Tag Archives: Groth Vineyards

60 Second Wine Review — Sheridan Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon

A few quick thoughts on the 2013 Sheridan Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon.

The Geekery

Scott and Karen Greer founded Sheridan Vineyards in 1996 in the Yakima Valley of Washington State. From the first vintage release in 2000, Sheridan has received much critical acclaim–being described as one of the rising stars in Washington.

In 2012, the Greers ventured into Napa Valley to produce a Cabernet Sauvignon sourced from the Wilsey Vineyard in Rutherford.

Located in the northwest quadrant of the appellation next to the Beckstoeffer-Melrose vineyard and near Emmolo’s Home Ranch and Whitehall Lane’s Bommarito vineyards, the Wilsey Vineyard was purchased in 1974 by the late Gary Wilsey.

According to Richard Mendelson in his book Appellation Napa Valley, Wilsey and his wife Lanetta, along with Agustin Huneeus of Franciscan Estate, Steve Girard of Girard Winery, Dennis Groth of Groth Vineyards, Jean Phillips of Screaming Eagle and the Duncan family of Silver Oak were part of the “Anti-Benchers” faction that opposed the delineation (and even existence) of a “Rutherford Bench”.

The Wine

Photo by ANAND HULUGAPPA. Uploaded to Wikimedia commons under CC-BY-SA-4.0

Right now the rich dark fruits and secondary oak dominates but this wine is not far from developing even more interesting tertiary flavors.

Medium-plus intensity nose–ripe dark fruit flavors of black plums and blackberry. Noticeable oak baking spices of clove and nutmeg as well.

On the palate those rich dark fruit flavors carry through contributing to the full-bodied weight of the wine.  The mouthwatering medium-plus acidity balances the fruit well. The high tannins are very present but very ripe and smoothed by the vanilla from the oak. The long finish is still fruit-forward but starts to linger with spice and just a hint of smokey tobacco.

The Verdict

It feels like this Napa Cab is certainly on the cusp of hitting its prime. It just needs the baby fat of ripe fruit and oak to give way to more complex notes.

This wine is drinking well within its $100-130 Napa peers. However, its structure and acidity has the potential to deliver much more.

Subscribe to Spitbucket

New posts sent to your email!

Why I Don’t Use Scores


My 60 Second Wine Reviews are a regular feature that give me a chance to geek out about various wines. But while I deliver a “Verdict” at the end of each review, I also leave a glaring omission.

I don’t give a numerical score.

It’s not that I’m morally opposed to using the 100 point scale popularized by Robert Parker and Wine Spectator or the 20 point scale favored by Jancis Robinson and UC-Davis. In fact, I regularly look at scores by those publications and use them as tools in researching wines.

But I think they’re useless for me to give out.

A 7 Point Scale

When I first started using CellarTracker, I got into the habit of rating wines numerically but soon discovered a disturbing trend. While in theory I had 100 points to divvy out, in truth, I was really only working on a scale of 87-94.

If the wine was well made but not my style, 90-91 points. If it had some issues then 87-89. For wines I really liked it was 92-93. If it blew me away then a 94.

For some reason I just couldn’t rate anything above 94 because I felt like there was always the potential for something else to come along to raise the bar—even though I’ve enjoyed some amazing wines over the years.

The 1996 Chateau Margaux? 94 points.
The 2010 Angelus? 94 points.
The 2005 Quilceda Creek? 94 points.
The 2012 Chappellet Pritchard Hill? 94 points.
The 1970 Taylor Vintage Port? 94 points.
The 1996 Champagne Salon? 94 points.

This is not a slight on any of those wines and they all deserved the much higher scores they got from professional critics. But for me, even though I richly enjoyed them and felt that I got more than my money’s worth with each, there was still that mental and emotional barrier that didn’t want to go higher than 94 points.

Painting by EGrützner. Sourced from Ketterer Kunst Auktion: 402, 14.05.2013, lot 699. Uploaded to Wikimedia Commons under CC-PD-Mark

Trust me, I’m a professional drinker.


It’s silly but isn’t trying to quantify numerically all the nuances of wine a fool’s errand anyways?

And truthfully when it comes playing the fool (and doing it well), we can’t all be a Falstaff, Stanczyk, Claus Narr or James Suckling.

I Rate With My Wallet

And I believe that most wine drinkers do the same.

While we might sometimes indulge our inner Robert Parkers with scoring, I would wager that most of the time when we evaluate a wine, we judge it on if we got enough pleasure to merit the cost of what we paid. It’s human nature to expect more from a $100 bottle of wine than a $10 bottle and that is the approach I take with each wine I taste.

I view the cost of each bottle as a potential investment in pleasure and I seek a solid return on my investment.

94 points but well worth splurging on to try at least once in your life.


And it is my investment as my wife and I personally buy more than 90% of the wines (and whiskeys) that I review on this blog whether it be the 2006 Petrus, 20 year Pappy Van Winkle, Taittinger Champagne Comtes de Champagne Rosé or the Groth, Pegau CdP, etc. A few times even at restaurant mark ups!

Now some wines like the 2007 Poisot Romanée-Saint-Vivant and the wines featured in my Walla Walla Musings post, I do get to taste at tastings open to industry/media and I often get my tasting fees waived at wineries for being in the industry–but with each wine I always default back to the question of “Would I pay $$ to purchase this wine?”

If I’m tasting it blind and I don’t know the cost, I ascribe a price point that I feel would be good value if I was buying the wine.

But unlike Robert Parker, Jancis Robinson, James Suckling and the like, I’m not trying to be a professional wine critic or consumer advocate. I’m just a geek who likes to drink.

I rate wines on my personal scale of if I think they’re worth spending money on because ultimately that’s what I’m interested in–do I want to buy this wine (again)? Just as other folks have their own personal tastes, people also have their own personal scale of value.

That’s perfectly fine and, frankly, is the reason why I put the “Verdict” section at the very bottom of each review. My opinion is just my opinion and, besides, it’s really the “Geekery” section where you’ll find the good stuff anyways.

Subscribe to Spitbucket

New posts sent to your email!

60 Second Wine Review — Groth Oakville Cabernet


A few quick thoughts on the 2002 Groth Oakville Cabernet Sauvignon.

The Geekery

In his 1989 book California’s Great Cabernets, James Laube of Wine Spectator ranks Groth’s estate Cabernet Sauvignon as one of the “Third Growths” of California–putting it on par with other great wines like Shafer’s Hillside Select, Louis Martini’s Monte Rosso and Stag’s Leap Wine Cellars’ SLV and above Laube’s “Fourth Growths” of Silver Oak Napa Valley, Joseph Phelps’ Backus Vineyard and Rombauer’s Le Meilleur du Chai.

Founded in 1982 by Dennis Groth, a former executive of Atari, and his wife Judy, the winery owns a little over 136 sustainably farmed acres between their Oakville Estate Vineyard and Hillview Vineyard in Yountville. Usually Groth produces a reserve Cabernet (which Laube ranked as a “Second Growth” on par with Dominus and Grace Family Vineyards) but because of vineyard replanting no reserve Cab was produced between the 2000 and 2004 vintages.

The 2002 vintage of the Oakville Cab was 76% Cabernet Sauvignon and 24% Merlot. The wine saw 23 months in 50% new French oak.

The Wine

Medium plus intensity nose. Rich roasted coffee aromas with savory black tea notes. You would expect this to be served by a barista.

On the palate you can find some fruit but it is more dried red cranberry and currants. The coffee and tea notes carry through and are met with more savory notes of leather and meatiness. Medium acidity still gives the wine life and balances well with the soft medium tannins.

The Verdict

By François Bianco - Freshly roasted coffee, CC BY-SA 2.0, on Wikimedia Commons

If you’re needing a Starbucks fix, the huge roasted coffee aromas in this Groth Oakville Cab will get you jonesing even more for the java.

It’s clear that this wine is on the waning side of maturity but it still had immense character with a lot of story left to tell. This is a wine worth savoring over a couple hours with good friends as each sniff and sip reveals something different.

Being an older vintage, the price will vary but at between $75-95 it is a solid bet for someone who likes elegant and savory Cabernet Sauvignons.

Subscribe to Spitbucket

New posts sent to your email!