Remhoogte Honeybunch Chenin Blanc 2010

By , 1 February 2014



Plenty of oomph.

Plenty of oomph.

Attending the Wine Expo on the Braak as part of this year’s Stellenbosch Wine Festival yesterday, I thought the Honeybunch Chenin Blanc 2012 from Remhoogte was looking smart.

This prompted me to open a bottle of the maiden 2010 with dinner (it was nominated for 5 Stars but not endorsed in Platter’s, the same fate befalling the 2012) and it drank extremely well, some time in bottle having done it no harm at all

Whereas I am sometimes left a bit indifferent by Chenin on account of a fundamental blandness, this is not the case with Honeybunch. The 2010 currently shows breadth and depth, with flavours of yellow peach, honey and spice unfurling on the palate. There’s plenty of concentration but this offset by an acidity which sort of slithers through the wine and there’s also just a touch of leesy character lest the wine be accused of being too polished. Top stuff.

Score: 92/100.


3 comment(s)

  • Derek Prout-Jones1 February 2014

    Hi Christian
    You may have explained this when you gave notice that you were changing your scoring methodology to the 100-point system. I cannot remember if you gave details of how you make up yor score ie do you evaluate the different components and then add them up to get a score out of 100 OR is your score your “overall assessment” of the wine’s general appeal?? The latter being my own ” Heath Robinson” approach!!
    Thanks mate

  • Christian1 February 2014

    Hi DPJ, Scores are an overall assessment of the wine. While I would be the first to admit no scoring system is perfect, I do like that the 100-point system is more finely calibrated and therefore does away with the scenario whereby two wines both score 16/20 but one’s more deserving than the other. It’s about avoiding “bunching” and so very roughly a score of 83 on the 100-point scale would be equivalent to 15/20, 86 to 16/20. 90 to 17/20, 93 to 18/20.

  • Derek Prout-Jones1 February 2014

    Thx for the reply Christian. Personally I agree with the approach. To me, the old “colour, nose, palate” thing was too “mechanistic” and restrictive and left little scope to express an “overall impression” or, in a word, a wine’s “drinkability” – which is my ultimate benchmark for vinous enjoyment. Specifically (for eg), would a “turbid” appearance affect your score if the nose and palate were intact? ..etc

    Thx and regards

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *