Hardy's Oomoo: Week #25

Earlier this week, I remembered that my brother & sister-in-law had given me a gift card to the liquor store for Christmas.  So, I decided that I would use it to its full potential and pick a more expensive bottle that normally I would be too frugal to purchase.  I have to say, that this week was the most enjoyable selection process to date - how fun to browse the aisles and purposely seek higher price tags!  I decided to stay in Australia, since the Autralian Shiraz can rarely be beat (the exception being Wally's Hut from week #12 ).  There were three bottles that fit the bill - but two were over my gift card value (one by $5 and the other by $10) and it's hard for me to be frivolous, so I sensibly chose the one that left me with a small balance on my card for next week.  Well, that and Oomoo is fun to say! 

Hardy's Oomoo (Australia, 2007)
$21.99
14% alc./vol.

A word from the wine:
"Back in the 1870's Thomas Hardy adopted the Aboriginal word Oomoo, meaning 'good' or 'attractive' for his post popular wines."
I think I will adopt the Aboriginal word Oomoo as well.

Well, this wine is oomoo - but I still have to say that I was underwhelmed.  Sure, it was a solid Shiraz - it tasted great and had a bit of pep - but there are other (cheaper) brands that I have preferred.  I was actually quite surprised that it wasn't full-bodied, rich or velvety as I expect a more expensive bottle to be.  Had I spent $12 on the bottle of wine, it may have ended up on the regular rotation, but I didn't and so it won't.  If you find yourself wanting to spend more than $15 on a bottle of Shiraz, save yourself the heartache of lonely disappointment and buy Wolf Blass.

I shared this bottle with a friend - and since the wine was still good and the company was great, I don't think my minor dissatisfaction affected the overall enjoyment of the evening.  Plus, there were tasty snacks!

Guest Tester: "When you pay more, you expect more"
Guest Tester's Helpful Husband: "Not bad"

I'm glad to see that all helpful husbands are equally descriptive.