oliverstoned wrote: GoldenSpiral wrote: the kind that comes in a box! But THIS is not wine!

oh god i remember when that thing came with vanlilla flavour...

i prefare

'Dracula' wine

oliverstoned wrote: R o V e R wrote: i prefare 'Dracula' wine i'd prefer a little bhang lassi

man; you got it right

oliverstoned wrote: BaldFriede wrote: I agree with Bordeaux. 2000 is a great year.

from 95 until 2000 all are very good years but 95,  98, 99, & 00 are excellent in Bordeaux. 01 , 02 are under average , 03 is only coming out now - for the good stuff - but it looks very alcoholic. most of the wines should reach 13 %.

As for Bordeaux , I prefer the Pauillac commune . I prefer Medoc or Libourne wines as I like less Merlot ceps in my wine.

I love Chinon and Saumur Champigny on the Loire Valley! But you have to know where the good territories are in those AOC.

oliverstoned wrote: 2003 seems not to be a good year as alcohol level is too high as you said. It was a very dried and sunny year, so it gave less production (because less water) and the wine obtained is strong (in the pejorative sense of the word). "Charpenté" we should say The best wine i have ever drink is : "Saint émilion grand cru classé 1991"

The more alcohol there is does not mean you have a lesser wine!

I regularly drink some Languedoc wine (Flaugergues or Rosemont Vielle Vignes, and Les Terrasses De Guilhem) but they are always between 13% and 14% and are fantastic wines. So likely the 03 millesime will be even higher than that, but I would not know, since they are coming out now.

But most of what I have tasted from 03 so far, was not very good , albeit that the wines having come out before now  are not as well brought up.

Chateau Grand-Poujeaux Moulis-En-Medoc 85 was the best bottle I opened but the best I drunk (with friends but not counting the old man )was a 76 Cos D'estournel (Pauillac) opened (and drunk) in 99.

My father has over 7000 bottles (half of them from the excellent 80's (for wine not for prog) and the other half from the superb 90's. Almost nothing from the crappy 70's (for wine not prog) bar the two excellent 75 and 76.

oliverstoned wrote: ...and yes, Chinon can be good when you know the good ones, but most of it is crap! I love Medoc too.

In Paris , they do not respect Chinon , Bourgueuils and Saumur serving the red wines chilled from the fridge.

Prefer the Saint Nicolas De Bourgueuil to the Bourgueuil AOC.

Prefer the Saumur-Champigny from the Saumur AOC, especially if they are from Parnay on from other villages close to the Tuiffaux cliffs.

In Chinon AOC, look out for the villages close to the River Vienne : such as Panzoult or Cravant. In good years , they rival the greatest Bordeaux for a tenth of the price. the Cabernet Franc ceps can be amazing, when treated right.

In white wine from the Loire valley , forget the Sancerres (too expensive ) and other Pouilly or Quincy but check out Savenières AOC (close to Angers) : Coulée De Serrant or Roche Des Moines.

And for licoreux , the Coteaux Du Layon or better yet Quart De Chaumes , rivalling any Sauternes for a fifth of the price.

oliverstoned wrote: 7000 bottles? nice collection! It's said that 2003 harvest has a too thick texture and lack of aroma.

It's my father's and he took the keys away from me.

My own cellar reaches almost 900 bottles!!

Of which 200 hundreds I bottle myself from a Listrac Medoc property for a superbly competitive price (€ 4.50 /bottle and he provides the corks - impeccable qualty - and labels), all I have to do is provide the bottles and the manpower as well as the manpower. Roughly 4 hours by myself for one container.

I love thick textured wines especially unfiltered !!! sure you lose about half a glass of deposit , but the wines age so much better!!

Filtered wines are not that good! Wines without deposits disgust me! They do not age well!!

oliverstoned wrote: Great knowledge. what about biological wine? It's unfiltered.

Have not really found one I really like except for the one I bottle myself. But he does not have the right to the Bio label, because he says sometimes he must use some products if he is to have a crop at all!

Good bio wines do not have no sulfates (which can cause a bad headache aftyer a full bottle consumption) , bio wines do not use those, but taste strange and aged poorly!

oliverstoned wrote: GoldenSpiral wrote: the kind that comes in a box! But THIS is not wine!

And this is not a box!

I like Red wine. Any red. Banrock Station from Aus is pretty good.

oliverstoned wrote: R o V e R wrote: oliverstoned wrote: R o V e R wrote: i prefare 'Dracula' wine i'd prefer a little bhang lassi man; you got it right Are there still banghs shops in India?

there are no such shops,

but you can get it on certain occasions,

like on 'lord krishnas birthday'

or holy night of SHIVA

Logos wrote: oliverstoned wrote: Did you know there's the equivalent in sugar amount of 17 sugar cubes in such a box? Scary! But it tastes so gooood!

Coke is barely drinkable if you squeeze half a lemon into a can , just to trake the sugar-ey feel from attacking the tastebuds.

oliverstoned wrote: Sean Trane wrote: oliverstoned wrote: Great knowledge. what about biological wine? It's unfiltered. Have not really found one I really like except for the one I bottle myself. But he does not have the right to the Bio label, because he says sometimes he must use some products if he is to have a crop at all! Good bio wines do not have no sulfates (which can cause a bad headache aftyer a full bottle consumption) , bio wines do not use those, but taste strange and aged poorly! Yes bio wines have to improve. But it MUST be possible to grow without any nocive product. Because bio wines exists.

I do not think nocive products are used for wine growing or else there would be no more wine drinkers. But using less chemicals is possible and unfortunately most wines lose the right of the Bio Label while the wine is made , not before the grapes are cut from the vines.