Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts

Another success in a 3-part series on Bordeaux 2000. These wines are all wide-open for current drinking, but they still haven't developed tertiary characteristics, so presumably they will age (and hopefully improve) for at least another 5+ years.

Cantemerle 2000 (Haut-Medoc)
I have a soft spot for this chateau. This is a 2000 claret that Suckling got right, not the Bob. Starts with an absolutely beautiful, sweet bouquet of dried strawberries, bayleaf, incense, and Indian spices. Highly sniffable, I hope the 2005 and 2009 versions are like this lovely 2000. It has an elegant texture and light-bodied attack, but this is married to intense flavors of strawberries, iodine, and smoke. Indeed, it is Burgundian in some respects, but I mean that as a compliment! Very Margaux, filled with berries and a bouquet the commune used to consistently make. Drinking wonderfully now. If you like the style as I do, this wine merits 92 pts

Haut Bergey 2000 (Pessac-Leognan)
Curious to try this Graves, as more recent vintages of this estate have left me a bit cold… Starts off quite Rhone-like in aroma, with some meaty hints in its sweet candied bouquet. Soon, some distinct notes of cinder and black cherry liqueur join the olfactory party. Comes across as a bit light at first, but gains some oomph with air, becoming medium-bodied with a sweet-sour cherry palate. Flirts with modern, with some slick tannins, but fortunately the oak isn’t excessive (as I’ve found in younger vintages). FWIW, a wino friend who is quite skeptical of Bordeaux, usually calling it “too funky, earthy, not enough fruit, foursquare texture”, was quite positive about this. I liked rather than loved it. Drinking well now. 90 pts.

Cap de Faugeres 2000 (Cotes-de-Castillon)
I had low hopes for this petit estate, and the bouquet suggests my skepticism was well founded. The nose is over the hill, with mostly VA with smells of rubber cement. Not horrible, but in decline. The palate is much better, with a sweet, herby, savory, plummy mid-palate and plenty of chewy flesh and good length. My guess is this was better 5 years ago, as the fruit goes acrid and off, but still drinkable. Drink up. 86 pts.

Bellefont Belcier 2000 (St. Emilion)
Like the 2005 version, this a modern/internationally styled Right Banker with a big nose of spicy-oaky vanilla, plums and a faintly soapy aroma. Sweet and lush on the attack with a concentrated mouthfeel and a silky texture, but marked by some slightly acrid barrel flavors. I have to wonder, why so much wood? If some elegance and complexity develop in down the line, this has some upside. Overall, a little thick for my tastes, so my score is conservative. Drink or hold another 5 years. 90 pts.

Sounds like some very good if not killer bottles, Patrick. A bunch of 90-pointers sounds like a pretty good evening. I bet these weren't even that pricey if bought on release or earlier.

Yes, they were all (almost) good value:
- Cantemerle $18 (as futures)
- Haut Bergey $40 (after Parker's 94 pt rating)
- Cap de Faugeres $14
- Bellefont Belcier $25

As I would have bet my 2 $ on the 2000 Cantemerle in all your listing, Iit end up first with the 2000 La Louvière. Me too, I like Cantemerle, really Margaux-like.

Nic

Yup, the Cap de Faugeres has been bleh for a few years now - http://bordeauxwine.org/bwe/new/1/145691/

You know, I never was a huge Cantemerle fan, I tried them young and old and always found them lacking. I guess it's a matter of taste.

Thanks for the note.

This begs for a La Louviere vs. Cantemerle final.

I can see why some folks aren't wowed by Cantemerle, as it is definitely light-bodied, but in 2000 it avoids being thin. I can imagine that Stefan likes Cantemerle.

Art, I think the Louviere will surpass the Cantemerle in a few years, as it has more oomph and still seemed to have a ways to go, while the Cantemerle is near to turning the corner where complexity increases but the fruit fades. Don't get me wrong, it could still be very fine in 10 years from now, but I'm saying for all it may gain over that time, it's likely to loose something too.

The 1989 is a legend...I was sorely tempted by the 2009 too...over here where they speak the Queen's English the 09 can be had for slightly less than the 00 and 05. The 2000 sounds great Patrick.

Indeed I do, Patrick. The '89 was wonderful, as Ian mentioned. I have no more, alas, as CabFan trashed my remaining bottles when he smashed a bunch of La Lagunes. (Last sentence for charter BWEers only.)

1983 and 1989 were strong vintages for Cantermerle.

Glenn

God Save The Queen! But really, Cantemerle is a refined, subtle wine. I loved the 1997 and always wished that I had got some of the 2003 that Nic was always raving about. I tried the 2000 at one point about 4 or 5 years ago and thought is was a very good wine. Elegant and fully ripe, a classically styled Bordeaux.

Count me in as a fan of Cantemerle. I liked the 95-96-97-00-03-06 vintages really much. Never a blockbuster, but what an elegant Bordeaux wine, gentle and genuine. A Chateau that ''still'' resist to over concentration and ''garage winemaking'''.

By the way, the 03 version is quite much better than a certain 03 Lynch Bages...

Nic

I liked the '05 a lot.

My third and last bottle of any 2000 Right Bank wines.

Still mostly primary and just starting to show some nice development. Ripe black fruits and charcoal on the nose. Smooth and polished flavors of earth and more dark fruits with decent acidity and length. There is room for more development although it is drinking well now.

This bottle continued my theme of pairing fruity low tannin Bordeaux with Chinese stir frys. This time it was enhanced by a ground pork with crookneck squash, oyster mushroom, celery, onion, red pepper, garlic, ginger stir fry with a chicken stock, mushroom dark soy sauce, oyster-hoisin sauce and black vinegar sauce. Lots of umami flavors to accent the wine.

Patrick,

Your analysis agrees with mine, so you are obviously astute and intelligent

It's time to drink your 2000 Bordeaux.
Oh, not Latour and Mouton, but most of the rest.
Go f'rit.

I've had 2000 La Louvière on a couple of occasions.
IMHO, it is past its best.

Yours sincerely,
Alex R.

Hi Alex,

We are both clearly intelligent, astute tasters. I assume folks noted that my notes were posted a little over 5 years ago? Thanks for the revival, Glenn.

In retrospect, I think most of the wines I tasted in Parts I & II of this 10 year retrospective were at peak in 2010. Some have stayed more or less at peak, but others definitely have started the decline. The 2000 Cantemerle is the poster child for this, I think it is has dropped off a lot since its peak in 2006-2010 (other palates disagree with this view, however, I'd note). But I've had this wine 7-8 times since 2006, when it was gloriously open with terrific fruit. Rather than taking on nuance and complexity with more age, the fruit has faded and it has become increasingly shrill.

Sounds like I need to check in again on the 2000 Louviere which I don't think I've tried in 3-4 years.

I can't think of another "vintage of the century" from Bordeaux that matured as fast as the 2000s have. Interesting.

In terms of the wines noted here, I agree -- the lesser, non-classified wines will get no better. I've had the La Louviere many times and agree that it will not improve from here. For higher-end wines I disagree completely. Drinking 2000 Pichon Baron, LLC, Leov Barton, or Montrose now is a terrible waste. Oddly the 2000 Leovi Poyf is drinkable now, but will almost certainly be as good or better in 10-20 years. IMHO these wines are aging slowly, and will still need plenty of patience, at least for my taste in bordeaux.

--Gary Rust

johnz wrote:In terms of the wines noted here, I agree -- the lesser, non-classified wines will get no better. I've had the La Louviere many times and agree that it will not improve from here. For higher-end wines I disagree completely. Drinking 2000 Pichon Baron, LLC, Leov Barton, or Montrose now is a terrible waste. Oddly the 2000 Leovi Poyf is drinkable now, but will almost certainly be as good or better in 10-20 years. IMHO these wines are aging slowly, and will still need plenty of patience, at least for my taste in bordeaux.

--Gary Rust

Agreed, the top 30 or so wines from 2000 need more time.

I was at a Cantemerle vertical last year, and from the strong vintages, the 2000 might have been the only one cracking up along with the 88. I would bet that other vintages of the wines in my tasting are holding better in non-2000 vintages, like d'Armailhac (95 and 99 are doing well) and apparently La Louviere (of which the 1990 is going strong and the 95 is in good form).

The Bellefont is still on the youngish side. No crack up here.
My remaining stock from 2000 is Rauzan Segla and Langoa Barton which remain untasted.

Cantemerle certainly punches above its weight.
I still have a few lonely bottles of 1989. Will have to check it out. Maybe tired but have had many bottles and keep a few to see how it held up.
And some 1996 Susan bought for me. Before we were married we have a few dinners with the 1996. Will have to re-visit it also.

Claret wrote:The Bellefont is still on the youngish side. No crack up here.
My remaining stock from 2000 is Rauzan Segla and Langoa Barton which remain untasted.

I think mine are all gone now, but the 2000 Rausan Gassies was also awesome. First good year for them in a long time.

RDD wrote:Cantemerle certainly punches above its weight.
I still have a few lonely bottles of 1989. Will have to check it out. Maybe tired but have had many bottles and keep a few to see how it held up.
And some 1996 Susan bought for me. Before we were married we have a few dinners with the 1996. Will have to re-visit it also.

Sounds bottles of the 89 Cantemerle are still terrific, fully mature but going strong. I like the 96 Cantemerle a lot too, but some recent experiences suggest that vintage may be just starting to turn, unless from a really cold cellar. Certainly no reason to hold the 96 longer, IMHO.