TN: 2002 Ch. Pontet-Canet (Pauillac) … lacks excitement.

[Ramon_NYC]

TN: 2002 Ch. Pontet-Canet (Pauillac)

Having had an overdose of Italian wines over the last 2 weeks, the wine-related thought that came to mind during my flight home yesterday was an old style Bordeaux for dinner. I had the 2002 Pontet Canet on standby mode in my home cooler as early as last month, but decided to give it a full 10-year calendar year aging. The last time I tasted this was during release and I recall a backward wine with wood and plenty of tannin and that 2002 vintage characteristics. Last night’s bottle, paired with a grilled rib eye, was still consistent in its traditional style, with lean fruit, medium-bodied mouth-feel and hints of minerals and herb. It still had the mouth-puckering acidity that I encountered with the ”at release” tasting. Where it differed was that last night’s wine was more forward, with soft tannin and without the high oak element that I had the first time I tasted. I have to admit that last night’s bottle didn’t excite me as much and to some degree I found the softened structure to be quite boring. Definitely different from the 1994, 1995, 1996 and the very big, but well-crafted 2003 and 2005 that I had at horizontal tastings. I also get that feeling that there’s not much room for improvement with further aging.

I’d be curious to know if any here had tasted this recently.

photo.JPG (113.62 KiB) Viewed 2995 times

[Comte Flaneur]

Thanks for the note Ramon

An interesting thread:

"Is Pontet Canet boring?" - please discuss

I was really excited by Mike's tasting note on the 2000, and have had drunk a lot of Pontet Canet lately.

I took out my 94s from storage two months ago and have drunk four. This is a wine that has been held to be head and shoulders above most other 94s. They need drinking. This is a foursquare wine without much charm, but it needs drinking because it is on a slow boat to China at best; it could be on the slippery slope because it doesn't hold together very well after a few hours; the cracks begin to show. It is very quintessentially chewy Pauillac but it doesnt have a lot of finesse and doesnt excite like - dare I say it, its now poor relation GPL, which is clearly a better wine in 1994.

I went to the estate in November and tasted the 2008 and 2010; neither excited me. Technically they are both excellent wines. In fact the 2010 is virtually perfect. But oh such boring juice. It left me cold. Just as there is no positive correlation between wealth and happiness maybe there is little correlation between perfection in wine making and pleasure. We had this discussion in Bordeaux when Alex showed a bottle of Lynch Bages 1985, which was manifestly flawed - bretty etc - but very delicious and exciting.

I should imagine that the apogee for Pontet Canet was the 1996 vintage - the best combination of quality and pleasure. The 2005, for example, may be a technically better wine, but the 1996 will be the wine that wins hearts and minds. It could be of course that the new breed of techno-wonder-wine-marvels just need a lot of time. Time will tell.

The point is that there may not be a linear relation between perfection in wine making and pleasure derived.

[Blanquito]

Interesting. My run-away favorite (and most of the room's) at the Tesseron vertical was the 1996. I have high hopes for the 2003 PC, too.

[AlexR]

Hi Ian,

If you recall, we had a discussion by e-mail about 2009 Pontet Canet a couple of years back and you were under the impression that this was some kind of over-hyped modern-style Parkerized beast.
And yet, I tasted it in March after the vintage and found it superb, on a par with a couple of the first growths.
You mentioned that you might go ahead and buy some futures. I don't know whether you did or not, but I'll be very interested to see if this wine delivers what I thought it would..
The 2009 is missing from the line-up of appraisals. I found it much better than the 2010.

Izak Litwar swears by the 2003 Pontet Canet and I bought a bottle not so long ago.
I tasted it at the château with him, and found it good rather than stellar, but we'll see what some bottle age can do.

I think the owners of Pontet Canet must be some of the happiest people on earth! The reputation - and price - of their wine have skyrocketed in a very short space of time, and they produce oodles of the stuff: first and second wines to the tune of 400,000 bottles!
(by the way, I wish Féret would break down their statistics into first and second wines...).
The "turnaround" vintage for Pontet Canet is relatively recent, perhaps the 2005.

Alfred Tesseron is retiring and his niece, Mélanie is slated to take over. She is currently spending 2 years in Hong Kong to promote the brand. That's probably good for Ponet Canet, but maybe not so good for those of us in the West with ailing economies and a clear memory of what the wine *used to* cost...

Best regards,
Alex R.

[Houndsong]

I've only seen a picture of Melanie, but while her wine may ultimately lack excitement, she appears not to.

Apropos, we have discussed Stepford wines before. I tried the 2002 on release and while it seemed closed to me - cool, glossy - it seemed to have substance. It did not move me to purchase more as did the Branaire, the Clerc, the Sociando, the Lafon-Rochet and the Duhart. One must factor in the whopping $5-$10 price premium it commanded at the time into my calculations, parsimonious as I be. In fact this did represent as much as a 50+% premium to the L-R.

Still I would think something more would come of it just from the smattering of older wines - many of far lesser repute - I've drunk that with only a couple of exceptions never fail to deliver an enjoyable, if not quite the copulating deity, experience.

Just to add, I have the 03 and the 04 (and a lone mag of the 01) and at the last go I'd give the nod to the 04 as having some interesting nuance the 03 did not at the time. But yes, maybe one helluva foursquare wine would make an apt description of the chateau's output. But as with the 02 I'd expect these wines need at least five and probably 10+ more years to show what they're made of, in anything.

[Comte Flaneur]

Hi Alex - yes I do understand that these are not 'Parkerized wines' as you explained at the time.
And I did buy a case of the 2009 so look forward to sharing a bottle with you when you are 80 and I am 70.

Hound - not only have I met the delightfully interesting Melanie but she invited Maureen and I to visit the estate - though she was in Honkers at the time. Her colleague, who also happens to be young blond and very pretty (nothing to do with marketing you understand), took us around on a golf buggie. As we got to the bottom of the estate we heard horses neighing. Very loudly. But we could not see the horses because they were behind the trees. Maybe they weren't even there. Maybe they had some loud speakers in the bushes.

As Alex knows this estate has moved on from Parkerizing their wines...the new mantra now is horse shit. As much as possible spread over the vineyards. That's why these estates have these amazing farting dobbins that can shit over 100 hectares. When we went to Pape Clement there was a very fat horse standing there in a very conspicuous position, no doubt with a gullet full of fudge to dessiminate over the Pape Clement vineyards. Pontet Canet has set the lead, the other estates are scarmbling to catch up.

[Ramon_NYC]

Nothing against Alfred. A fun and engaging guy during the vertical a few years ago.
Just thinking that it would have been a helluva more fun had he brought Melanie with him then. Had I seen her in person, heck, I might even think that the 2002 PC is the most exciting wine in the world.

[DavidG]

You guys gotta get out more.

[Houndsong]

You guys gotta get out more.

No more PC for you!

[Blanquito]

This ain't a PC conversation!

[Claudius2]

Guys
I have reviewed this wine twice over the last 6 months or so, and drunk it three times.
I preferred it to the warm, slightly porty 03 (and I have 20 more bottles of it) and the 01, which was a little fluid in the middle, lacking depth and not integrated.

The 02 is medium bodied but I did not find it overly acidic or tannic. Rather, the balance was good and it showed well.
However, it needs 4 hrs or so of decanting, and really improved in the glass over the night.