Chef Mark Usewicz has posted the new club menu on our Dining page

Word has it that the Dry Aged Sirloin with Salt Roasted New Potatoes is the early favorite!

See you at the Club

On June 18, we hit the road again, this time transporting ourselves to several regions of Spain. The first stop was the Rioja region, which is a couple of hours NNE of Madrid, where we sampled a 2003 Marqués de Riscal Reserva from Rioja (14% alcohol). Then we headed west to the Toro region along the Rio Duero to try a 2003 Oro by Bodegas Mähler-Besse (13.5% alcohol). The last leg of trip then took us way east to the surroundings of Barcelona for a taste of a 2007 Priorat called Onix (14.5% alcohol). With Spain, like France, we refer to wines by region, so that’s what we’ll do here. This is what’s recorded in our travel journal:

We had a very traditional introduction to Spanish reds with the Rioja, made from the tempranillo grape. Marqués de Riscal is a venerable bodega (no not a corner grocery; that’s the Spanish word for winery), although it is connected to a Frank Gehry designed hotel which makes a striking statement on the landscape when you first see it a couple of kilometers away. The wine, a reserve, meaning it has spent at least 18 months aging in the cask, had a distinctly plum color that diffused around the edges, creating somewhat of a halo effect. It had a lower viscosity or lighter body than the other two wines judging from its legs. We first noted a vanilla scent until more herbal, grassy tones came through, particularly oregano. What made this seem more traditional or Old World was the balance of tannins, herbs, plums and mustiness like light Bordeaux. (Indeed, that was the competition when this winery came into being.) We liked this with the Manchego cheese that we had at the same time.

The Toro, made from the tinto de toro grape, which is very similar to the tempranillo, had a bit more body than the Rioja and was clearly the inkiest of the three wines we tried. The smell smacked of gravel and earth or perhaps a sandy beach with a hint of ocean air in the background. It seemed a bit bolder in that not only did the fruits – blackberry and black plum – come through more strongly, but also one could really taste the terroir, funky or moldy like decomposing hay. Moreover, it had quite a tannic mouth feel. We thought we’d prefer this wine with a juicy steak or a hearty paella valenciana.

We expected even more body and boldness from our third wine, the Priorat. (Not a Spanish looking or sounding name? Try Catalan.) In fact while it was purpler in color than the Rioja, it was not quite as inky as the Toro. You could see the color in the legs, though. This wine had very rich aromas of black cherry or even a fruit compote while at the same time giving off floral scents. All of the smells (except the shoe polish that one person caught) showed up again in the taste. It had a greater fruit flavor that even reminded some of us of maraschino cherries. At the same time it seemed silkier and smoother than the other two wines reflecting a style less balanced by tannins. Perhaps because of the high alcohol content, it tasted clean and dry. Several people thought this wine was quite drinkable on its own.

On preferences, we were pretty evenly split among the three, but we managed to finish every last drop through dinner.

We decided to stay in Spain in July to explore a variety of white wines. On July 16, we’ll first trip down south to Jerez in Andalusia to taste a Tio Pepe Palomino Fino Extra Dry Light Sherry (no vintage, 15% alcohol – should get us off and running quite nicely). Then we’re off to the Rias Baixas region in the far northwest province of Galicia for a 2008 La Cana Albariño (13% alcohol). Then we’ll finish up our tour back by Barcelona in the Penedes region with a sparkling Freixenet Cordon Negro Cava (12% alcohol). If you want to review Spanish wines, check out pages 251 through 257 and 290 of Andrea Immer Robinson’s book Great Wines Made Simple.

See you all for our next class on July 16 around sevenish!! And don’t forget to look up past tasting notes on montaukwineclub.blogspot.com. They’re also coming soon in searchable form on the Club’s revamped website.

Suzy Marquard

The May 21 Montauk Club wine class began our third year of monthly tastings. Time flies when you’re tasting wine I guess. This class was a review of the most popular red varietals. We tried a 2006 Blackstone Sonoma Reserve Pinot Noir (14.3% alcohol), a 2006 Estancia Paso Robles Cabernet Sauvignon (13.5% alcohol) and a 2006 J. Lohr Paso Robles Syrah (13.5% alcohol). We tasted them in that order to go from lightest body to fullest body. Here’s what we thought.

(more…)

Having completed our world tour and all of the tastings laid out in Andrea Immer Robinson’s book, Great Wine Made Simple in March, we decided to review some of the basics at our April 16, 2009 class. After all, with wine it’s not possible to practice too much. We started our review by exploring the three most popular white varietals: a Reichsgraf von Kesselstatt 2003 Piesporter Goldtrőpfchen Riesling Kabinett (9.5% alcohol), a Robert Mondavi 2006 Fume Blanc from Napa Valley (14% alcohol) and an Acacia 2006 Chardonnay Carneros from Sonoma Valley (14.4% alcohol). We tasted them in that order to go from lightest body to fullest body.

(more…)

Ciao Italia again! This time we traveled to Piedmont and Veneto and then said goodbye to Italy. With this tasting on March 19, 2009 we completed the tastings laid out in Andrea Immer Robinson’s book, Great Wine Made Simple. We sampled three of the four major varietals grown in the Piedmont region – Dolcetto, Barbera and Barbaresco – and had a little trouble distinguishing the Barbera from the Dolcetto. Almost everyone picked the Barbaresco though. After that we tried an Amarone della Valpolicella from the Veneto region.

Our first wine was the 2005 Patrizi Barbaresco (13.5% alcohol). Of the three, this had the palest color, being almost translucent. While it had an expansive bouquet, it had a more rustic and musty aroma, like one student’s cellar in fact. The fruit was tart cherry, and the abundant tannins really dried our tongues. As Andrea predicted, a little cheese improved the flavor of the wine.

Our second wine turned out to be the 2006 Marengo Dolcetto D’Alba (14.5% alcohol). Contrary to what Andrea described in her tasting notes, this was the darkest of the three wines which is why many in the class thought it would be the Barbera. The scent of the Dolcetto was not quite as earthy as the Barbaresco with licorice and vanilla peaking through the sour cherry. The high alcohol content came through in the smell as well. The taste echoed the scent with cherry and plum flavors. Though we definitely tasted tannins, this wine didn’t dry us out as much as the Barbaresco. We thought this was more refined than the first wine.

The last Piedmont wine was the 2005 Borgogno Barbera D’Alba (a measly 13% alcohol). This wine had more of a garnet color, but its smell was certainly not as potent as the Dolcetto’s. In fact we found it to be more complex and idiosyncratic. We could definitely taste the acidity and noted that the tannins were clearly softer than the other two wines. We found flavors of red fruits like red plums and cranberries. Some likened this to an easy listening wine whose finish slowly faded away. Perhaps this is the reason almost everyone in the class liked this wine the best of the three Piedmonts.

We then ended our first world tour with in the Veneto region with a 2005 Zeni Amarone della Valpolicella (a whopping 15% alcohol). This wine is made is fermented to dryness, so it is typically very strong and full bodied. We thought this wine had a great scent, with raisins and tar defining it. We could really taste the high alcohol content and wanted to have it with chocolate. Everyone thought it delightful and picked it as the overall favorite of the four wines we tried this evening.

So, having ended on such a high note, we discussed our plans going forward and thought we should go back and review some of the “lessons” in Andrea’s book, Great Wine Made Simple, before striking out on our own to explore some other countries like Spain, Australia and South Africa. Where better to start our review than with the Big Six – the most popular varietals of white and red wines. At our next class, which is scheduled for April 16, 2009, we’ll explore the three most popular whites with a Reichsgraf von Kesselstatt 2003 Piesporter Goldtrőpfchen Riesling Kabinett (9.5% alcohol), a Robert Mondavi 2006 Fume Blanc from Napa Valley (14% alcohol) and an Acacia 2006 Chardonnay Carneros from Sonoma Valley (14.4% alcohol). If you have the book, please review the tasting notes on pages 21 and 22.

See you all on April 16 around sevenish!!

Suzy Marquard

Ciao Italia! Our February 19, 2009 class took us to Tuscany where we sampled four different Tuscan wines that moved up the quality scale. We enjoyed one so much that one of our students ran out and acquired another bottle. Here’s what we found on our tour:

We started with a 2006 Castello di Farnetella Chianti Colli Senesi (13% alcohol). It had characteristic scents of pepper, black cherry and blackberry. It also smelled a bit on the sweet side, taking us back to college dorm days. As for flavor the taste was soft and simple although some acidity and tannin would sneak through. Finally a metallic after taste took over causing some to remark that they wouldn’t get a second glass. (I think we finished the bottle during dinner anyway.)

Next we tried a 2005 Ruffina Riserva Ducale Chianti Classico (13% alcohol). This is a higher quality Chianti because the vines are grown in the hilly center and historic heart of the Chianti region. Also this is a riserva meaning it was aged in the barrel and bottle longer than the minimum required of non-riserva wines. This wine had a deeper color and a more complex scent. Not as peppery as the basic Chianti, it had a mix of floral and earthy aromas with a bit of vanilla thrown in. Some thought this combination made it smell like a steak! The taste proved to be softer and more complex also. We found some oakiness coming through with softer tannins but a full mouth feel. After taasting it for awhile, we narrowed down the steak flavor to sirloin as opposed to rib eye. Using a violin analogy, we thought this performed best at low ranges

Third we moved on to a 2007 Castello Banfi Rosso di Montalcino (13.5% alcohol). We thought this wine performed well in all ranges. The scent was more powerful, due in part to the slightly higher alcohol content and also to the bigger, fresher fruit aromas. We also noticed the smell of dried candied fruits, vanilla and even chocolate chip cookie dough. The taste did not disappoint either, as we found it rounder and fuller with nice tannins and a very berry taste. Unlike the basic Chianti, it made us want to take a bigger sip. Very easy to drink and the favorite of all but one of the students in the class.

We ended our tour with a 2004 Villa Antinori Toscana (a sangiovese/cabernet/merlot blend; 13.5% alcohol). If the Chianti Classico reminded us of sirloin steak, this made us think of steak au poivre with its more in-your-face scent. We also picked up honey and oakiness in the smell. The taste had more spice to it, but we still liked to hold it on our tongues for awhile letting the initial burst of fruit fall off to reveal more tannins. Were it a violin, we would say it performs well at middle ranges.

Next we’re off to the Piedmont region where we’ll make three stops with a 2006 Marengo Dolcetto D’Alba (14.5% alcohol), a 2005 Borgogno Barbera D’Alba (a measly 13% alcohol) and a 2005 Patrizi Barbaresco (13.5% alcohol). Then we’ll finish off our tour of Italy in the Veneto region with a 2005 Zeni Amarone della Valpolicella (get this, a whopping 15% alcohol). Looks like we’ll get to review our different alcohol level tasting as well.

Our next class takes place on March 19 at 7ish. For those of you who have Andrea Immer Robinson’s book, Great Wine Made Simple, you can start practicing ahead of time by reviewing pages 218 through 225. I purchased the wines above at 7th Avenue Wines and Liquors in case you want to practice over the weekend.

See you all on March 19!!

Suzy Marquard

On January 15, 2009 the wine class made its last stop in France by visiting the Rhone Valley, home of the well-known Chateauneuf-du-Pape. The plan was to compare a cheap, but good Cotes du Rhone with a more classic Chateauneuf-du-Pape and then taste a Muscat Beaume-de-Venise. Well it turned out to be difficult to find a couple of examples of each of the Cotes du Rhone and the Chateauneuf-du-Pape, and the Muscat was not to be found either. But I did find two white Rhones that were quite interesting. Here’s how our last sojourn in France went.

(more…)

At our December 18, 2008 class we explored different rankings of white and red burgundies. Wines in Burgundy are actually ranked according to the quality and prestige of the neighborhood in which the wine is produced. So in our blind taste test to determine whether we could distinguish this quality we compared a 2006 Jean Marc Brocard Chablis Montmains Premier Cru (13% alcohol) with a 2005 St. Jacques Rully Premier Cru Marissou (13.5% alcohol) and a 2006 Louis Latour Pinot Noir (13% alcohol) with a 2004 Joseph Drouhin Beaune Premier Cru (13% alcohol). Well, we easily distinguished the two whites from the two reds, and we picked out the higher quality white, but the reds stumped most of us. Here’s what we thought about each.

Our first white seemed to have slightly more legs and a more golden color compared to the second. The smell appeared more complex with grassy and more toasty aromas. We found the wine to be bolder and rounder with flavors of green, baked apples showing through. The taste was also oakier while at the same time being sharp and tart. Some thought it had more alcohol.

In comparison our second white was paler in color and had a brighter, fresher and decidedly fragrant floral small, as one person put it “like electricity after it rains.” The taste was sweeter than the first wine, although it seemed blander and softer and at times somewhat chalky. Most of us correctly identified the first wine as the St. Jacques Rully Premier Cru Marissou and the second as the Jean Marc Brocard Chablis Montmains Premier Cru, being of a slightly lower quality. And a majority of us favored the higher quality St. Jacques Rully.

When we turned to the two pinot noirs we found the first to have more going on. It was lighter, brighter and sharper. We detected more oak or smoke and some cinnamon in the flavor. The mouth feel was rougher and more granular, and as time passed the color changed, becoming tawnier. Perhaps it was the rougher mouth feel that led most of us to misidentify this as the lower ranked Louis Latour Pinot Noir, when what we were actually tasting was greater tannins in the Joseph Drouhin Beaune Premier Cru.

Our second red, what turned out to be the Louis Latour, had a slightly darker color, and its legs were slower to develop and drip. Perhaps we should have known from the cherry pie flavor that this was a less sophisticated wine. Although to some it had a deeper, richer and spicier flavor, some thought it had a calmer taste. We thought it held up better on its own, and there were some of us who thought this wine was more tannic and complex. So as you see, we were all over t he lot on this one, which is why it had us fooled. Even though this was the lower ranked wine, all but one of us preferred it to the premier cru. Just goes to show you we need MORE PRACTICE!!

But that won’t stop us from traveling on, this time to the Rhone Valley where we will explore a cheap, but good Cotes du Rhone, a more classic Chateauneuf-du-Pape and a Muscat Beaume-de-Venise. If we can’t tell the desert wine from the other two, well we’ll just have to KEEP PRACTICING.

Our November 20 wine class took a trip to Alsace to taste four quite different white wines from the region – a Riesling, a pinot gris, a gewurztraminer and a muscat. All were from the same producer, so we were confident we could distinguish the four in our blind taste test. Once again we were baffled, or perhaps the producer got his labels mixed up.

Our first wine had a clean aroma with scents of apple and petroleum. The gas station flavor followed through in the taste. The wine was not very fruity and was quite dry. This one we correctly identified as the 2004 Frederic Mallo Riesling Reserve Speciale (12.5% alcohol).

Wine #2 was both dry and fruity, having the richest smell, both spicy and musky with lots of lychee aroma coming through. The taste closely echoed the smell – lychee nuts, minerals and pepper. It felt quite fat in the mouth. Natually, because of the spiciness and dryness, we thought this was the gewürztraminer, but No-o-o, it was the Frederic Mallo 2006 Muscat (12% alcohol).

Our third wine was sure to be the Muscat having a sweet smell of nectarine and floral tones. It too tasted just the way it smelled, very floral and not too dry. It really struck us as a desert wine that would be great with biscotti. But we were wrong again; this was the Frederic Mallo 2005 Gewurztraminer Cuvee Saint Jacques (13% alcohol).

Our final wine was so clean in smell and taste that we actually found it a bit boring. In fact the smell reminded us of linen sheets drying outside, although we did pick up a scent of candied apple. In the taste we noticed a bit of marmalade, but in all it was not very sweet or fruity. This we correctly identified as Special Delivery 2006 Pinot Gris (which means dingy in French, so why so clean?) by Frederic Mallo.

Oh well, having decided unanimously that we favored the Riesling over all, we packed our bags and hit the road for Burgundy, probably the most famous wine-producing region of France. At our next class, on December 18, we’ll taste two white wines, a French Chablis and a Cote de Beaune, and two reds, a village ranked wine and a premier cru- or grand cru-ranked wine. To learn about these, please read pages 170 through 190 of Andrea Immer Robinson’s Great Wine Made Simple.

See you all on December 18!

Suzy Marquard