‘98 and ‘99: Tricky Vintages for Zinfandel Fans

On the whole, I find Zinfandel to be the most reliable of wine grapes. Just look at the 1990s--great vintages in 1990, 1991, 1992 (if you like them super-ripe), 1994 (which I loved), 1995 (which somehow turned out even more intense than ‘94) and 1997 (a year that reminds many of 1995). That’s six very good to exceptional vintages, and 1993 and 1996 were not all that shabby themselves.

Well, now I have tasted most of the 1998s and a fair smattering of the 1999s, and the picture they present is a little less rosy. It is not that those vintages are total failures, but rather that they are inconsistent from producer to producer and from place to place. I have found plenty to like, but youdo need to choose carefully.

The 1998 and ’99 were late to ripen, challenging growers to delay harvest to allow the grapes to mature fully. I remember seeing grapes still hanging in late November 1998 and thinking then the vintage was going to be problematic.

Most grapes get ripe through photosynthesis, which requires sunny days and a fair bit of heat. By the end of the year, when it’s cooler and cloudier, the vines ordinarily shut down and no further ripening takes place.

The grapes can hang a long time in those conditions if there is no rain to cause rot in the tight bunches, and the sugar level in the grapes can rise, simply because they are drying out on the vine. The wines of 1998 often show flavors more akin to raisins, chocolate and dried fruits than the zesty, bright fruit for which Zin is most noted.

The ‘99s could have gone the same route. After all, that vintage was also very late because of a surprisingly cold September. Miraculously, though, California had a mid-October heat spell and those slow grapes got ripe in a hurry.

Unfortunately, this last-minute dash accentuated Zinfandel’s tendency toward uneven ripening in its bunches, and many of the ‘99s are marked by a streak of under-ripeness in the midst of the concentrated fruit and the high alcohol that comes with extreme ripeness.

It seems to me that the wineries that have succeeded best fall into two categories: those that have exercised very strict control over their vineyards and over the grapes that come into the winery, and those that just got lucky.

Without overemphasizing the failures, I can think of several wineries whose multiple bottlings from 1999 vary dramatically in quality and character.

* 1998 Baileyana Winery, Paso Robles, $16. The ripening problems that vexed the north coast were far less evident in the warm vineyard sites of the Paso Robles area. As the result, this wine is plump and juicy with a hint of dried spices to go with its fairly full-bodied mouth-feel. It can age for a few years, but nothing about it would keep it from being enjoyed today.

$* 1999 Beaulieu Vineyard, Napa Valley, $12. This very nicely made Zinfandel sports sweet and inviting blackberry aromas with touches of ripe cherries and plums. It is medium-full in body and supple at entry, and its medium-depth dried berry flavors, while pleasant, are influenced by youthful coarseness. It can be served now with hearty food or set aside for a couple of years.

* * 1998 Grgich Hills Winery “50% Napa County/50% Sonoma County,” $22. Over the years, Grgich Hills Zinfandels have been a little more austere than most, but they have also aged more gracefully. This wine is a little more ripe and open than usual, with lovely, pure aromas of berries and cassis and hints of spice and fleshy texture. It is slightly firm and will improve for several years, even if it won’t age for decades.

* * 1999 Rosenblum Cellars “Rockpile Road Vineyard,” $20. No winery makes a more diverse array of Zins than Rosenblum. In my latest tastings, 10 bottlings showed up and most of them were quite good. This one, from the Rockpile Road Vineyard, is one of my favorites because it has captured Zinfandel’s riveting fruit along with the richness that can come from hanging out an extra bit of time on the vine.

$ NV Rosenblum Cellars “Vintner’s Cuvee XXII,” $8. The winery has added 10% Merlot to its budget-minded blend and come up with a bright, zesty, berryish wine whose slight tart edge speaks to 1999’s growing conditions without getting in the way. This style of Zinfandel is most appropriate for washing down plates of pasta in red sauce.

$ 1999 Renwood Winery “Sierra Series,” California, $10. Renwood’s first foray into the arena of moderately priced Zinfandels is a ripe, fleshy wine, reflecting the winery’s foothill heritage. Whereas the Rosenblum is a light-hearted quaff, this one will be best alongside more substantial food.

1997 M. Trinchero Estates “Proprietors Series,” Amador County, $15. The Trincheros are the family behind the very successful Sutter Home winery. Indeed, there is a theory that they were instrumental in reviving Zinfandel’s fortunes some 30 years ago with their first Amador County bottlings. This wine represents the winery’s move into the more upscale end of the market, and it is a rich, ripe abundantly fruity, slightly jammy effort that carries an interesting bitter edge alongside its high ripeness.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

*** A world-class wine, superb by any measure, the top 1% to 2% of all wines tasted.

** A exceptional wine, well worth the effort to find, 10% to 12% of wines tasted.

* An admirable wine, tasty, focused, attractive about 25% of wines tasted.

No Rating: The best are quite pleasant and can be good buys when moderately priced.

$ Good value for the money.

x Below average quality, to be avoided.

*

This column is based on tasting conducted by Connoisseur’s Guide to California Wine, a monthly newsletter devoted to the critical review of California and West coast wines. Readers of The Times may obtain a sample copy by sending their name and address to: CGCW, P.O. Box V, Alameda, CA 94501, by calling or faxing (510) 865-3150 or by e-mailing CGCW@aol.com.