Two Palmers among a star studded line up

[Comte Flaneur]

Before I meet up with Jay and Peggy tonight at Noize in London’s Fitzrovia I thought I would post a write up for my last visit there last Friday where four of us welcomed Melvin Yeo from Singapore.

This was the line up - of ten bottles - between the five us. Note our friend from Singapore - who is probably 15-20 pounds lighter than me - had already had a eleven-bottle-between-six-people lunch at La Trompette in Chiswick earlier the same day.

2004 Domaine Christian Moreau Père et Fils Chablis Grand Cru Les Clos Clos des Hospices dans Les Clos

2012 Domaine Ramonet Chassagne-Montrachet 1er Cru Les Ruchottes

2017 Ramey Chardonnay Rochioli Vineyard

1999 Château Palmer

2010 Château Palmer

2011 Cappellano Barolo Piè Rupestris Otin Fiorin (Gabutti)

2011 Comm. G.B. Burlotto Barolo Monvigliero

1990 Domaine de Marcoux Châteauneuf-du-Pape Vieilles Vignes

2009 Pian dell'Orino Brunello di Montalcino

1999 Château Tirecul La Gravière Monbazillac Cuvee Madame

In this star-studded line up there were four outstanding wines and it was very difficult to choose between them. They were the two Palmers, the Cappellano and the Marcoux. It was unfair on the next tier of excellent wines: the Brunello, the Moreau Chablis and the Tirecul, which otherwise would have shone more brightly in less exalted company.

The 2012 Ramonet was a cerebral wine, which I expected to blossom over the evening but it remained frustratingly aloof. But otherwise nothing wrong with it and youthful. Ramey is a producer that in the past has tried to market itself as ‘Burgundian’ but this 2017 was more overtly ‘Californian’ - in a good way - tropical and a bit oaky - but the 2004 Moreau more than matched it for epicurean pleasures and was more interesting too, with an alluring wet wool trait. The Ramonet was more stoical by comparison with the other two.

The 1999 Palmer showed exceptionally well - a better bottle than the one I brought to a lunch in April - which played second fiddle to a sublime bottle of Cos 1978, but was nevertheless the second ranked wine on the table. It was fascinating to match the 1999 Palmer against the 2010, and what a contrast it was. The 1999 still has a youthful hue and the nose was in full glorious bloom. It is medium bodied, and like many 1999s does not have a lot of stuffing in the mid-palate, which is not necessarily a bad thing, and there is still a little residual tannic bite, which lends a pleasing contrasting austere note against the sybaritic bouquet. I think this will drink extremely well over the next 15 years or so.

The 2010 Palmer with 54% merlot in the blend against 40% Cabernet Sauvignon, was bigger, more densely stacked, richer and more concentrated and more primary of course, with incense on the nose. It is plush with ultra fine tannins and a velvety texture but with poise and freshness to match, and terrific length. While it will gain more complexity as it ages it is frightening easy to drink now. It already delivers oodles of pleasure - a bit like the otherworldly 2010 Chateau Margaux. Two years ago during Covid lockdowns Thomas Duroux presented on zoom six vintages of Chateau Palmer five years apart from 1990 through to 2015. I thought the 2010 was the standout wine and it made the 2000 and 2005 come across as a bit rustic by comparison. This wine is easily first growth quality. After a lot of thought I awarded this my wotn accolade.

I was looking forward to the 2011 barolos from two of the hottest addresses in Piedmont. It was like the atmosphere before an FA Cup final back in the day. It in the end it was no contest. I had previously tried this vintage of Cappellano Pie Rupestris at a Christmas lunch a few years ago and it hadn’t really settled down. What a difference 3-4 years makes. This came across as a compelling, riveting wine which throws down the gauntlet, grabs you by the lapels, pushes you onto the back foot and challenges the senses. It has so much energy, nuance, complexity, poise…and sheer brio.

The Burlotto Monvigliero by contrast was all over the place like a drunken sailor. It had a beguiling sweet nose attack, which verges on being a little over the top, and loose knit and jammy on the palate. It seemed to lack structure and backbone, and its deficiencies were magnified next to the Cappellano. You can still drink the Burlotto with pleasure but this is the third bottle of this wine which has disappointed my expectations. It is not up to par with other vintages of this producer‘s Monvigliero.

The Marcoux and the Brunello were a good pairing with the Marcoux putting on a masterclass. It is a beguiling and haunting wine. We were well into the evening now and my impressions became a bit hazy - Melvin still looked as fresh as daisy - but I was starting to flag, like cycling into a stiff headwind as I had to do early the following morning. But I remember the 1990 Marcoux VV as being ever so smooth, inviting - and the most complex wine of the night - it was that magical animale note that lingered and was the abiding memory of the evening.

The 2009 Brunello acquitted itself very well and would have shone in other company. A much younger wine it was strapping and had a nice grippy intensity on the palate. Most of us were flagging by the time the 1999 Tirecul La Graviere was served, but it had a bright orange hue and intensity which carried over into the palate. I remember mandarins, with great intensity but lift at the same time. I would love to try this again and devote more attention to it over an evening. I could have said that about most of the wines from last Friday.

Melvin Yeo is now a legend among the London fine wine drinking fraternity.

Among the wines I am bringing tonight is the 2009 Marcoux Chateauneuf VV, and a couple of others. Three among three is probably enough because Peggy and Jay are making an early start to Greece in the morning.

[Comte Flaneur]

LtR: Rohit, Melvin, Chris, Nick

The rankings - the Cappellano by a nose over the 1999 Palmer with the Marcoux a strong podium finish:

[Comte Flaneur]

[Musigny 151]

I used to go to Primeurs every year. Palmer was always an excellent stop, but I never felt that the wines could have reached the level of 1961. Then I tasted the 2010.
let me backtrack a little. Before they poured the 2010, we had the 2010 Alter Ego. I have always thought it a bit of a nonentity. In their push not to call it Palmer’s second wine, but a separate “expression” of Palmer, they had created a wine that was an equivalent of a Cru Bourgeois. Or as the Brits would say, luncheon claret.

But 2010 Alter Ego was anything but. A very serious wine which is begInning to unfurl. I bought some. The 2010 Palmer Grand Vin was my wine of the vintage, a throwback of what the Palmers of the sixties must have tasted like young. Absolute concentration, absolutely perfect balance, and a complexity that will only improve with time. I last tried a bottle two years ago, and only on the second day did it totally reveal its brilliance, a wine of so many layers, it was hard to keep count. So glad to hear, it is beginning to show well.

[jckba]

Ian, great notes on a nice set of wines.

[JimHow]

Oh man I've loved that 1999 Palmer on multiple occasions, such a sweet spot in that year. The 1999 Chateau Margaux we had when hounding came to my house was sublime. I've never had the 2010 Palmer I don't think but I'm guessing it must be amazing just from extrapolating my experiences with other wines from that vintage. A very lovely warm up for the Jay/Peggy Experience.

[hautbrionlover]

I didn’t buy a lot of 1999 Bordeaux, just cherry-picked a few bottles here and there.
The Palmer was by far and away the best. It’s a beauty.
I have one bottle left, so I’ll have to save it for the right occasion.

[Nicklasss]

Comte, nice notes on a great lineup of wines.

Count me as a fan of Palmer, that rarely deceive. That 2010 sound fabulous.

I have to track back which vintage, and when i had it, but i had once Domaine Marcoux regular cuvée and it left me a great impression too.

Very long time i did not see a Ramonet.