Clos du Tue-Bœuf makes my favourite wine of the year

   
Clos du Tue-Bœuf Rouge Cheverny 2006 (about $15)

In any previous year, Portuguese red blends -- frequently strong values -- would be in my list of favourites. Last year, the Casa de Santar Dão 2003 was one of my go-to everyday wines, for instance.

This year, I have found similar strong value, and a familiar rusticity, flavour profile and food-friendliness, in a Cheverny red blend, the generic cuvée from Clos du Tue-Bœuf (of France's Puzelat fame).

Cheverny is a French AOC in the Loire Valley and it is more associated with white wines than red. I would hardly expect it to suggest to me my favourite Portuguese bottles. But it did.

It's even stranger that the grapes blended together to do this are Gamay and Pinot Noir -- not exactly kin to the indigenous grapes of Portugal, or their reputation for yielding heavy and tannic wine.

This entry-level Tue-Boeuf was introduced to me by BrooklynGuy back in August. At that time, I was the first of thirteen people to comment on his report, salivating over what sounded like my ideal find -- what he titled "The Finest Value Red of the Season". Having just arrived back from a New York vacation days earlier (during which time I got to experiment with some inexpensive unfiltered Beaujolais that was Bguy-approved and meet the man himself), I commented that I could only hope to return sometime in the fall to hunt down this fetching cow-killer of a cuvée.

Months pass, and it's late November. I'm in Brooklyn. By all accounts this wine is out of stock (but I had all but entirely forgotten about it anyway). Sure enough, along comes Brooklynguy to meet me at a Seventh Avenue wineshop in Park Slope called Prospect Wines and he's carrying with him his last bottle of Tue-Boeuf and he proceeds to serve it me at BYO down the block. What a guy. That this wine turned out to be every bit as good as he had described was just the icing on the cake. This was one of the best wine experiences of recent memory -- and surely one of my favourite pours of the year too.

This wine is definitely unavailable in Brooklyn (or else I would've retrieved it), and as I mentioned, I couldn't get it in Canada. So suffice to say good luck to you tracking some down.

For the tasting notes on this one I leave you in the capable hands of Brooklynguy, who wrote about this bottle from summer into fall on CellarTracker in 2007. Here's how I cut and paste his observations together. (Thanks again Brooklynguy!)

Eyes: Light but deep, ripe and earthy (hmmm... I think this is referring to palate rather than appearance).

Nose: Lovely Pinot Noir nose of griottes, clean aromas of dark red berries and once open for about 10 minutes, vivid floral aromas -- dark violet.

Mouth: Pure, juicy, sweet and luscious, this is a bowl of black cherries on the palate, with pleasant earthiness and lip-smacking acidity. Smooth, although slightly grainy texture, and floral. Delicious. Low alcohol.

Stomach: Fantastic inexpensive Pinot/Gamay blend incredible how delicious this wine is (especially when you're eating -- we had it with hummus and fresh Middle-Eastern bread, bean stew, grilled lamb, and salad). When you think that it costs about $13 it becomes ridiculous.

How to interpret a wine label

Here's a wine I bought based on the label. It's a Cheverny. I interpreted that to mean that it would be a Sauvignon Blanc varietal, the type of refreshing and appetizing wine that's affordable, serviceable and, these days, quite crowd-pleasing.

After noting the wine's designation, my eyes went to the year of vintage. It was 2005, which played in its favour, if for no other reason than it was fresh and not past its peak. (Many say that 2005 was a great year all across France and for white wines in particular so that was another consideration in my purchase.)

At this point, I wasn't quite ready to buy the bottle yet. In addition to the price tag, my eye would be drawn to one other place on label that most people ignore: The percentage alcohol by volume. A weird place to look when you first are picking up a bottle but it's natural for me. I go from wine designation, to vintage, to alcohol level.

This is because I don't like "hot" wines, not because I'm inclined to getting a quicker buzz when I drink. Those wines that have alcohol measuring 14% and above (even alcohol of lesser proportions in white wines) have a greater potential to seem hot. That's not to say that heavily alcoholized wines like Zinfandel and Amarone can't be balanced -- I'm just always on the lookout for that percentage captured in the lower corner of the wine label.

GETTING THE FACTS UP FRONT

The Oxford Companion to Wine says the labeling information for alcoholic content that appears on a wine label is usually stated as a percentage followed by '% vol' but may be expressed in degrees (°) or, in Italy in particular, as gradi.

For the wine pictured at right above (click for a larger view of its label), the typical percentage measurement was given, coming in at an expectedly light 12% alcohol -- at the low end of the scale but certainly well within the norm for white wines of this type. I made a mental note, and by virtue of this, plus the vintage and designation, I went for this bottle.

When I finally opened it, I knew there was some mistake. It was as if this odd shaped wine label had its grayish circular frontspiece peeled away to reveal a bright red octagon -- STOP! (Just take another look at the shape of the label...)

This 12% Sauvignon tasted like its 14.5% cousin produced by Grand Marnier in Chile's Valle del Rapel. It was incredibly hot, with the alcohol expressing itself in a searing, unpalatable, and thoroughly unbalanced way. I was amazed that a 12% wine could taste this alcoholic.

It was at that point I checked the percentage again. This time the label said 14.2%. I did a double take. But how could that be?

A ROUNDABOUT WAY TO TRUTH IN LABELING

It turned out the back label indicated a level of alcohol more than 2% higher than the front label (see image at left). From tasting this wine, it was clear that the back label was correct and the front label was lying. But I bought the wine based on what the front label said, as one could expect.

I had to refer to the Oxford one more time. It said: Alcohol tolerances vary considerably and can be as high as 2 percent alcohol in the US.

Although this wasn't the US, I could tell that this wine's labels were playing fast and loose with the tolerance standard, a rule that ultimately would allow having two different readings for a single wine and have them vary by an industry-accepted margin of error, and still have each of them be considered accurate!

I won't buy 14%+ alcohol Sauvignon so I took this bottle back outright.

THE MORAL OF THE STORY

A bottle of wine can have one, two, three or even four separate wine labels affixed to it. Any one of them can carry pertinent information and it pays to look at each of them before making a purchase.

Tomorrow: How to interpret wine labelers!

Mixed-Bag Blogging Monday: Domaine de Montcy Cuvée Clos des Cèdres, Domaine Claude Lafond "La Raie" & Joseph Balland-Chapuis Coteaux du Giennois 2004

Like the mixed bag of inclement weather hitting the Atlantic Coast and Northeast, today's post presents a bit of a mixed bag. (By the way, news on the next Wine Blogging Wednesday, which is happening on this site, is just around the corner -- for now, see the final round-up entries as Billy wraps up WBW #32.)

Before the greatness that is Wine Blogging Wednesday, there is always a Mixed-Bag Blogging Monday to get through. But as far as today's MBM goes, things could be worse. (None of the wines in this mix came close to being as unforgiving as today's soggy and awful forecast.)

Back in early March, I set out on a bit of Sauvignon Blanc spree, focusing in on what France's Loire Valley has on offer. I think a similar pursuit with New Zealand Sauvignon inspired me to do this. So over a couple of weeks, my friends and I sampled three of the region's Sauvignons, some with Chardonnay blended in, some without.

We were surprised that the bottle which got the least praise (three stars in Michel Phaneuf's Le Guide du Vin) outshone by far the other two bottles (which had garnered four stars apiece). This was even more surprising considering that we all were in agreement and that we drank the exact vintages that were rated. They were all 2004s, a lovely and auspicious year for this refreshing, compelling style of wine.

At the top of the pack was the Domaine de Montcy Cuvée Clos des Cèdres Cheverny 2004. It was the bottle we described as "perfect" -- it perfectly delivered all we were looking for in a nice appetizing Sauvignon. I've already bought three more bottles of Montcy's Clos des Cèdres since last month's uncorking. And I intend to get more while supplies last.

The first time I tasted this I got bright citrus flavours. The second time, weeks later, which obviously was influenced by memory and expectation, I was more immediately struck by reediness and minerality that had a touch of wood. The burst of citrus I was prepared for was still there. (But you know what they say about first impressions -- or rather is it something about never being as good as the first time?) In any case those delicious grapefruit edges provided some interesting character and this wine scores, every time.

Montcy's Loire winemaker displays a descriptive profile which indicates linden and I guess I'll buy that tasting note -- it's definitely more than just zest because there are some vegetal and herbal components that are well integrated too. It's a winning package that serves up the refreshment and nice raspy edge you expect from a Sauvignon out of the Loire (Cheverny is just northwest of Sancerre, by the way).

Perhaps this winner of a cuvée has a secret in the form of its 30% Chardonnay in the mix.

Domaine Claude Lafond "La Raie" Reuilly 2004 was the one we called the "appley" one. (Click on the image at right for more details on this wine.) Raie, which is the French word for skate, as in the funny-looking plate-like fish, was much flatter than the other wines. Hey, this cuvée is well named! This Sauvignon actually verges on pear and that was quite unexpected. This was my first experience with a Reuilly wine and my first experience with this producer (Claude Lafond) so maybe lush fruit is a characteristic I should've been expecting. In any case, we were all surprised as it is, after all, Sauvignon Blanc. Definitely a subject for further research.

It came off like heavy wet snow, didn't tingle or brace our palates much as we ramped up to dinner. Not bad overall, but not the Sauvignon that we seek out. (That would be the bottle you see at the very top of the page -- click on it for more details.)

Joseph Balland-Chapuis Coteaux du Giennois 2004 was the final of the three we tasted and we labeled it the "grassy" one. (Click on the image at left for more details on this wine.) More similar to the first bottle than the second -- ain't nothing wrong with grass, especially when it comes to Sauvignon, but this was just not quite as good at the first bottle. It was a touch on the tart and unforgiving side.

Just like today's sleet and snow, it could sting in just the slightest way and it could definitely make you make faces.

R. et S. Simon, La Porte Dorée, Cheverny, France. 12%.