TN 2000 Potensac - there may be some hope

[Houndsong]

I bought a case of this a couple of years after release. The obligatory drink one on arrival/purchase and a follow-up bottle a couple of years later were, in a word, nasty.

Based on the first whiffs and sips tonight, there's some light at the end of the tunnel. But it might be a train too.

By design or accident, this is a vin de garde. This is still strong medicine with hard acids and tannins. But it's developing a bouquet that's suggestive of early maturity. A very dark color. There's some flesh beneath this iron exoskeleton. It also seems a touch alcoholic, and while not having the whiskey barrel/Jack Daniels sensation of overripe, overoaked Shiraz, it has a bit of a Scotch aftertaste.

This is all based on about a half ounce sip. Let's see how it progresses. I would be surprised and pleasantly if this would drink well at some future date.

Although it's not been my personal experience, I've been conditioned by critics and encyclopedias to expect that simple cru bourgeois should be drunk up by age 10. Certainly wines of a style, I can see. But "traditional" Bordeaux of this level, it's not been my experience at all. I see notes all the time on Cellartracker saying drink this or that now, or it's over the hill, and I don't get it at all.

[oldwinenut]

Houndsong, I agree with your note.
I bought a few on release along with a couple of mags.
In Feb of 2010 I posted on cellar tracker;
2/28/2010 rated 89 points: 2010 - Decanted for about 1 hr before tasting. Still Opaque and looks like a much younger wine. Still tanic but not to the extent that it was 7 yrs ago but none the less this wine still needs 4-5 years to resolve. The balance between fruit, acid and tannins is still there just need to wait.
I have been tasting a few 2000's and that balance is/will always be a hallmark of this vintage. I love it. 89-90 pts today.
I also agree about drinking windows. I have always wondered if people followed the drinking windows of the critics then how would there be any older wines to drink and enjoy??

[Houndsong]

Kathy says this is good and have we had it before. She likes here wines on the austere side and so do I but this is not so much austere as a bit brutal.

[Blanquito]

I bought 6 of these for $17 back in 2006 from Internet Wines, based on your wine-hunting skill, Hound (if memory serves).

I have given up on Potensac. The 1996, called it's greatest wine by HWSRNL at the time, wasn't cheap (~$25-30) and it has been very irregular over the years (some good bottles, some off bottles). Other vintages have been even more irregular or disappointing. Even with a good bottle, I find the stuff dull-- foursquare, chunky and clunky. Maybe the problem is I've never had a fully mature Potensac? This is made by the LLC team, my most disappointing chateau afterall.

With so many great QPR Bordeaux available these days in many styles, Potensac is off my list.

That said, it doesn't surprise me that the 2000 Potensac needs more time, based on the bottles of the 1996 I tried in the last year. Most of the petit chateau I've tried from 2000 will hold or improve for at least 5+ years (2000 Chateauneuf is another matter, as the "tradition" bottles need to be consumed sooner than later).

FWIW, HWSRNL gave the 2000 Potensac 89 pts and said drink 2004-2011!

[Houndsong]

As Gen. Buck Turgidson famously said, I hate to judge before the facts are all in. No doubt this wine will be better in a few-several years, and I'm no wine swami, but I fail to see how this will ever delight the senses. There is a resemblence between this and its 03 sibling, which is better for being softer, but with the same dark and stolid flavor profile. I've had at least one bottle of the 1996 which was very good by any measure, and a few more that weren't good at all.

So Patrick I'm with you in the camp of "I don't know why this has a reputation of being among the better cru bourgeois" or even unranked chateau. I've had other Medocs I liked, and many Haut Medocs and St. Estephes I preferred (and in quantity, with consistent characteristics), that had similar heft and superior deft. And were priced a few dollars less, at least. Plus, it's a lot more fun finding the really overlooked but entertaining wines than buying some widely available plonk with a hard to fathom Parker minimum seal of approval.

[Chasse-Spleen]

I think Potensac can be somewhat inconsistent in general, even within the same vintage. I think part of the reason that it's regarded so highly is because it's an unclassified wine from the Medoc that can last 15 years or so and is sometimes quite enjoyable to drink. The 'heralded' '96 did nothing for me. I drank several bottles of the '95 before I hit on one that was any good. The lone 2000 I tried was horribly, disappointingly corked. But ah!, the 2001 was lovely, early drinking a cheap. The lone '03 was succulent and modern. More recently I had two bottles of the '06. The first was silky and elegant, sweet and had good complexity. The second was more rustic and savory - ???

Anyway, I will always be curious about Potensac in a new vintage but wouldn't pay that much for it or expect any miracles. It just might come back and bite you in the ass though if you ignore it completely. It's a sneaky sort of wine.

[robertgoulet]

So I'm not crazy after all, I'll get to that in moment

about 6 mos. back I tasted the '05 20 mille from Jean-Philippe Janoueix

Soon after I approached the wine consultant to turned me on to this bottle

I told him I tasted it

He asked what I thought

I said, "I'll open the next bottle, in thirty years". No joke

This was the tightest most tannic backwards beast I've ever layed my palate on. I thought I was going to book an emergency visit to a periodontist since my gums were literally being ripped apart. The drying tannins were huge. Did they even throw the stems in?????????????????????????? WHOA

Getting back to the crazy part. My tasting note said, tasted like scotch...from the Islay region...wtf?????? What is this stuff.........???????????

So I'm not crazy, others have experience that scotch phenomenom.

[Tom In DC]

Well, we shared a bottle of the 1982 Potensac -- pretty close to that 30 year point discussed above -- and it was terrific. Cedar and cigar notes followed through on a dense fruit palate. It was a bit short on the finish, but then it was only $50...per case!

I think the rep of Potensac may have been made back in the 80's when it was punching way above its price.

[oldwinenut]

I bought some of the '05 and it is surly a tanic beast which will need years to calm down, but there is a tremendous core of fruit wraped up inside. The '05's are starting to remind me of the '86's where some wines are still not ready and in a few cases I question if there the furit can outlive the tannins? Anyone else find this?

[DavidG]

The '05 Bordeaux have had a reputation for plenty of stern tannins from their first evaluation by the experts in barrel, much more so than the '00s. I don't doubt that many will need years to show well. I am holding off on all of my bigger classed growth '05s, so I can't really comment on them. Some of the less exalted wines have been OK at this early stage. d'Aiguilhe, for example, wasn't too tannic. I haven't had the Potensac in '00 or '05 - doesn't sound like either one is getting a lot of love here.

Five years out is usually the worst time to taste Bordeaux. If the '05s turn out to be similar to the '86s, that would be fine with me. Over a year ago we had a BWE '86 horizontal in NYC and many of the wines were starting to come out of their tannic shells to show really beautifully. Those that hadn't yet fully developed still had plenty of fruit in evidence to stand up to the tannins for the long haul It was maybe a dozen or so wines, so I don't know if it's fair to generalize to the entire vintage. Nevertheless, based on that sampling I would disagree strongly with those who say the '86s don't have enough fruit to outlast the tannins.

[oldwinenut]

I am not saying all the '86's do not have to much tannins compared to fruit but there are a few wines, such Leoville Barton, where I do question if the wine will truly come into balance. Haut Brion, Leoville Poyferre and Las Cases are just starting to come into their drinking window. I just hope that the '05's won't take as long because if they do I won't be here to enjoy them at maturity.

[Blanquito]

Yes, Parker was initially worried about the 2005 tannins. I don't think the tannins are nearly as hard in 2005 as in 1986, but what do I know? That said, many 2005s will take a long time to come around, probably longer than 2000 or perhaps 1996...

Tom, your 1982 Potensac proves the point-- I've never had a mature one! But then, white zinfandel was the cat's meow in 1982 and undoubtedly only ran $0.63 per 2-liter box back in 1985.

[DavidG]

OWN - I agree wtih you that there are a number of '86s whose tannins will long outlast their fruits. But I don't think the vintage as a whole has turned into a tannic mess.

[Houndsong]

One thing I've noticed about 05s I've had since they seemed to dy up/close down (this is relative because they still have plenty to offer) is their acidity has come to the fore. I remember drinking some wines right at release and being repulsed by the sweetness/turgidity/density. Anyway it's only a couple of bottles lately but these seem to have a lot of everything. Thank can't be bad for the long haul.

It will be interesting to compare the 05s and the 09s. I was looking at K&L's 2009 vintage report the other day and they claim that on averge acidtiy is far lower in 09s than in 05s (but above 03s). But of course they're wonderful wines nonetheless.

[rjsussex]

Did a 2000 left bank cheaper wines tasting a few months ago for friends and the Potensac came out top (over Moulin Riche, Baron de Brane etc) - but I agree about bottle variation. The 2005 Pot is really, seriously good.

Richard

[Blanquito]

Had a bottle of the 1996 Potensac tonight. Did little to change my mind about this wine. In a word: very, very boring. That's one French word, translated: "Potensac". I don't even like saying that word, "Potensac".

But who knows, maybe another 5 years will do something wonderful for this is...

[AKR]

My brother and I had a bottle of the 2000 Potensac after splashing around the pool with the kids, as we watched the rotisserie spin around, mesmerized by the meat. This was a good example - good depth, earth and fruit. Both this year and 1996 have been inconsistent, even from the same cases, but at least a nice experience with tonight's bottle. I'll have the rest with a bone in strip steak tomorrow.

+24 hours: there is more red fruit character (cranberries, early picked plums) and its more light bodied than the 13% abv would suggest. The kids wanted pork chops and grilled peaches instead of steaks tonight, so I slurped this up while doing kitchen prep rather than having this with beef. Its a good, not great wine, but has held in ok. I'm reluctant to cellar this estate nowadays. For a few bucks more, I'd rather have the denser Chasse Spleen.