Wine Asylum

The Wine Asylum, the leading Internet destination devoted to the enjoyment of wine.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Red blend tasting - cheapest wine wins...

Posted by mkuller on November 9, 2018 at 10:59:15:

...6 of us blind tasted 6 red blends from Napa or Sonoma, lowest point score wins.

5/6. Tie - 2012 District 4 Napa $35 - 28pts - 3 lasts - not as much fruit as the others, a little earthy, not much going on.

5/6. 2013 White Oak Mighty Oak Napa $19 - 28pts - 2 lasts - little off odor at first, not much fruit (my last).

4. 2016 Decoy Red Sonoma $20 - 22pts - 1 first - lighter, fruity, sweet, not much depth.

3. 2014 Cuvaison Two Estates Napa $59 - 19pts - 1 first - a little sweet, not too bad

2. Alpha Omega II Napa $39 - 15pts - 1 first (mine) - a little fruit forward, not too sweet, nice depth

1. 2016 Malm Cross Blend Sonoma - $16 (Costco) - 14pts - 3 firsts, 1 last (my second) - nice fruit, sweet, nice balance

The bottom two were the oldest of the six and one taster said they tasted "older" to him. For the money, the Malm is a terrific buy.