Patty Smythe

Karly 2008 Zinfandel “Warrior Fires” (Amador County) – 15.4%. Giant, dark, dusty fruit that’s trying way too hard. Power without substance. To write more about what I found would be giving the wine more credit than it deserves for overachievement despite a lack of something to say. Let up on the gas pedal, please. (11/11)

Pokerville? I don't even know'erville!

Karly 2009 Zinfandel Pokerville (Amador County) – 14.5%...and yes, the name means what you think; it was apparently the name of the town of Plymouth at one point during the gold rush years, and for the immediately obvious reason to anyone who thinks about leisure-time activities for a bunch of men who’ve spent weeks scratching for little more than riches and mosquitoes. (It’s kind of a shame they changed it.) Bursty fruit, as if the half-wild, half-cultivated berries are being crushed as the wine’s sipped. Or, rather, guzzled. This isn’t a sipping wine. Fruity fun. (11/11)

The vieux, the proud

Edmunds St. John 1993 Zinfandel (Amador County) – 13.7%. As fully-resolved a zinfandel as I’ve ever tasted…mostly, they tend to evolve, mature, and then start falling apart, and not always on parallel curves. This is soft, even plushy, in its textural circularity, with some erosion evident and a little bit of reduced gravity from the core. Around it, though, is still wrapped a lightly peppery sheathe, and dusty minerality rests on the ground, fallen but not yet separate. Very appealing. (7/11)

Edmunds St. John 1994 Zinfandel (Amador County) – Round, polished, sweet red fruit. Whatever structure there was is long gone, but what’s left is mostly just fruit, rather than anything particularly complex. It’s teetering on the edge of failure as well, though it hasn’t quite gotten there yet (note, however, that this is a recent release from the winery, and differently-stored bottles might already be on the downslope). A similarly-acquired bottle of the 1993 was better, and clinging more strongly to relevancy, a few months ago. In any case, one must be careful to not expect too much from aged zinfandel; there are exceptions and surprises, but they’re (definitionally) not the majority. (9/11)

Sobon mot

Sobon Estate 2008 Zinfandel “Old Vines” (Amador County) – 14.9%. A reliably slightly-better-than-mediocre bargain zin, here a little better than that. Wiry and brambly, with the pine woodsy character of the region, and as much bite as it has (at least in my memory) ever shown. Tasty, though it neither demands nor offers much. (9/10)

Wren

Renwood 2002 Zinfandel “Old Vine” (Amador County) – 15%. Twisted red and black berries fading to pine and layered with too-prominent coconut. This is about half spiced rum at this point. Which isn’t an entirely unusual fate for aging zinfandel, but this was better in its youth. (4/10)

Deux date

Folie à Deux 1999 Zinfandel (Amador County) – 15.5%. From the Scott Harvey era, and even though I’d expected it to age based on that alone, I didn’t really intend to hold on to this particular bottle as long as I have. One of the single-site bottlings, perhaps, but this is the entry-level blend. Still, it’s held up pretty well. A little sappier and stickier than I might prefer, and with a concentrated, sloppy smooch of vanilla butter providing discomfort (even under Harvey, this was always a winery that was prone to sloppy overwooding), but the fruit reflects the Amador style: concentrated wild berries grown even more concentrated, almost to the point where they exhibit a resinous quality. It’s good, but drink up for sure. (2/10)

Tulocay for the straight guy

Tulocay 1999 Zinfandel (Amador County) – 15%. Though this wine will unquestionably age a good deal longer, changing as it does, I’m quite attracted to its present charms…poised on a pinnacle between the boisterous fruit of youth and the textural lavishness of maturity. The berries, dark and spicy, aren’t quite so wild anymore, but neither has the wine edged into one of those realms in which it can be mistaken for a different grape, as so often happens with well-matured zinfandel. I like that stage, too, but there are other ways to get to those places. Zin of this quality (and with these qualities) is something to be cherished on its own merits. (2/10)

Amador, not a bricklayer

Easton 2006 Zinfandel (Amador County) – 14.5%. Leans more to the blueberry and plum side than is typical for Amador zin…there’s not quite so much of the thorny, wild-vine iconoclasm as there has been in other vintages. Perhaps this is what leaves the tannin and acidity a little more exposed, as well. Some time (not a lot) might help knit these elements. Not a bad wine, but not the best Easton’s produced. That said, it’s still one of the highest-quality zins to be had at a non-premium price these days, which is saying something at least. (10/09)

Tulocays walk into a bar...

Tulocay 2001 Zinfandel (Amador County) – Jeez, this is good. Full-throated black fruit, all wild vines and tangled pulp, without being over the top or tricked-up in any way. There’s tannin and acidity in the background, both lesser components but providing sufficient support for all else. Evidence suggests this will continue to age and develop for some time, with the current hints of black pepper fanning out into a wider mélange of spices and soil characteristics. (5/09)

Onwest

Easton 2006 Zinfandel (Amador County) – Forward fruit with some stick and tack, its berries redder and a little more syruped than might be expected (the wine isn’t heavy, though it is big), its structure mostly hand-waved, its finish a diminuendo of simplicity. It’s zin. It’s very, very, very cleanly-made. It’s good, but read between the lines. Or, read the lines themselves. Either’s good. (4/09)

Tulocay, three to go

Tulocay 1999 Zinfandel (Amador County) – 15%. And: wow. I remember drinking zin like this. Ridge used to make it, and then we’d let it age, and much later on it would taste like this. Rolling tumblers of soft red fruit, spice (mostly of the baking genre, though there are various hues of pepper as well), earth, cinnamon cap mushrooms, and that delicious sensation of fruit-weight so crucial to zin, but without the all-too-common burn of Scotch on the finish. Long. I’d call this at very early maturity, but with emphasis on the mature aspect. More, please. (3/09)

When it was 2006, it was a zinfandel year

Easton 2006 Zinfandel (Amador County) – Upon first opening, a huge rush of bubbles and massive volatility seems to indicate an in-bottle refermentation. I put it aside and open something else. Two days later, it’s still a little prickly. A full week later, at room temperature – something I would not generally recommend – it has come into full form, shedding some of the wood along with the volatiles and knitting itself into a far more cohesive and more “winy” wine, full of dark, wild berries and that pine bark-edged touch of pruniness, twisted and sauvage, that so often seems to mark the region. I’m not sure what was going on at first opening, though. (1/09)

Easton down, Easton down the road

Easton 2006 Zinfandel (Amador County) – 14.5%. Suave zinfandel, carrying its weight with ease, and dressing up its usual tangled-vine Amador gnarliness in a fine, tailored suit…which it wears well. Those for whom differential character in zins is the primary goal will be slightly disappointed in this wine, but it’s very hard to criticize it from any other perspective, as it could hardly be more sluggable. (10/08)

Big Tulocay country

Tulocay 2001 Zinfandel (Amador County) – 15.7%. Based on the color, I’d think about drinking this. Based on the palate, I’d wait. Based on the structure, I’d have to choose against Caol Ila. How to solve this dilemma? Twisted, back-country berries and black pepper-dominated spice mark the wine’s unmistakable origin, but there’s a little more heat than usual (even for often-fiery Amador zin), and a lot of spirituous invective. As a pure expression of “fuck you” Californicated aggression towards even its most spiritually native of grapes, it’s a triumphant achievement, and I honestly do admire it for that quality. I even enjoy it on those terms. As a wine in the greater world of such beverages, however, it’s a bit much. (10/08)

Easton exposure

Easton 2006 Zinfandel (Amador County) – Comes in columns, with separation and little integration, of sweet black fruit, pepper-spice, wild-eyed – almost olive-like, though the wine doesn’t taste of olives – brininess, and minor structure. The finish is shorter than usual, and there’s a significant final chord of vanilla. This might just need a little bit of time to knit, but I think it’s not quite the wine it has been in recent years. (7/08)

Sobon, farewell

Sobon Estate 2005 Zinfandel “Hillside” (Amador County) – 14.5%. Good, basic Amador zin flavors…wild, tiny, dark berries and a gnarly, twisted texture burned into some remote, grassy, sun-drenched hillside…with little in the way of complexity or nuance. Sometimes, that’s all you want. (5/08)

Semi-human resources?

Montevina “Terra d’Oro” 2001 Zinfandel “SHR Field Blend” (Amador County) – 15%. The initial burst is oak, followed by over-toasted vanilla and then some tortured, mangled, and blackened fruit residue. Eventually, it calms down enough to be unpleasantly drinkable, but the damage remains clear on the face. This just isn’t very good. (4/08)

Veterans' Administration

Easton 2006 Zinfandel (Amador County) – Perhaps an off bottle. If not, a rather dramatic stylistic left turn. The nose is quite volatile, then a breath of coconut precedes a crisp, light, tangled and gnarly palate of thin vines and biting, early-picked acidity. I like it (once that volatility blows away), but it’s certainly not what I expect from either Amador or Easton. (4/08)

Amadoration

Easton 2006 Zinfandel (Amador County) – Reliably fruity and vine-y, its twisty palate a result of grapes that have been goofing around rather than studying Dadaism. There’s very little a zin should have that’s not present here, and while it’s fairly straightforward, it holds on to a varietal purity that grows increasingly rare in these days of tricked-and-tarted volume wines. (12/07)

Karly sign, mon

Karly 2003 Zinfandel “Buck’s Ten Point” (Amador Country) – 14.5%. Tight, dried-berry Amador wildness; call it blackened zin without the Cajun spicing. Fruit tends towards blackberry and other less common, tiny and slightly bitter berries, with a slight whiskey burn that somehow doesn’t offend. It lacks ambition, but it’s tasty enough. (8/07)