2000 Monbousquet vs. 2000 Pavie Decesse

[JimHow]

Let the games begin....

[Michael Malinoski]

So funny! A few of us just did a side by side of these two wines from the 2001 vintage!

-Michael

[AlohaArtakaHoundsong]

The wine fast is over! Can I have an Amen!

[AlohaArtakaHoundsong]

The PD exposing some midriff there. The Monbo less, and a third label. So modest.

[pomilion]

I've had the '00 PD twice in the past year -- once it was mind-blowing, the other time shut down hard. A bit of a head-scratcher, look forward to your thoughts.

[robertgoulet]

Cracked '01 pd recently....oh my what a nose...like freshly cut cedar...gorgeous

[Nicklasss]

I really did not liked the 2001 Chateau Pavie-Decesse a few years ago. Beated easily by the 2003 Chateau l'Angélus that same night.

So Jim, which one did you preferred?

Nic

[JimHow]

It's hard to say, because my tastes are so calibrated to the left bank. I think I like both of them. The Pavie Decesse was the more serious wine, bigger, lots of sediment, the Monbousquet was its usual voluptuous, flamboyant self. Typical right bank chocolate, the Pavie Decesse more cedary and complex. Still, they seem to lack the gravitas of my St. Juliens and Pauillacs and Margauxs. I'd rate them both 91 points. Very enjoyable, but in my blind devotion to the left bank I am probably not the best person to judge. Like, for example, I enjoyed that 2005 Sociando Mallet more last night.

[RDD]

Seemed like a good contrast in stlyes.

[OrlandoRobert]

Has anyone checked in on hte 2005 Monbo recently? I have a sixer sleeping.

[DavidG]

Haven't cracked an '05 yet. CT notes suggest to me it's still too soon.

[stefan]

We'll drink an '03 Monbo tonight, mainly because I want to find out if a certain CA palate friend will say that it does not suck.

[Jeff Leve]

I really like the Pavie Decese. I find the Monbosquet to be too oaky.

[stefan]

The Monbousquet 2003 was too oaky for my taste. The texture was rather thick. Maybe in a few years the oak will integrate. The lighter '03 Lucia served by our host is very pleasant for drinking now.

I was also disappointed in 1996 Lagrange. I broke my case on Friday to bring one to the dinner. While certainly good, I expected more because Lagrange has been on such a roll. It does have the backbone to improve, though, and we'll try another bottle in a couple of years.

[Claret]

I was also disappointed in 1996 Lagrange. I broke my case on Friday to bring one to the dinner. While certainly good, I expected more because Lagrange has been on such a roll. It does have the backbone to improve, though, and we'll try another bottle in a couple of years.

stefan, I have opened several bottles of the 96 and they have all been somewhat or very closed. Another couple of years is a good idea.

[Michael Malinoski]

I really like the Pavie Decese. I find the Monbosquet to be too oaky.

This was essentially my take on the side by side tasting we did of the '01's last month...

[Michael Malinoski]

I was also disappointed in 1996 Lagrange. I broke my case on Friday to bring one to the dinner. While certainly good, I expected more because Lagrange has been on such a roll. It does have the backbone to improve, though, and we'll try another bottle in a couple of years.

I don't know, a bunch of us drank the '96 a few weeks back after a few hours of decanting and it was extremely nice. Not world-beating, but hardly disappointing.

-Michael

[stefan]

I did not decant, Michael, but opened the bottle four hours before the dinner. Lucie liked it better than I. Maybe I was expecting too much.

[pomilion]

The Pavie Decesse was the more serious wine, bigger, lots of sediment... the Pavie Decesse more cedary and complex. Still, they seem to lack the gravitas of my St. Juliens and Pauillacs and Margauxs.

'00 PD was very shut down when I had it recently. Having had it multiple times, it's a very serious, potentially great wine that imo will have the "gravitas" and complexity of many top left bank wines when it enters its optimal drinking window.