1989 Bordeaux tasting - October 17

DavidG · Post by **DavidG** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:17 pm

There you go again, Jimbo...

Let's see, in the last two years 1989 Lynch Bages has been beaten by (and these are BWE-sanctioned blind tastings, mind you, not just random throw-downs):

1989 Vieux Chateau Certan
1996 Pichon Lalande
1982 Pichon Lalande
and what wine came in second at Charlie Palmer in DC, also ahead of the Lynch?

In the last two instances, Lynch lost despite (because of?) a concerted effort by one well-known Bages apologist to fix the fight.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:24 pm

Well, we have documented the fix that what put in by Tommy "The Hit Man" Wheltle against the VCC, which was the lowly 1988, by the way, not '89. Also, I do not believe there was a vote taken in that highly suspect VCC vs. Lynch flight in the bowels of Hit Man Arena in '07.
I do not recall a defeat to the 1996 Pichon Lalande; the Lalande was victorious in the '96L vs. '98R tasting from two years ago, which did not involve the '89 Lynch.
And finally, I seriously question the results of this most recent tasting in DC, my glass of '89 Lynch was light years ahead of anything else that night, I think there was a) bottle variation and b) the group was voting for the last glass they had tasted (and thus most fresh in their minds), which happened to be the Lalande.... Hardly a scientific tasting....

Bring on the Ausone!

DavidG · Post by **DavidG** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:41 pm

That's what I get for arguing with a lawyer...

I stand corrected.

But there was a vote on the '88 VCC vs. the '89 Lynch, Jim, and even if we don't have formal documentation of the final tally, I distinctly recall which wine YOU voted for...

On this we agree: Bring on the Ausone!

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 9:49 pm

The '89 Lynch defeated the lowly '88 VCC by a two-to-one margin, David, it was my vote that was the subject of controversy. The Hit Man waited until I was distracted, not focused on the tasting, then called for a quick vote. without any thought on the subject, I haphazardly voted in the minority for the VCC.

DavidG · Post by **DavidG** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:16 pm

JimHow wrote:And finally, I seriously question the results of this most recent tasting in DC, my glass of '89 Lynch was light years ahead of anything else that night, I think there was a) bottle variation and b) the group was voting for the last glass they had tasted (and thus most fresh in their minds), which happened to be the Lalande.... Hardly a scientific tasting....

I think the 2 bottles were pretty similar, but voting for the last glass could have been a factor. Not to mention the fact that you tried to fix this one by getting a few people to vote for what you thought was the '89 Lynch, but which was in reality - what - the '82 Pichon? - which eventually won!?!? Based on hand signals from Peggy, who was just goofing around because she had no idea which wine was which, and wasn't even tasting them.

I sense a theme here. In 2007, there was distraction. In 2009, there was misdirection. But in both cases, there was confusion. Jim, clearly you are totally smitten with '89 Lynch Bages. If there is an '89 Lynch in the same room with you, your mental faculties desert you. Frankly, I don't blame you. It is a wonderful and bewitching wine (I own more of it than any other except maybe '88 Krug). It was my #2 in DC, after the '82 Pichon Lalande.

And unless someone brings '89 Haut Brion, I think the '89 Lynch is the odds-on favorite to win the '89 tasting this fall. Even without your shenanigans. In fact, given your track record, it's best bet for winning may be for you to keep mum until the votes are counted.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:41 pm

Remember, I voted for 3B as my number one wine because I thought it was the Lynch. I thought 3B-- the Lalande-- was a distant second best wine of the night. I refused to believe 2B was the Lynch because I couldn't believe it was that much superior to the legendary RMP100 1982 Pichon Lalande (which I had previously never had). Adding to the confusion was the unquestionable youthfulness of the 1982s from Stuart's cellar, something we also saw at the Thursday night dinner.

jal · Post by **jal** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:50 pm

JimHow wrote:Remember, I voted for 3B as my number one wine because I thought it was the Lynch. I thought 3B-- the Lalande-- was a distant second best wine of the night. I refused to believe 2B was the Lynch because I couldn't believe it was that much superior to the legendary RMP100 1982 Pichon Lalande (which I had previously never had). Adding to the confusion was the unquestionable youthfulness of the 1982s from Stuart's cellar, something we also saw at the Thursday night dinner.

Considering the amount of shenanigans going on, I recommend no prior double decanting. Someone may put the juice of a 89 VCC into a bottle of Lynch Bages to ensure a win! A fair fight is what we want. Grrrrrr!

DavidG · Post by **DavidG** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:35 pm

Well, Jim, this last time you were truly hoist by your own petard. Next time trust your instincts and vote your heart.

In Vino Veritas

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:02 am

Ultimately, of course, the 1989 Lynch Bages was benevolently decreed the victor.
These tastes of democracy can become seditious. In the end you have to trust the judgment of the philosopher king.

Tom In DC · Post by **Tom In DC** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:52 am

Jimbo,

If you think the Comte's LMHB won't relegate your "Po'Boys Mo-town" to the next days' marinade, you just haven't tasted enough great wine!

We'll bring the La Conseillante and that "other" Graves Ian was dancing around, and maybe one more just because, as sdr says, we simply might need more wine...

Tom In DC · Post by **Tom In DC** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:57 am

JimHow wrote:Remember, I voted for 3B as my number one wine because I thought it was the Lynch.

A politico to the bitter end..."I thought I was voting for my guy!"

Blanquito · Post by **Blanquito** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 1:33 pm

Egads! We need to put the '89 Lynch to the sword more often, if the likes of LMHB and HB 1989 are trotted out to smack down the contender. BWE is doing the 1989 vintage proud!

PappaDoc · Post by **PappaDoc** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 1:46 pm

Jim,

I still can taste the 89 Haut Brion you brought to Gios Home the night before the 03 Convention in NYC. It was amazing, and the most massive Haut Brion I've ever drank. While it was an infant more similar to Paul Bunyan at birth, it could not have been mistaken for any other Bordeaux. One of my greatest Bordeaux experiences, thanks again.

I guess this sets the lonest finish record for me personally

Stefan, or anyone else. I missed out getting the 89 Cos, I was outbid. It does have an excellent rating and the 90 Cos was outstanding. I'd certainly like to try it for my first time, but everthing so far looks incredible. This will prove to be one of the greatest BWE dinners ever!

stefan · Post by **stefan** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:02 pm

OK, Pappa, Cos and Ausone it will be, plus Olivier (which actually is a good wine; just not deserving of its Speculator rating).

Jay, I hope you bring the 89 La Lagune as I know it will present itself well even in this exalted company (particularly if we taste blind).

stefan

OK, Ian; I'll delay the decision on what to bring (other than one will be Ausone) to see what fits best.

stefan

Comte Flaneur · Post by **Comte Flaneur** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:40 pm

Further to stefan's post above I just need to re-iterate here that right from the outset it was made explicitly clear that a strict limit of 12 was imposed, and that it would be on a "first come, first served basis" - for the very simple reason that beyond that number the experience can get diluted for everyone. Going through the thread this is the order in which people signed up - it is easy to check this - and I want to be scupulously fair about it:

1. CF - organiser
2. Patrick Blanquito
3. Chris Bublitz
4. Pappa Doc
5. Jim BD How
6/7 Tom and Gail
8. Jacques
9. David G
10. Ramon
11/12 - stefan and Lucie

So Jay, if anyone drops out for any reason , you are in. The chances of that probabilistically are quite high.

Comte Flaneur · Post by **Comte Flaneur** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:43 pm

This is really shaping up fantastically well now, especially thanks to Tom's and stefan's generosity with wines pledged...stefan I would vote for Lagune and Leoville Barton over Cos and Olivier

Ramon_NYC · Post by **Ramon_NYC** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 pm

I'll pitch in with a Prieure-Lichine, as well. It's not up there with the great Lynch-Bages-vs-the-rest-of-89-Bordeaux debate, but it'll up the Margaux contingent to 2. Exciting line-up so far!

Blanquito · Post by **Blanquito** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 3:49 pm

Well, damn. The legendary BWE generousity on full display. Ian, please ammend my wines to include the Cantemerle, the Dominique and the Rieussec 1989 (92, 93 and 93 RMP pts, respectively). The Cantemerle is Parker's favorite wine from that Chateau since the 1961, FWIW. What my cellar lacks in quality can be made up with quantity, hopefully.

At this rate, someone will pony up the Petrus and Clinet (the vintage's other two 100 RMP pt wines)!!!

DavidG · Post by **DavidG** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 5:31 pm

Not that I had any doubt that we're in for drinking some wines that don't suck, but here's what a couple of professional critics have to say about '89 Bdx, from that "other" thread that started out less than positive.

Robert Parker wrote:Had both 89 Lynch Bages and Montrose recently...and both were incredible wines after 2+ hours in the decanter....1989 is a surprisingly lack-luster vintage for the Medoc first growths (1990 is vastly superior for the firsts save for the insipid Mouton)...Haut Brion 1989 is one of the monuments of the 20th century....my two cents...the best 89s need lots of aeration....

Neal Martin wrote:I'm quite surprised at they did not show better, though I agree with Bob in that the real delights are to be found away from the First Growths (except HB and occasionally Mouton.) Off that list, I love Pichon Baron and Lynch Bages although I think they need more time. Ditto a mag of Tertre-Rôteboeuf I had in January and Troplong Mondot a month before. Montrose I have always loved and for me, I prefer this to the 1990. Of course, there are some very sexy Pomerols (Petrus, Le Pin, Lafleur) but they are just a wee bit pricey!

The '89s we drank in DC had been double decanted about 2-3 hours before pouring, to good effect.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:21 pm

I am pleased to see Robert Parker finally finds the 1989 Lynch Bages to be "incredible," something we realized about twelve or thirteen years ago. Sounds like he and other afficianados are finally coming around on the glories of Pontet Canet, something we identified here in the earliest days of BWE some nine years ago. If he would like any more advice on Bordeaux wines he should just come on over here and we'll be happy to guide him in the right direction....

Blanquito · Post by **Blanquito** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:57 pm

Sorry Jim, Parker rated the 1989 Lynch Bages a 97 as long ago as 1992. That's before grade inflation too! Perhaps "incredible" is higher than a 97?

Still, there's no doubt Parker copies us at BWE. Take those head-to-head match-ups of the 1989 Lynch Bages-- he rates the 1988 Vieux-Chateau-Certan a lowly 91, so clearly he knows what he's talking about and/or has been surreptitiously using BWE before making his calls. Of course, the 1982 Pichon Lalande received 100 pts from Parker, leaving the "incredible" 1989 Lynch behind, providing further evidence that he could be a proud member of BWE's blind show-downs.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:56 pm

Hmm did he really rate it 97 points, blanquito? I think he rated it 95 points in one of his books, but I believe he rated it lower than than in a Wine Advocate issue on a Lynch vertical. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't ever recall him rating it 97 points. Regardless, I'm pleased to see that he finds our BWE icon to be "incredible." Next I'd like to introduce him to the '96 Sociando....

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:14 pm

MAINE TIMES
PARKER: 1989 LYNCH IS "INCREDIBLE"

Lewiston, Maine (AP)-- International wine expert Robert M. Parker, Jr., announced today that he found the 1989 Lynch Bages to be nothing short of "incredible" and predicted success for the legendary Medoc at a faceoff of 1989 Bordeaux wines scheduled for the twentieth anniversary of the harvest this October in New York City.

"I had this wine recently with the '89 Montrose," said Parker. "It is nothing short of incredible. I now understand what all the fuss is about!"

Jimmy L.B. How, the international lawyer and philanthropist who alse serves as trainer of Team Bages, said he was delighted by the announcement.

"Wow! Wow! Wow!" exclaimed a delighted How. "We are humbled by the wisdom and knowledge of Mr. Parker, and are pleased to hear that he has decided to join the ranks of the many of us who have recognized the 1989 Lynch Bages as the greatest Bordeaux wine since 1961."

The '89 Lynch-- fresh off a recent blind-tasting victory at the annual convention of Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts in Washington, D.C.-- will be put to the test yet again in October when it faces off against the likes of '89 Ausone, '89 Prieure Lichine, and others.

DavidG · Post by **DavidG** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:18 pm

JimHow wrote: "Wow! Wow! Wow!" exclaimed a delighted How. "We are humbled by the wisdom and knowledge of Mr. Parker

This may come back to haunt you...

Blanquito · Post by **Blanquito** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:31 am

Parker on the 1989 Lynch Bages through the years:

Wine Advocate # 129
Jun 2000 Robert Parker 95 Drink: 2004 - 2030 $197-$466
Consistently backward and dense, with enormous potential, this admirable wine will not be ready for prime time drinking for another 5-7 years. The color is not quite as opaque as the 1990's, but reveals more purple and no lightening at the edge. Hugely concentrated flavors have just begun to offer up a nose of cedar and creme de cassis. Powerful and muscular, with high tannin and superb concentration, this is Lynch Bages at its biggest and most beastly. However, everything is in balance for a stunning evolution. Anticipated maturity: 2004-2030.

Wine Advocate # 109
Feb 1997 Robert Parker 95 Drink: 2002 - 2027 $197-$466
The style of the two vintages for Lynch Bages parallels the style of the 1989 and 1990 Pichon-Longueville-Baron. In both cases, the 1990 is the more forward, flattering, and delicious to drink wine, in contrast to the more massive, backward, tannic, and potentially superior 1989. The opaque purple-colored 1989 is less evolved and showy. However, it looks to be a phenomenal example of Lynch Bages, perhaps the finest vintage in the last 30 years. Oozing with extract, this backward, muscular, dense wine possesses great purity, huge body, and a bulldozer-like power that charges across the palate. It is an enormous wine with unbridled quantities of power and richness. The 1989 requires 5-8 years of cellaring; it should last for three decades. These are two superb efforts from Lynch Bages.

Wine Advocate # 95
Oct 1994 Robert Parker 96 Drink: 1996 - 2015 $197-$466 (45)
Tasted 7 Times Since Bottling With Consistent Notes
The 1989 is the finest Lynch-Bages I have tasted. Its opaque, black/purple color suggests a level of concentration one rarely sees in Bordeaux. It is a wine with extraordinary flavor extraction, huge body, high glycerin and tannin levels, and a viscous, powerful finish. The wine, which was overwhelmingly ostentatious after bottling, has closed down. This super wine needs another 3-4 years of bottle age. Anticipated maturity: 1996-2015.

Wine Advocate # 88
Aug 1993 Robert Parker 96 Drink: 1996 - 2015 $197-$466 (50)
The 1989 is the finest Lynch-Bages I have tasted. Its opaque, black/purple color suggests a level of concentration one rarely sees in Bordeaux. It is a wine with extraordinary flavor extraction, huge body, high glycerin and tannin levels, and a viscous, powerful finish. The wine, which was overwhelmingly ostentatious after bottling, has closed down. This super wine needs another 3-4 years of bottle age. Anticipated maturity: 1996-2015. Last tasted, 6/93.

Wine Advocate # 85
Feb 1993 Robert Parker 96 Drink: 1996 - 2015 $197-$466 (40)
The 1989 is the finest young Lynch-Bages I have ever tasted. Its opaque, black/purple color suggests a level of concentration one rarely sees in Bordeaux. Some might accuse this wine of being too extracted, too weighty, and too unclaret-like, but that is what the great old Lynch-Bages vintages of 1970, 1961, and 1955 all offered. A powermonger that wants to grab all your attention, this bruiser is a super wine, and undoubtedly one of the finest wines ever made at this property. Anticipated maturity: 1996-2015.

Wine Advocate # 84
Dec 1992 Robert Parker 97 Drink: 1992 - 2020 $197-$466
Last Tasted 8/92
I am going to crawl out on the proverbial limb and state that this is the finest Lynch Bages I have ever tasted. A mammoth wine, it is the arch-typical style of wine that this property can achieve. The color is an opaque dark ruby/purple and the nose reluctantly offers up aromas of grilled nuts, leather, cassis, and smoky oak. In the mouth, there is a roasted richness to the wine, extraordinary concentration and depth, as well as mind-boggling levels of sweet tannin. The impression in the mouth is one of blockbuster massiveness and power. This monster Lynch Bages is closest in style to the 1970, but given the more modern vinification techniques, it is a cleaner, more balanced wine with less of the hard tannins that many 1970s exhibit. The wine is just beginning to close up, so if you are going to sample a bottle do it soon. It will require at least 5-7 years of sleep before it emerges from its shell. This is a Lynch Bages to drink through the first two decades of the next century. A colossal wine!

Wine Advocate # 80
Apr 1992 Robert Parker 96 Drink: 1996 - 2015 $197-$466 (40)
The 1989 is the finest young Lynch-Bages I have ever tasted.
Its opaque, black/purple color suggests a level of concentration one rarely sees in Bordeaux. It will not have the round, seductive charm of the 1985, and it is sweeter and richer than the 1982. Some might accuse this wine of being too extracted, too weighty, and too unclaret-like, but that is what the great old Lynch-Bages vintages of 1970, 1961, and 1955 all offered. If you are looking for elegance or something to stimulate intellectual conversation, this is not the wine to drink. A powermonger that wants to grab all your attention, this bruiser is a super wine, and undoubtedly the finest made at this property since the 1970, which, in a more modern way, it resembles. It is an awesome winemaking effort. Anticipated maturity: 1996-2015. Tasted eight times. Consistent notes.

Wine Advocate # 79
Feb 1992 Robert Parker (94-97) Drink: 2000 - 2022 $197-$466 (35)
If your tastes gravitate toward powerful, highly extracted, and densely flavored, chewy styles of Bordeaux, check out the 1989 Lynch-Bages, which I have rated as high as 97, and never lower than 94. It is the most massively built blockbuster I have ever tasted from this property, already well-known for its burly style of Pauillac. Opaque black/purple in color, it offers up super-ripe aromas of black-raspberries, licorice, chocolate, cedar, and new oak. With awesome concentration, as well as a level of richness and extract that must be tasted to be believed, it is definitely better than the great 1970, and my instincts tell me it may be superior to the 1961, although I never had the opportunity to taste the 1961 at a similar age. Those who love the style of Lynch-Bages should put as much of this wine as they can possibly afford in their cellar. Look for it to reach full maturity by the late nineties and last for 20-30 years.

Nicklasss · Post by **Nicklasss** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:08 am

I wish I could attend, but NY is now out of price, and the attendance is full. This will be a nice BWE dinner. I wish the best luck to the 1989 Lynch Bages. But like a boxing fight, the opposants have many tricks in their bag...

Maybe I should try to organize a BWE dinner like that in Québec City, Montréal or Ottawa? An objective for 2010?

Nic

Ramon_NYC · Post by **Ramon_NYC** » Sat May 02, 2009 1:38 am

Nicklasss wrote: Maybe I should try to organize a BWE dinner like that in Québec City, Montréal or Ottawa? An objective for 2010?
Nic

I'm definitely interested in a northern, ok a slightly far northern, offline in 2010. It's been a while since i've visited the foodie city of Montreal.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sat May 02, 2009 2:05 am

I'm in!

Comte Flaneur · Post by **Comte Flaneur** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:56 am

Still over three months away from our 1989 tasting but given that a good number of you will be "rocking up" from outside the "tri-state area" and will be spending a weekend in NYC is there any interest in doing a warm up dinner on the Friday night?

Last year for the '86 event Tom, Gail, Alex, Patrick, his brother and I met up for a barolo dinner the night before in Fabios...we didn't go mad...about one bottle per person...but it was a great evening and a nice warm up for the main event.

Any takers and any thoughts? I like the idea of doing another barolo/piedmont dinner but I am biased because I am addicted to nebbiolo. I think doing a burgundy dinner would be too dangerous.

Any thoughts on any other themes? Any takers?

Blanquito · Post by **Blanquito** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:40 am

I'd vote for Italian or Spanish.

stefan · Post by **stefan** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:46 am

Why would a Burgundy dinner be too dangerous, Ian?

Anyway, Lucie & I are in for whatever.

stefan

Comte Flaneur · Post by **Comte Flaneur** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:19 am

Maybe not stefan, it is difficult to articulate, but I have often been to events where burgundy has outshone bordeaux...unless we bring some amazing burgs there is perhaps little danger in that happening given the mouth-watering line up we have for Saturday...but burgundy is an imposing and deceptively powerful monument, like bordeaux, which always has the possibility of upstaging its competitor - for the mantle of greatest wine region in the world - lets face it there are only two in the running. While nebbiolo arguably bears some resemblance to pinot noir, it is, perhaps, sufficiently removed not to steal the limelight from the main event. It worked well last year. A weak explanation , I grant you, but I hope you get my drift! And given the budding enthusiam for burgs on this board, maybe not a bad idea...I think Jim would be sold on doing some 05 burgs!...I just snagged some 05s from a brilliant unheard of producer in Pommard...Thierry "The Walrus" Violot...got em delivered today from Portland Oregon of all places...but given we did barolo last year, may be a change is in order?...Given that many of you will be in town for a long weekend an informal get together on the Friday sounds like the ticket. Maybe we do an eclectic mix on the Friday, with the theme: bringing what you consider to be interesting or exciting?

DavidG · Post by **DavidG** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 1:16 pm

Put me down as a probable for Friday, regardless of theme. If there's room, I might bring Peggy, though she can't drink...

Ramon_NYC · Post by **Ramon_NYC** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 1:21 pm

Blanquito wrote:I'd vote for Italian or Spanish.

I vote for the above, too.

DavidG · Post by **DavidG** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 1:49 pm

Re-reading this thread, I'd almost forgotten how many really great wines we have in the lineup.

Jim, I think the '89 Lynch might be at risk of an early round knock-out! If it weren't for your reputation for trying to rig the votes, I'd be tempted to posit a wager on whether the Lynch can even take second place, let alone first.

jal · Post by **jal** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:00 pm

I'm in as well and I think nebbiolo always tastes great in the fall. BTW, I did find the 1989 l'Evangile.

Blanquito · Post by **Blanquito** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:42 pm

Didn't we have the 1989 Evangile last Fall, Ian?

I've been having some terrific Spanish wines this past year, an open tasting sounds fun. Count me in.

Comte Flaneur · Post by **Comte Flaneur** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:07 pm

Yes we did, Patrick, on the Wednesday before the 86 tasting...super wine, but still a youngster

Jay Winton · Post by **Jay Winton** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:45 pm

I can't remember...are we in or on the waiting list?

Blanquito · Post by **Blanquito** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:59 pm

My bet is on the Haut Brion taking 1st, the La Mission HB taking 2nd, with 3rd place a dead heat between Lynch Bages, Pichon Baron, Montrose, Palmer and Angelus.

Check Vegas, these are now the official odds.

JC, what a line-up!!!