Tasted at the JanuarySQN Dinner...

In a word, this Pinot is HUGE. I never would have guessed blind that this is from Oregon, as it shows more like a hugely extracted California pinot. Gobs of bright cherries, spice, and vanilla notes on the nose, the palate is equally full throttle, with copious fruit, a hint of earth, ripe fine tannins, but showing it’s alcohol a bit on the finish. 90 points.

This tasted like a Santa Lucia pinot but was really from Oregon (I think the last SQN pinot from Shea, or perhaps there is one more). This was a hugely monolithic wine and not one I particularly cared for.

Shoot! I knew this was OR, but posted it in Cali anyway - can an admin move this pleeeze?

I had this at a barbecue at Beaux Freres back on Memorial Day and I had similar thoughts. After trying it I went back to the 1969 Deleger Chevalier Montrachet.

Had this with Valentine's dinner last night, and I concur with everyone else. A big, full-throttle bruiser of a pinot, tasty but monolithic and rather simple. The comparison to Amour Fou is apt; I'm not sure it's better than AF, to be honest. On a positive note, because the Hollerin' M was so massive and had decent acidity, it worked perfectly with my veal and my girlfriend's John Dory. 90 points seems about right.

I had the Hollerin' M at dinner last week in Minneapolis. I thought it was big for an Oregon Pinot, but I didn't think it was nearly as big as others here are saying. It was tasted along with a few other Oregon and Cali Pinots - and while I would have guessed it was from California, I didn't think it was over the top. Not nearly as big as the Amour Fou. It seemed to fit in nicely with the Kistler, DuMol, and Loring levels of intensity.

Oh ya... I really liked it! Which made me sad and glad. Sad because Manfred isn't going to be making a Shea Pinot Noir anymor Glad because I know a certain Cali Pinot guy who's now going to be getting Manfred's block Who could that be?

Anybody we know???

This Pinot is for a Sine Qua Non disappointing but calling it Amour Fou is really really harsh imo.

Well then we will just have to agree to disagree because I find Amour Fou to be a grotesque mockery of a wine which is completely out of balance. The Hollerin M is a bit much but Parker did rate it a 96. Parker did not review or rate (if I had to bet I would say rate) the Amour Fou. Stating that the Hollerin' M is Amour Fou 2 is grossly misleading imo and frankly insults the SQN.

The Hollerin' M is a better (though not perfectly) balanced wine and will no doubt age better than the Amour Fou. And if by "grotesque mockery" you mean out of balance (massive waves of fruit, too little acidity, somewhat hot), lacking delicacy and subtlety and not terribly varietally correct, I agree with you. I never said I thought the Fou is a great, balanced or typical pinot. Just a tasty, enjoyable drink (as is the SQN). If one is a stickler for varietal correctness I can totally understand seriously disliking the Fou. At the same time, unless the Hollerin' M evolves into a much more complex wine, it will never come close to meriting RMP's 96 points. At this stage in its life the HM is a big, monolithic, not-very-complex, slightly out-of-balance (less out-of-balance than the AF) though tasty wine. What Parker would have scored the Amour Fou is beside the point. What's disappointing is that one can name so many '02 domestic pinots better than the SQN.

We simply disagree. The Amour Fou is a bizarrely poor wine. It is just sickening. The Hollerin' M may not deserve Parker's 96 point rating but is still a good well made wine. Comparing the Hollerin'M to the Amour Fou unfairly discredits Hollerin'M.

Dan -- I'm still not clear where you stand on Amour Fou.

I received a bottle of this as a gift a couple days ago. Any comments on drinking windows? It sounds like the wine is quite the bruiser right now. I can't believe the alcohol level is 15.4%. That's in Amarone-land.

Medium-garnet colour. Aromas of alcohol, currant, red berries. Medium-full bodied, with spice, alcohol, and currant notes. Moderate finish, 30-35s. Too much alcohol for my liking. Some commented it would have performed better served a little cooler. 90 points (11/18/2005).

That was beeeggg hint, do tell.

This wine was too steroidal for my tastes. It was also unbalanced with the alcohol marring the finish. I thought it merited between 89-90 points.