full-bodied, long and vimful displaying a backside that would make a peacock proud. Its acidity dominated its first sip, but it smoothed out in the glass. It came back with a fury, snapping and crackling again on its finish (96).

The 1991 Guigal Cote Rotie La Landonne followed suit with its deep, decadent and dense core. There was lots of creamy black fruit in this distinguished red. La Landonne is definitely the square that fits the circle in Cote-Rotie. Guigal plus Cote Rotie equals great (95).

One last wine was served, a delicious 1962 Yquem. It was rich and decadent with candle wax aromas and brown sugar flavors. It was all brulee without the cream (95).

Here’s a brief recap paragraph: The Selosse was very apple juicy and tasty but a NV Champagne better served in its youth. The Chevalier Blanc remains one of the best kept secrets in fine white wine that can age. Honey, nut, oak, glue, baked fruit and coconuts. Austere yet super stimulating. The 1981 Sauzet was a revelation. A forgotten vintage for Burgundy, this Chardonnay delivered an outstanding experience. ‘Better than 1983,’ the Keymaster resonated. The 1959 Montrose was affected, but the 1955 was solid. Nice, buttery and with tension are some of my observations. I am not a big fan of young Comte Armands, but perhaps the older ones are just what I needed. Deep, dark and delicious, it even had one of our distinguished guests guessing Griottes. All wines were served blind btw. What else is new, the DRC proved to be the best wine on the table. It was classic mint with red Christmas fruits and beef satay action. The LHB was all about the cassis and chocolate, and it delivered a great drinking experience. 1971 Bordeaux are definitely under investigated.

I am off to Hong Kong tomorrow, cheers to more excellent wines in store this week, for each and every one of us.