Rating Bordeaux Vintages of the 1990s

[stefan]

Eleven years on seems to me a good time to rank Bordeaux vintages of the 1990s. Here are my ratings. I gave the the Haut-Medoc & Pessac-Leognan the highest weight, then St Emilion & Pomerol, then Sauternes. I am not considering white Graves or the lesser appellations.

# 1 1990. Great overall. The best vintage for Sauternes and also on the left bank IMO. Excellent on the right bank, too; just a step behind 1998.

# 2 1995 (Sucking up to The Sucker.) Third best vintage on both banks and a decent year for Sauternes.

# 3 1996. The left bank is excellent and might surpass 1990 eventually. Sauternes are also very good. Some right bank wines are good, but they are not true, and I downrate the vintage severly for that.

# 4 1998. The best vintage of the decade on the right bank and fourth best on the left bank, after '90, '96, and '95. Sauternes also quite solid, behind '90, '97, '96, and '99, but probably better than '95.

# 5 1999. This was a useful vintage on both banks. I loved the boisterous Sauternes when they were infants and they have developed well.

# 1997. The 1997s were much too expensive on release, but there are many pleasant wines that eventually were priced reasonably. The second best vintage for Sauternes.

# 6 1993. '93 beats out '94 because the bouquets on some wines are ethereal.

# 1994. More consistent than '93, but hard wines.

# 1992. Some pleasant wines.

# 1991. A few were drinkable.

What is your ranking?

[Ramon_NYC]

Hard to disagree with your well-thought out and logical ranking, Bill. With one excepition ... and that would be, with my preference, bringing up 1994 ahead of 1997.
Hence, here's mine and everything stands as in yours, with exception of moving up 1994 and my rationale :

#6. 1994. More consistent than '97 with better structure and a good Pomerol vintage.

#7. 1997. The 1997s were much too expensive on release, but there are few pleasant wines that eventually were priced reasonably. The second best vintage for Sauternes.

#8a. 1993. '93 beats out '94 because the bouquets on some wines are ethereal.

#8b. 1992. Some pleasant wines.

#9. 1991. A few were drinkable.

Btw, and as a caveat, I've had very limited experience with 1991, 1992 and 1993.

[Comte Flaneur]

My 2c:

Left bank: 96, 95, 90, 98, 99, 94, 97, 93, 91, 92
Right bank: 90, 98, 95, 96, 99, 94, 97, 93
Pessac: 90, 98, 95, 96, 99, 97, 94, 93
Sauternes: 90, 97, 96, 95, 98, 99

That makes 1990 clearly the best vintage, with 1995 and 1996 tied in second, 1998 a whisker behind in fourth, with 1999 some way back with 1997 close behind and 1994 some further distance back then 1993.

[JimHow]

1998R
1996L
1995
1990
1993L
1994
1999
1997
1991L
1992

[Blanquito]

Interesting that some folks rate 1995 over 1990, at least for the Left Bank.

I haven't had that many 1995s, but the ones I've had have been pretty charmless (except for the wonderful PLalande).

The 1990s as a whole didn't make old bones, but I had a bunch of cru bourgeois up to 2000 that were really terrific and great value.

[JimHow]

From the beginning I've valways thought 1990 was somewhat overrated blanquito, at least on the left bank. But I know that I'm in a very small minority in that regard. I think Ian's list is pretty close, give or take a vintage here or there.

[dstgolf]

Jim,

I beg to differ with your assessment and question your position and experience with 1990. I've had many 90's that have rocked my boat and possibly with time the 95s might challenge. Certainly at 15 years of age plus the 90s were beautiful leaving fabulous memories across the board and I can't say that at the same time point the 95s have reached that pinnacle.

Just my impression and I've certainly had the pleasure to enjoy many more 90s than 95s maybe because they haven't come into their own.

Danny

[JimHow]

1990 has been good. I had a '90 Gazin that was amazing.
But:
1990 Mouton disappointed.
1990 Lafite was good but not great.
1990 Pichon Lalande was... well, never mind.
1990 Cos was weird.
1990 Ducru... even the non-flawed ones were no big shakes.
For the life of me, I don't know what all the fuss is over '90 Latour.
1990 Montrose? I'll take the '89.
Baron and Lynch? Again, I'll take the '89s.
I know some here are crazy over 1990 Sociando and Poyferre. It must just be me, i just wasn't that wowed.
I'll agree with Ian on Pessac: 1990 LMHB, wow, wow, wow!

1990 Leoville Las Cases rocked my boat.
1990 Leoville Barton... eh, take it or leave it... Very tannic.

1990 Margaux... epic... I think things got better the further south and east you went....

[Comte Flaneur]

In my opinion the 1996 is the best left bank vintage and that is why I own more of that stuff than anything else. When it comes to 1990 vs. 1995 - it is a close call but for me the 95 comes out on top. I have a really good feeling about the 95 lefties...they need eons, but when they get there they might challenge the 96s, different sure but not necessarily inferior.

If you go down the list of big names in 90 vs. 95 this is what I get - these are all my opinions:

Montrose - 90 is clearly better
Cos – about even
Lafite - both monumental, about even
Mouton - 95 is streets ahead
Latour – I actually think the 1990 is a tad over-rated and the 1995 is the better wine
Lynch - I am not a big fan of the 1990 but have not had the 1995
GPL - I have not tried the 1990 and I hear it is brilliant, but I adore the 1995
Pichon Lalande - the 95 easily
Pichon Baron – the 90 easily (makes you wonder how Lalande next door could have screwed up so badly)
LLC – I definitely prefer the 95
Leoville-Barton – a close call
Ducru B – the 95, easily
Gruaud L – the 90 wins easily
Margaux – both awesome, but 90 wins
Palmer – pretty close, but the 95 will pull ahead in time

I think 1990 was a hot vintage, and some of the wines turned out a little too bumptious for my liking - LLC and Lynch spring to mid. I got a batch of LLC 90 last year and drank through them. I was never really very impressed.

[stefan]

I don't down rate '90 for the two "bad" wines because clearly Pichon-Lalande simply screwed up and Ducru was still suffering from taint in the cellars. All the other '90 left bankers I drank were really good. I like the '90 Lynch a lot, Ian. The '95 is weak by Lynch standards; you haven't missed much there. Our 2nd favorite (after Palmer) 3rd growth, La Lagune, is excellent in '90 and just good in '95. I would rather drink the '90 GPL than the '95 even if both are excellent.

[Comte Flaneur]

Yes fair do's stefan...I just have this sense that the 1995s will surprise us in the future and I am talking my book too because I am betting heavily on them, second largest position after 1996.

[Blanquito]

Based on the bottle we had in December, the 1990 Sociando is monumental. It tasted like it was just beginning to open; it was probably the youngest wine of the night.

For the umpteenth time, I really, really hope the 2003 SM turns into something like the 1990.

[JimHow]

Gruaud Larose is another 1990 that I just do not understand.
I've had that wine about ten times over the years.
I much prefer the 1988 and 1989.

[DavidG]

Similar to your ranking, Stefan, though I would place '96 ahead of '95 (not by much, but that's my personal experience), and I'd jump '94 up a few spots:

1990
1996
1995
1998
1999
1994
1997
1993
1992
1991

[Claudius2]

Guys
the 90s was NOT a good decade for Bordeaux overall, and frankly, only 90 and 95 are consistently good.
98 is excellent tin the right bank but average in the right, and 96 is the opposite.
After 90, a run of ordinary years - 91, 92 were poor vintages, 93 a bit better and 94 an uneven vintage with some good wines and a lot of unbalanced ones (some have really surprised me but other are forgettable).
95 I still see as a bit over-rated as it lacks complexity and I actually agree with Coates on his summation of the vintage.
Over-produced maybe.
96 is a top left bank vintage but average right bank making angular and often unbalanced wines.
97 is better than 93 but no more than average.
99 I don't know a lot about. It was somehow lodt in translation in Australia. Funny.
The few 99s I have tried were better than expected and a good overall vintage.

The issue about rating vintages is that it becomes anecdotal.
For exmaple, 90 isn't crap just coz a few wines like PL and to a point Mouton were failures.
I would rate 90 the best vintage overall ahead of 95 (as it did well in the right bank, unlike 96), then 96, 98 and 99.
The rest are hard to rate. For me, 94, 97, 93, 92 and 91.
In any case, 90 and 95 are the only two vintages that were very good on both banks.

[tailorcut]

New Guy Here, Saturday night a fine 96 Priere Lichine which was drinking right on. Just a hint of browning on the edge, almost sweet, lead and tobacco and just a semi old cab flavor. Seems most of the left bank wines are drinking great!

[DavidG]

Claudius - I agree completely about vintage ratings being "anecdotal." They are useful for only 2 things:

1) serving as a springboard for discussion and debate, and
2) guiding an otherwise blind guess as to what to select from a list of unknowns in a restaurant when there is no knowledgeable sommelier and no access to the internet to guide you.

If find the first reason the one I use most often.

Tailorcut, thanks for posing on '96 Prieure Lichine. The '83 version of that wine was the first full-case purchase I made.

[aimeedogdogdog]

Rating vintage is being personal for me.

I rate the vintage of having the style I like higher. I probably rate '94L higher than '90L, not to mention '95L, '96L, '98L, and '99L. I haven't tried '97L, '91L, '92L, or '93L yet (ok, maybe 1 or 2 bottles).

Werner