Latour, Latour, Latour

[s*d*r]

LATOUR, LATOUR, LATOUR - WineWatch, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida (1/7/2023)

There are days when I think Château Latour is my favorite First Growth. Then I try an uninteresting bottle and think maybe not. To try to make a final decision on this epic question I decided to round up some examples and extend the list to include some ancient bottles to determine if Latour’s reputation for exceptional longevity was justified. Fortunately I was able to corral enough tasters to help me drink all the bottles.

Dom Pérignon Reception

• 1996 Moët & Chandon Champagne Cuvée Dom Pérignon - France, Champagne
  Nicely mature now; gingery and minerally. Strong acidity, as usual for this vintage. Will last well. (93 pts.)
• 1996 Dom Pérignon Champagne Oenothèque - France, Champagne
  It’s a distinct step up from the very good original release. Richer, rounder, oily, yellow fruity, less acidic. Really delicious but I wonder if it will last as long. At its glorious peak now. (95 pts.)

Upward Bound

• 2000 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Very young, bold sweet cassis fruit framed by oak. Give it a lot more time to let the magic develop. Will be great since it’s a beauty now and it’s clean and built to age. (94 pts.)
• 1996 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  An off bottle since it was more advanced than it should have been. Moody and stern and the tannins were too bitter. NR (flawed)
• 1996 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  This backup bottle showed just how good the ‘96 is when it’s sound. Really fresh, bright, intensely fruity. Not mature yet since there's not much secondary development but so promising. No denying how delicious it is right now so don’t feel guilty if you guzzle it down. But try to save some for your grandchildren. (95 pts.)

Are They Ready?

• 1989 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Some brown at the rim and fruit deficient. Too dry. If this bottle is indicative, the ‘89 Latour is not a success in a vintage with many stars. (88 pts.)
• 1988 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Distinctly better than the ‘89. It has the vintage characteristic of some coarseness of tannin and rawness of black fruit. Enjoyable, though and maybe a modicum of Latour character. Perhaps with even more bottle age the balance could improve and addition nuance emerge. (92 pts.)
• 1990 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  The first one in the series to display more than fruit. There’s some bark, gravel and petrichor. Nicely fragrant. Still quite tannic though and the finish is a little short. Apparently there is a lot of bottle variation in this vintage. (92 pts.)

Mature Latour

• 1978 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  This is really quite good in a vintage much praised at the time but most have not evolved especially well. This one has. Very pretty fragrance softened by time and somewhat gentle fruit. Slightly too dry. Perhaps a bit past prime but pleasant. Very good rather than great. Intriguing though. (93 pts.)
• 1975 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Almost all the wines from this ferociously tannic vintage have dried out and give no pleasure. Latour is a modest exception. While roasted and leathery there still remains an interesting kernel of cranberry fruit. The race between the tannin and the fruit is a decisive win for the tannin. It will probably go on like this for some time since it hasn’t changed in years. (90 pts.)
• 1971 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Gentle and shy in Latour terms, such is this vintage which has evolved kindly rather than falling apart. Light cherry and some cinnamon. Nice but not memorable. (91 pts.)
• 1970 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Nineteen-seventy Latour has always been a candidate for Wine of the Vintage, especially at this age. It still has the meaty, masculine intensity and concentration that only old Montrose seems to rival. From an era where modern levels of selection and vinification were unknown it shows a certain sternness and leather that are very imposing. The epitome of “masculine” Pauillac character. (93 pts.)

The Elder Statesmen

• 1966 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Not obviously spoiled or corked but far from a good example of this variable vintage. Just dull and tired. Sad. (86 pts.)
• 1966 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Luckily this backup bottle was flat out fabulous. I can’t imagine any other bottle of ‘66 Latour showing better than this one which has it all. Healthy deep maroon color. Archetypical Latour bouquet of black, black berry, cassis jam, charcoal and damp earth. Medium full palate. Great energy and thrust. Just the right amount of ripe tannins. Wonderful balance. Wow. (97 pts.)
• 1964 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Latour picked before the rains that adversely affected the late pickers on the left bank and avoided the dilution and dullness of most of them. Still, while correct, it’s not inspiring and the depth is modest. Not bad but why bother? (91 pts.)
• 1949 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Mellow, sweet and simply stunning. Perfectly preserved very old Bordeaux like this develops honey and gentle smoke. Of course you don’t get the bold blackberry you might in the younger vintages but the tradeoff in mysterious kaleidoscopic range of smell and flavor is more than worth it. I don’t normally worship ancient Bordeaux or any other wine but this one forces me to recalibrate. A revelation. (95 pts.)

The Legends

• 1982 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  So disappointing; the ‘82 did not show up. Most of us expected it to be Wine of the Night but alas it was not to be. It’s just this bottle though since 1982 Latour is usually reliable and a strong candidate for wine of the vintage. This one was slightly flat and lacked life and natural sweetness. (89 pts.)
• 1961 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Another major disappointment for what should have a masterpiece. It’s not spoiled but it is definitely off. There was a lot of coffee in the bouquet but not much else. Medium weight but seemed even older than it was. Lacking the kernel of blackcurrant the better examples have. Interesting but not giving much pleasure. (88 pts.)
• 1959 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Looks and somehow both smells and tastes brown. Roasted plum, old bark, woodsmoke. Turns astringent. Only the best preserved of these old bottles show well so this one may have been overheated at some point in the past. Yet at least one taster thought it was Wine of the Night though. (92 pts.)
• 1928 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  Even to survive at this age is quite an accomplishment. This bottle not only survived but thrived. Of course you don’t expect juicy fruit from a near centenarian but this example did have a whisper of it. Phenomenal complexity that no mere 30 year old youngster ever shows. Remarkably thick texture. Appreciated on its own terms there is a lot of pleasure to be had even if it is more for the intellect than the palate. Fascinating. (94 pts.)

The Extra

• 1952 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
  A late addition to the Latour lineup, the ‘’52 was definitely alive. Severe as usual for this vintage, it’s more about the structure than the flavor. Encouragingly it acts younger and more lively with air which is quite unusual with these ancient bottles. Yet it somehow shows its age even more than some of the other ancients. (91 pts.)

Yquem

• 1962 Château d'Yquem - France, Bordeaux, Sauternais, Sauternes
  This vintage, or at least this bottle, showed a tremendous concentration of orange fruit with a hint of pineapple. Perhaps slightly less concentrated and sweet than monsters such as the ‘59 but all the more enjoyable for that. Not as many layers as some yet extremely enjoyable if you like orange juice. (94 pts.)

I still can’t decide if Latour is my favorite First Growth. Too many don’t show up. But the splendid performance of the backup bottles reminded me that it is foolish to make any conclusion about an old wine unless you try it multiple times from multiple sources.

Big tastings like this always yield surprises. In this case there were fortunately enough to the upside, such as ‘28, ’49 and ‘66 to drown out the relative failures.

Check out this for an entertaining review by the Impresario of WineWatch:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CnK2bFrJ ... c2ZTc4Nzk=

[SF Ed]

Wow. 1928 Latour. I haven't had many 1928s but those few I have tried I have loved. Huge tannins that seem to have taken a minimum of 50 years to come around.

Much as I love 1964s, I have to agree on 1964 Latour. They picked before the rain, but it isn't a spectacularly good wine.

I remember having all the 1966 First Growths at one tasting about 20 years ago, and being so impressed with them across the board. I am not surprised that the 1966 Latour showed so well.

Very disappointing not to get great bottles of 1982, 1961, or 1959. I don't think I have had any of those.

Thanks for sharing - you are certainly drinking the good stuff!

SF Ed

[William P]

Great notes, thanks Stu.

[stefan]

Thanks for the very fun read, Stuart.

1964 Latour is puzzling as most estates that did poorly picked late. It's nice that you got one fine bottle of the great 1966.

[JimHow]

Interesting notes, Stuart, like you said, we can't read too much into them, but they do seem to corroborate a 1980s decade of underperforming from Latour.

[Blanquito]

Wow.

[dstgolf]

Always an enviable intriguing awe inspiring read after Stu posts one of these extensive verticals. Like life..nothing is perfect! Thanks for the read.

[robert goulet]

Wa wa wee wahh...vey nice

For me Haut brion is king, I have to say I am quite surprised at some of the big vintages that fell short here....darn

I think we need a do over with us included

[JimHow]

Do the Orlando Bobbys exist, and if so, are they omnipotent?

[Nicklasss]

Very nice report sdr.

Latour and Lafite are probably the First Growth that we see less in tastings.

I did not taste Latour often, but I remember that you brought the 1970 at a convention and that it was clearly corresponding to the idea we have of a Latour. It was a great bottle.

Other thing, when Comte Flaneur opened a 1996 for dinner at his place this summer, i thought it was a Pichon Lalande, but when i think about it, after revealing it was Latour, i should have found it because the family link with the 1970 you made me taste is clear.

Extra question for you Stu: which other First Growth is your favorite, if you're hesitating on Latour?

[Blanquito]

I’ve had so little Latour, the least by far of the 1sts. And the few I’ve had were duds, which has created the impression that Latour is the LLC of Premier Grand Cru: a charmless wine to be admired, but not necessarily enjoyed.

Of course, this is a silly opinion to form on the basis of so little information, but it’s either this or become a Qanon adherent (one delusion or another).

That said, as good as some of the bottles sound, these notes don’t do much yo dispel my impression of the chateau’s style, if not it’s quality.

[SF Ed]

I think the "problem" with Latour is how long it takes to come around, even compared with other first growths.

The youngest Latour I've ever had that I thought was fully mature was a 1955.

That doesn't mean it can't drink well sooner. Latour is easily my favorite 2002 I've tried and was drinking very well two years ago, even while I think it has decades in front of it to evolve.

SF Ed

[greatbxfreak]

s*d*r,

It looks like several wines in the tasting didn't have the good provenance, unfortunately.

In the vertical of Latour, I participated in October 2021, were lucky to have stunning bottles of 1982 and 1961.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=9817&p=98330&hilit=Latour#p98330

[Comte Flaneur]

Congratulations Stu, you attend some epic events, and you could never be accused of being star struck and hyping these legendary wines. How disappointing that the 1961 was not up to scratch.

[Blanquito]

[*]1949 Château Latour Grand Vin - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac
Mellow, sweet and simply stunning. Perfectly preserved very old Bordeaux like this develops honey and gentle smoke. Of course you don’t get the bold blackberry you might in the younger vintages but the tradeoff in mysterious kaleidoscopic range of smell and flavor is more than worth it. I don’t normally worship ancient Bordeaux or any other wine but this one forces me to recalibrate. A revelation. (95 pts.)

This is a great tasting note. It captures the perfectly old wine experience perfectly.

[s*d*r]

s*d*r,

It looks like several wines in the tasting didn't have the good provenance, unfortunately.

I agree with you. Three of the four vintages in my “Legends” flight were very disappointing.

More typical bottles of the ‘59, ‘61 and ‘82, even now, are AT LEAST 95 point wines.

I don’t think my recent tasting was representative of Château Latour in older vintages. Of course bottles of this age can vary greatly and I purchased none of them on release. And I can’t explain why the ‘66 was much better than any previous one I have tasted, so there’s that.

If the three vintages above had performed properly the conclusions about the general quality of Latour might be much different.

[s*d*r]

Last night I tried the backup bottle of ‘61 Latour. Unfortunately it was a recorked in 2000 bottle and tasted decades younger than it should have so I couldn’t compare it to the real thing .

Also last night, a stunning bottle of 1949 Calon Ségur from the perfect provenance of the Ben Ichinose collection (Christie’s auction). Not quite as good as the Latour but not far off.

I rarely get a chance to taste wines this old and when I do I am usually unimpressed. But now I have learned not to dismiss them prematurely.

[AKR]

Quite the lineup. It seems to me, that even with perfect provenance, that there is plenty of natural variation in a material like a cork closure, leading to bottles in the same case offering differing experiences. As we get to half century marks on some of these, it just comes with the territory.

[s*d*r]

A couple of days ago, a wine friend who was not at this tasting decided to get a few people together and taste some Latour. I got to taste some vintages I have rarely or never tasted before.

1994 - correct, decent, good, not exciting
1989 - weak, thin, blah
1988 - surprisingly very strong, lots of black fruit and charcoal, tannins under control
1982 first bottle, purchased on release, perfectly stored - a dud, dry and fading
1982 second bottle, recent auction bottle - excellent, concentrated although not at the very top
1975 - lots of acetone, unpleasant
1967 - astringent, way too old

If you want consistency and reliability, drink your 2019 Bordeaux instead. Vintages really do matter a lot in Bordeaux as the wines age, even at the FG level.

[Harry C.]

Lovely read. Reconfirms, to me, that I have rarely had a mature-drinking now-bottle. Here's to the eternal search!