2000, 2003 Branaire Ducru; 1995 Sociando Mallet

[marcs]

These are from memory, the Branaires from some weeks ago. I have grown too lazy to take notes while drinking and also to obsess about numerical point scores. But they should give a decent sense of things.

2003 Branaire-Ducru: This is fantastic, actually. Really plush, already multilayered and revealing some more complex flavors, tannins are still present but in no way detract from the pleasure of the wine. Very hedonistic -- dark chocolate, coffee, pipe tobacco, as one expects from a certain type of slick-styled Bordeaux, but this is *very good quality* chocolate, coffee, and tobacco. Back of the bottle has a little note from the chateau saying B-D is dedicated to pleasure. Ummm, yes. This will keep going and developing for at least another five years, probably ten, but it is wonderful to drink now and you won't lose by indulging yourself today.

2000 Branaire-Ducru: Has excellent fruit but much sterner structure and more prominent tannins than the 2003. It's all there, lots of dark cassis, beautiful midpalate, very graceful and well balanced wine, but my impression was that you are not getting into the deeper layers yet. Nice to drink now, especially if you can taste through better than me but unlike the 2003 (and like most other good 2000s) you would certainly benefit by holding it for a couple of more years. These 2000s are going to last quite a long time, but I bet you knew that already.

1995 Sociando Mallet: Somewhat metallic, nothing soft here, but a beautiful seam of sweetness runs through it too. Easy drinking, but still has a touch of tannic hardness to it. Definitely lacks the depth of fruit that the 1996 has, but does have enough sweetness that it's quite pleasant. Some nice herbal qualities are starting to develop too. In a very masculine style, can certainly age longer, but I wonder if it will ever really relax.

[Claret]

I tasted and bought 1995 SM shortly after release and my memory is of big tannins and to let the wine sleep for a long time. I will probably wait another couple of years to open a bottle, and open a 1996 next year. Thanks for the update.

[JimHow]

The '03 Branaire sounds something like the '03 St. Pierre except with maybe more meat on its bones.

[marcs]

Have not had the Saint Pierre. I may not have made clear just how good the 2003 Branaire is. I would say it's a clear, legit 94-95 pointer. Maybe 94 points today, 95 if it takes maybe a little additional step up while shedding tannin. It is structured -- it's hedonistic but not a big blowsy mess and it's filled with fruit but not soft. It unfolds on your palate. A wine with a proper narrative structure. A little cliched, it's an international style with all the standard things one looks for in luxurious Bordeaux, but it delivers them just right.

Maybe I should be giving points. I need to come up with some kind of general scoring categories as I am tired of the "is it 91.7? 92.5?" type thing that goes on with points. Anyway, for the other wines:

2000 Branaire: 91, maybe 92 today, 95-96 at some hypothetical future point but who knows? Not me, who only started buying with 2000s and has barely tasted any Bdx older than 15 years old. Anyway, a good wine that will improve.

1995 Sociando: 88-89 today, very nice but too hard and not giving enough to rate it higher for me. I do like my fruit. Hopefullly will improve But an 88-89 is a very nice wine as far as I'm concerned. Not as good as the 1996 for my tastes though.

[JimHow]

Thanks for the report Marc. I know He Who Shall Remain Nameless rated the '03 Branaire very high. I don't think I've ever had it, unless maybe at a Blanquito dinner in NYC. Most 1996 and after vintages of Branaire seem to appeal to my palate. Then again, the '82 was a beauty.

[marcs]

RPs OK on Bordeaux (am I allowed to say that, or will I get booted off the site?). He made his bones during the 80s and got enough experience with old-style Bdx that he learned decent judgement. Of course, I don't really have the $ for new cult right-bank stuff, and I usually stick with the old traditionals. I also like when he systematically underrates something, because then I save money, so I figure I win with him either way.

One issue I now remember with the 2003 -- the nose is lagging a little behind the palate, which is I think is pretty typical for rich and early maturing wines. Maybe that will even out with time.