Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts

For whatever it is worth, John Gilman has ranked the vintages of this century in a Tweet, even though 2000 is technically the end of the previous century:

"1st decade in the new millennium Bordeaux vintage chart: 2005, 2000, 2008, 2009, 2001, 2006, 2002, 2004, 2010, 2007, 2003. 4 what it's worth."

I'm not surprised to see 05 and 00 at the head of the list, but I am surprised to see 08 ahead of 09, and 10 so far back in the pack. I'm sure such a list will confirm Gilman's idiosyncratic place in the wine tasting community. On the other hand, by placing the most affordable recent vintage in the top 3 he could win me over as a disciple. Buy up those 08s now!

Gilman's known for liking "classic" styled Bdx and disliking the "modern" fruit forward, lush low acid wines, which might explain his preference for '08 over '09.

But wasn't the consensus on 2010 it was classic squared? Solidly ripe but also solidly tannic. Sounded like my kind of vintage but unfortunately not my kind of pricing. I'll be watching though in a year - wherever I am - to see what happens as the wines hit the shore.

Agree Hound. Don't know why he ranked '10 so low - points off for ripeness?

Can't be points off for ripeness, 05 and 00 are both ripe vintages. We must also remember that the ranking is relative against a very good decade. In other words, being so far down doesn't necessarily mean a bad year or that the wines are bad. It is interesting, however, that 10 is behind 04, and 07 is ahead of 03, that vintage bringing up the rear!

Interesting that he liked 2005 so much, as there's no shortage of material there. Maybe the balance is such that he's a believer in 2005? Putting quality aside, 2000 seems a bit more old school to me than 2005, particularly on the Right Bank.

On my very limited experience, with mostly Bordeaux wines under 35 $, i would agree that 2005 would be first and 2000 second, but this is the only similarities I have with Mr. Gilman ranking.

The 2005 are great and will hold forever. The 2000 are great and will hold almost forever. For 2009-2010, not enough wine sampled yet.

Nic

I agree with 05 based on what I've tasted but would put 09 and 00 equal I think.
Interestingly, 03 is last.
This heatwave vintage - which I am not fond of - is not liked either.

People follow Gilman for Bordeaux and Jeff Leve’s rating get published by the top merchants. We live in an interesting time, the power of Internet.

DCWINO wrote:Jeff Leve’s rating get published by the top merchants. We live in an interesting time, the power of Internet.

I like Leve's tasting notes! http://www.thewinecellarinsider.com/?p=20591

If only this Leve character had taste buds!

Hey, I'll take Leve over all these other pretenders.

Ya, I actually visit his site on pretty regular intervals.

Ranking 08 ahead of 09 (and 01 and 10), and ranking 02 ahead of 10 and -- at least in the Northern Medoc -- 03, tells you pretty much all you need to know about Gilman. An old-school traditionalist, hates modern-styled wines with a passion (and lots of self-aggrandizing flair), prefers leaner, more austere wines. A witty, interesting writer, he goes out of his way to say outrageous things, and "stunt" scores wines he doesn't like (i.e., gives them absurdly low scores), to get attention for himself.

" . . . he goes out of his way to say outrageous things, and "stunt" scores wines he doesn't like (i.e., gives them absurdly low scores), to get attention for himself."

Pomilion, you say this as though it were a bad thing!

I'm not sure that's all there is to say about him, Pomilion. It's certainly true that as a general rule he prefers "traditional" wines over their modernized kinfolk, but if he were a doctrinaire traditionalist, would he have 05 at the head of the decade's class, and not, say, 02 or 01 or 04 or 06, or even his beloved 08? I wonder what else might be going on there? He's certainly self-aggrandizing, but I don't think he's a charlatan.

I think this discussion illustrates Pomilion's concern:
http://www.wineberserkers.com/forum/vie ... 7ee09b16f9

pomilion wrote:Ranking 08 ahead of 09 (and 01 and 10), and ranking 02 ahead of 10 and -- at least in the Northern Medoc -- 03, tells you pretty much all you need to know about Gilman. An old-school traditionalist, hates modern-styled wines with a passion (and lots of self-aggrandizing flair), prefers leaner, more austere wines. A witty, interesting writer, he goes out of his way to say outrageous things, and "stunt" scores wines he doesn't like (i.e., gives them absurdly low scores), to get attention for himself.

Nice summary - I think you've captured the Gilman persona pretty well. People do follow him, but at times I feel like he's more interested in getting publicity by making outrageous statements than in consistently or accurately describing what he's tasting. My palate is about 180 degrees opposite his. In fact, I'm more aligned with Jeff Leve!

I like the Jeff Leve critiques because... he is an unabashed Bordeaux Wine Enthusiast!

Jim
I've started readng Leve's scores as well.
He does not seem to have one style that he prefers and thus is not too set in his ways.

One point about 05. This is a "traditional" style though with heaps of everyhting as there is a lot of material here.
Even the lesser wines are very good - the Bernadotte last week was way above its station in life (i.e., "only" a CB).
They are powerful and tannic and not at all "new world" like ( a term I don;t like in any case).

I think it is too early to rate 2010 with any confidence, until they are finished and bottled.
I have no doubt that 2009 with be a great year.
They are a modern 1982 and I think more even than 82.

If some are not keen on 2010 and 2009, then they need to recall that 1989 and even 1990 were also questioned at the time, and so was 1982 - the vintage Parker drew fame from.

Claudius2 wrote:Jim
I've started readng Leve's scores as well.... He does not seem to have one style that he prefers and thus is not too set in his ways.

Thanks for saying that. I'm glad you enjoy reading my notes. I try being open minded, but I like some wines and some wine styles more than others. But in different vintages, there are always winners, losers and surprises. If you or anyone wants to see which wines or styles I prefer, I have close to 5,000 searchable examples on my site: http://www.thewinecellarinsider.com/win ... n=Bordeaux

Thanks for the assignment, Jeff. As a university prof it has all the hallmarks of some assignment I'd give to undergraduates. But it's been a long time since I've been a student, and I just can't do the assignment thing anymore. Maybe I'm just lazy these days, but I'd love to know something of your approach to wine. What is your preferred style? How do your preferences fit into the traditional/modern debate? And please give examples to illustrate your point.

It's a good and fair question, but I really think that looking over tasting notes I wrote says more than I could write in a post. That being said, I value texture, length, purity of fruit, the ability to age, depth, concentration of flavor and unique character in wine. Few wines have all those characteristics. However, for my wallet, cellar and palate, those are the wines I cherish.

Jeff's username on here in the old days was pomerollover, if that gives you a clue Bacchus.

Jeff's taken a lot of cr*p on various boards for being a Parker acolyte and an unabashed Bordeaux enthusiast. Indeed RP and Jeff do seem to share a love for length, fruit and concentration. I think he's got a mind and a palate of his own and he seems to call 'em as he sees 'em. He might not go ga-ga over the "classic" more acidic wines that Gilman tends to like, but frankly I tend to like the wines Jeff likes, and I can pretty much tell where he's coming from when I read his notes. His enthusiasm comes through and his stories and pictures of people and food add an extra dimension to his tasting reports that often make them more interesting reading than RP's usual fare. He's a generous host to boot (speaking from first hand experience), and a good cook as well (from what I hear).

Well, Jeff, if someone like David has to elaborate on your essay, you know it wasn't what it should have been: C- I'm afraid.

It's too bad someone has to take cr*p for loving Bordeaux, even if it is right bank (are people still using the term "Bordeaux" for that syrup?) Sorry, couldn't help myself.

I find the Wine Cellar Insider to be a very useful tool, actually, and regularly check it out. I, for one, am glad it and a number of other strong sites dedicated to Bdx exist on the web.

Here's a link to another view on the quality of the four most recent vintages, which comes to a different conclusion than Gilman:
http://www.thewinedoctor.com/blog/index ... 2008-2011/

Aw, hell. I'm just kissing up for another invite next time I'm out in LA...

Bacchus, it is easier to read Jeff's Burgundy tasting notes. In fact, even if he has 22 on his site, you need to read only one to discover his opinion of 99+% of red Burgs:

This overly acidic, tart, thin joyless wine offered no pleasure. This was the type of wine Bette Davis would have been sipping when she uttered, “what a dump.”

Or the following provocative evaluation of the 1993 Faiveley Corton-Clos des Cortons: "A decent Burgundy that reminded me why I prefer Bordeaux." I guess he's not a member of the anti-flavour wine elite!

You guys are funny.

David G... You are always welcome to come hangout and pop bottles together. Let me know anytime you're in LA.

I openly admit, I am guilty as charged. I am not the biggest fan of Burgundy. I seldom post notes on the wines, although I taste them a bit more often than my notes seem to show.

On the other hand, doesn't the B in BWE stand for Bordeaux?

I work hard at letting interested people know what a wine tastes and feels like when I write tasting notes. It should not matter if you or anyone agrees with my score or not. What's important is, that you gain a clear idea on what that wine will be like when you pop a cork. I also think I am reasonably consistent. For example, at a recent dinner, before being poured a wine blind, I was asked what I thought of 1970 Mouton. I berated the wine. Of course I had no idea the person was asking me because he bright that specific bottle. The bottle was served blind and I could not stand it. While it made the person sad to see his pride and joy blasted, he smiled and remarked I was consistent.

Aside from the searchable tasting note link, you can also browse notes and bios on chateaux if you like. This also expresses what I like or not. http://www.thewinecellarinsider.com/bor ... -profiles/

"What's important is, that you gain a clear idea on what that wine will be like when you pop a cork. I also think I am reasonably consistent."

Yes and yes. I don't have the same likes and dislikes as you or The Bob, but I like the descriptions you both give as well as your consistency of taste.

stefan wrote:Yes and yes. I don't have the same likes and dislikes as you or The Bob, but I like the descriptions you both give as well as your consistency of taste.

Stefan,
The consistency can be easily achieved without having a good palate. This is the major problem with the wine world. People think that they palates align with the critics they like. Quite often, this is just a placebo response. It isn’t too hard to write TNs tasting none-blind, heck I bet I could have written a comprehensive 2011 report without tasting the wines by just knowing the vintage characters. There are a lot of critics with exceptional knowledge but poor palates. They can be very convincing. The sad part is some of the best tasters that I know are relatively unknown and will remain that way. Tom Wheltle and Frayan as examples.

With many years of practices with Barolo Chinato, I can imagine that Mr. Wheltle palate is unbeatable...

Nic

Mr. Wheltle I think I know. Who is this Frayan? Is there a world beyond BWE?

JimHow wrote:Mr. Wheltle I think I know. Who is this Frayan? Is there a world beyond BWE?

Jim,
Faryan is a young Bordeaux lover, in his twenties, living in DC. His palate is very precise. I have shared wine with a lot of the recognizable names including three or four world champion sommeliers and Tom and Faryan have as good of palates if not better.

Move that '04 up a bit!!! Love this vintage

Just for you robertgoulet:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Rkja8wQyVY

Is this guy not the greatest:

http://youtu.be/Szg8NwycduQ

Thanks Bach....it's true....andreas thinks like me.....he must be some kind of genius