Once again, I feel compelled to briefly note some of the other wines I’ve opened recently; these aren’t full tasting notes, but rather quick impressions of things that are currently ensconced in my recycling bin. Bear with me…Monte Xanic Cabernet Merlot 2004: One of Mexico’s top wines, this is grown and produced in the Valle de Guadalupe, which is only an hour south of my home here in San Diego. The label says 13.5% alcohol, and the winemaking bears out the suspicion that this is a wine entirely in the Old World tradition. Not especially cheap at US $25 a bottle, this wine was made in a lovely, traditionally French style, with expensive and elaborate oak supporting the very fine fruit. This is a fantastic bottle of wine if you like your wines in the Old World mode: it’s very full bodied in the mouth, and it’s entirely due to supporting oak, not primary fruit. Delicious and a nice change from the usual North American suspects.Ridge late harvest Zinfandel, likely from 2003: This was an ATP selection that I opened after a late night dinner with friends at The Linkery in San Diego. Ridge don’t produce a lot of these late harvest Zins these days, but I’m a fan. Yes, they’re ridiculously alcoholic at 16% and up, but this is a classic California style that’s been decidedly naff since the early 1980s, and I’m glad someone is keeping the tradition alive. Sure, it’s huge, alcoholic, a little porty, and not well balanced in the traditional sense… but it’s also delicious, exhilarating, uniquely Californian, and arguably in a style that lives on today through Robert Parker’s high scoring of behemoth Aussie shiraz from the Barossa and elsewhere. If you buy this, share it with friends and don’t plan on driving anywhere – and prepare yourself for a uniquely Californian experience.Clonakilla Hilltops Shiraz, 2002: This demanded decanting; even with air, this was a massive, feral syrah that displayed an earthiness you don’t normally see in wines from outside the Rhône Valley. This is drinking really well right now – if you have some, I’d consider opening it sooner rather than later as I can’t imagine it getting any better than it is at the moment. Soil, minerals, dirt, earth, funk, and none of the ‘raspberry motor oil’ character typically associated with Australian wines.Hamilton Russell Pinot Noir, 2006: Served at cellar temperature, I was disappointed by this wine at first. Although I’d had some at the winery two years ago, this seemed a little reedy, a little too trebly, and altogether wan and uninspiring. However, as it warmed up, it improved somewhat… but was still lacking somehow. If you’re going to go there, I’d consider looking for Bouchard-Finlayson wines first, or perhaps a different vintage of Hamilton Russell. Even so, it’s better than many disappointing wines in this price range (about US $25).Gallo of Sonoma Cabernet Sauvignon, Frei Vineyard, 1996: Dead on arrival. Sugar water that smells like it might have been wine at some point. Delicious two years ago, but it’s dead, Jim. Avoid.Robert Mondavi Cabernet Sauvignon, 2002: Tim Mondavi’s signature is all over this wine, both literally and metaphorically. This was an oak-driven, restrained, Old World style wine, which seems (especially in retrospect) a stylistic misfire on the part of the Mondavis. Mad props to Tim and family, however, for sticking to their guns and producing it. No, it’s not what any consumer would expect from a California cabernet, but it is nevertheless a delicious drink and an interesting stylistic experiment. This sort of thing works better with family or cult wineries, though – think Wendouree or Rockford – and not at all well with huge corporate wineries. Truly sad to see the Mondavi family dynasty going out on this note: a good, delicious wine in the finest European tradition utterly lost on a wine-buying public that just didn’t get why it tastes like this.