Archetype Wines for $150-350/bottle (drinking well now)

I have a friend who is interested in picking up a case of “top” and “ready to drink” red wines for $100-300 to help him discover which wine regions/grapes he likes, across the world. The average bottle price he wishes to spend is about ~$200. He wants to see what gives him an “epiphany”.

Curious to hear others ideas that fit that range:

Ideas that I have (some of these wines I have not had):
Barolo: 2006 Monprivato and 2001 Sandrone Cannubi Boschis, for two different styles
Bordeaux: 1989 Lynch Bage and a VCC, for two different regions
Napa: 2016 Greer and 1996 Montelena, for two different styles
Burgundy: Not sure how to approach, as bottles with age cost $
Rhone: Thinking Jamet Cote Rotie + something else

1990 Chateau Beaucastel Chateauneuf-du-Pape

^
Good call

07 Angerville Champans, Taillipieds, or Ducs

Does he drink a lot of wine or have a lot of exposure, or is he pretty inexperienced?

Lots of Cote de Beaune 1er Crus available with bottle age that fit the criteria:

d’Angerville already mentioned.
Courcel Pommard Epenots or Rugiens
Jadot Beaune Clos des Ursules
Pousse d’Or Volnays
Bouchard Beaune Greves ‘Enfant Jesus’
Chandon des Briailles Pernand Ile de Vergelesses, or for more money (but still within range) up into the Cortons

The key here is bottle age. The mentioned wines are emphatically not ‘epiphany’ wines under 10 years of age. At 10 - 20 or 30 they can be truly great.

Dan Kravitz

40+ of age. Has drunk wine, but not a wine geek.

So I’ll make a suggestion — it would be interesting to get him a mix of well selected wines of various price points ($250 wines and $50 wines). All the better if you could get him to try them without knowing which is which — an experiment, if you will. The best education you might offer is that he learn he doesn’t need to spend that much $ to fully enjoy wine. He might even find he can’t tell the difference at this stage.

I’m drinking a $27 2016 Carema tonight. I’m pretty sure I prefer it to a lot of wine I have in my cellar that costs several times as much today. In the early 1990s, I remember not having a strong preference between the 1994 Lytton Springs and the 1994 Bryant Family. Hell, for all I know, I might feel the same way today. One of the beautiful things about wine today compared to 25 years ago is it is a LOT easier to find truly compelling wine for less than $50 a bottle. If he doesn’t have a lot of experience, IMO, the nuance will be lost on some large % of those bottles.

Just one person’s opinion. Good luck, whatever you decide to do.

Burgundy:
(can find these with a bit of age on them in that $ range)

Lambrays
Drouhin Clos Mouches
Jadot Clos Saint Jacques

Chave Hermitage

Any particular vintage/price? Thanks

This is actually a great idea. It’s consistently awesome.

If 1989 Lynch Bages is out of the price range, 1989 Pichon Baron or Pichon Lalande are great choices too.

If sweet wines are of interest, something like 1988 Climens or a 1985 vintage Port might be in the middle of the range. Or 2001 Rieussec or Suduiraut. Half bottles of Yquem could be in range from some pretty good years.

Chave is known for making great wine even in off vintages. Some (many?) vintages are going to be out of your price range. But they can easily use 10-20 years of age.

Definitely VCC for right bank. You can get any of these excellent vintages for under $300: 1998, 2000, 2001 and 2004. They show the style well, and what’s cool, is that they cost less than the new releases! Lynch Bages 1989 is excellent, as is 1989 Pichon Baron, an archtetype Pauilliac. Perhaps you can get lucky and find a 1990 or 1989 Montrose for the budget. All winning.

Chave is a fantastic choice for the Rhone, I think 2012 falls in the budget. A 2011 Jamet would as well, and drinks excellently.

I like Craig’s idea of sweet wines. 2001 Climens versus Rieussec would be fun. For Port, you could try a 40-year Tawny versus a 1985 Grahams or Fonseca, to illustrate the difference between Port aged in wood versus bottle. And for California, I would put a Monte Bello in the mix with something from Napa from a similar vintage, if you can find them.

Ed

I am thinking my Barolo recommendations are weakish

I’m not knowledgeable enough to weigh in, but when I first read your list, my instant reaction was “2006 Monprivato is ‘ready to drink?’” I know if I had a bottle in my cellar it would be marked for 2026 at the earliest

I think this discussion is going to come down to style of wines, so rather than pick those, I’d probably suggest vintages:

Left bank Bordeaux: 2001, 2002 or 2004. I think these were solid vintages that produced good wines that are ready to drink, and are sandwiched between “vintages of the century”, so can be had cheaper. Obviously if you can get some 89s, sure, but they’ll command a premium. 2006 would also be a contender - a 2006 Haut Brion last year was fabulous.
Barolo: 2007 or 2001 (I had a great 2007 Brovia Villero a few days ago that spent about 3 hours in a decanter); 2001 is more structured but I also think is drinking pretty well.
Burgundy: 2002. I think 2007 and 2009 are also candidates, but more variable. I’ve found 2002 to be consistently great, even for some producers whom I don’t ordinarily enjoy all that much.
Northern Rhone: 2004. I think 2011 is another choice, but some of those wines can be very shut down - the 2011 Allemand is weirdly massive, and the 2011 Jamet is not that approachable imho without a massive decant. All the 2004s are drinking great now; a 2004 Sorrel Le Greal out of mag last week was delicious. My least favorite 04 Northern Rhone that I can remember is actually Chave. pileon
Southern Rhone: Beaucastel of basically any vintage - they’re not expensive wines and age great.
Tuscany: I’ve really liked the 2000s I’ve had, but that’s been a total of 3 (and they were Pergole Torte and Soldera, so that may not be a vintage view :slight_smile:)
Right bank Bordeaux/Loire: I don’t drink enough of either, so can’t really comment.
California: Dragons be here; all I own is older Heitz/Corison, so have no clue :slight_smile:

Clos Ste Hune
1/2 b of Donnhoff Eiswein
Vega Sicilia Unico

Why only reds? I think most people who enjoy wine and think they don’t like whites just haven’t tried the right ones. I am sure there are exceptions to that, but for someone without much experience, I don’t think there’s any good reason not to include some whites and a good bottle of champagne. Usually when I’ve gotten requests like this from retail customers they are under the impression that white wine isn’t as good for some reason.