2016 Cayuse Camaspelo wine review: Oh what a bad wine this is

 There is one thing to like in this wine: It has olive notes. But it's still a fairly poor wine, because you need much more than olives to make a good wine.  Please don't waste your money on this. Parker and Suckling gave it 94 points, but at just six years it hasn't aged well. I suspect if those critics were on truth serum, they'd have trouble scoring it in the 80s now. It's actually difficult to drink. It is so stridently different from any well-made Bordeaux blend that it's almost painful. By straining a bit, I could give it a "C." Meaning, 75 points. Save your money! There are THOUSANDS of good wines costing much less. Why pay into the Emperor's Got No Clothes? 

In fairness, Christophe Baron makes some very good wines, but you have to hunt for them. It's a poor strategy to just buy everything he makes. I finally wised up to that wisdom, and backed off-I only buy the superb Bionic Frog now. That is the ONLY wine made by Mr. Baron that performs well on the resale market. 

I say this too often perhaps, but it's essential information: Anyone can overpay for wine. It takes no skill. Do you really want to play in a game where everyone pretends that a wine is good, when it sucks? I wish I could've sold this bottle in the auction market, but the buyers understand that this is not a very good wine, so I had to drink it. Shame on me.

2015 Horsepower Sur Echalas Syrah - Review

 First, this is a well-made wine. I can see how it received 98 points. But I hated it.

I think that, as wines are made from grapes, and as grapes are a fruit, wines should taste like fruit. There is no fruit in this wine. But it is a fascinating cornucopia of aromas: Bitter coffee; bitter chocolate; blood; spam. Problem is, I don't like any of those things. That's why I don't like this wine. 

California wine buyers must agree-I couldn't sell this profitably at auction, so we opened one to drink, instead of selling it. Man, was it painful. I could not drink it. I know Christophe is an artiste, but I wish he would allow his wines to taste like winegrapes.

My grade on this wine: The bouquet is A+ but the palate is D-. Not a very good use of $140.

Update 2 days later: The wine is marginally better--I can even sense a faint hint of some slight bit of purple fruit--but it is so bitter on the palate that it's not drinkable. This winemaker has made many supremely wonderful wines, but this one is a failure in the mouth, where the bouquet is so wonderful that perhaps this product's best use is as perfume, not for drinking?

My Secret Squirrel was almost a bad wine

 2015 Secret Squirrel Cab Sauv: $27 retail. The appeal is that this is made by Corlis and Tranche, from the same fruit that goes into their $50-$100 wines (I don't personally now that bit is true-I found it online). Various online tasting notes are quite effusive, but this wine didn't do it for me. It's a lovely inky dark purple, but has no bouquet (if it has any, it's just alcohol). The Palate seems silky at first, which I appreciate, but later there's just no "there there." I swirled and splashed it, hoping it would wake up, but no dice. It's just bad. It's dead. Don't waste your money. I bet they knew there was something wrong with this wine, and they resorted to pushing it out into the market using an alternate name that wouldn't harm their primary labels' reputation. Not necessarily a smart plan. Two hours later, in the glass, it's still dead. Ugh.

Let's save Charles Smith's reputation!

 LOL. Tonight I opened 2014 El Jefe Tempranillo. 95 points Robert Parker and he nailed it, though I predicted (after tasting and before checking scores) 96 points, as Jane is my witness. This is so smooth, so big, and it's in my wheelhouse with lovely non-black-fruit flavors of purple berries and iron and bull's blood. The oak is lovely. Lots of complexity. I'm a fan! This is a $55 wine that is worth it!

Face to face: 2018 Cinder Syrah vs 2015 K Vintners "The Beautiful" Syrah

Wow. Seldom do you have a chance to compare two such different, yet fascinating, Syrahs.

1. In this corner, we have the 2015 K Vintners "The Beautiful" Syrah. 97 points and $60. 

2. In that corner, there is the 2018 Cinder Syrah (Snake River Valley). It's won several awards and is $30.

Charles Smith is easily one of the greatest success stories of Walla Walla wine. He worked his butt off and achieved amazing wine success. Sold for ?$20M? ?$200M? I forget the number. Good for him. On the one hand it was well-deserved, but on the other, I ask... really? This wine came to us during my stint on his mailing list. The wine had a 97 point nose that's for sure. Just angelic. But the palate fell to maybe 91. It was fine, but not earth-shaking. After one day, the nose (formerly purple fruits) had morphed to a GREAT black olive note, but the palate was even more pedestrian. Today, at 5 years old (which is NOT too old for a great Syrah), I'd give the wine 88 points or so. Respectable and fun, but worth $60? No. Effing. Way. We had this with La Bottega's braised pork shoulder (Covid take out). I've had many GREAT GREAT GREAT Charles Smith wines, and this was in that part of the baseball field, but it fell short.

Now, to Cinder. Their wines are fresh, new, and exciting. The winemaker/owner trained at Chat St Michelle, and is really inspired; she makes wonderful wines. The staff at the winery calls this Syrah "Silk, Smoke, and Chai." I get the silk and chai but not the smoke. This one's power is in the palate, not the bouquet. We had this with grass-fed Oregon Valley Farms' beef tenderloin, and slow-sauteed green beans, and mashed potatoes with garlic and au jus gravy. It delivers more satisfaction than Charles' wine, and certainly so in terms of QPR quality-price ratio). But both are quite good. 

We who can try such wines are fortunate. If you are one such person, thank you for taking time out to find ways to help those less fortunate. Lately, we have supported the Chinook Nation, the Clark County Food Bank, OPB (some of the best journalism in the US), and some others.

Unacceptable

 This article describes sexual harassment of women sommeliers by male sommeliers. Their organization is aware of it but has done little. No means no, and aside from that, it is a great management practice not to harass others at work. Oh, and it's also illegal.

Three diverse views of a wine:

 How can this happen? Consider the 2014 Caparzo Brunello:

It sells for about $35 retail. 

Wine Spectator scores it 92 points and sees bright cherry and raspberry, with minerals and peppery greens. Drink 2021-2032.

Wine Enthusiast scores it 88 points and sees strawberry, rose, and herb in the bouquet, and pomegranate and clove on the palate.  Drink now through 2022.

James Suckling scores it 91 points and sees dark fruit and cedar.

Wow! Those are very diverse views of the same wine. Which one should a consumer believe? It may be they're all correct, and the wine was different at different times of tasting. Or it maybe one or more of the reviews was way off.  Or maybe each reviewer was accurate according to their own palate, as palates do vary a lot among wine lovers. But either way, are you willing to risk $35 on a wine that might or might not have a flavor profile you like? 

More importantly, should you buy it if you need to drink it by next year, or can you keep it for twelve more years? 

Would be nice to not see this sort of "review disparity" among wine professionals, but I don't know how to accomplish that.