Sunday I joined a group of friends for a nice al fresco dinner.
Magnificent setting (they rent a wing of an old mansion, the rest of
the house is shuttered) with great grounds, we watched the fireflies -
unfortunately the family of skunks who troop by (at a safe distance)
were apparently otherwise occupied last night.

Jim had said he was grilling pork loins with a chimichurri sauce from
yesterday's NYT magazine, I was bringing appetizers (proscuitto and
emlon) decided to bring a light red to go with the pork. So I brought
the 2002 Clos de Roilette Fleurie. Unfortunately this slurpable treat
didn't make it to the main course, but I at least managed to fill my
glass a couple times as it was finished quickly. Nose of wild
strawberries and flowers, nicely concentrated red (raspberry/cherry)
fruit with a nice clean minerally finish. Beautiful wine, I'm sad I'm
down to last few. A-

Things slid a bit from that point on (winewise, the pork was delcious,
as were the rice, beans, and grilled pineapple). The hostess's stock
wine was out, the 2003 Kendall-Jackson Vintner's Reserve Chardonnay.
There' s a bit of sweetness there, if a bit less than I remember from
vintages from the 1990s. Bosc pear fruit, a little oak/buttersotch
note. Better than I expected - I tend to use KJ Chard as a codeword
for "boring bad industrial swill", but not an exciting wine. B-/C+

The 2002 Raymond Estates Merlot (Napa, I think)seemed to have a sweet
edge to it, also. Rather thin red plum and blackberry fruit, somewhat
short with that edge of sweetness on the finish. C/C+

Actually had a lot of fun, with great people, but mostly drank
sparkling water after the Fleurie had fled.

Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent
wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't
drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no
promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency

In article .com>,
"DaleW" > wrote:

> Clos de Roilette Fleurie

The 2003 is available for $18. Have you tasted that one yet?

I passed on the 2003 without tasting. Some tasters I respect reported
that it was (like many/most 2003s) a fatter riper rounder version of
the 2002. I prefer my Beaujolais on the crisper leaner side, just my
tastes- I could see a lot of people preferring the 2003. $18 does seem
a little steep, though- I paid $12ish for the 2002.

If you get some 2003, I'd love to see your notes.

I ordered some today. I'll put up a report in a few weeks.

In article . com>,
"DaleW" > wrote:

> I passed on the 2003 without tasting. Some tasters I respect reported
> that it was (like many/most 2003s) a fatter riper rounder version of
> the 2002. I prefer my Beaujolais on the crisper leaner side, just my
> tastes- I could see a lot of people preferring the 2003. $18 does seem
> a little steep, though- I paid $12ish for the 2002.
>
> If you get some 2003, I'd love to see your notes.
>