Jay Kline

9.2

Popped and poured; enjoyed over the course of an hour. The 2016 “UV Lucky Well” pours a deep ruby color with a near opaque core; medium+ viscosity with light staining of the tears and some light sediment. On the nose, the wine is vinous with fascinating notes of ancho chilis, bruised strawberries, potpourri, licorice, leather, organic earth and fine baking spices. On the palate, the wine is dry with medium tannin and medium acid. Confirming the notes from the nose. The finish is long and spicy. True to its Russian River roots, this is an opulent expression of Pinot Noir. Not my preferred style but this was very well made and has plenty of interesting things to say. Drink now. — a month ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.2

2007 vintage. From magnum and tasted 1.5 hours after being decanted. Herbal (but not mint) and woodsy nose. Medium body. Tons of thrusters at full power initially but the dark cherry, plum and baking chocolate notes were the only remaining flavors after the leap to hyperspace. That expected and (in)famous Latour power definitely in the picture but without any other stars in the cast to make this worthy of Oscar consideration. Not a top notch vintage, yet it seems like this effort is on a giant plateau and could remain there for a decade-easy. Likely would have benefited from an additional hour or two of air time but not enough to move the needle significantly…maybe to 9.3. — 2 years ago

Aaron Rankin

9.2

Very much ‘No Girls’ in that this tells exactly you what it is and how it’s feeling. Feed it simple comforts and it’ll love you forever. Interesting and earnest, if uncomplicated.

Very approachable young while showing the Cayuse funk kiss. This is going to enter my rotation of burger wines. — 3 years ago

Clay Bullwinkel

9.1

Full well rounded, wild cherry, plums, spices — 9 months ago

Delectable Wine

Follow to learn about our favorite wines & people.

9.5

I tasted the 1982 Lynch-Bages twice within a month, both at a private dinner in London and at the château, from bottle and double-magnum on separate occasions. Both vindicate an exceptionally fine 1982, perhaps a bit overlooked in a vintage full of stars. Curiously, the bottle in Bordeaux does not fully deliver the mesmerizing freshness and energy compared to the bottle in London: pencil-lead-tinged black fruit intermixed with clove and freshly-rolled tobacco. The palate is medium-bodied with firm tannins, perhaps just a little austere compared to its peers. Yet, indeed, the bottle in London exudes class and composure with a detailed, mineral-driven vintage belying that year's unseasonably warm period. Superb. Tasted both in London at a private dinner and at the château. (Neal Martin, Vinous, July 2023) — 2 years ago

Donald Williams

9.5

Always a really nice wine at a great price. — 3 years ago

with Bonnie

Jaclyn McHugh

9.5

Perfectly balanced white blend! Not too sweet, tart, acidic, etc. Would be a total crowd pleaser, and would repurchase — 4 years ago

Brett Vanderbrook

9.0

Here’s the thing: this is good wine. It’s dense, chewy, and structured. There’s a nice balance of red and black fruit, graphite, cedar, mushroom, soil, and just a touch of Brett funk. It’s fairly tannic, so probably best with food, but can still be enjoyed on its own. I would never be mad if I was offered this. I was lucky to take home an open bottle from a job tonight, but I think the price tag on this is ridiculous. — a year ago

Michael Chelus

9.1

Cherry, raspberry, blackberry, currant, cranberry, licorice and oak. Light-bodied and soft tannins. — 2 years ago

Dimitris Karyamis

9.2

Great and affordable wine. I was lucky enough to try the 2020 vintage. I got some cherry notes on the nose.When tasting I can taste blueberries and generally lots of fruit and some acidity with a long lasting aftertaste. I would definitely recommend to anybody that wants to try some quality chianti. — 2 years ago

with leonidas and Markos