100 Best Washington Wines
Our wines keep getting better and better, and here are the best of the best.
1. Quilceda Creek Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 2007, $125
An extremely appealing nose with light spices and opulent amounts of black cherry and blackberry, along with earth, chocolate, and light herbal notes. It’s a big wine on the palate with heaping quantities of black fruit accented by chocolate and perfectly integrated tannins. 97 percent cabernet sauvignon, 3 percent merlot. Champoux, Klipsun, and Tapteil vineyards. Aged 22 months in new French oak. 15.2 percent alcohol. 4,250 cases produced.
2. Cayuse Vineyards God Only Knows Grenache Armada Vineyard Walla Walla Valley 2006, $65
An outrageous, funky nose that leaps from the glass with black olives, earth, and savory notes. The palate is seamless and loaded with earth, umami, pepper, meat, and red fruit. I searched for a superlative that could adequately describe the experience to no avail. 100 percent grenache. 15.2 percent alcohol. 288 cases produced.
3. Woodward Canyon Cabernet Sauvignon Old Vines Washington State 2007, $79
Abundant toast and spice on a pleasing nose that is initially oak-driven. As the wine opens up, rich black fruit aromas come to the foreground. On the palate, a rich, intense wine with waves of fruit and an impeccable balance. The finish hangs on forever. 100 percent cabernet sauvignon. Champoux and Sagemoor vineyards. 14.8 percent alcohol. 651 cases produced.
4. Waters Winery Syrah Forgotten Hills Vineyard Walla Walla Valley 2007, $40
An aromatic wine with earth, sliced black olives, bright berries, floral notes, game, and a kiss of chocolate. Elegantly textured palate. A persistent finish caps off this exceptional effort. 100 percent syrah. Forgotten Hills Vineyard. 13.8 percent alcohol. 514 cases produced.
5. Owen Roe Chapel Block Syrah Red Willow Vineyard Yakima Valley 2008, $45
Beautifully expressive nose with floral notes, earth, blueberries, and light game. Impeccably well-balanced on a palate packed with fruit buffeted by a pleasing lift of acidity. Capped off by a long finish. Red Willow Vineyard (Yakima Valley). Aged 14 months in French oak (26 percent new). 14.9 percent alcohol. 359 cases produced.
6. Buty Winery Rediviva of the Stones Walla Walla Valley 2007, $55
A compelling, funky nose with olive juice, earth, seaweed, and game. Richly textured on a lithe, exceptionally well-balanced palate. An extended finish. 77 percent syrah, 23 percent cabernet sauvignon. River Rock and LeFore vineyards. Aged 14 months in French oak. 14.2 percent alcohol. 365 cases produced.
7. Rasa Vineyards Principia Reserve Syrah Walla Walla Valley 2007, $85
A very pretty nose with violets, game, chocolate, a touch of lemon zest, and blackberries. A rich, beautifully textured palate tightly packed with layers of black fruit. Beautifully polished with well-integrated tannins. Capped off by an exceptionally long finish. 100 percent syrah from five different vineyards (Les Collines, Lewis, Portteus, Double River, and Seven Hills). Aged 24 months in French oak (25 percent new). 14.9 percent alcohol. 70 cases produced.
8. Grand Reve Vintners Collaboration Series II Red Wine Ciel du Cheval Vineyard Red Mountain 2007, $45
Dark in color, this wine has an expressive, intriguing nose with earth, mineral, game, and red fruit. Light on its feet on the palate but with great complexity and an elegant tannic backbone holding it all together. 55 percent syrah, 25 percent grenache, 19 percent mourvedre, 1 percent viognier. Aged 17 months in French oak (40 percent new). 14.8 percent alcohol. 184 cases produced.
9. Gramercy Cellars Lagniappe Syrah Columbia Valley 2007, $40
A drop-dead gorgeous with floral notes, game, and earth. The textured, acid-driven palate boasts intense fruit flavors. Syrah cofermented with viognier. Forgotten Hills and Minick vineyards. 13.9 percent alcohol. 220 cases produced.
10. Abeja Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 2007, $42
The nose is initially closed, but as it opens it shows toast, blackberry, dark chocolate, spice, and a light earthiness. A polished palate offers rich, focused black fruit and silky tannins, and the finish goes on and on and on. 88 percent cabernet sauvignon, 8 percent merlot, 4 percent cabernet franc. Aged in French oak (60 percent new) for 24 months. 14.9 percent alcohol. 2,294 cases produced.
All labels courtesy the wineries.
Published: September 2010
11 pages of links for one article…. gimme a break. Are you really trying to create the most inconvenient, painful user experience. Do you think that would endear you to your reader base……3 pages is fine but 11, are you freakin kiddin…have you sat down and poured through or even tested this on a computer with a wireless web connection… I dare say no. Do you want me to go on and on here to get my point across and make it as painful to you as you did me in the way you published this article… AND we actually purchased a paper copy but left it at home and are now in Eastern WA trying to to a wine tour and wanted to use your info……
ARE YOU FREAKIN KIDDIN ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 11 PAGES FOR ONE ARTICLE
This comment has been edited.
The list is a nice list but it isn’t anything that can’t be found in Wine Spectator. I was hoping a local magazine would promote a few more of the many wineries that Washington has to offer that is making darn fine wine too.
One of the other writers brought up a great point on the writer of the article’s credentials. Other than having a real nice website I could not find where he has had any formal training. It appears that he has evaluated a lot of wines but so have I for that matter.
sean, you have completely out-done yourself, again. the definitive list, to be sure, of washington wines this year. excellent wrap-up and thanks for doing this. i’ll always have this on hand now and you’ve already filled my morning with wine searching.
Nice job, Sean! Congratulations on the piece.
Love seeing these BS Top 100 lists. One man’s palate and no way blind tasted, not for some of the crap that made the list. Sean’s friends maybe, afraid to go against the grain and call out of some of those established wineries for dropping in quality? Maybe.
Bottom line, go out and discover new wines people! Sure, there are some gems on this list and wines that hold their own among the world’s best….but come on……there are some crapping wines on this list and also a lot of wines that somone else made (consulting winemakers, which really means they made the wine).
I am bored with these over hyped wine writers and those that follow them
I agree with the above statement that this doesn’t seem to be a “definitive list of the 100 best wines” though the title seems to suggest otherwise doesn’t it?
“100 Best Washington Wines
Our wines keep getting better and better, and here are the best of the best.”
Given the restrictions put on entries where, for example, wineries were only allowed to submit 1 wine over $50, this list most likely missed a lot of good wines. What if there’s a winery out there that makes 2 wines that are both worthy of being in the top 100, but both of them are over $50, then they could only submit one of those for review, and the list will not truly reflect the top 100 wines. For the sake of transparency, the should have listed all of the wines that were submitted, and said “out of all these wines we tried, here’s the top 100”
Kincaid, as for someone’s credentials: if someone is a good cook, you can put them to the test by tasting their food and seeing if it’s good. In this situation, however, we have not tested the reviewer’s knowledge of wine, we’ve only seen how good he is at telling us his opinions about them Anyone can review wine, they just have to taste it and tell you what they think of it, and some people are very good at expressing their opinion in writing, with or without any serious wine knowledge. This does not demonstrate, either way, their knowledge and skill with wine, only their skill in writing and expressing their opinion.
Maybe they should make some sort of Wine-SAT exam for wine writers to take and then every time that wine writer posts an article, their W-SAT score will be printed along side their name so that you will know what level of expertise this person has compared to other writers, reviewers, and bloggers. That would be something
Barbara, sorry to hear that you missed the call for submissions. I more than understand that wineries are deluged with requests to provide samples, participate in charity events, etc. This was part of the reason I placed restrictions on submissions, to make it a bit more manageable for all concerned. Some wineries have more than twenty different offerings! I would love to visit Paradisos del Sol. I will reach out with an email so we can set it up.
Ray Burt, wines from Adamant, Ramseyer, Reynvaan, and Ross Andrew were not submitted unfortunately. Each makes excellent wines. See my blog for a recent review of the 2007 Ramseyer wine. I will have a post up about the upcoming Reynvaan releases later this month. The new wines are a considerable step up from the first vintage. Quite a statement as those wines were already extraordinary.
It amazes me how worked up people get up over an opinion driven list. This is simply one man’s effort to provide some insite and review on wines that were submitted to him. It is important to remember that this is an opinion. The only way it holds merit is if people try wines that are reviewed and decide if they agree or disagree.
This a great marketing tool for wineires (if they get listed) and for retail outlets. If nothing else, it tells people about wines they may never have heard of and help them discover new ones.
Besides at the end of the day it’s just grape juice!!
Keep putting the lists out, and keep watching people get worked up over words on a page and grape juice that has been spoiled.
A great article, Sean. Once again, I have a list that sends me on a search for some great wines. As a follower of yours on Washington Wine Report, I know that these tastings were done with the impartial objectivity you have shown in the past.
I agree with Dude if all the entries would have been truly blind tasted the readers would of no doubt been given some wineries that are new or not part of the “usual suspects.” Competitions that are truly blind tasted with local wine experts seem to do a much better job being impartial and finding those hard to find/hidden gems.
Just wondering what credentials does the writer have other than having a wine blog.
This is great! Love that the wine labels are with each description, I always remember a face better than a name. Wish this was in a “Met 200”-type little booklet to carry around with me.
Congrats on the list, Sean. Very nice wines all I am sure.
Had to dig deep before I found some white wines though!
Nice job!
Nice list – not an easy task! Nicer still is that I’ve seen darn near all of these wines/wineries for sale from Paul at Full Pull. Washington wine lovers take note: fullpullwines.com
With all do respect this seems like too perfect of a list to actually be the result of a blind tasting. This simply is a list of all the famous, well known, wineries in the state. I could have written this list without ever tasting any wine. If someone told me to sit down and write out out 100 of the state’s most well known wines, this is the list I would have made, no tasting needed. Lenoetti, Quilceda, Betz, Dunham, Woodward Canyon, these are all good wines, but with most blind tastings the list usually has a high number of unexpected winners
Dude – do respect???
Some great vineyards not represented — were they not included in the tasting? Specifically, I’m thinking of Adamant, Ramseyer, Reynvaan, Ross Andrew….
From the methodology (for full text, scroll to the top of this article): “Sullivan started by authoring a call for submissions that was published in the Washington Wine Commission’s newsletter, which goes out to all wineries in the state. Wineries were allowed to send a maximum of four wines: one bottle (red or white) under $25; one under $50; one over $50; and one white wine of any price. (Thanks to Full Pull Wines, for providing storage and tasting facilities.)”
C’mon guys, 11 pages to click through so that I can see all your ads? No thanks…
Look it! Sean Sullivan doesn’t really need me to defend him. He"s a big boy!
It is hard to read however, that he may not be qualified to author this list.
Not many people in the country, let alone Washington, put the amount of effort that Sean does to understand wine. He lives it! He breathes it! He is meticulous, definitive, articulate and most decidedly passionate about wine and Washington wine in particular.
And whether you like the choices or your wine isn’t there, it is not because Sean doesn’t understand the Washington wine scene. If he doesn’t know about your wine he WANTS to know!
And come on, Wine Spectator does not list the best 100 wines in any given year, and Columbia Crest did not make the BEST wine in the WORLD. It’s just someone’s opinion. So if you think these types of lists are incorrect, flawed, misleading…don’t read them!
Of the average consumer, how many have heard of Amavi, Buty, Walter Dacon? Maybe it will stretch a few folks off the Chilean, Australian…whatever “ean” bandwagon and try some locally outstanding wines, wineries and winemakers.
Are there some wines I would like to have seen included? Sure, the Barrister or Barrage Cab Francs, McCrea Picpoul or the NW Totem Cellars Late Harvest Viognier to name three. But it ain’t my list! It’s Sean Sullivan’s.
“And I know Sean Sullivan and you ain’t no Sean Sullivan!”
While I was very excited about reading this magazine, and I commend the writer for getting such an amazing line up, I was a bit disappointed overall. To put it boldly, I would have had much more respect and paid more attention to this article if I had felt that the writer had more credentials in wine. What type of formal education does he have in wine? While I know that education does not make you a good writer or even make you have a good palate, at least some sort of formalized credentials would have been nice. These ratings can make or break a winery and I would have had much more respect if you had chosen a writer that has more education and credentials. Knowing WA wines means that you will know the best wineries to choose, but does not mean that you will be completely impartial. I’d suggest next year choosing a non WA wine expert perhaps to get someone that is less biased toward the well known WA wines.
Check out some of the other award winning labels the Seattle area creative agency Blend has designed for Milbrandt at http://blendseattle.com/Brand_Portfolio/Milbrandt.html
Great job Sean- this was no small feat!
I own a winery that did not make this list, simply because I did not see the notice in the newsletter. We are inundated with requests to send our wines here, there, and everywhere, in addition to sending them to every auction that comes along.
As a small (only 1000 cases a year) winery, I would love to have this recognition, but between our entire staff (my husband, myself, and a few part-time people to help at harvest and in the tasting room), we don’t have the bandwidth to respond to all of these requests in addition to growing the grapes, making the wine, and selling the wine from our tasting room.
That said, the wine judges that we are most concerned with are the ones that we face every day across the tasting room bar. Perhaps Sean could come to our winery and taste our wines (on his way to tasting the other 640 wineries in Washington State). Hmm, 640 . . . that means if everyone one of us sent the maximum to him in response to this newsletter plea, he would have had to taste through 2560 wines! Well, probably less since there are a lot of us out there who do not have wines that cost more than $50, including myself.
I think the list would have been more useful if the categories had been more reasonable, like under $10, $10-$25, over $25. Not sure how many people out there are consistently buying wines that are over $50!
Thanks, Barbara
Owner Paradisos del Sol Winery
There is method and there is marketing. Lets face it, would you pick up a magazine that said 100 best Washington wines that were submitted for judging? Probably not. That title might be more accurate but it isn’t going to sell magazines. It isn’t a perfect method. I am not sure there is a perfect method to evaluate the best wines in the state. There are too many issues in terms of palate fatigue, shipping and storage, cost, scoring controversies, winery participation, QPR etc.
This isn’t a wine industry magazine, “Seattle Metropolitan is our city’s indispensable news, culture, and lifestyle magazine.” The audience is looking for experiences and a guide to some of the best Washington has to offer. It is a guide more than the ultimate authoritative report.
Dude- the wineries on the list are no doubt famous and well-known BECAUSE they are consistently producing the best wine in the state. What you’ve said is an exercise in circular logic and the wines still deserve to be on a top 100 list. And I think if you peruse the list a bit more carefully I think you will find that quite a few are relatively unknown wines for most of us.
Peggy- similarly it seems that such a list might be found in multiple publications by virtue that many people agree on which wines and wineries are the best in WA. While some gems might slip through the cracks I think overall (when these lists agree) we are looking at a general agreement by multiple sources about great wine and wineries in our state. I think the recurrence of certain wines and wineries on top-suchandsuch lists is not suspect but rather proof-positive that they are releasing great stuff time and time again.
Cheers Sean! Great work and I look forward to trying some of these which are new to me.
Sean, an excellent job at a massive task. Some seem to be missing the point that whether we individually agree or disagree, there is a wealth of information included that I’m certain none of us had in the past. I commend you.
But, you know me, and I can’t resist adding a comment or two. I’m certain that the reason is somehow tied to which wineries decided to submit and then on to which of their wines they decided to submit, but being the lover of Washington State cab’s that I am, I was also surprised at a few things.
No note of some extremely fine cab’s and cab blends like Andrew Will Sorella, Owen Roe DuBrul and Bookwalter Foreshadow. There’s Betz Clos de Betz but no mention of their Pere de Famille, in my mind an excellent cab that blows away the Clos de Betz. Again, likely driven by the subscription restrictions and participation.
But then, for me at least, two very confusing points. I was glad to see Januik’s Columbia Valley, simply an excellent cab, but at #70 in comparison to numerous other cabs substantially higher, that was hard for me to agree with. And the other, the Novelty Hill cab at #26 in relation to numerous outstanding cabs well below it .. that one made me question the pallet of the taster. Novelty Hill is a good cab, I have several on hand myself to pass out a decent wine at a bbq with friends who aren’t necessarily into wines as its good enough to offend no one and even yield a bit of satisfaction, but again IMO, it’s nowhere even close to the league of the top 26 wines, let alone the cab’s, of WA state. I guess its placement was driven by “VALUE” as it’s the only wine of the 100 to show that note, but I don’t see “VALUE” as one of the judgement criteria.
Still, an excellent effort and aside from my ranting notes, an effort from which I and I’m sure many others will derive substantial value. Many thanks!!!
Keith, thanks! You are entirely correct regarding which wines wineries decide to submit and, of course, whether they submit wines at all. I found it fascinating to see what folks sent in. Keep in mind that the category restrictions made it impossible for a winery like Betz, in your example, to submit the Clos de Betz (under $50), the Cote Patriarche (over $50), AND the Pere de Famille (over $50) as only one bottle over $50 was permitted from each winery.
Continuing with your point, as a consumer, one of the things I always find difficult is trying to determine, when wines are not listed, whether they were not submitted or were poorly rated. For example, Robert Parker’s Wine Advocate only lists wines that receive a score of 85 points or higher in its publication. When a wine isn’t listed, is it because it scored less than 85 points or because it wasn’t submitted? Similarly, if you don’t see a wine on this list, is it because it wasn’t submitted or I didn’t rated it above 90 points? There is no way to know unfortunately. Ultimately such reviews speak to the wineries listed but are silent on the wineries not listed. The problem is that, as a consumer, one is inclined to think that it also speaks to the wines not listed.
One way to try to address this – from a writer’s perspective – is by attempting to include the entire universe of wines. This was my intention by making the solicitation via the Washington Wine Commission’s newsletter, which is sent to all wineries. All wineries had the opportunity at least to see this solicitation and submit wines. Of course, not everyone saw it and not everyone who did see it submitted wines.
Regarding the Novelty Hill Cabernet, two things to keep in mind. First, all of these wines were point scored blind. Second, these point scores were not adjusted for things like price – or for anything for that matter.
How to account for the Novelty Hill Cabernet being listed higher than the Januik Cabernet? There are numerous possible explanations ranging from it’s a better wine in this vintage; differences in how wines display themselves when they are popped and poured; on ‘any given Sunday’; palate preferences, etc. I will say, of course, that I stand behind the ratings I gave for each of these wines given the format I used.
Thanks for the comment and enjoy the list!
Wow. It’s obvious some people jumped straight to the list and failed to read how it was compiled. Unless you think that Sean Sullivan is stating bald-faced lies, he says upfront he sent a out a request to ALL Washington wineries asking each to send in four bottles and that they were blind tasted.
As for the lack of credentials or formal training, do you really think it’s impossible for someone to acquire the same knowledge and experience via DIY methods?? Not saying Sean did or did not have any formal training. Don’t know, don’t care but that’s like telling your mother/father/whoever, “Sorry, you may be a great cook but because you didn’t go to Le Cordon Bleu in Paris, you’re not qualified to offer an opinion.”
Get over yourselves.
I doubt very much that every winery in Washington sent in four bottles and those that did probably didn’t send in as many as they could. I’m satisfied that Sean did his best to get as many wines as possible but he can only evaluate what was sent in. Not every winery can afford to – or even wants to – send in multiple bottles to every person/publication/organization that wants to rate their wines. I forget which one it is but I’ve been told that one publication requests that a winery send in a full case in order to have that particular wine rated.
Having defended Sean, I don’t regard this list as THE DEFINITIVE list of the 100 best wines that the State of Washington has to offer because, other than the mention of blind tasting, there’s simply too much left unsaid regarding the evaluation process.
If you look at this list as a jumping off point for discovery or even a conversation starter, you’re less likely to take offense at what’s essentially one person’s opinion.
Good wine list. An apparent volume of work done and done well.
Bad article title.
My suggestion is that if it is truly to be definitive as the title implies, a stronger more succesful effort should be made to evaluate all wines. I want to be on record that my wines have never been evaluated by anyone on behalf of Seattle wine magazine. WIne Press NW continues to provide a direct avenue for submission.
I do not recall reciving an email/twitter/facebook invite or text for submitting. I would be interested in correcting my error if it is on my side or interested in seeing the error in Seattle Magazine’s contest protocal change if I indeed did not receive a direct solicitation.
Respectfully,
Mike SHaradin
NW Totem Cellars
Hi Mike, as described in the article, the solicitation request went out through the Washington Wine Commission in its monthly newsletter sent to all Washington wineries. Both the commission and Seattle Metropolitan also mentioned it on Twitter I should add, as I know you spend a good deal of time in that space.