Now not many people can invite eight guests to a dinner party, ask everyone their birthyear, and come up with eleven wines from five different vintages from six different wine regions. This is a true drinker’s collection, and what makes this ‘A Great American Cellar.’ On to the wines…

The 1971 Krug Champagne was next, his first experience with truly great Champagne back in 1982, and ‘it has gotten even better.’ This was pure apple pie, in a dry and sophisticated way, with supporting aromas of bread crust and honey. Round and long, this was a perfect bottle, emitting butter crumb flavors with a smoky and toasty personality. It got more and more buttery with time in the glass, and cream soda and earth switched sides of the court well and often. That was my birthyear, by the way (97).

The 1958 Clos des Lambrays had a lot of metal at first, but there was some surprisingly great fruit underneath. There was a bit of a reconditioning debate that ensued, but this ended up clean and pretty with pleasant red fruit. This was the vintage of both our hosts (92).

The 1947 Clos des Lambrays was a stunner. It had a fabulous nose that was super aromatic with great spice. Mint, painted wall, autumn and lovely red fruit blended into its great aroma and flavor profile. Appealing grill qualities emerged in this gritty, cherry bomb of a wine (96).

The cellar was now an impressive ’10 for 10,’ as one guest put it. There was one wine to go. Our cellar’s story came full circle with a bottle of 1971 Von Simmern Hattenheimer Nussbrunnen Trockenbeerenauslese. Say that ten times quickly! Thankfully, we didn’t have to, as our mouths were already full of this decadent nectar, which almost looked like a Burgundy at the right angle. But this was no Burgundy. This was a rich, deep wine with loads of coffee, petrol, forest, molasses and oil. There was this Milanese edge to its motor oil, and this was a butterball of a mouthful of sweet wine (96).

The evening was a perfect snapshot of this Great American Cellar, a true drinker’s cellar that will continue to reward hundreds of new drinkers over the next 35 years. I look forward to sharing many more great nights together with this true connoisseur accordingly, and with bottles from his cellar with many of you!

The 1961 Latour took no prisoners. This was super smoky, thick and very long. Its ‘tannins overshadowed’ the plush polish of the Mouton a bit. This was a bigger, thicker and longer wine with a regal and powerful dryness. This was rock solid, thick and muscly (97).

The 1961 Haut Brion was probably the most exotic of the flight, showing much more mesquite to its also smoky quality. There was more cedar and gravel here, and there was this dirty, earthy quality that the other two didn’t have. Balanced and thick, this was a rich, hedonistic wine. There was good structure and lots of barbecue to our third ’61 beauty (95).

There were six votes for the Latour, and three apiece for the Mouton and Haut Brion, showing both the universal strength of the vintage and also how the human perception of pleasure will always differ.

The 2002 Mugnier Musigny was an excellent counterpoint to the 2003s, although The Rainmaker prefaced this wine by saying he thought 2001 was a better Red Burgundy vintage. Hmmmm. The nose of the Mugnier had lots of bread and sour cherry, along with honeyed fruit, cream and pheromones. This was a tender and creamy wine, showing lots of soft porn love. It also got better in the glass, stopping right on the border of outstanding (94+).

The 2000 Mouton Rothschild was no slouch, but it was definitely in third place amongst its distinguished brethren. It felt more shut down in its nose despite a flash of ripe cream. The last bottle I had of this felt more open. This bottle was more leathery, earthy and gritty. However, it was shy compared to the previous two wines, perhaps intimidated by the company (95).

It was time for a nap or a massage, or both, I can’t remember. I do remember the dinner the night after the auction the next day, where DRC was the theme, and Kelly’s Heroes gathered together in a fitting tribute to the world’s most important producer. Everyone dug deeply and generously into their cellars for an amazing night of La Tache and a few others.

We started with a perfect bottle of 1976 Dom Perignon. This bottle was super fresh with zippy and long white fruits and less vanilla than usual, but that was quite alright. Still young and ascending while also showing some of those mature nuances, this ‘76 DP was in a great spot (95).

The 1969 DRC La Tache had gorgeous color and nice rose and citrus aromas. There was more fruit than usual for this vintage, as well as cola and ‘quince’ per Jennie. It had a round, plush palate with pleasant, soft fruit. It was leathery and long with nice, autumnal flavors (94).

The 1978 DRC La Tache was a killer bottle, gracefully brought by The Historian, and also gracefully acquired at an Acker Hong Kong auction. Gil started making horny tiger sounds as he dug his nose into the glass. There was a lot going on. Bouillon, meat, animal fat, chrysanthemum, earth, sandpaper and cherry could all be found. Its autumn and wafer qualities were great, and there was a nice kiss of cola to its finish. Kelly likened it to a ‘belly dancer’ (97).

The next wine was an impressive 1985 DRC La Tache. At first, there was a touch of tutti frutti, which blew off into redder fruits and vintage leather. Its acidity was ‘strong,’ but its palate was more soupy. The tutti frutti officially left the building, and root beer and exotic fruit emerged. It got tasty in a rusty way as it got better and better in the glass. There was nice leather, and caramel emerged in this outstanding bottle of 1985. I couldn’t help but notice the Acker sticker on the back of the bottle lol (95).

The 1993 DRC La Tache that followed was very primary compared to everything else so far. It was almost jammy by comparison, a ‘fruitcake’ per Gil. It was very ripe and a great bottle that almost tasted a decade younger than it should have been. There was nice flesh and a lot of fruit for a ’93, and its bright ‘cranberry and rhubarb’ flavors combined with some ‘red Twizzler,’ all per Mr. Wine Vegas. Some ’93 DRCs can be very cedary and tight, but this bottle was all about the goodies (95).

The 1989 DRC Richebourg had a much deeper nose with blacker fruits, iron and vitamin aromas. It was richer than I thought it would be, and it had a nice kiss of forest and milk. This was a great ’89 and a pleasant surprise. It had nice thickness to its finish as well (94).

Howdy. It’s been a while, I know. It has been a busy busy Fall season, with a major amount of travel time, even more so than usual. It got so bad, I finally had to make a deal with my significant other. Two weeks a month max on the road, and the two weeks I am home, only three nights a week out. Fair deal!

A 2004 Louis Latour Chevalier Montrachet Les Demoiselles was classically 2004. It was buttery and smooth, showing more citrus, rainwater and balance. ‘Solid’ summed it up (92).

The wines of Domaine Leflaive are amongst the best and most ageworthy in all of white Burgundy, and the next pair showed why. The 1999 Domaine Leflaive Chevalier Montrachet was big and smoky, with toasted kernels and a drop of honey. This was a powerful wine that was big and smoky. It was clearly in a better bracket (95).

We two-stepped to Tuscany with a 1997 Solaia. There were herbs and spices almost a la Chartreuse, and this was clearly a different category from that of Piedmont. It got more herbal and a bit confused in the glass (93).

The 2002 Mugnier Musigny was an excellent counterpoint to the 2003s, although The Rainmaker prefaced this wine by saying he thought 2001 was a better Red Burgundy vintage. Hmmmm. The nose of the Mugnier had lots of bread and sour cherry, along with honeyed fruit, cream and pheromones. This was a tender and creamy wine, showing lots of soft porn love. It also got better in the glass, stopping right on the border of outstanding (94+).

The 1990 Leoville Las Cases has long been one of my favorite wines; in fact, it is probably the best overall quality-to-value ratio in the vintage. I will never forget how Las Cases convincingly won a blind tasting of 15 wines and 60 people in Hong Kong with most top wines. Deep chocolate was the first quality that came to mind in the LLC. It was rich and creamy, possessing loads of cassis and great allspice. There was this Christmas goodness to the Las Cases, call it trees, pudding and/or warmth. This was a rich, classic and outstanding wine (96).

The 1990 Montrose was a step behind, although it had its own unique gait. Its redder fruits had a touch of wild herbs to them as its nose figured itself out in a post-teenager, pre-adult fashion. Vanilla bean and cream pie came out on the palate of this honey bunny of a wine. Delicious, ripe and creamy, this bottle of Montrose was a definite Thumper (95).

The last of our ’90s was a 1990 Beausejour Duffau, and it was much more disappointing than the last two occasions I had it. This bottle was round, soft and easy, but uncomplicated (91).

The last wine was a 2000 L’Angelus, which was a big, big, red, red wine. I needed a fork to scrape this sucker off my tongue. There was a lot of wheat, black, grits and grit to the wine, but I didn’t have a lot left in me, so I reserve my right to amend my (93+).

The first wine had a nice, fresh nose with white, crystallized fruits, minerals and smoky twists of citrus. Its palate was soft and tried a little tenderness to make up for that initial kiss of morning mouth on its finish. Nobody shot JR, because he noted ‘sweet tropical orchard and peach nectar,’ and he decided it had to be a hot vintage. It was, as in a 2006 Jadot Batard Montrachet. It got more honeyed and sweet in the glass, showing even more nectar. It rounded out and ultimately felt softer than I wanted it to be (90).

The second wine wasn’t undrinkable, but it wasn’t perfect. I am not sure if it was premox, as it was a 1992 Sauzet Batard Montrachet, which was supposedly pre premox, so to speak. With almost 55 wines tasted over these four days alone, I will let it rest in peace, at least for this bottle (DQ).

The fifth white and final wine in this flight was out of magnum. It was very sweet, almost Sauvignon Blanc-ish. It had a lot of ‘stone fruits,’ a little pungency and a grassy, smooth finish. Clean, light and refreshing kept coming up in my notes for this 2005 Remoissenet Montrachet. Honeysuckle crept in (91M).

The first red served was bright with lots of vitamins. It had this marijuana, exotic herbal thing happening. I thought this was a village wine, but it was actually a Grand Cru. Oops. It was all downhill from here. One piece of advice: whenever you guess correctly one thing blind, take the rest of the night off. This 2002 Mongeard-Mugneret Grands Echezeaux was soft, but it had good acidity. JR noted ‘a little dill, herbaceousness.’ Spell check on aisle 3 please. Someone guessed 2008, and M found ‘nice spice.’ Spice and cinnamon joined the party. Too bad the party was already closed (90).

This next flight was two of a kind, and while the first reminded me of 1997, it was actually a 2007 Rouget Vosne Romanee Cros Parantoux. There were dirty, round red fruits along with hints of vitamin to this simple but nice wine. Velvet and velour tricked out the room, and acid and more spice emerged. There was this exotic banana thing happening, but it got a little oaky, and then it got better again. I am a big fan of drinking ’07s now, although this felt like it needed more time. JR found it ‘a tad over acidic’ (92).

We were on to the next pair, and the first had that ripe, round, green bamboo of 1997, and it sure was a 1997 Rousseau Charmes Chambertin. This was an open and ripe wine, complicated and brothy. Someone found its nose ‘sexy.’ It had great red fruit and honey bear flavors, along with some apple (93).

The next wine was also a 1990, and it also had that good stink and wow factor. It was a touch gamey, but so aromatic and honeyed. There was more animal here, along with some wet hay and a drop of good urine. Lemony flavors played well into its high pitch and nerve, and its leathery flavors also complemented. ‘Dill pickle’ and salt licorice rounded out this 1990 Rousseau Ruchottes Chambertin Clos des Ruchottes, which made me come up with a new verb. What are you doing tonight? Oh, I’m Chamberting, you know you know baby (93).

The night was all about 1959, except the magnum of 1988 Dom Perignon Rose. Its nose spoke of good herbs, showing more fraise than strawberry. Lots of citrus and orange peel rounded out this aromatic bubbly, which had lots of grass and hay. Good flesh, nice richness and good minerality summed up our aperitif (94M).

The 1959 E. Brocard Corton that followed was great except for that same edge of cardboard. In fact, it was corked. However, despite that handicap, it still showed deeper black and purple fruit and a much riper (and better) palate. There was some good thickness to its thighs, and its acid was strong. Someone noted, ‘great weight’ (93A).

The next wine was a pleasant surprise, a 1959 Rene Couly Chinon Clos de l’Olive, Its nose was very dark with lots of violet and black fruits, as well as this dash of pot pourri. Its great aromatics were met by a very dry finish that had thick, expressive tannins. Black olives emerged in full force. I deduced the vineyards were surrounded by olive trees. I am assuming I am right. Great spice and pretty fruit described this marriage perfectly (92).

The 1959 Pichon Baron took a little time to warmup, but oh did it ever. This was classic Pauillac on the irony side, stony with lots of rocks in its nose. It came across very young and fresh, with a touch of ashtray in there. The Fisher King found it ‘more lively’ and with ‘so much acid.’ Its palate was all about the purple with some light tannin expression. It continued to get stronger in the glass, emitting pencil, nut, cedar and ‘cherry.’ Better and better appeared again and again in my notes (94).

If this were a game of chess, there would be four logical moves. Thankfully, two of them were played. The 1959 Mouton Rothschild was very minty, possessing that classic, old Mouton menthol. There was also ripe cassis to this sexy nose, along with thick cement and cedar qualities. Chocolate, cream and forest flavors abounded in this delicious wine. There was great balance to this toffee and coffee orgy, and ‘eucalyptus, classic mint (and) lead pencil’ came from the crowd (95).

The 1959 Latour came, saw and conquered. Its brooding, black fruit was bursting out of its shirt and pants with great t ‘n a. Its round and tasty palate was full and long. The tannic display was impressive. While thick, long and strong, it somehow remained elegant. ‘Gorgeous (and) finish of a lifetime’ came from the crowd (97).

There was a dry, wheaty, cardboard nose to the 1959 Damoy Chambertin Clos de Beze. It felt lighter and browner than the Ponelle, but it got better in the glass. Toasty and minerally, its acid really rocked out with its peacock out, but I still liked the Ponelle better, even if this could go farther down the road (93).

The 2005 DRC Montrachet was a knockout. I expected this to be a bit clumsy, as ’05 whites are not usually in the same category as reds, but this one sure was. We were discussing how everyone always assumes a great red vintage is a great white vintage, but how it isn’t always the case, and how whites beat to their own drum. This 2005 white, however, shut down the ’07, which is theoretically the better white vintage. This was big, buttery, smoky and toasty. Rich, thick and lush, this was about as strong as a white wine gets. DuJeremy found it ‘easy to like,’ and that it ‘feels readier than it should,’ also finding this ‘Hawaiian vanilla’ in it. This was a powerful powerhouse, it had the power (97+).

The last Montrachet of the evening was quite reductive and smoked. There was great volume to its palate, and it felt like we should have saved it for dessert. The 1986 DRC Montrachet kept getting better and better and better, but it ultimately was a bit of an outlier (93A).

The 1978 DRC La Tache was tall, dark and handsome, all that and then some. This was a minty, beefy, bloody wine. There was lots of menthol, rose and garden in this nearly perfect ’78. Its palate was rich and saucy with great, handpicked, heirloom tomato flavors. The Mogul was gushing how he just ‘melted into it;’ this was quintessential LT. Lots of complicated spice added forte to its finish. A masterpiece (97+).

The last of this triumphant trio was the 1971 DRC La Tache. It had a mushroomy, truffly nose. It was also saucy, but overshadowed by the 1978. Four out of five times, the 1971 wins this battle, but on this night, the 1978 stood tall. This particular bottle of ’71 also lacked the usual acidity and was a bit softer on its finish. Its flavors were more brothy, and while still outstanding, it scored lower than usual (95).

1991 DRC Romanee Conti. Well, hello, old friend. It’s getting rarer to see RC’s opened like the good ol’ days, so it was much appreciated to have this dynamic duo thanks to The Mogul and The Rocketman. The 1991 had deep ocean fruit that was rich, saucy, big and beefy. The stuffing was greater than the turkey lol. DuJeremy cooed, ‘this is what I envision.’ Sir Robert found it ‘above its class.’ It was so sweet, so perfumed, so great…what a wine. Its finished smacked asses and faces, letting everyone know who the superstar in the room was (98).

Fall is upon us, and on September 6th we are kicking it off at Marea with our best NY auction in years, with close to $4 million available and some fantastic cellars. Bang bang.