Comparing 2000 and 2001 Bordeaux

[Comte Flaneur]

We did this dinner at the Piccolino restaurant behind Kiverpool Street Station in the City of London on Tuesday night

What we found was that our selection of wines was of uniformly high quality and ever so evenly matched. However, somewhat to my surprise no wine really stood out, grabbed the torch and ran with it. No wine really excited me. No ‘FMTG’ moments.

Line up

F1: 2001 - Figeac, Dome, Palmer
F2: DDC rouge 00 & 01
F3: 2000 St-Julien Gruaud and Lagrange
F4: Baron 00 vs Cos 01
F5: Ponet Canet 00 & 01

I was so looking forward to the 2001 Figeac because the 1998 is now finally in the groove and we had a memorable encounter with the fabulous 2000 a couple of years ago. But the 2001 is still a bit discombobulated in my opinion, and the exuberant raspberry-fruited attack really threw me - not what you expect - nor want - with Figeac. Lots of moving parts here and a lot of potential but it needs more time to come together - 92 for now but with clear upside potential.

The 2001 Dome had an alluring Cab Franc freshness and was in a good spot - a less complex wine than its more illustrious flight mate - and bit of a one trick pony by comparison. I wonder what it would be like to spend a whole evening with this? Would it maintain your interest? I somehow doubt it, but the one ninth share was enjoyable and a strong showing nonetheless - 91

The 2001 Palmer had the telltale Margaux berries and I thought we would be in for an absolute treat with this - the classical Palmer bouquet carries over to the trademark tobacco and ash tray notes. But on the palate this is lean, bordering skinny, more so than the superior 1999. Lovely wine but as Simon noted Palmer in minor key - 92

It was a shame that there was clearly something awry with the 2001 DDC, because I was looking forward to this comparison having had great experiences recently with the 1998 and 2002. The 2000 DDC has that familiar cool-fruited and tobacco signature, and as already noted, was in a very good place, but while there was so much love for this around the table, it just didn’t move me - in contrast to the way the 1998 and 2002 have done. A fully resolved accomplished wine, but with no wow factor - 92

Next up the 2000 St-Julien flight. Unlike most of the other wines the 2000 Gruaud Larose suffered from not being stood up for several days and was murky and not a particularly great bottle - well behind the one we drank in May - but even that bottle was outclassed by its flight mates - the 1996 Ducru and the 2002 LLC - 90. The 2000 Lagrange had clearly benefited from the vertical treatment and came across as classical, buttoned down, old school, dense and austere. Very much a food wine and not a lot of fun to drink on its own. Plenty of time in hand … but frankly why bother? Stolid - 90

The 2000 Cos was a no show so we decided to match the 2001 Cos against the 2000 Pichon Baron. If there was a pre-match favourite the 2000 Baron - marking Christian Seeley’s first vintage nominally at the helm - was surely it? But for me this was disappointing and somewhat lacklustre versus my lofty expectations - or was it just in a stroppy mood? Some intense fruit and focus but not in the same league as the 2005 Baron say - 91. Around that time Cos was beginning to flirt with the dark side and the 2001 Cos is undoubtedly a modern-style wine. But it was the only wine on the night that gave me that tingly excited feeling. It has that little bit of mystery, intrigue and hint of exoticism conspicuously lacking in the other wines - and a very well made thoroughly enjoyable wine to boot - my wotn - 93

On to the last flight of Pontet Canet with the two vintages served single blind. On opening and before decanting several hours earlier the 2000 Pontet Canet was brutally tannic, while the 2001 Pontet Canet was much less on edge. These two wines mark a work in progress in the transition from the trad style, typified by the 1996, on the one hand, to the modern style, typified by later vintages in the 2000s, on the other. Both are characterised by vivid red fruits and a lot of precision with impressive structure. Both are excellent, with the 2000 denser and more brooding and the 2001 a little more relaxed in its own skin. But to me these two wines are a bit too soulless and clinical. Of the two I marginally preferred the 2001 especially to drink now, both 92 points.

[jckba]

Nice notes as always Ian and it’s too bad that there were no standouts given the advertised lineup.

And I remember buying the 2001 Pontet Canet @ Zachys off the shelf for $26.99/per and can’t help but think, boy how times have changed!

[Nicklasss]

Tough to read, as i was expecting a little bit more "oomf" for 2000-2001 wines. But at the same time, the BD confirmed 2002 is a better vintage...

What to say? Well i had some of these wines and yes i can understand the term "clinical" for them. Like excellent wines but where is the intellectual and "oomf" sides?

Had a 2000 Pontet canet with dstgolf that was excellent beating my 2002 La Mission the same night) while the 2001 never moved me, the 2000 Gruaud and Lagrange, while concentrated, missing that extra mixture of Margaux +Pauillac balance that Saint Julien can show at it best, and 2000 Pichon Baron while extremely good will developp more complexity in what, 10 or 20 more years? Making me going more and more slightly away from Bordeaux as i can feel that concentration, ripeness, modernity in the 2000's, have made red Bordeaux that need even more time than the 80's version, to reach complexity/maturity...

A little hope with what happened from 2012 and after, but not completely convinced yet.

[Gerry M.]

My head is spinning reading ypur impressions. I have most of these in my cellar but don't have a lot of notes on my long ago tastings. After 20+ years it's nothing like I would have expected.

[JoelD]

Great writeup as always, Ian. I've had most of these wines(some multiple times), outside of the first 01 flight. And funny enough the 01 Cos is the only one that I remember quite fondly also.

I did also enjoy the 00 Gruaud for sure. The 00 Baron seems to be in a weird, minerally, lean spot to me right now. Hard to gauge. I've had it at least 5-6 times in the last few years and only one bottle really moved me. I much prefer other vintages. Even a 97 recently was better.

I have yet to be impressed with the 00 Pontet, but we'll see where it goes.

[dstgolf]

Ian,

Don't know how I missed this thread but great review however I'm somewhat disappointed in some of the reviews. It's often hard to compare a group of very good wines side by side and not sure if this is the case or you're just drinking so many great wines some of these that I thinkere quite good on their own like the 2000 Lagrange from memory were better than why bother! I still have a soft spot for Pontet Canet and maybe has a lot to do with our personal encounters with Alfred Tesseron but I've never been totally disappointed drinking this on its own or up against others but definitely on the modern style. We did have the same opinion on the 2001 drinking better at the moment than the 2000.

Le Dome has always been enjoyable, modern and somewhat unidimensional but I still like it. The 01 a little weaker than some but from memory was still and enjoyable drink.

Thanks for the review and I don't know how this one slipped by.