Parker tweets on 2002 Napa Cabernet

[jhowe]

@Rick Gregory

Of course. Actually, I took RP’s tweet merely to indicate that the wines weren’t dead or dying, so I think picking it apart is a bit silly at some level. The question about the modernist/cult Cali cabs and age won’t really be answered for 5-15 more years. At 15-25 ageworthy wines should either be moving toward mature flavors or fully mature. If they still taste young or just taste older but still primary, eh. And if the were going to die, they’ll have done it in 20 years from vintage.

I agree with everything above. Well said.

[mike_pobega]

Let me just add, I think this thread has gone way off the tracks: Robert Parker posted about 2002 Napa Cabernets and now we are discussing 1973 Heitz Martha’s.
I too have experienced a ‘well aged’ Cab or two in my life. All of my notes that reflected them showing as such had someting of a ‘youthful’ mention. (a 1973 Mayacamas comes to mind in 2008) Cabernet Lovers Of New York City : CLONYC #8 - Mature Mayacamas and Bella Oaks with Impeccable Provenance. Check out those Martini notes.
I agree with Parker for the most part, that part being about the 2002s holding up well/aging well to now; many of these were blousy wines with a big fat mouth feel which at the time seemed a specific quality (in this vintage) that would not age well. I too had my doubts. I also think this part of the original quote slightly misstated: “…most taste like 5 year old wines…”. These wines are better at 10 than they were at 5, no matter what you call it: age, awakening, or shedding mountainous baby fat. In two more years he will tweet the same of 2004’s to a lesser extent. Wait for it.

In the last two years or so I have sampled about 70 of them and I have found (for the most part) the moderate to better labels to be now graceful, well balanced and more in line with thier brethren, the 2001, though not exactly the same, but the chasm has sure diminished, and it was a big one. In that context, they are aging well, and let’s face it is all about context. Where they go is anyone’s guess and I for one would not be surprised to find them still youthful and lively at 15, all while taking on some additional secondaries/interest. I think when you look at the list of 2002 wines that Parker sampled you will find more new world types than old.

Anyone who had ever tasted a 2 year old Heitz Martha’s know that they need bottle age and a thread discussing the general agability of Napa Cabs since 1997 would be awesome to be a part of, this just isn’t it.

[C_Grimm]

@Curtis Raskin

@Keith Levenberg

I wasn’t talking about 2002 Napa cabs.

As this is a thread about 2002 cabs you will understand the confusion. Which of the “New World glop” are you referring to, and are these wines you have had? Are the 2002 Napa Cabs “New World glop”?

Don’t be silly, Curtis. This isn’t a thread about 2002 Napa Cab. This is the umpteenth thread about bashing Parker. One could say that it’s the WB MO.

[C_R_a_s_k_i_n]

@C. Grimm

@Curtis Raskin

@Keith Levenberg

I wasn’t talking about 2002 Napa cabs.

As this is a thread about 2002 cabs you will understand the confusion. Which of the “New World glop” are you referring to, and are these wines you have had? Are the 2002 Napa Cabs “New World glop”?

Don’t be silly, Curtis. This isn’t a thread about 2002 Napa Cab. This is the umpteenth thread about bashing Parker. One could say that it’s the WB MO.

Quite frankly, RP deserves it to a degree based on his behavior. But bashing him on his palate is a bit disingenuous, particularly when it comes to the 2002 Napa Cabs. Of course, “New World glop” is a term that everybody intuitively understands, right?, so it really was silly of me to have no idea what Keith was referring to.

[WvanGorp]

@Rick Gregory

Wilfred - but has anyone here claimed that? I’ve had those 70s cabs including the 73 Stags Leap and 74 Heitz “Martha’s”. They’re amazing. But the thing is… they matured. Wines that remain static or simply get older (but without positively evolving) aren’t aging. That’s the core of the comments I started to make above about the tweet - a wine that is tasting young at 10 isn’t an argument for that wine aging. It’s an argument that the wine’s not dead, but it simply makes no sense to say a wine’s aging well when it’s showing little sign of evolving secondary aromas and flavors.

Hi Rick

We agree 100%. I think I wasn’t very clear in my post but yes, this is what I was trying to say.

[M.Kaplan]

I drank those '60s and '70s iconic Cabernets in their youth and they never tasted like NWG, or any other kind of Glop for that matter. They were less fruit forward and more structured, but not to the detraction of the tasting experience. Except for very young Mayacamas, they always tasted good.

[C_R_a_s_k_i_n]

I have rarely experienced a Napa cab that tasted like glop. And I have had thousands.

[AKuehn]

What exactly does glop taste like, anyway?

[C_R_a_s_k_i_n]

@AKuehn

What exactly does glop taste like, anyway?

Quit asking stupid questions. It’s so obvious.

[Leonard_Maran]

For gosh sakes, the video gave me a chance to scoop up some more 2002 Chateau Montelena. The vid was in the context of a 2002 retrospective just like last years’s 2001, except this time with a sneak peek to a write up down the line.

[Roy_Piper]

@Curtis Raskin

@AKuehn

What exactly does glop taste like, anyway?

Quit asking stupid questions. It’s so obvious.

[Keith_Levenberg]

@Roy Piper

WS99

[loren.grossman]

The 2002 1147 is super and is flying under the radar right now because of a low score at release. Really - a dynamite wine. Of course, I do not know what RP thought of it if anything at his recent review of the vintage. Hope he hated it!