Which post-1990 vintage is closest to full maturity?

[Blanquito]

Which post-1990 vintage is closest to full maturity?

We had so many wonderfully mature wines at the convention in London, it has me thinking yet again about which of the many bottles in my cellar are close to similar peak drinking. Everything we had at the convention post-1990 still seems like it needs more time, at least the Bordeaux we enjoyed (like the 1998 VCC and LLC).

So even if they aren’t fully mature yet, which of the strong vintages in the last 25 years is getting closest? Not the 95 and 96 or the 98, I’d say, what about the 2000? Certainly the 2001s are drinking well as are the 2002s, maybe it’s those two vintages, but I haven’t really had any of the top level wines from either of those years to know.

[JimHow]

Both the 2001 d'Issan and Rauzan Segla in London still seemed young to me.

[Blanquito]

Both the 2001 d'Issan and Rauzan Segla in London still seemed young to me.

Exactly! These are evolving glacially. Or maybe 21-22 years old was always primordial in Bordeaux, outside of the 82s, 83s and 85s.

[Blanquito]

Maybe the best answer is, none of the above. There are outlier vintages like 2003 we might agree are better consumed sooner than later, but for everyone with palates like me, it’s really a holding pattern and hope the 01s and 02s hurry up.

But someone like AlexR should have a very different perspective, like which years since 95 need drinking up! Lol. Alex?

[AlexR]

I assume you're talking about "politically correct" vintages here .

Because 91s, 92s, 93s, and some other vintages are clearly close to, at, or past maturity.

Many good surprises with the 94s.
The 95s are richer and more forward than the 96s.

97s: best to drink up.

98s: mostly there for me.

99s: a pretty vintage, just fine now.

2000: drink now or hold

01: in a really good place at present

02: Médocs showing considerable staying power

03: dicey

Alex

[Comte Flaneur]

Good question Patrick. My assessment would be as follows, but the answer to your question is 1994, 1999 and 2002.

1991,92,93 - drink up/past best. I have one Mouton 1993 left, the one with the dodgy label, the last one was showing its age (unlike the depiction on the label).
1994 - drink up but some wines are now drinking very well from that vintage notably the first growths and top left banks like Leoville Barton; have not tried a 94 RB for ages, but I suspect they would need drinking
1995 - most are drinking well now with one or two exceptions - again first growths and some top Medocs, may improve further but most are in the zone, so drink/hold
1996 - same applies but wines like Lafite, Mouton, Latour and LLC are still on an upwards trajectory
1997 - drink up but some are drinking delightfully - Lafite still youthful and Haut Brion - vgi
1998 - most left banks are drinking well - but Lafite, Haut Brion are still improving - the top right banks are very good but some are still improving or yet to reach their peak - Trotanoy springs to mind
1999 - drink and the best wines are close to their peak - like Palmer, Margaux etc - anyone tried Lafite or Latour recently?
2000 - have come on well in the last 3-4 years - most are in the zone - apart from the top wines which I am sure will improve further over the next decade
2001 - on the right bank wines like Cheval Blanc, Conseillante and VCC are still young, likewise Lafite on the left bank, but most wines are in a great spot
2002 - everything without exception is fully mature. There are none to my knowledge that will materially improve. Though I am going to try one of the LLCs you kindly brought over soon. A perfect vintage for drinking now on the left bank.
2003 - many wines are cracking up, the rest are fully mature, these wines have aged prematurely and badly. I am selling my remaining 2003s next month (Pontet Canet)
2004 - lots to like, many wines drinking ever so well. Not tried many of the very top wines recently. But seems like a very useful vintage on both banks for current drinking but it is clearly not a great vintage (apart from Lafite, which IS great in 2004)
2005 - some of the lesser wines are there, and so are some of the good ones like Beychevelle, Duhart and Gruaud. But the ‘big beasts’ are still one or two Blanquitos away
2006 - as Christian Seely noted when I last saw him a rather recalcitrant vintage which has matured slowly and can be grumpy. I would not touch a 2006 FG, but I don’t own any!
2007 - a useful restaurant vintage, everything is pretty much there, but clearly a weak vintage in relative terms
2008 - lots of promise and so much to access now as the superior tannin management kicks in, lots to like and enjoy already, even Mouton
2009 - a really great vintage even though hot and ripe and lots to access now - even the top wines give a lot of enjoyment - but a vintage for the ages
2010 - another big vintage, tougher and less accessible now than 2009, but similar logic and I would not touch the top wines for another decade
2011 - a useful restaurant vintage but not a great one, similar level to 2007
2012 - a good vintage like 2004 plenty of wines are accessible already, but 2014 is a better bet
2013 - very little experience with this vintage but only bad/mediocre ones
2014 - the great modern accessible cool vintage, so much you can access now. I took delivery of three Branes today after I tried one a week ago. I can’t wait to pop one open. Is 2014 the ultimate BWE vintage?
2017 - similar to 2014, probably underrated despite the difficult growing conditions, one to pick up opportunistically

[JoelD]

Great post, Ian. Not that I would have been as detailed but I agree with almost everything except for a few exceptions.

What a treat getting to try the 2002's at BWE 2022, all of the first growths on the same table except for Margaux. I would argue that the Lafite and Latour aren't ready yet, especially the latter. Haut Brion is quite accessible now with a lot of air but has clear upside to me. Unsure on the Mouton if it wasn't a representative bottle or just early maturing. Every other 2002 that I have tried has been fully mature or past. Including the super seconds.

I think 2014 is the ultimate BWE vintage, at least at the moment. Although 1989 must be noted. As well as 83,85,88.

[Comte Flaneur]

Yes upon reflection you are probably right on the 2002 FGs Joel. I only have Mouton but I have had very positive feedback on Lafite/Latour/HB from my friends in London who said they are all young to drinking well with Mouton actually being the pick, but it was a magnum.

[stefan]

Really a great post, Ian. The only analysis I don't agree with is 2002. In my experience, the 2000s are more evolved than the 2002s. I expect the bouquet to improve on the 2002s even if most smell pretty good now.

As for 2003s, dumping them is a good strategy IMO if you have a lot. My 2003s that showed well 5 years ago are mostly falling apart.