To age or not to age?

Obviously the title of this post refers to ageing wine.

Over the past month, I have gone through about half of my wine collection. Mainly because a lot of what I opened was past its prime. There were nights when I would open three bottles of Cabernet Sauvignon from the Napa Valley just to find one that was drinkable. It was very disappointing to learn that so many of these wines—which I was told would improve with age when I purchased them—did not live up to my expectations.

But it wasn’t all disappointing. The 2006 Crocker &Starr St. Helena Estate Cabernet Sauvignon (purchased in 2009; $90/bottle) was incredible and well-worth the wait! A sexy stunner with loads of blackberry, black currant, mocha, and black licorice. The palate was silky smooth with well-integrated tannins. I recently tasted the 2008 vintage of this wine, which I probably will enjoy a year from now—if I can wait that long!

The 2007 Lava Vine Pritchard Hill [St. Helena] Cabernet Sauvignon ($110/bottle) was good. But when I purchased this wine in 2010, I recall it being full-bodied with firm tannins and gobs of dark fruit. After two years in the cellar, the tannins had broken down considerably and it negatively impacted the mouthfeel of the wine. It had a medium weight with a short finish and predominant spice notes. It was drinkable, but I prefer how this wine tasted two years ago.

Other wines that I wish I had opened sooner include the 2005 Volker Eisele Vineyards “Terzetto” and the 2004 Joseph Phelps Cabernet Sauvignon. I recall these wines as fruit-forward and balanced upon release, but when opened recently, they expressed non-fruit savory flavors of black olive, dried herbs, and earth.

I opened three bottles of the 2006 Ghost Block last month and each bottle was particularly underwhelming. But the current vintage is delicious and lush, which tells me it’s just not a good candidate for cellaring. I sold this wine at Napa Wine Company in 2009 and we assured our customers that the Ghost Block would improve with 3-5 years of age. I thought this sales pitch about ageing potential referred to the release date (which, for the 2006 vintage was May 2009); I realize now that it would have been more accurate to tell people to enjoy this wine within 2 years of the release date or 3-5 years from the vintage date. How confusing!

It would be unfair to say that it’s not worth it to age expensive wines [because I’ve had some great experiences with older wines, like the 1998 Honig Cab, the 2001 ZD Cab], but I have a new stance on the practice. If you like a wine when you taste it, don’t worry about whether it could improve with ageing. If you like it as is, drink it within 1-2 years! (That’s my plan.)

I think our culture places too much value on the “if” and “when” aspect of cellaring wine, and overlooks the fact that if we really like the wine upon release, then it makes sense that perhaps we won’t enjoy the wine anymore three years later. In fact, we could very well not like the wine after three years. And thus, the downside of ageing—pouring those once-beautiful $65+ wines down the drain.

If you are sitting on bottles of 2004, 2005, 2006, or 2007 Napa Cab, I would suggest opening them soon. And let me know what you think. Do you agree that these Napa Valley vintages are now ready to drink?