Even as an old Bordeaux lover I have had very little experience tasting vintage 1962, consistently passing over it for its more celebrated neighbors 1959, 1961 and 1966. Having recently tried a range of ‘61s, I was delighted to find that Wine Watch was putting on a tasting of ‘62s so I could compare them at the same very advanced age. Of course the experts have never heaped great praise on the ‘61s and the price reflects it. Still, apparently it was by no means an “oublier” vintage like 1963, 1965 or 1968. After a couple of forgettable 1962 Burgundies, we got down to tasting real wine.
1962 Château La Pointe - France, Bordeaux, Libournais, Pomerol
Non-château bottled. Maderized or otherwise spoiled and undrinkable for the non-masochist. NR (flawed)
1962 Château Léoville Poyferré - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, St. Julien
A pleasant if modest aroma of old Cabernet Sauvignon greets you if you bring the glass close enough. Well preserved. Mellow and sound. Invites some respect due to the elderly but no love. Yet better than some of the more august wines in the series. (90 pts.)
1962 Château Léoville Las Cases - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, St. Julien
Ex Mähler-Besse. Now this is quite good and shows what a fully resolved Léoville Las Cases can taste like. Genuine purity of ripe and low octane Cabernet Sauvignon; mulberry, cassis, tender tannins, decent finish. Enjoyable and not fading, at least from well kept bottles. (92 pts.)
1962 Château Lynch-Bages - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
A chunky example of Lynch Bages with a lot of charcoal. Solid. Reasonable breadth of flavor and good tannins and acidity. Yet somehow it’s not totally clean even though you can drink it without gastric distress. (89 pts.)
1962 Château Montrose - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, St. Estèphe
Ex Mähler-Besse. Finally a very good example of the vintage. While not close to great vintages for them such as ‘89 or ‘90, it’s easy to appreciate the thrust, concentration and flavor authority. The inky St. Estèphe black fruit is on display with a pleasing hint of sous bois. The group favorite as well as mine. Still, even this long-lived Montrose is probably past its best days. (93 pts.)
1962 Château La Mission Haut-Brion Réserve Nicolas - France, Bordeaux, Graves, Pessac-Léognan
I was guessing that La Mission Haut-Brion would likely be the most successful wine of the tasting due to its famed longevity and intense character. Well it was intense but actually too much. Overburdened with smoke but the fire had burned so long the smoke was burnt even beyond charcoal. A balsamic note was helpful in balancing it and the tannins were fine. I can actually enjoy it in small doses. Some tasters thought it was spoiled in some way, perhaps maderized. (91 pts.)
1962 Château Margaux - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Margaux
Ex Mähler-Besse 2009. I just don’t see how this was almost voted first by the group. While it seemed a bit better than the ‘61 I tasted recently, if the property had been well managed in this era, I think they could have done much better. The well saturated color is the best part and suggested it was a pristine bottle. Not much aroma. On the palate it’s decent but lacks fruit and sucrosity and finishes short. (90 pts.)
1962 Château Lafite Rothschild - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
I have to wonder if some of the testers were influenced by the label since they praised it for its alleged elegance and complexity. For me though, clearly too old, too weak, too light in color and flavor; altogether too soft. Not as good as the better bottles of the ‘61. (88 pts.)
1962 Château Climens - France, Bordeaux, Sauternais, Barsac
Usually Climens can be relied on to deliver a fairly elegant and nuanced Barsac but at least at this point and for this bottle I found it top heavy. Thick, rich and syrupy. That can work with some of the heavier Sauternes but only if there is perfect acidity and a substantial panoply of flavors, which it lacked. Still, it’s good, just not delightful. (91 pts.)
1962 Château Suduiraut - France, Bordeaux, Sauternais, Sauternes
Half bottle. Demure, fragrant, light to medium weight, nicely balanced and not too sweet. I would have liked a bit more concentration and intensity which perhaps it had a decade ago. (92 pts.)
The experts and the amateurs are correct. Nineteen sixty-two is a secondary vintage that has not lasted nearly as well as 1961, at least by this showing. Would bottles we did not have such as Latour, Haut-Brion or Pétrus been much better preserved? Possible but not likely.
As I have mentioned before, I have had spectacular 1961 Margaux, but I believe that at the time, they bottled each barrel individually, which may account for the bottle variation.
My only experience of the 1962 vintage is Gruaud, which was good, and Las Cases which was better. I have a Cheval ready and waiting for an October 60th birthday, and will report back.
I think what this tasting *may* illustrate more than anything else is that ageworthiness and quality are not consubstantial although, of course, they can overlap.
Since time machines have not yet been invented other than in the minds of science fiction writers, there is no way prove my point, but I'd wager that the results of this tasting would have been vastly different - and superior - if it had been held 20 or 30 years ago.
I *was* a huge fan of the 62 vintage: open, fruity, non-heavy, classic Bordeaux.
But their time is long gone.
Like a beautiful woman in her old age, there is surely much to admire.
But that ship has largely sailed.
So, put me down as someone who prefers more vigorous wines in their prime.
Yes, I've had decades-old Bordeaux that was superb and in fine fettle.
But far too often, I ask myself: what is the point? Have they really gained appreciably?
i might add that :
- this is not a "fox and the grapes" type of comment
- I fully appreciate that everyone does not agree with me about the notion of "peak"
Interesting input. Personally I like older wines, but without being at the tasting, or knowing the palate of the OP, it is very hard to make judgements as whether these wines are too far gone for me.
It also asks the the more important question; if you make a wine that hits early maturity at ten years, is at its peak at twenty, and falls off a cliff at thirty, can you fault it at thirty one years old if it is madereized?
1962s were still available when Lucie and I started drinking Bordeaux in 1969. They were mostly very pleasant wines with tasty fruits and inviting bouquets. Already by 1980 some were on the downslope. Since 1980 we have probably drunk fewer than you tasted in one night! It is interesting to get your take on these wines at age 60.
Stu your peek at some past-peak 62s piqued my interest.
I like Mark’s question. My answer is no, there’s nothing inherently wrong with a wine that drinks great from age 20-30 and then dies suddenly. Of course, it’s upsetting if that sudden death is unexpected and you are left with a bunch of corpses in the cellar.
Ageworthiness and quality are often assumed to co-exist for Bordeaux. Yet sometimes we’re told that a vintage is too good, too approachable in its youth to be able to age well. Sort of but maybe not quite the opposite of the first statement because the claim that it won’t age well is typically offered as a reason it’s not a great vintage.
I’m not aware of an example of a great vintage of Bordeaux that didn’t age well. Can anyone suggest one? Alex (I think) says 62 might be such an example? Stefan’s comment reads to me that he found the 62s very good in their youth but not great.
The 1982s were the poster child for wines that drank great young but were tagged by some as not being ageworthy. Maybe the 1990s as well. Some are over the hill but many, not just the icons like Latour and Pétrus, disproved the early doubters.
Maybe greatness and ageworthiness do go hand in hand in Bordeaux. I’m not saying it has to be that way. I’m open to suggestions for Bordeaux vintages that drank great young but didn’t age. Any nominations?
Let’s use Mark’s semi-arbitrary minimum of 30 years and still going strong as the minimum for aging well. If you simply don’t like Bordeaux beyond 30 years of age, that’s a palate preference. It’s fine, but needs to be taken into account.
