A day after the NY AUSTRALIAN WINE HARVEST TASTING and I am still amazed at how great every single Australian wine is.I could not pick out one bad wine that was not pleasant to drink. Australian wines are rich and thick, big and bold with exciting bright flavors with layers of complexity and a pleasure to drink with almost any type of food.They possesss great balance with elegant structure and finesse.Im telling you we need to wake up and try these wines,I had so many Australian wines at this event that would knock your shoes off at less than half of what California wines go for. I understand that we are talking about a different grape variety but I have had many California wines that are simply too tannic to swallow and enjoy and who knows if time will develop them into something better....HAVE AUSTRALIAN they are ready to drink now and can also be aged.

Whether they age successfully is another question entirely.

Jones - I totally agree with you. There are a couple that need a year or two in the bottle, but they're largely ready to drink when you buy them.

Which isn't a bad thing! We can cellar our Frenchies (unless we're Mouton88888 - in which case, I'll take his share) and the others. And drink the Aussies.

I think there may be a bit of hyperbole on the "all Aussie wines are great" front, though. I've had a couple of disappointments.

Is this the 2002 vintage that you are talking about, tahiti89? Because, that is supposed to be a Great year for them. Definitely a region that you have to keep an eye on.

I agree with Tahiti. Most of the Aussies I've tasted lately have been great. And the prices are excellent. Think many will benefit from a few years in the cellar although across the board they're ready to roll with some splash decanting and swirling in the glass.

To be honest I think you will find that a large percentage of Aussie wines will go the distance- but that maybe you just don't see them State side.

Wines that need at least ten years and as much as twenty.
Some you may know and some you may not, the range is dependant on vintage like any other region.
Henschke Hill of Grace (8-15)
Henschke Cyril Estate Cab Sav (8-20)
Penfolds Grange (15-40)
Mt Langhi Ghiran Shiraz (10-15)
Tyrells Winemakers Reserve (see TN's on WS site it was 15 yrs old and drinking perfectly although another year would have done well)
Cullen Cab (10-20)
Cape Mentelle Cab Sav (8-15)
Mount Mary Quintet (10-25)
D'Arenburg Deadarm (10-15)
Jim Barry Armagh (12-20)
Rosemount Balmoral (12-15) - have 1987 and 1989 in 2000 and 2001 respectively and still needed time.
Orlando Padthaway Lawsons Shiraz (10-?)
Yarra Yerring Number 1 and Number 2(8-10 and 10-15 respectively)
and so many more ( at least another fifty wines I could list).

Much like any region around the world in a good vintage there are a larger number of age capable wines, where as in poor vintage there are fewer. I think the best Aussies are as age worthy as any Bordeaux, Rhone, Supertuscan or Rioja.

The differance is that unlike many Bordeaux's and Rhones the Aussie wines are very approachable in their youth ( old vines being the most obvious reason.). The continued hot summers force beautiful fruit to the fore, while the tannins are often rounded.

Considering that some vines in areas such as Mc Claren vale are over two hundred years of age would suggest that if anything the regions of Aussie are not dissimilar to California , both in climate and ,from what I've read, style. And I know some CA wines can go the distance as well.

The ones that stood out in my mind from the many yummy ones I had that day are :
Gibsons Barossa Vale Shiraz 2000
Willow Bridge Reserve cab 2001.............great QPR
Flinders Bay Margaret River Shiraz 2001
Armstrong Vineyards shiraz 1999
Elderton CSM Shiraz Merlot 1999
Kooyong Mornington Peninsula Pinot Noir 2000----Great stuff
Grant Burge Filsell Shiraz 2000...................Amazing
Grant Burge Meshah
Yalumba The Signature cab-shiraz 1998
Penfolds Bin 707
Wynns Coonawarra Shiraz............and many others all ready to drink and my point is that they all go down well unlike many cabs that are very tannic and just dry up your mouth.

CHEERS

Both the Bin 707 and the Filswell are capable of good age (say more than 10 yrs) the problem is that they taste great in their youth but after a few years they are even better.

Virtually every wine you have mentioned is imported into the US. Claiming that Australian wines age as well as Bordeaux is certainly a rather ambitious statement.

I have to agree. Not sure how age-worthy Australians are, but I doubt that any region produces Wine that can age like Bdxs (30-50+ years). And, how would we know, the French (or that region) is the only 1 with that kind of “proven” history & design their Wines that way.

CA-based Wines, very few can go that kind of distance (if any)...

One word LCC "Inglenook". The old ones made in 1933 through about 1964 are still fantastic wines and have proven that CA Cabs can age.

touché. Forgot about that 1. BUT, I did say they are some. But, you must admit (very few & far between). Yes?

Grange 57 is said to be drinking well now, it is also called the hidden vintage, because it wasn't released. But I know 1986 and 1983 need another ten years before they reach their drinking window which would last at least five years. That put's it in the 30+ window.
Armagh 1985 still needs another ten years according to the few that have drunk it.

The 30-50 yr Bordeauxs aren't the majority of Bordeaux they are the better wines from Superior vintages. Look at Lafite 77for example. Many felt it was a poor vintage and wouldn't go the distance, and from what I have read it hasn't. 1982 Bordeauxs are drinking well now and over the next five years, but I wonder if they would make fifty years. I wouldn't think so.

You may be correct in the statement that it is an ambitious comment, but I feel that all the wines I mentioned are ageworthy and not only improve with age but require age to reach their potential. My comment was really in relation to the question- are they ageworthy? I think Aussies are and often can surprise.

Jones,
Have you tried Yarra Yerring Number 1 and Number 2? I'd be interested to hear what you thought of them. I've had the 1988, 1986, 1983 abd 1990 vintages and found them to be drinking well but still had quite developed acids and tannins.

LCC, with the exception of Inglenook and a couple of others there wasn't much wine made in CA that wouldn't be considered plonk 50 years ago. Most wineries were just trying to survive, not necessarily make extrodinary wines. The late 60's seemed to usher the begining of the period where CA wineries spent the time and resources to make outstanding wines. Witness the fine wines from the 1968 and 1970 vintages. 1974 is considered a Legendary vintage in CA Cab history (although these wines may not last much longer). When you start asking for a 50 year time period CA just doesn't have the track record for that (for the most part). The only fines wines I know about that predate 1966 are the BV GDL's and a couple of vintages of Ridge Monte Bello (plus Inglenook).

Yes, my point exactly (& may be a few others).

While I agree with Jonse's original comment. My question is where have you been Tahiti? This is not a new thing. I and many of my good friends have been drinking great Aussie wines for years now. Try some NZ pinot and get back to me.