Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts

2001: Initially lots of tar on the nose and palate, but that blew off/faded after a few moments. What a beautiful wine. Deep red in colour (none of the neonic purple) with a small measure of bricking. Once settled after opening the nose was really pretty: dark berries, plums, licorice, spice, some floral notes. But the palate is where this wine lives. Beautifully balanced between acids, tannins, and alcohol. Nice grip on the back end, neither hot nor bright. Acids and alcohol are in check with the tannins. Nice silky mouth feel, buy not gooey or syrupy. Retaining that lightness in the mouth -- Bdx is the butter in a wine world filled with oleo! On the palate: black fruits, forest floor, tobacco, cedar, truffle, a measure of violets and a touch of the powder of cocoa. Ya the oak is in there, but it's nicely integrated, not burying it. This is drinking nicely right now, but is in no hurry. Hey, only 12.5%! Sorry Jeff!

2004: More tannic and tighter than the 01. Still, you can tell it's a very good wine. A beauty of a nose. En bouche, it's better the next day, more open. Dark berries, cedar, graphite, earth, something like white lilies, musk, chinese all-spice. This is also very nice but needs more time.

Both of these are gorgeous wines, but I'd leave the 04 for a few years yet. Go for the 01 if you've got them and you're desperate for a bottle of Palmer, but they're no where near their end, of course. Both are rich wines without being gooey or alcoholic or too tannic. In other words, these are nicely balanced, sophisticated wines. Palmer, of course!

The seal of approval of wine gods everywhere.

Haven't had a Palmer in 20 years-not sure why but over that time I'm not sure it has gotten the attention of other great properties. Or maybe I'm reading the wrong stuff. Good report.

Nice notes Bacchus...makes my mouth water...if Palmer is not a first growth standard it must be pretty close and therefore a good value for money. In my book Palmer has stronger first growth credentials than any super second, and maybe second in the hypothetical pecking order after LMHB?

At least through the 1980's and 1990's, I think Palmer didn't get the attention of other "super seconds" because it wasn't nearly as consistent as say Pichon Lalande or Leoville Las Cases. The hits were home runs but the wine seemed overpriced most years.

I think that changed after around 1996 Tom, and by 1998/99 Palmer had pulled ahead of the SSs