is 2009 a weak vintage?

[stefan]

Will these new style, high alcohol, Bordeaux wines develop the complexity that we all love? Jeff Leve and The Bob say yes, but I have my doubts. Time will tell, I guess.

[Jeff Leve]

"It was actually fantastic if you like modern-style bordeaux (one of my wines of the tasting), but you never would have picked it blind as Figeac in a million years." I mean, Pom, isn't that the problem here? It's no longer Bordeaux! It's become something else.

FWIW, Figeac did not do anything different in 2009. 2012 was the first vintage they tried to do something positive in. That is the year they brought in Michel Rolland. http://www.thewinecellarinsider.com/bor ... on/figeac/

[DavidG]

It's no longer the Bordeaux you' grew up with, Jim. Neither is your car, your washing machine, your phone, your TV, your slide rule, I mean calculator, I mean computer, I mean laptop, I mean tablet...

It's evolution. And it sucks if you don't like the direction things are heading. I've always maintained that given time, the great wines, even if ripe, oaky and alcoholic compared to their ancestors, will still turn into aged Bordeaux as I know it and love it, though I'm having some second thoughts about some of them. If you drink them young, though... If you can't resist finishing the case once you've pried off that wooden lid and drunk that first bottle... you're out of luck. If your palate isn't evolving along the same lines as the wines, you've either got to evolve in your aging/drinking habits or move to more friendly territory. That might mean a narrower subset of Bordeaux or an entirely new region. If Orlando Bobby were here, this is where he'd chime in about Loire Cab Franc.

Or you could just complain about the way things used to be and evolve instead from a BWE into a BWC*.



* Bordeaux Wine Curmudgeon

[DavidG]

Here's a great post from John Gilman over on WineBerserkers addressing the whole traditional/no traditional/modern debate. He concluded with a list of Chateaux that he feels are producing traditional wines.

======================

Hi Folks,

I have only been able to read through about 8 or 9 pages of the posts here, so I may have missed some important points in the discussion. I like Dale's list from way back in page one pretty well, but have added or subtracted a few estates due to what I think are recent changes at a property since he compiled his listing in 2006. I have placed below the list of who I would call "traditionalists" in Bordeaux these days- not an insignificant number of estates, despite the perception that the region has been pretty much overrun by the modernists in recent times. The thing to remember when scrolling through the list below is that there is no cut and dry demarcation between "traditonalist" and "non-traditionalist" (probably a more useful term than "modernist" for the point of discussion), as the Bordelais are quite reticent about what they actually do in their cellars and it is quite clear that they will do whatever they deem necessary to save a vintage if Mother Nature is seen to conspire against them in a season. There are no Bordeaux estates that I know of that would loss as much of a crop as Chandon de Briailles did for instance in 2008 to stay true to their vision of biodynamics. First of all, most estates are not managed by their owners, so the management team has to answer to the ownership group or person, and secondly, most of these (outside of Pomerol and the tiny St. Emilion properties) are big businesses with a lot of wine to move and IME larger institutions in any business tend to be far more risk averse than smaller enterprises. So probably a lot of the estates on this list would break out the concentrators or the RO machines in a very rainy and thin vintage these days, or resort to other cellar parlor tricks to compensate for what they deem nature did not provide if faced with that or courting disaster for the vintage. And on the list, some estates are certainly more prone to see a threat on the horizon than others and resort to parlor tricks sooner.

So it is not what an estate might or might not do in the cellars in a difficult year that earns them a place (or not) on my list of traditionalists, but rather, whether or not their wines would be deemed classic claret in inspiration to folks such as myself who cut our teeth on vintages of Bordeaux from the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. For instance, I include Prieure-Lichine on my list of traditionalists, despite Stephane Derenoncourt being the consultant here, as the wine is still done in an elegant, middlewight style that would not strike one as out of character with the property, even if the fine 1983 was the definition of Prieure-Lichine one was using as a benchmark. But, I think that all of these wines would make lovers of traditional claret content to add to their cellars and drink at their apogees of maturity. Naturally, some of these are more "classical" in style than others, as this is a continuum of style and one has to make a cut off somewhere arbitratily to try and construct a campful of traditionalists. Rather than make the list longer than necessary, I have not listed second or third labels of the big estates here, or their satellite properties, but one can usually be pretty confident if the "grand vin" is reasonably traditonal in style, so will the second wine.

Several of the estates on this list make wines that are a bit too new oaky for my own personal palate, as new oak syndrome is still as rampant amongst the classified growths as it is in Vosne-Romanee today, and we are still waiting for the courageous chateau team to step up like Freddy Mugnier did several years ago and define a new paradigm of minimalist new oak for high end wines. For example, the superb wines at Pichon Baron are awfully marked by their new wood these days- so much so that I would not buy them for my own cellar at the present time- but, I still think that they have both feet still at least very close to the traditionalist camp and others who are more tolerant of very new oaky wines would certainly find them fairly traditional in style (beyond the wood). New wood is part of the "luxury goods" wine world these days, and most classified growths in Bordeaux are either already firmly ensconsed in this camp or have aspirations in this direction, so the percentage of new oak in Bordeaux cannot really be a barometer of in which camp the wine belongs.

For me, the things that I look for when trying to ascertain if a property would make it into the traditionalist camp include date of harvesting (is late harvesting the norm here?), malolactic fermentation in barrel, heavy-handed extraction, micro-oxygenation to manipulate palate opulence and tannin perception, and which tonneliers are used (if Taransaud is the tonnelier of choice, it is usually a pretty safe bet that the wine will lean away from the traditionalist side of the ledger- though not always, as Ducru-Beaucaillou is making one of the most classically old school wines in the entire Left Bank these days and yet use exclusively Taransaud for their barrels). And again, there is slippage on some of these fronts with each passing vintage- for example the Moueix properties on the Right Bank, Canon and Beychevelle (another wonderful old school estate) are now using partial malo in barrel for their wines (probably to make them show better earlier for the En Primeur tastings). So there are no hard and fast rules, but these are good parameters to look at along with tasting the wines (when and if possible).

But, the thing to remember is that no one is making as traditional wine today as they did in 1985- there is simply more money now at the estates to buy more new and higher quality oak barrels, be stricter with selection through the use of optical sorting etc, stuff like extraction enzymes and the like were only in their infancy back in the early '80s, and there was generally a different generation in charge of the properties back then- even where the estates remain in the same familial hands, there is not the same generational connnection to the style of claret that was preeminent in the early post-war decades. So one is not going to find the '82 and '09 Calon Segur cut precisely from the same cloth (though one also has to account for climate change and the dramatic differences in the style of the two vintages that one gent compared earlier- try the 2008 Calon-Segur and see if that strikes you as more attune with the style of the brilliant 1982, as 2008 is the second coming of the 1985 vintage at an even higher level of potential quality, whereas 2009 is a torrid vintage in the era of global warming). What can be seen as an uncompromising pursuit of the highest quality possible is also a classic management fear of sparing expense on the latest gadget, gizmo or prevailing winemaking tool and being seen as negligent in their duties and being removed by the financial interests of the estate. So when Leoville Las Cases started routinely using concentrators in the mid-1980s (or did they start with the 1982?) and garnered huge scores for their wines, this correlation was not lost on other neighboring estates and pretty soon everyone had a concentrator or a RO machine or what not. Not that they are always used, but not having the technology on hand if it were necessary could be deemed negligent. Managing a classed growth is a very lucratice gig and no one wants to lose it by not keeping up with the technological advances that are making waves for neighbors. The same dynamic is one of the important impetuses for hiring on one of the trendies consultants.

This post is already too long, and I have not even put up the list, but I wanted to take a quick moment to comment on a few estates I left off of the list. Haut-Brion and LMHB are not here- which would have seemed an insane oversight only a few years ago- but, I sense a very strong push away from the traditionalist camp at both properties in the last several vintages and IMO, the Prince of Luxembourg has pushed on to what he deems as the warmer climes of the modernist school. Maybe I will be proven wrong when the next great, classic vintage like 2008 comes along and both of these wines return to their great historic styles, but the last several vintages have been over the top wannabes to my palate. Likewise, I have not put Margaux, Mouton or Leoville Las Cases on the traditionalist list, as all three (for varying reasons) seem to me to not have their roots any longer in the traditionalist camp- certainly not the same way that Montrose, Latour or Ducru do. Ausone is also missing from the list- though it is by a very, very wide margin my favorite modernist Bordeaux, as there is simply too much terroir at this particular magic spot of earth to keep down with even the slickest, "cuvee de luxe" techniques in the cellar and more than enough new oak to make Bartolo Mascarello roll over in his grave. Anyway, the list, for what its worth, appears below.

All the Best,

John

Pomerol:
La Conseillante
Certan de May (though a bit over-oaked these days)
L'Evangile
La Grave
Hosanna
Lafleur
Lafleur-Gazin
Lafleur- Pétrus
Latour à Pomerol
Pétrus
La Pointe
Providence
Trotanoy
Vieux Château Certan

St. Émilion:
Bélair-Monange
Canon
Corbin
Cheval Blanc
Figeac (up through 2011)
Magdelaine (up through 2011)
La Serre

Graves:
La Louvière (through 2011)
Haut-Bailly (again, a bit oaky these days)
Latour-Martillac (since 2006)

Médoc and Haut Médoc:
Beaumont
Cantemerle
Chasse-Spleen
Fonréaud
La Lagune
Lannesan
Laujac
Potensac
Sociando-Mallet
La Tour de By

Margaux Appelation:
Ferrière
D’Issan
Palmer
Prieuré-Lichine (bit spit-polished, but still with old school soul)
Rauzan-Ségla
Rauzan-Gassies

St. Julien:
Beychevelle
Lagrange
Ducru-Beaucaillou
Gruaud-Larose
Talbot

Pauillac:
Croizet-Bages
Grand Puy Lacoste
Haut Bages Libéral
Latour
Lafite-Rothschild
Lynch-Bages
Pichon-Lalande
Pichon-Baron (though very oaky these days)
Pontet-Canet

Ste. Estèphe:
Calon-Ségur
Montrose
Phelan-Ségur
Tronquoy-Lalande

[JimHow]

"Or you could just complain about the way things used to be and evolve instead from BWE to BWC*."

Yes, we can just accept things the way they are, like the rest of Parker's sheep.

It's amazing they sold ANY wines from 1982, 86, 89, 90, 1961, etc., etc., I mean, NOW we know how good bordeaux can REALLY be as compared to that swill back in '82....

[robert goulet]

Goodbye pichon baron and la a grave pomerol...take those off the list

[Jeff Leve]

Goodbye pichon baron and la a grave pomerol...take those off the list

Not that we share the same taste in wine, which is fine, but what is about Pichon Baron, and which vintages did you taste that make you not like the wines today? The same for La Grave a Pomerol?

[Jeff Leve]

Yes, we can just accept things the way they are, like the rest of Parker's sheep.

Jim... People are not sheep for liking the same wines as Bob. They have their own palates and decide all on their own what wines they like or don't, based on what is in the bottle.

It's amazing they sold ANY wines from 1982, 86, 89, 90, 1961, etc., etc., I mean, NOW we know how good bordeaux can REALLY be as compared to that swill back in '82

You are trying to rewrite history. When 1982 was produced, many tasters made similar comments as to what you are saying today that the wines were too ripe, sensuous or alcoholic and that they would not last... Plus, today, while there are several stunning wines from '82, the truth is, when you count them, perhaps there are 15, 20, 25 great wines. Today in a great vintage, there are 40, 50, 60 top wines.

As for 86, at least to me, most of those wines are hard, austere and not fun to drink. I can count the great wines on one hand and still have fingers left. People made the same high alcohol comments and ripeness levels about 89 & 90 too. They also endlessly carped about price increases as well. Nothing has changed there either. If you prefer wines with less ripeness, lower alcohol and more rustic tannins, the good news is, those wines are still made today and generally speaking, they cost less money. No, they are not made by the same producers, who now prefer ripe fruit, seeds, skins and stems, coupled with lower yields. But they are available. You just have to look into other chateau.

[DavidG]

"Or you could just complain about the way things used to be and evolve instead from BWE to BWC*."

Yes, we can just accept things the way they are, like the rest of Parker's sheep.

It's amazing they sold ANY wines from 1982, 86, 89, 90, 1961, etc., etc., I mean, NOW we know how good bordeaux can REALLY be as compared to that swill back in '82.

That's a diversionary tactic worthy of a...

...wait - you ARE a politician and simple country lawyer...

I didn't suggest that you or anyone else accept things the way they are. I suggested three alternatives for those who are dissatisfied with the current state of affairs in Bordeaux. I'll restate them for the benefit of those who didn't catch that left turn you just made:
1) seek out the Bordeaux producers that have remained traditional,
2) look outside of Bordeaux,
3) age your wines longer before you drink them.

As far as #1, the good news is that John Gilman lists about 60 Chateaux that are still producing traditional Bordeaux, at least to his palate. They may not suit your style preferences, however, Jim, because Gilman tends to cellar his wines a loooong time before he feels they enters their prime. The other sources for leads on wines that are in your wheelhouse for drinking young are, of course, our own BWE brethren and folks who post TNs on CT and elsewhere, once you get to know their preferences.

Regarding #2, there's Loire Cab Franc. Not as sexy, reputation-wise, as Bordeaux. But I'm assuming it's the pleasure in the glass and sharing with others that is most important.

And for #3, I still think that many of these ripe wines will develop classic aged Bordeaux characteristics. Not as many as I might have thought before, but many. I sense that you get the greatest enjoyment out of these wines on the young side, though, so perhaps this would not be a satisfactory solution. Plus it requires a large investment of time and money.

All that said, to respond to your point about sheep: I have no disagreement with the argument that there's been a style shift to riper, higher alcohol wines. Nor do I disagree with the argument that high points from Parker increases interest, sales, and prices on the retail end and the effect of that moves back up the chain to motivate owners to create wines in a style that garners high points. I do have trouble believing that Parker has continued, for the last 15-20+ years, to convince the majority of the Bordeaux-buying public to keep buying wines they don't actually like. At some point people open and drink these wines. If their preferences differ from yours, it doesn't necessarily follow that they are mindless sheep. Some may be, but a blanket statement accusing the majority of them is an elitist and insulting stereotype.

[JimHow]

I'm sure there are many out there who trust their own palates, Jeff.
I personally believe many like particular wines because He says its so.
(Read: Cellartracker and Squires.)

I keep reading people say that many tasters made similar comments about 1982 upon release.
I know there were some skeptics about 1982 early on, but I've never heard specific details about what their concerns were.
I wasn't drinking wine in 1982 so I don't know.
But those wines weren't 13.5, 14, 14.5, 15% alcohol levels.
They were 12.5%.
Heck, I've seen Bordeaux labels with 11%!

I think most of the people on this site, yourself included, became passionate about Bordeaux in the first place because of the stuff being produced in the 90s ("Bordeaux this young isn't supposed to taste this good!" exclaimed James Suckling in that famous WS issue from 1997ish), the "golden decade of the 80s," and on back.
Heck, I created BWE in February 2000, because I was obsessed with what I was tasting coming out of Bordeaux from the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.

I keep hearing Bordeaux is struggling in the global market. Other than the $300+ wines of the One Percent, why is the rest of Bordeaux struggling in the global market? I realize other wine regions are making more popular, internationally-appealing wines, but still....
It seems to me that Bourgogne has been doing just fine without selling its soul like Bordeaux has.
Oh wait... Parker doesn't cover Burgundy.

And as for the sheep, hey, far be it for me to criticize anyone and tell them what they like. But I think Parker has led consumers in a direction, and his influence has pushed the winemakers to alter their products accordingly. In some cases His influence has been good. In other cases, in my opinion, it has been very bad.

[JimHow]

David: Reading the last paragraph of your note:

Okay, at least you agree that there's been a shift to riper, higher alcohol wines.
By the way, can somebody tell me why "higher alcohol" is a good thing?
What is it about a 14.5% alcohol level that makes it "better" than 12.5%?

You also agree that the winemakers are "motivated" to make wines that garner higher points.
Now in some cases this may or may not be good. Better grape selection, de-stemming, and all that....
But at what point does "good winemaking" turn into "manipulation"?

You say you have trouble believing Parker has been convincing people to buy wines they don't like.
I wonder why Carruades sells for $300+? It must be because it is soooo gooood!

I think the wine snob crowd that follows Parkers points like a religion is much more elitist than someone who actually dares to raise a lonely question among the masses every now and then, David. To say that that Squires crowd are the victims of elitism and snobbery is beyond laughable.

[Jeff Leve]

By the way, can somebody tell me why "higher alcohol" is a good thing?
What is it about a 14.5% alcohol level that makes it "better" than 12.5%?

Higher alcohol means more sweetness which comes from riper fruit. The goal today, when possible is to obtain phenolically ripe fruit. This means that more than just the pulp is ripe. The skins, seeds and in the best years, the stems are ripe as well.

But at what point does "good winemaking" turn into "manipulation"?

What is manipulation? IMO, it's a silly term anit Parker folks toss out far too often without thinking. Please list wines that you have tasted that are manipulated and let me know what they did to manipulate the wine.

I think the wine snob crowd that follows Parkers points like a religion is much more elitist than someone who actually dares to raise a lonely question among the masses every now and then

Come on, give me a break. What about all the people who have never tasted many, if any of the high scoring Parker wines, yet they think they are manipulated, not worthy, etc, simply because Parker likes them?

[stefan]

I was drinking wine long before the 1982s came out. The critics I read liked them, although some wondered how long lived they would be because of the high fruit and relatively low acid. RP raved about them. My only problem with them was that they were expensive relative to my income at the time.

I don't recall any major criticism of the 1989 and 1990 Bdx.

1986 was over praised, I think. I personally like many 1986s, but they were very slow to come around and on some the fruit is not sufficient to balance the still hard tannins. It is not a surprise to me that pomerollover is not a fan of 1986.

IMO, the alcohol level of Bdx made today is too high. Like Jim, I think these modern wines would be better at 12.5% alcohol. No doubt we are in the minority as the trend world wide is to make high alcohol wine.

[JimHow]

I guess Bordeaux wine makers have done nothing to produce wines with 14.5% alcohol levels Jeff, it just happened naturally.
I'm surprised you don't like the southern Rhone, those wines come in at 14.5-15% every year!
But I wonder how 1982 Mouton and 1989 Haut Brion and the 1961 Ducru we had in Boston once (I think that was actually 12%) ever produced anything of note at only 12.5%.
I mean, La Fleur de Bouard has 2% higher alcohol than the Moutons, Margauxs, and Lynch Bages of the '80s.
If that "sweetness" in the 2009 La Fleur de Bouard and La Tour Carnet and La Vielle Cure is what makes for great Bordeaux nowadays, I'll take the oldies but goodies, thank you.
I'm assuming you became passionate about Bordeaux before 2000, no?
Before you said "thank goodness" when I said they don't make 'em like they used to.
If those lower alcohol wines of the golden decade of the 1980s were so terrible, what WAS the reason you became passionate about Bordeaux before 2000?
"Higher alcohol means more sweetness which comes from riper fruit...."
Doesn't higher alcohol also often mean more heat?
Doesn't it often mean less balance?
And more volatility?
And less age-worthiness?

[Jeff Leve]

[quote="JimHow"]I'm surprised you don't like the southern Rhone, those wines come in at 14.5-15% every year![/qoute]

I am a huge fan of Chateauneuf du Pape. I own them, drink them, buy them and visit the region.

La Fleur de Bouard has 2% higher alcohol than the Moutons, Margauxs, and Lynch Bages of the '80s.

What is your point? La Fleur de Bouard is Merlot. The other wines are Cabernet Sauvignon. Cabernet Sauvignon ripens at a much lower degree of alcohol than Merlot.

If that "sweetness" in the 2009 La Fleur de Bouard and La Tour Carnet and La Vielle Cure is what makes for great Bordeaux nowadays, I'll take the oldies but goodies, thank you.

As I have mentioned time and time again, you cannot judge a vintage on a few samples, especially from the lower end of the spectrum. To compare apples with apples, you need to taste Mouton, Lynch Bages and Haut Brion being made today to compare it with its previous vintages. FWIW, I am not a big fan of La Tour Carnet, but I really like Vieille Cure and La Fleur de Bouard. If you want to use those wines as an example, you will need to compare them with older vintages of the same wine, or at least the same region. Have you ever tasted those wines from previous vintages?

I'm assuming you became passionate about Bordeaux before 2000, no? Before you said "thank goodness" when I said they don't make 'em like they used to.
If those lower alcohol wines of the golden decade of the 1980s were so terrible, what WAS the reason you became passionate about Bordeaux before 2000?

That is not the point and you know it. I've tasted a lot of wine from the 20's forward as well as a moderate amount of wine from the century before that. Bordeaux, as well as most of the world's top wines are better today. You do not have to agree. But that is a simple truth. The wines are cleaner, offer more purity of fruit, better textures, more freshness, depth and complexity. They will age differently, but just as long in the same types of vintages. Why you think the wines will not age is beyond me. In fact, why don't you think the wines will age? Plus, wines from all appellations are making quality wine today, it is not only left to the top estates to produce good wine. In part, the improvement is from using phenolically riper fruit. It is also due to better selection, stringent sorting and a clearer understanding of the vineyards and new technology in the cellar.

Now, if we are going to have a fair conversation, how about answering the questions I posed, instead of just asking more? Fair is fair.

Q: What is manipulation?

Q:. Please list wines that you have tasted that are manipulated and let me know what they did to manipulate the wine.

Q: Why don't you think the wines will age?

Let's start here...

[JimHow]

You are focusing on my use of the word "manipulation."
As far as I know, the only time I used the word manipulation in this thread is when I asked David, at what point does "good winemaking" become "manipulation"?
I didn't claim to know what manipulation is.
In fact, I was basically asking David what manipulation is.
Are you saying that's a term Robert Parker has never used?
Is it Robert Parker's belief that a wine has never been "manipulated"?
If I find a time when Robert Parker used the term "manipulated" in describing a wine, will you concede that Robert Parker doesn't know what he is talking about?
Have you never used the term manipulated to describe a wine?
I personally don't know when leaving the good grapes in and taking out the stems and cropping the bunches and trimming the leaves and over-extracting and vacuuming out the water and all the hundreds of other things that modern winemakers do today that they didn't do as recently as "the golden decade of the eighties" crosses over from "good winemaking" to "manipulation," with its ominous connotations.
We've had this discussion before about SHL. Many of us think SHL has become more "modern," but that it has captured the "good" things about modern winemaking rather than going "over the top."
And I think the wines of the Medoc are coming in at 1%-2% higher alcohol levels than they were as recently as the Parker-acclaimed "golden age of the eighties," I don't think it is just the merlots.
As for judging vintages "from a few samples," at the "lower end of the spectrum": Well, sadly, for most of us, the upper end of the spectrum has become completely irrelevant. So I'm never going to be able to judge a vintage based on how the Latours and Petruses performed, or even the Pontet Canets and Pape Clements, for that matter. So I'm stuck with drinking the de Fieuzals and Larrivet Haut Brions and Haut Bergeys in making my assessments.
"It is the simple truth" that Bordeaux of today is better. Well I say "it is simple truth" that the Lynches produced in the 1980s are better than those of the 2000s.
We've gone from "the golden decade of Bordeaux" in the 1980s to "the controversial decade of Bordeaux" today.
I'm glad you've been able to find some decent wines from the 20th century and even the pre-phylloxera era.
I take it you must be stocking up on Aussie wines these days?

[JimHow]

But, of course, I respect your right to think that 2009 is a "great" vintage. <rolls eyes>
Kidding!
I brought a bunch of 2009s to a lawyer holiday party the other night.
They were a big hit!
Then again, they were all beer drinkers....

[Chateau Vin]

No doubt there is a shift in higher alcohol levels in the past couple of decades. I think J&J are both correct in their own ways...

Jeff, I think you are correct that today's higher alcoholic levels are due to viticulture and viniculture practices that changed over the years...Mostly better sorting and picking times etc. which translated into juice with better concentrations. In olden times lower level fruit that was unripe (both sugar level and tannin level wise) was also part of the wine, thus creating lower alcoholic levels. Now with the selection process, better concentration levels of sugars and ripe tannin levels have become a norm. These higher sugar levels naturally means higher alcohol...

Jim, I also agree (I disagree with Jeff if he is saying that there is none) that there is a bit of manipulation on winemakers' part these days to make wines that are more fruity with higher alcohol levels. It's just the nature of business, not because of anything else but due to pure incentives...(I was told by atleast two small producers in Bdx that these days more modern wines do garner scores especially from us based wine raters/magazines and they seem to be ok with making wines like that). I also think that the US consumers' palate has a role in this IMO. After all, US is a big market especially before the far east came onto the scene...As we know, the weather in the US is different (rather more warmer) than Bdx, and US producers' wines are overall riper with higher alcohol levels naturally. And the US consumer is more accustomed to it. And so, the incentives are already there for the Bordelaise to go that way. But luckily, so far with improved technology, the quality of Bdx improved even though the alc levels increased.

Doesn't higher alcohol also often mean more heat?
Doesn't it often mean less balance?
And more volatility?
And less age-worthiness?

As per the comment about which is better 14.5 alc or 12.5 alc, IMO, it all depends...IMO, the most important thing is the balance...If the 14.5 alc wines have good core of fruit, (if not good amount of acid), mature tannins and are well balanced, that's fine. With less alc levels, if it has good acid, tannins and decent fruit, that's fine too. But I think overall the wine quality in Bdx improved over the past decade or more.

I think most of us agree that the overall wine quality in Bdx increased. We also agree that the overall alc levels also increased. So higher alcohol levels always do not mean lower quality. But I also disagree with Jeff in that Higher alcohol does not always mean more sweetness which comes from riper fruit. Higher alcohol also comes from producers going overboard in fermentation at the expense of fruit, thus making some wines flabby. Although I agree with Jim that some chateaux are producing wines with high alc, extracted and out of balance. May be because the lower tier chateaux do not have enough resources to take advantage of technology to find that fine balance between alc level and quality. (For the record, I personally like 12-13 alc levels, but I think I am willing to overlook higher alc levels IF the other elements are there and the wine is well balanced ).


Here is an article worth reading....

http://www.wine-searcher.com/m/2013/05/ ... hol-levels

[Jeff Leve]

I take it you must be stocking up on Aussie wines these days?

Now you've gone too far! I'd almost rather have dinner with Alex R than own Aussie wines. Notice I said almost, but it was a close call

You are focusing on my use of the word "manipulation." As far as I know, the only time I used the word manipulation in this thread is when I asked David, at what point does "good winemaking" become "manipulation"? I didn't claim to know what manipulation is.

Jim, for a man that uses words for a living, that is a not very convincing argument! If you do not know what manipulation is, why would ask that question? By inference you are clearly stating your leanings, especially when coupled with your other numerous posts in this and other threads.

Is it Robert Parker's belief that a wine has never been "manipulated"?

How would I know? Subscribe, post on his board and ask him.

Are you saying that's a term Robert Parker has never used?

Once again, how would I know? In the name of science, I searched for the terms manipulate and manipulation and those terms are used about 150 times. For the record, they are never used in any tasting note about Bordeaux.

If I find a time when Robert Parker used the term "manipulated" in describing a wine, will you concede that Robert Parker doesn't know what he is talking about?

We are talking about you, not Parker What a silly query.

Have you never used the term manipulated to describe a wine?

No.

Many of us think SHL has become more "modern," but that it has captured the "good" things about modern winemaking rather than going "over the top."

Have you tasted many vintages of Smith Haut Lafite before the new owners took over? They would be pre 1990. Can you honestly tell me those wines are better than what is being produced today?

I think the wines of the Medoc are coming in at 1%-2% higher alcohol levels than they were as recently as the Parker-acclaimed "golden age of the eighties," I don't think it is just the merlots.

What specific wines are you referring to?

As for judging vintages ...Well, sadly, for most of us, the upper end of the spectrum has become completely irrelevant.

Regardless of your interest in spending or not spending that much money, without the experience of actually tasting a wine, you cannot make a sound judgment on it, or wines like it, without having tasted them. I cannot afford a new Aston Martin or Ferrari, but that does not mean I should make a claim that all cars drive the way they do without driving a wide array of cars including the best cars out there.

[Jeff Leve]

also disagree with Jeff in that Higher alcohol does not always mean more sweetness which comes from riper fruit. Higher alcohol also comes from producers going overboard in fermentation at the expense of fruit, thus making some wines flabby.

Huh? Once the fermentation has stopped, how do you add more alcohol? I think you can remove alcohol and excess water, but I am not sure you can add more alcohol to the wine.

[Chateau Vin]

Huh? Once the fermentation has stopped, how do you add more alcohol? I think you can remove alcohol and excess water, but I am not sure you can add more alcohol to the wine.

What I meant was the point where the fermentation is stopped can be moved around to get higher/lower alcohol levels, and some chateaux are stopping fermentation at later times, thus producing more alcohol...

[stefan]

A winemaker certainly can increase alcohol, Jeff. Keep the fermentation going. Add some sugar. Yeast eats sugar. Yeast pisses alcohol.

Or increase concentration by removing water but not alcohol.

Or a consumer who loves alcoholic wines can just add a bit of everclear. I think that AOC rules prevent winemakers from doing that, but I could be wrong.

Winemakers can choose to make their wines more or less alcoholic or adjust the alcohol level by "manipulation" or "winemaking technique". Consumers these days seem to prefer higher alcohol in their wines--that is why wines are more alcoholic than previously.

[Jeff Leve]

Huh? Once the fermentation has stopped, how do you add more alcohol? I think you can remove alcohol and excess water, but I am not sure you can add more alcohol to the wine.

What I meant was the point where the fermentation is stopped can be moved around to get higher/lower alcohol levels, and some chateaux are stopping fermentation at later times, thus producing more alcohol...

You probably need to ask a winemaker, but I am not sure that is what takes place. Fermentation is done when it's finished, meaning when the sugars have been fermented into alcohol. You can by reducing temperatures stop the process , which makes the wine will be sweeter, which happens with dessert wine. But with dry wine, it is what it is based on the levels of sugars in the grapes. The higher the sugar levels, the higher the alcohol levels. Of course I am aware that there are times when additional sugar is needed to get the process going, for example, chaptalization took place at numerous estates with the 2013 vintage and possibly in years like 2011. But in a normal year, when the fruit is ripe and there is ample sugar levels, I do not think that takes place. I am not even sure what French AOC law is on adding sugar if there is ample levels of sugar in the fruit.

In the years that are already quite ripe, I do not think many if any serious producers would want to add additional sugar levels as their ABV was already be sufficent.

However, if you know of any producers that practice this, who are they? I think in Bordeaux that estates wanting to use chapalization need to ask permission or inform the AOC, or “Producers who wish to enrich their wines by sucrage, by adding concentrated must, or by concentration by cold treatment (congélation) must deposit a declaration of enrichment at the local office of the Customs in Bordeaux office.

[stefan]

Sure, but there are winemaking techniques to adjust the alcohol level. I verified this with Paul Draper at a trade reception in Houston. He knows as much as anyone about producing wines with a range of alcohol.

[Chateau Vin]

You probably need to ask a winemaker, but I am not sure that is what takes place. Fermentation is done when it's finished, meaning when the sugars have been fermented into alcohol. You can by reducing temperatures stop the process , which makes the wine will be sweeter, which happens with dessert wine. But with dry wine, it is what it is based on the levels of sugars in the grapes. The higher the sugar levels, the higher the alcohol levels.

As far as I know there is some residual sugar in reds/whites, although at very lower levels and in no way closer to the level of demi sec wines. In fortified wines, you pretty much go the distance (and more by adding some) but not in the whites/reds. At least that's what I gathered from my course. I will check and if it's otherwise, I will stand corrected...

Jeff, I will be attending the UGC chicago in coming Jan. I remember reading your notes on the 2011 right bankers, esp pomerol. Am looking forward to enjoying the event...And check out the right bankers...

[JimHow]

I think some Aussies and Amarones get up to very sweet 16% levels.
Of course I understand what the word manipulation means.
I'm not sure I understand what it means relative to winemaking.
I manipulate my cholesterol with drugs and diet.
Some baseball players manipulate their ability to hit a home run with steroids.
Some people manipulate their hair color.
Or their sex life with Viagra.
So in a sense picking out the unripe grapes is manipulation.
And plucking the stems, etc.
I go back to what Pomilion said at the beginning:
Figeac is so different ("manipulated"?) that he doesn't even recognize it anymore.
Personally, I loved the 82, 90, and other Figeacs of the 80s and 90s.
I don't know about the SHLs of the 80s, I don't know if I've drunk any.
I liked the SHLs of the 1990s and the 2000s.
I can tell you, though, there are many out there who would rather have a 1982 Pavie than a Pavie post 1997.
Surely Bordeaux had SOMETHING going for it before 2000.
Thomas Jefferson obsessed over them over two centuries ago.
The Nazis seized them, presumably because they were good.
All before Robert Parker was born.

[Chateau Vin]

Jeff, Yep. I don't think chaptalization is allowed in Bordeaux. But surely, they can stop fermentation whenever they want as long as the min required alc level is achieved as per appellation laws. And I think CDP has one of the most strict appellation laws and is not allowed. However, it is allowed in Burgundy, but with strings attached...

[Jeff Leve]

Jeff, Yep. I don't think chaptalization is allowed in Bordeaux.

It is allowed. It was widely used in 2013. But I do not think it is common.

But surely, they can stop fermentation whenever they want as long as the min required alc level is achieved as per appellation laws.

But you would not want to do that. Your wine would be lower in alcohol, sweeter and you could have wines that end up fermenting in the bottle.

Jim... You win I cannot even follow your logic, or lack of logic on this one.

[DavidG]

Holy cow, I can't keep up with you guys. Don't you have to work?

Jim - sadly, I am not King of Bordeaux. If I were, they would be making 12.5% ABV wine that tastes as ripe and lush in its youth as 14% ABV wine and ages over 10-30 years into that same magical stuff that I originally fell in love with. I could drink more of it, enjoy more of it, and get less buzzed from it.

I wont get into the definition of "manipulation" other than to say I don't really care what they do to it as long as it isn't unhealthy and it results in a better wine. We could have a lengthy discussion of the meaning of better but suffice it to say that I am a believer in stylistic variations for different palates. Something for everyone. I'm not beholden to any historical concept of how Bdx should get there process-wise or how it should taste along the way as long as it ends up with a reasonable resemblance to aged Bdx. If it tastes lush and sweet in its youth I don't care, because I don't plan to consume it in its youth. But if it ages like Cali cabs, I'll be pissed. So far so good.

Costs: I think there is more to costs than just Parker. Carruades costs $300 due to snob appeal, sure. It says Lafite on the label and the Chinese went big for that, so I think that's a situation that had nothing to do with Parker. In fact, I just popped over to eRP and I see that Carruades never cracked the RP95 barrier, so it isn't expensive because of Parker. I don't understand why it hasn't crashed back to earth with the decline in Chinese interest - maybe it has come down some? I know Lafite isn't at the highs it once was but it's still ridiculous. I'm not happy about prices on my favorites going up. I can't afford Haut Brion any more and Angelus is in nosebleed territory. I don't think Parker is responsible for that either. They are great wines that are in limited supply in a global instant-knowledge marketplace with ever-increasing demand. That's why prices went up. If it weren't Parker, someone else would have become the arbiter for what is best. And in many cases, there is enough agreement among the general public (or the mindless sheep) about what is best to drive prices up based on supply and demand. I haven't had time to read all of Jeff's responses here but I bet this is pretty close to how he feels.

[RDD]

Jeff, Yep. I don't think chaptalization is allowed in Bordeaux. But surely, they can stop fermentation whenever they want as long as the min required alc level is achieved as per appellation laws. And I think CDP has one of the most strict appellation laws and is not allowed. However, it is allowed in Burgundy, but with strings attached...

Chaptalization is allowed in Bordeaux . But not really needed much in these warmer climates and higher sugar levels.

There are a million ways to control and regulate fermentation.
The most important factor being the yeast used.
And in that vein almost all wines can be considered manipulated as campden tablets are used to kill wild yeast (and other methods) and then the must is inoculated with commercial strains of yeast.
This makes the fermentation more predictable.

So the crux is what scientific techniques improve wine making.
Since there are no scientific standards for taste it is all opinion.

[JimHow]

It has gotten so bad, the world of wine has become so Parkerized, that a man gets ridiculed because he says he prefers the restrained 12.5% alcohol clarets enjoyed by generations over several centuries, until things changed dramatically in the past 15 years or so. Hopefully some day we'll be able to identify the difference between a 2009 Figeac and a Cali cab, even IF it is one of the favorites at the UGC tasting.

[Chateau Vin]

As we all agree that sorting/picking has improved a lot, the chateaux are able to pick the best grape with good concentrations of sugar levels, therefore not needing to add more sugar (but there may be situations due to weather etc. where it might be warranted)...But if they have to file a report when they want to follow chaptalization process for their wine, is this information not for public records?

[JimHow]

Some 2009 left bank alcohol contents:

Cos d'Estournel: 14.5%
Ducru: 13.5%
Haut Bailly: 14%
Haut Brion: 14.3%
d'Issan: 13.7%
Lafite: 13.59%
Latour: 14%
Les Forts: 13.5%
LLC: 13.8%
Leoville Poyferre: 14%
Lynch Bages: 13.5%
La Mission: 15%
Montrose 13.7%
Palmer: 14%
Pontet Canet: 14%

[Nicklasss]

The future of Bordeaux is made of wines at 14% or more alcohol, mixture of Merlot and Grenache like Thunevin Baby Bad Boy, so rich in fruit-alcohol-fat-terroir-oak, that it is only the so rich people that will be able to afford.

2010 Château Tournefeuille, Lalande-de-Pomerol, 15% alcohol.
2010 Château de Beaucastel red, Chateauneuf-du-Pape, 14,5% alcohol.

Soon coming, the Cask Strength Bordeaux, at 17% alcohol.

Thick, sweet, syrupy, like Coca Cola soon. Some CO2 will be left for freshness.

The 80's and 90's Bordeaux time are over, welcome to the 00's, Bordeaux wines that will drink well with bacon dip in chocolate, or fried Mars chocolate bar.

The grape and juice will be concentrated, just like the melanome on your skin when you go to artificial tanning machine, more alcool is good for you, a bit like more THC in marijuana.

One day soon, Bordeaux with 20 % alcohol, but no heat in the final, balanced super ripe jammy perfection, as nanoparticules of flavors are now added to produced that super Bordeaux from the "never seen before" 2022 vintage, THE REAL vintage of the last hundreds years... 2022 Château Tournefeuille at 295$, a bargain for a Parker 98+ wine...

I'm stoping here, give me a headache.

Nic

[JimHow]

Ha ha Nic I've actually been writing a dystopian short story about a wine club set 40 years into the future not too far off from what you have described...

[JimHow]

Some 2010 left bank alcohol levels from that vintage that is supposedly a "JimHow Kind of Vintage":

Clerc Milon: 14.5% ("quite high for a Medoc" He says)
Cos d'Estournel: 14.5%
Ducru: 14%
Haut Brion: 14.6%
d'Issan: 13.7%
Lafite: 13.32% ("relatively high alcohol," according to Charles Chevalier)
Latour: 14.4%
Les Forts: 14.3%
LLC: 13.7%
Margaux: A "heady" 13.5%
La Mission: 15.1% !!!!!!
Mouton: 13.9%
Palmer: 14.5%
Pontet Canet: 15%


La Mission and Pontet Canet at 15%.... Okkaaay...

[Jeff Leve]

Some 2009 left bank alcohol contents:

Cos d'Estournel: 14.5%
Ducru: 13.5%
Haut Bailly: 14%
Haut Brion: 14.3%
d'Issan: 13.7%
Lafite: 13.59%
Latour: 14%
Les Forts: 13.5%
LLC: 13.8%
Leoville Poyferre: 14%
Lynch Bages: 13.5%
La Mission: 15%
Montrose 13.7%
Palmer: 14%
Pontet Canet: 14%

Jim... What is your point? How many of these wines have you tasted? Did you like them or not? Or are you basing your judgment on a wine based on what is printed on the label? FWIW, I have tasted each of these wines 2-4 times.

[Rudi Finkler]

...“It seems to me that Bourgogne has been doing just fine without selling its soul like Bordeaux has.
Oh wait... Parker doesn't cover Burgundy.”...

...“It has gotten so bad, the world of wine has become so Parkerized, that a man gets ridiculed because he says he prefers the restrained 12.5% alcohol clarets enjoyed by generations over several centuries, until things changed dramatically in the past 15 years or so.”...

Indeed, Jim, the sad truth is that too many Bordeaux winemakers don’t show respect for their own traditions and no respect for the traditional groups of buyers. More and more, their grotesquely unbalanced wines become interchangeable at will. That’s a shame! BTW, in hundred years, the master wine forgers will have an easy job.
Jim, the Bordeaux winemakers are the ones who are responsible for the disaster, not one single overrated critic.
Here in Germany or France, most people who I know have an insurmountable aversion to 14+ % alcohol red Bordeaux. Such taste preferences are not negotiable. Some people can’t get their heads round it. Who cares?

[Nicklasss]

More is better, modernity better than the past, but not best than what future will bring.

So concentrated orange juice is better than freshly pressed, mass production beef better than little farmed beef, new bands that I don't even know the names better than the Beatles or Elvis Presley, modern painting better than Monet or Rembrandt, glucose-fructose better than honey or other natural sugar, frozen meals better than your mother meals...

So Jim, what's your argument now? Have you consummed these modern things?

Nic

[JimHow]

Rudi, we know Americans love the sweetness of these 14%-16% "Bordeaux" wines.
What has been the reaction in Europe?