|
100 Point Rating Guide | ||
|---|---|---|
| 96-100 | Extraordinary | A wine of finesse, complexity, and expression. True to variety and region. Perfect balance of flavors with a long finish. |
| 90-95 | Excellent | True to variety and region, with terrific complexity and balance. While not a wine for the ages, a superior example. |
| 85-89 | Good | Meets your expectations, with sound flavors and balance. Might have limited complexity or be short on the palate. A sound wine. |
| 80-84 | Average | Drinkable, might not have as much varietal character. Simple flavors, no flaws, but nothing special. |
| 75-79 | Below Average | Might contain one flaw, simple straight-forward flavors, off-balance, unpleasant. |
| 60-74 | Undrinkable, Flawed | Contains significant flaws. Unpleasant, not commercially acceptable. |
| Need some help? | ||
You're not logged in! ... so we can't track this review for you.
Login or create a free account and we'll bring you right back. (or continue anonymously)
3 User Reviews
Mar 31, 2007
Sweet, supple, oaky, vanilla. Typical one dimensional cheap merlot. On the + side, nothing horribly wrong w/ this wine, and it's cheap. Ok spicy finish, but nothing really stands out in this wine.
Dec 21, 2008
This wine is the right color, but it smells like rotting garbage. Not TCA, not Brettanomyces. I would rather eat a diaper than taste this wine. Disgusting. Hardly worth 65 cents, let alone the 5.00 plus it usually fetches. I would be embarassed to serve this to my guests. What an insult to Robert Mondavi's legacy.
Mar 30, 2007
Thin, flat, can't hang if you have it with food. Very smooth, but very one dimensional.
