2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post Reply
User avatar
Musigny 151
Posts: 1258
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:06 pm
Contact:

2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Musigny 151 »

I saw the La Lagune 2010 thread, and was surprised to see that 2010 vintage as a whole is so highly regarded. It is strange for me to feel the need to say anything negative about it, as among the people I taste with, both in Bordeaux and New York, my take on the vintage is probably the most positive of all. Yet it has faults, it is very alcoholic, tannins are even higher than the record levels of 2009, acidity is also high. This is a large scaled vintage, it's not got much elegance or finesse, and particularly on the right bank, the alcohol levels are disturbing. Merlot got very ripe in 2010, Troplong Mondot is nearly 17 %, and even Canon, usually one of the most restrained of the wines of St. Emilion tipped the scale over 15.5. Pomerols were better (Lafleur was magnificent),Graves patchy (La Mission despite the great reviews will struggle with alcohol over 16%) and the wines from the Medoc are very good indeed, but there were only a few properties where I felt the 2010s were better than the 2005s. Montrose and Pichon Lalande possibly, Ducru certainly and Palmer made the best young wine I have ever had from the estate. However, none of the first growths were as good as their 2005 counterparts.

Overall, it is a vintage that I have been very careful in what I recommend and what I have purchased. It's also a vintage that I would strongly suggest looking at actuarial tables, as this is one for the long term.
Last edited by Musigny 151 on Sat Jul 12, 2014 12:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Claret
Posts: 1143
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:16 pm
Location: Reno, NV
Contact:

Re: 2010 is very definitely not the greatest vintage ever in Bor

Post by Claret »

This should get interesting.

I have not tasted any 2010's so I have no opinion.
Glenn
User avatar
Harry C.
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:00 am
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Harry C. »

Patience, Grasshopper, patience.
User avatar
Comte Flaneur
Posts: 4863
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:05 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Comte Flaneur »

All valid points Mark - I assume that it is you Mark.

Also if you bought EP as I did you would be 20-30% underwater.

But I am pretty confident about this vintage based on what I have tried.

Yes the alcohol levels are very high on the right bank, but there are some gems and arguably best ever wines there too.

On the left bank I think several estates may have made their best ever wines.

Notwithstanding generalisations about vintages I am certain that 2010 is superior to 2009 - Alex would disagree - but 2005 may turn out even better. It may take a long time to find out.
User avatar
Musigny 151
Posts: 1258
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Musigny 151 »

Yes, it is me.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying it's a bad vintage, in fact I I think it is a very good, with pockets of greatness, but definitely areas which are very problematic. It is certainly not as homogenous as some of the great vintages of the past, which immediately it disqualifies from being among the greatest ever vintages. The hallmark of 1961, 1982, 2000 and 2005 was that they were almost no weak areas.

I can say that for me, the 2005 in general was much better vintage overall, the balance better and the wines had an elegance which was relatively rare for 2010s. Those that have it, tend to be quite elegant anyway; Ducru, Beychevelle, Branaire, La Lagune, Rauzan Segla and Palmer. If you pick carefully, you will do very well with the wines, but I suspect you will see a few more fire sales before the prices start to climb.
User avatar
Comte Flaneur
Posts: 4863
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:05 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Comte Flaneur »

I think you are really wide of the mark there Mark.

Are you suggesting that 2010 is weak on the right bank or in Graves? I don't think you will find anybody else agreeing with you on that.

Yes there are one or two wines with very high alcohol, one or two tasted a bit unbalanced. But I find the wines generally impeccably balanced, generally better balanced than the 2009s and fresher.

2010 is a long way ahead of 2000 in my opinion, which has turned out to be a difficult vintage. The tannins are much more refined on the 2010s.

Yes the 2000s will come around eventually, but there was too much hype around this vintage. The 2001s are generally a much better bet.

You maybe right about 2005 turning out to be the better vintage than 2010 but it is a bit early to make definitive judgements.
User avatar
Musigny 151
Posts: 1258
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Musigny 151 »

I was very careful with the words I wrote. I did not use the word "weak"; Graves was as I said "patchy" again better in 2009, with some excellent wines, but also some like La Mission which I am not convinced by. I also did not think the word "weak" applied to the Right Bank as a whole, but there quite a few people agreeing with me on the St. Emilions; most estates struggled to get ripe grapes without being overly alcoholic, and I can't think of an estate there that made a great wine in 2010, and even the best wines (arguably Cheval, Ausone and Angelus) were less successful than 2009. Pomerol OTOH did make much more restrained wines, and overall I felt it was a very successful vintage there.

I think your comments about 2000 are particularly interesting; I have begun drinking a few "lesser" wines such as Du Tertre, La Louviere etc and they have been really delicious. I like many of of the 2001 Right Bank wines, but the few left bank wines I have tasted recently have been pleasant, but don't have the concentration and interest of 2000.
User avatar
Nicklasss
Posts: 6384
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 5:25 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Nicklasss »

Last night, with JimHow, the 2010 Château la Providençe was very good and definitely Pomerol taste, but yes the alcohol was a bit too showy. But it is a very young wine. I opened the bottle in the morning, decanted two time and pour it back in the bottle, left open for the day. We taste it by 7:00 PM.

The 2000 Château Lynch Bages was very very excellent, with lots of Pauillac character, and cassis Cab Sauvignon. Still many years to go.

I will post more detailled comments tomorrow.

Nic
User avatar
stefan
Posts: 6224
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: College Station, TX
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by stefan »

I usually agree with Ian's opinions, but this time my view is much closer to Mark's on the older vintages (i have yet to taste any serious 2010 Bordeaux).

I think 2000 will be very good. As Mark mentioned, Du Tertre is delicious, and I am not surprised that La Louviere is also very good (but I have not drunk it).

I bought two cases of 2000 Meyney on futures ($20!) and tasted one bottle when it arrived. I returned the second unopened case as I thought the wine was weak. A few days ago Lucie and I drank a bottle of the Meyney. It has developed very nicely. The bouquet is inviting and the blackberry fruit is strong enough to offset the tannins. I doubt that it will become as good as the '89 Meyney, but I am sorry that I don't have that second case.

2001 right bank wines are mostly very good for drinking now. I am not a big fan of 2001 left bank wines. Good, to be sure, but they are mostly luncheon clarets. I prefer 2002 left bankers.
User avatar
greatbxfreak
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:09 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by greatbxfreak »

I certainly don't agree with Mark.

I would say: 2010 is the greatest vintage since 1961 in Bordeaux.

1982 - big harvest, many excellent wines, nobody had at that time vats with cooling system, so they ordered ice blocks packed in plastic sheets to put these in the must. No control of phenolic ripeness.

2000 - more modern than 1982 in terms of equipment, better selection on the arrival of graves or even in the vineyard. Better phenolic ripeness.

2005 - beautiful vintage, winemakers said this vintage was extremely easy to work with, no diseases, perfect ripeness inside and outside grapes which happened at same time, perfectly ripe tannin. Beautiful all over Bordeaux.

2009 - beautiful vintage with a lot of sweetness, reminding of California, please note that there was a gap in maturity of grapes as phenolic ripeness happened 2 weeks after ripeness inside grapes due to a lot of rain in the beginning of September. Tannins aren't that fine, ripe and fat as in 2005 and 2010. Alcohol seems to integrate more and more with fruit and it's more evident now than before.

2010 - extraordinary vintage with unseen levels of fat tannin with antioxidants (flavonoids, etc) which are good for the heart, more intensity, depth, length, richness and complexity than in 2009, ripeness happened at the same time inside and outside grapes. Easy harvest as in 2005. Alcohol with disappear with time while integrating with fruit, believe me. I tasted a lot of 2010 and 2009 side by side and 2010 has better future. To say 2010 isn't homogenous in Bordeaux, it's great sin.

Please check my report from a tasting of several 2010s less than 1 year ago - http://www.greatbordeauxwines.com/Horis ... tings.html
User avatar
brodway
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by brodway »

One thing is for sure. We will all agree to disagree. Would it not be a generalization to say that one vintage is superior to another ? Would it not be more fair to state that one winemaker had a more successful vintage than another in that particular year Reading through the messages, it seems Mark is simply saying that certain regions were adversely affected by the heat in 2010 and may have produced wine with higher alcohol content. One thing is certain, no matter how long you cellar a wine, the alcohol level won't subside as tannins do. A Bordeaux containing 14.5% alcohol will always have that burning sensation whether its primary or on the back end, and a characteristic that i suppose no one here would concur is a pleasant one. In times, where a bottle can easily fetch $75 for a 5th growth, i can't imagine any Bordeaux drinker would appreciate a whiff of alcohol on the nose or a disturbing cough medicine effect to the back of the throat. As i've personally consumed a few 2010 left bankers, where alcohol levels are contained under 13.5% (and that is my personal threshold), i have to agree with Jimmy Howe and say that there were indeed good Bordeaux made in 2010. The same holds true for 2000 and for 2005 and 2001 and 2002 and even in challenging and hot 2003 vintage as well.
User avatar
brodway
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by brodway »

greatbxfreak

any reason 1989 and 1990 are left out from your vintage chart? i think many here would argue that those vintages although different (as are the 2009 and 2010) have produced a good number of successful wines.
User avatar
brodway
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by brodway »

One correction regarding alcohol levels. 14.5% alcohol content CAN produce the burning sensation in wine, there are times that that is not the case. Rhone and CDP in particular can somehow integrate higher alcohol amounts into wines successfully. I find this to be less true in Bordeaux, however.
User avatar
Comte Flaneur
Posts: 4863
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:05 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Comte Flaneur »

Mark I take issue with your assertion that the alleged lack of consistency, in your opinion, 'immediately disqualifies it' from being among the greatest vintages. OK that's your opinion and you are entitled to it...I respectfully disagree...

Regarding St-Emilion others would disagree with you re the likes of Cheval Blanc, possibly the greatest ever, and even Angelus. Troplong Mondot has been making alcoholic monstrosities since 1990. But yes others like Grand Mayne made wines with disturbingly high alcohol. Re Graves, I think Pape Clement made its best ever wine, even though I have been a vocal critic of the Magrez-Rolland wines on this board. Many estates may have made their best ever wines in 2010, including Latour, Margaux, Palmer, Cheval Blanc, La Conseillante, Pape Clement, Leoville-Barton, The Ducrus, Gruaud-Larose, Palmer, Rauzan-Segla and probably many more.

Regarding the 2000 vintage my problem with it is that a lot of the wines have aggressive/abrasive/uncouth tannins. Sure some wines are coming round...I like Potensac...but few that I have experienced yet make pleasant drinking. The tannins on the tens and fives are much more refined. Try 2000 and 2005 Montrose side by side. The 2000 is virtually undrinkable, the 2005 is glorious. But the ten is a step up from the five. I think the template for 2000 is 1995...a very good vintage but not a really great one, which will take an age to come round. The 2001s maybe less concentrated, but concentration is not what I always look for in Bordeaux. I think you should look again at left bank 2001s: there are some outstanding wines, like Leoville-Barton. To dismiss them as luncheon clarets is a bit unfair! Stefan try Margaux and Palmer 2001...
User avatar
greatbxfreak
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:09 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by greatbxfreak »

brodway,

For me, 1989 and 1990 are not that consistent as 2000, 2005 and 2010, but saying that, some of my all time favorite wines are from these two vintages, like Angelus and Tertre Rotebouf. Angelus made some astonishing wines in 1989 and 1990, full of character and style, and direct opposite of today wines from this property, too modern and too extracted for my taste.

Mark, the easiest comparison is to taste Tertre Rotebouf 2009 and 2010 and you will find out what surpluses 2010. And just hear Francois Mitjaviles explanation. Lafleur 2010, L'Eglise Clinet 2010, Giscours 2010, Montrose 2010, VCC 2010, Palmer 2010, LMHB 2010 and Cheval Blanc 2010 are heaven on earth. :D
User avatar
Comte Flaneur
Posts: 4863
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:05 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Comte Flaneur »

greatbxfreak wrote:brodway,

For me, 1989 and 1990 are not that consistent as 2000, 2005 and 2010, but saying that, some of my all time favorite wines are from these two vintages, like Angelus and Tertre Rotebouf. Angelus made some astonishing wines in 1989 and 1990, full of character and style, and direct opposite of today wines from this property, too modern and too extracted for my taste.

Mark, the easiest comparison is to taste Tertre Rotebouf 2009 and 2010 and you will find out what surpluses 2010. And just hear Francois Mitjaviles explanation. Lafleur 2010, L'Eglise Clinet 2010, Giscours 2010, Montrose 2010, VCC 2010, Palmer 2010, LMHB 2010 and Cheval Blanc 2010 are heaven on earth. :D
Couple of questions GBF

1. What is your opinion of 2005, 2009 vs 2010 first growths including de facto FGs on the right bank like Cheval Blanc?
2. Don't you find the alcohol on LMHB '10 problematic?
User avatar
Musigny 151
Posts: 1258
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Musigny 151 »

Comte Flaneur wrote:Mark I take issue with your assertion that the alleged lack of consistency, in your opinion, 'immediately disqualifies it' from being among the greatest vintages. OK that's your opinion and you are entitled to it...I respectfully disagree...

Regarding St-Emilion others would disagree with you re the likes of Cheval Blanc, possibly the greatest ever, and even Angelus. Troplong Mondot has been making alcoholic monstrosities since 1990. But yes others like Grand Mayne made wines with disturbingly high alcohol. Re Graves, I think Pape Clement made its best ever wine, even though I have been a vocal critic of the Magrez-Rolland wines on this board. Many estates may have made their best ever wines in 2010, including Latour, Margaux, Palmer, Cheval Blanc, La Conseillante, Pape Clement, Leoville-Barton, The Ducrus, Gruaud-Larose, Palmer, Rauzan-Segla and probably many more.

Regarding the 2000 vintage my problem with it is that a lot of the wines have aggressive/abrasive/uncouth tannins. Sure some wines are coming round...I like Potensac...but few that I have experienced yet make pleasant drinking. The tannins on the tens and fives are much more refined. Try 2000 and 2005 Montrose side by side. The 2000 is virtually undrinkable, the 2005 is glorious. But the ten is a step up from the five. I think the template for 2000 is 1995...a very good vintage but not a really great one, which will take an age to come round. The 2001s maybe less concentrated, but concentration is not what I always look for in Bordeaux. I think you should look again at left bank 2001s: there are some outstanding wines, like Leoville-Barton. To dismiss them as luncheon clarets is a bit unfair! Stefan try Margaux and Palmer 2001...
I am not sure why you wouldn't think consistency important when you are looking at "best" vintages. There are plenty of vintages that were successful in every commune; many were mentioned. If there are important areas which were not as strong as they should have been, then I think it disqualifies the vintage as a whole.

Disagree with you both on Pape and Cheval Blanc; the Pape was not as overblown as I feared it would be, but it still does not contain its terroir the way young examples used to. Cheval meanwhile was a very good wine, but hardly in the same league as 2005, 2000 and 1998. Actually, ditto Angelus, except in this case I would add the 2009.

Itzhak, I'm sorry, but I am just going to say we have entirely different palates and leave it at that. You have only got to look at your score of 98 for Pavie, and know we will never agree; Pavie extracted the hell out of the wine, made an alcoholic nonsense of one of the finest terrors in St. Emilion, and the wine was nigh undrinkable.
User avatar
Musigny 151
Posts: 1258
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Musigny 151 »

Comte Flaneur wrote:
greatbxfreak wrote:brodway,

For me, 1989 and 1990 are not that consistent as 2000, 2005 and 2010, but saying that, some of my all time favorite wines are from these two vintages, like Angelus and Tertre Rotebouf. Angelus made some astonishing wines in 1989 and 1990, full of character and style, and direct opposite of today wines from this property, too modern and too extracted for my taste.

Mark, the easiest comparison is to taste Tertre Rotebouf 2009 and 2010 and you will find out what surpluses 2010. And just hear Francois Mitjaviles explanation. Lafleur 2010, L'Eglise Clinet 2010, Giscours 2010, Montrose 2010, VCC 2010, Palmer 2010, LMHB 2010 and Cheval Blanc 2010 are heaven on earth. :D
Couple of questions GBF

1. What is your opinion of 2005, 2009 vs 2010 first growths including de facto FGs on the right bank like Cheval Blanc?
2. Don't you find the alcohol on LMHB '10 problematic?
1. I thought all the first growths were extremely successful in 2005. I did not buy heavily because the prices were so high, but I have backfilled where I could.
It is a better vintage than 2009, which I think in turn is marginally better overall than 2010. I would have to go back to my notes for specifics.

2. La Mission 2010 was a wine I mentioned as being problematic because of its alcohol. I would not buy or recommend it.
User avatar
Comte Flaneur
Posts: 4863
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:05 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Comte Flaneur »

Thanks Mark, those questions were actually directed at Itzhak.

Consistency is important but I wouldn't have thought necessarily the over-riding criterion.

The 1995 vintage is consistent...good to very good across the board...but not in the same league as 2005 or 2010.
User avatar
JimHow
Posts: 20106
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Lewiston, Maine, United States
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by JimHow »

That 2010 La Providence that Nic brought the other night was 14.5%, and the alcohol was really unpleasant.
I've had some other 14-15% wines from 2010 and felt that the alcohol did not intrude.
User avatar
Carlos Delpin
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:44 pm
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Carlos Delpin »

Aren't we all a bit premature in this argument? We don't even know how the 2000's are going to turn out and we are already talking about 2005, 2009, and 2010? We can talk about vintage with the greatest potential, but greatest vintage? For now I will gladly continue drinking the 1985's that no one seems to like. Cheers.
User avatar
greatbxfreak
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:09 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by greatbxfreak »

Comte Flaneur,

I haven't tasted all 1. Growths + Cheval Blanc in bottle in 2005, 2009 and 2010. Only Haut Brion, Lafite, Latour and Mouton R in 2005, Haut Brion, Margaux Cheval Blanc and Mouton R. in 2009 and Haut Brion, Latour, Mouton R and Cheval Blanc in 2010. Here it's close call between vintages. On my website you'll find TNs concerning Cheval Blanc 2009 and 2010.

Mark, why in the world you compare Pavie 1998 to La Mission 2010?? It's completely different vinification on these estates and different approach to things. When you extract too much you extract alcohol too. I'm pretty sure alcohol will disappear from LMHB 2010. It's natural not added, so why making an issue?? Please tell me!

Carlos,

Really nobody has a clue here about how 2000 vintage will develop?? You're very late with this one. I can explain you exactly how this vintage will be in the future. I like 1985 vintage (my first harvest).

Some comments here are simply way off the common sense.
User avatar
Musigny 151
Posts: 1258
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Musigny 151 »

greatbxfreak wrote: Mark, why in the world you compare Pavie 1998 to La Mission 2010?? It's completely different vinification on these estates and different approach to things. When you extract too much you extract alcohol too. I'm pretty sure alcohol will disappear from LMHB 2010. It's natural not added, so why making an issue?? Please tell me!
Where did you get that from? I looked at your notes, and saw that you gave Pavie 2010 a score of 98 points. This was a wine that really showed what could go wrong in 2010, and I realized that based on this, and a few of your other scores, how completely different our palates are, and therefore, it makes little sense to discuss what we have tasted. But I do have a few problems with some of your assertions.

1. "When you extract too much you extract alcohol too."
Extraction has nothing to do with alcohol; it is getting more tannin, color and flavor compounds.


2." I'm pretty sure alcohol will disappear"
Where exactly do you think the alcohol will go to when it ages? Ultimately it may turn into vinegar, but that is not really something that most wine drinkers want in a wine, especially one as pricey as LMHB 2010.

Also please explain why it being naturally high in alcohol is a good thing, and finally, how a La Mission measuring 16% doesn't concern you.

But on one thing we agree:
"Some comments here are simply way off the common sense."
User avatar
greatbxfreak
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:09 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by greatbxfreak »

Mark,

I'm a chemistry technician, so please don't teach me about alcohol.

2009s tasted recently show alcohol being integrated and not as present in wines as 1-2 years ago, so why would it not happen for 2010.

16% alcohol in LMHB 2010, so what?? It's what nature gave and by the way LMHB is one of the first estates to harvest. I don't fell alcohol in LMHB 2010 as I do in Troplong Mondot 2010. And I'm pretty sure in 4-5 years it's gone (integrated).

Don't want to further discuss 2010 vintage with you. End of discussion, thank you.
User avatar
Musigny 151
Posts: 1258
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Musigny 151 »

I will not bother with the petulance, but I think it is important to answer the alcohol question.

Bordeaux produces elegant wines that reflect where they come from. Historically they struggled to make 12-12.5% , and in some vintages it was hard to achieve double digits. Their aging reflects that the wines were ripe, but barely so, but with age, they are able to "integrate," the tannins soften, and the wines take on that glorious complexity that we prize in Bordeaux.

They were never designed to be 16%, and by harvesting at these levels, you obliterate elegance, finesse, terroir and balance. You make a 16% alcohol wine, and in in four or five years time, it will be still be massively alcoholic, and the thought that you might see it integrated into the wine, is completely absurd. For my sins, I have tasted enough high octane California wines with some age to know that there was no integration, perceived alcohol was still too high, the wines were unbalanced, difficult to drink and impossible to enjoy.
User avatar
AlexR
Posts: 2373
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:35 am
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by AlexR »

Hi,

I arrived in Bordeaux in 1978 and have lived here ever since, with the exception of 2 years in Saumur.
I came here from the Napa Valley. At first, the Bordeaux wines seemed very "perfumed", but lily-livered.
The wines were 11.5 and 12% alcohol.

As time went on, I came to prefer - by and large - the balance of Bordeaux and found many New World wines clumsy
(not all, by any means!).

As the years went on, with global warming, Parkerization, what have you, some of the better wines grew stronger and stronger.
I can remember meeting someone who had tasted the 2010 Pavie en primeur. He said, "and it has 15.5% alcohol".
I found this impossible to believe, so called the château. They confirmed...

Personally, I don't like my wine that powerful, especially not my Bordeaux.
Even if - and that's a very big if - the wine remains balanced at that sort of alcoholic degree, it's not as much of a "food wine", i.e. something I can drink half a bottle of at lunch and still work efficiently all afternoon.
"Drinkability" and "digestibility" are big factors to people like me who drink wine often.
I can understand, however, that others who drink wine less often and are looking for a more memorable experience, and like stronger, more dramatic wines...

It is a pity that some people reject Bordeaux because of the modern extracted/oaky/alcoholic specimens when these wines are really in the small majority.

Back to Pavie, I tasted the 2013 in April. It was the perfect example of the modern style as train wreck.
How these guys ever got promoted (Gérard Perse has had "Premier Grand Cru Classé A" engraved on the pediment of his new multimillion-euro cellar...) is beyond me.

It is interesting to see the passion this discussion has provoked.
In fact, I think we can all agree that there is no "one size fits all" to vintage rankings.
Can one really say that a successful round, lucious, fruit forward vintage (ah, some of the 2009 St. Juliens...), is better - or worse - than a more austere, more structured vintage?
Of course not.
There is no golden yardstick, no objective measure...

By the same token, ageing potential is beside the point in my opinion. If a wine tastes wonderful at an early age, this is more an advantage than a disadvantage.
And the fact that it does not age as gracefully as another vintage does not detract from it.
What counts is how the wine is at its apogee.

Best regards,
Alex R.
User avatar
greatbxfreak
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:09 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by greatbxfreak »

Alex,

You have an interesting point of view.

"By the same token, ageing potential is beside the point in my opinion. If a wine tastes wonderful at an early age, this is more an advantage than a disadvantage.
And the fact that it does not age as gracefully as another vintage does not detract from it.
What counts is how the wine is at its apogee."


Funny thing is, that nobody complains now of quite alcoholic 1989 and 1990 vintage at their birth. It just proves what I predict of alcohol disappearing while fruit and tannin integrates.

I remember tasting 2009 en primeur in 2010 and was baffled by big amounts of cherry vodka burning flavors in many wines, but two years later when I retasted several of these, alcohol wasn't that present, which indicated it was "evaporating".

Concerning Pavie 2010, yes it's extracted and alcoholic, very, very modern, but you can't abstract from the fact that's well made and some wine-freaks actually buy it.
User avatar
Musigny 151
Posts: 1258
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Musigny 151 »

Nobody complains about high alcohol in 1989/1990 because the Medoc was in the low 13% range, and the Right Bank around 14%, a far cry from what was produced in 2010.

And I do dispute that Pavie 2010 is well made; this was for me one of the the worst wines I tasted during the futures campaign. It was sweet, clunky, fat, rich, alcoholic and tasted of Koolaid.The argument that there are people who buy Pavie is like saying people buy Yellowtail or Big Macs in quantity.
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by DavidG »

I can't comment on the 2010 vintage as I have not tasted a single one. But I do feel compelled to correct a misleading statement by GBF.

The alcohol does not preferentially "disappear" or "evaporate" from a sealed bottle of wine as it ages. The alcohol level (% alcohol by volume) stays about the same. It may be less noticeable to the taste as the wine evolves, but the alcohol is still there.

When talking about vintages one has to generalize. There are always counter examples. But generally speaking...

Some people fretted about high alcohol in 1989/1990 because 13-14% was creeping higher than traditional levels. Some said "don't worry, they'll be fine." To my palate and most others, those wines turned out fine. So now 2009/2010 has turned up the heat another 1-2%, and some folks don't like it and don't think the wines will age. Will they?

Have the wines' alcohol levels crossed an important threshold? They certainly have for those who want to be able to drink 2-3 glasses without being tipsy, because as noted above, the alcohol does not disappear. But what about taste and bouquet and complexity? Time will tell. I bought a bunch of 2009s, and I'm hoping they'll turn into "real" Bordeaux with age. I got off the carousel for 2010 and will have to experience that vintage vicariously.
User avatar
greatbxfreak
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:09 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by greatbxfreak »

Thanks DavidG for clarification.

Of course I meant alcohol will become less noticeable, "disappearing/evaporating" was only metaphor.
I'm with you on 1989/1990 having turned out fine despite complaints about high alcohol.

Btw, 2010 La Mission has 15.1% alcohol not 16%, according to Jeff Leve's The Wine Cellar Insider - link - http://www.thewinecellarinsider.com/sea ... Brion+2010.
I wonder why anybody doesn't complain about 14.7% alcohol in 2009 LMHB, only 0.4% less than in 2010!

I tasted 2010 LMHB last time in September last year and didn't notice at all burning sensation of cherry vodka hurting my senses, neither did I get same experience by tasting other 2010s in 2013 like Tertre Roteboueuf, Corbin, Bourgneuf, Seguin, d'Issan, Beychevelle, Montrose, Lascombes, La Lagune, Belle Brise, Malescot St.Exupery, L'Eglise Clinet, Clinet, Lafleur, Giscours, VCC, Trottevieille, Latour, Palmer, Haut Bailly and L'Evangile. Recently, I didn't get vertigo by tasting 2010 Cheval Blanc, 2010 Rauzan Segla, 2010 La Conseillante, 2010 D.d.Chevalier, 2010 Corbin Michotte and 2010 Cantelauze.

I don't like that some people attack me for being so fond of 2010. I taste wines from this vintage on regular basis. I adore this vintage and I think it will turn in something extraordinary in 5-7 years time. It has everything to become a legend. It's my personal opinion.
User avatar
Comte Flaneur
Posts: 4863
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:05 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Comte Flaneur »

Getting back to Mark's original thesis it is deliberately provocative, which I applaud, and it is great to see a heated and mostly civil debate about this.

But it also fatally flawed. His thesis only gets a C- at best in my book. But more likely a fail.

Because what he has cleverly done is try to tar the whole vintage with serial right bank monstrosities like Pavie and Troplong Mondot which produce pretty vulgar and spoofulated wines year in year out...as Alex noted the 2013 Pavie is an abomination just as I have little doubt that the 2010 is...but you can't otherwise compare the two vintages. But to imply this to the rest of The 2010 vintage is disingenuous and utterly misleading, because most of the wines are in the 13.5-14.5 ABV range, very similar to 2009 and not that much above 2005. Someone please tell me what is the average incremental alcohol increase in 2010 vs 2005. I bet it is 0.5% or less.

As I noted earlier even Pape Clement made its best ever wine in 2010, which is a credit to the Magrez-Rolland axis of evil even though it's 14.5%ABV. It does have recognisable terroir, like the 2004 for example. So did right-Banker La Conseillante, which is 14%, make its best ever wine. I have tried most vintages of La Conseillante going back to the 1970s, and great though the 1982, 1985, 1989,1990, 2005 and 2009 are the 2010 is the crowning glory.

It may well be the case that 2005 emerges as the greatest vintage of them all, but to dismiss 2010 now is just plain daft. On the left bank it is absolutely extraordinary, especially in the Margaux appellation.
User avatar
Musigny 151
Posts: 1258
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Musigny 151 »

Comte Flaneur wrote:Getting back to Mark's original thesis it is deliberately provocative, which I applaud, and it is great to see a heated and mostly civil debate about this.

But it also fatally flawed. His thesis only gets a C- at best in my book. But more likely a fail.

Because what he has cleverly done is try to tar the whole vintage with serial right bank monstrosities like Pavie and Troplong Mondot which produce pretty vulgar and spoofulated wines year in year out...as Alex noted the 2013 Pavie is an abomination just as I have little doubt that the 2010 is...but you can't otherwise compare the two vintages. But to imply this to the rest of The 2010 vintage is disingenuous and utterly misleading, because most of the wines are in the 13.5-14.5 ABV range, very similar to 2009 and not that much above 2005. Someone please tell me what is the average incremental alcohol increase in 2010 vs 2005. I bet it is 0.5% or less.

As I noted earlier even Pape Clement made its best ever wine in 2010, which is a credit to the Magrez-Rolland axis of evil even though it's 14.5%ABV. It does have recognisable terroir, like the 2004 for example. So did right-Banker La Conseillante, which is 14%, make its best ever wine. I have tried most vintages of La Conseillante going back to the 1970s, and great though the 1982, 1985, 1989,1990, 2005 and 2009 are the 2010 is the crowning glory.

It may well be the case that 2005 emerges as the greatest vintage of them all, but to dismiss 2010 now is just plain daft. On the left bank it is absolutely extraordinary, especially in the Margaux appellation.
Oh, I think it is worth more than a C+, especially if you realize that I am not tarring the vintage as a whole. My thesis is that it is overall a very good vintage, some really wonderful wines, particularly from those estates that normally make balanced terroir driven wines. I did however say, that good as it is, I do not think it is the equal of vintages such as 2009, 2005, 2000, 1990, 1982,1961 and 1959. There are two reasons for this:

1: There are very few wines that are as greatest ever made at their respective estates; even if you compare a single vintage, such as 2005, only Mouton made a better wine in 2010. Outside of the first growths, there were some beautiful wines (I mentioned the better ones in my OP) and I did buy them. But generally, the highs were not as high as the other vintages I mentioned.

2. There were some lows: and the vintage was inconsistent. A major appellation, St. Emilion, should have produced a few exceptional wines: it did not.
If you look at the major estates, the wines were fighting hard to keep alcohol levels down, while at the same time getting ripe grapes. A couple of chateaux I usually love did not do well. Canon and Figeac were considerably better in 2009. I mentioned Pavie, but Angelus which is made in a sensitive modernist style had problems in 2010. The problems were pretty universal here (I did like Cheval; it was promising, but still fairly elemental when I tasted it.) Pomerol as I said was better than St. Emilion, but I still preferred wines from 2009 and 2005. Graves wines also needed to be be selected carefully; overall again better in 2009 and 2005.

BTW, Ian you are correct. la Mission was 15.1. I had misread my notes. That being said, it is still way too much.
As for being too early; the trade, the press and the consumer have been making decisions based on how they perceive individual wines. Making an opinion about a vintage overall is just an accumulation of those notes. I have been tasting barrel samples for far longer than I want to admit to, but ball park over 25 years, and I am pretty sure some of the problems I see with a few of these wines, will not "evaporate" with time. But we will have fun over many years comparing.
User avatar
DavidG
Posts: 8280
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by DavidG »

Straying again from defining "greatest ever" and focusing on general characteristics of 2009 vs 2010, it was my impression from reading the critics (and having tasted only 2009s), that 2010 was crisper, less ripe, more acidic and tannic than 2009. And that was supposed to be a good thing for those who are not enamored of the riper (they would say over-ripe) style. The high tannins and extract in 2010 were supposedly more reminiscent of 2005.

Are those still accepted generalizations about 2010? Or have the wines (or opinions/preferences) evolved in a different direction? Is Mark's central thesis that alcohols are too high for the level of ripeness achieved in 2010? Or just that the top wines didn't hit the highs achieved in 2005?
User avatar
Musigny 151
Posts: 1258
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2010 is not the greatest vintage ever in Bordeaux

Post by Musigny 151 »

David,
It's not the alcohol itself; the alcohol is the result of various decisions which were forced on the winemaker by the weather-it was especially difficult for those who use a lot of Merlot. 2010 was in the middle of a long term drought, exacerbated by little rain during the growing cycle (half that of 2009).

In addition (and partly a result of this) there was a record amounts of tannin, but the tannins were coarse, and hard. To soften them you had to leave the grapes on the vine, sugar levels (i.e potential alcohol) would go up but luckily, the acidity was still high. If you over extracted, you were going to get some pretty ugly wines, and even if you extracted lightly, at the very least even with short macerations etc, you were still going to have a fairly alcoholic one
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 9 guests