2009 v. 2010 Chantegrive

[JimHow]

Have heard good things about this property, I have two glasses in front if me.
The 2010 has a distinctly more powerful bouquet but the 2009 seems to have a nice elegance to it.

[JimHow]

These wines are very nice!
Got them for like $17 at Zachy's on sale.
Initial impressions, anyway. Seems like there's a lot going on here.
Distinctively different wines, but both tasty in their own way.

[JimHow]

Fascinating nuanced differences between the two vintages.
Certainly seems to be consistent with the advanced billing for each vintage.
2009 is ethereal, lighter on its feet.
2010 is more of a blockbuster, deeper opaque purple, ripe tannins, much more powerful nose.
Both wines show a great Graves character, smoky, tobacco, gravelly.
Very impressive QPRs, lets see how they stand up to the steaks!

[JimHow]

Both wines were good, I thought they came up just a bit short. HWSRN gives each of them 90 points. I'll give them each 89+, as I think they are very good but don't quite hit that wow factor for me.

[Tom In DC]

Made me LOL, Jim.

[Chasse-Spleen]

I had the 2011 Chantegrive White recently. It was excellent, although a very inexpensive wine. Light, balanced, delicious. I think 2011 is a very good year for Bordeaux whites. I've had the red before and liked it. I love the old school label. I would buy the red if I saw it. Good price.

-Chasse