Pontet-Canet 1990

[mek]

As we know this wine was completely underrated by Parker at 89 points. Tasted it today, it was pretty decent. Ruby/garnet robe and narrow garnet rim. Mature fruits, cassis and an interesting liquorice and earthy note. I really enjoyed the palate: good structure, quite powerful and yet balanced by a maturing elegance, still plenty of backbone here. I tried it alongside a rather disjointed, out of sorts 1996 and a lovely 1994, which had those wonderful notes of cedar and graphite, and plenty of grip. I'm somewhat smitten by Monsieur Tesseron, an honourable and savvy man, and these older vintages were a joy to sample today. 92 points

[Roel]

Same for the 1989. Had a few of these, the first vintage made my Jean-Michel Comme, and it's more than just a good Pauillac.

[AKR]

That 1994 Pontet Canet was like Cal Ripken's rookie year.

[JimHow]

I had a 1986 Pontet Canet once, it was big, bold, and bad, just the way I like my 1986s.

[dstgolf]

The only time we had the 90 was in a vertical 2 yrs back and unfortunately it was mildly corked which is the ultimate disappointment when you've waited sooo long and it was dead out of the blocks. Going forward with the price points I find it amazing that there isn't a guarantee from the Chateaux to replace there product whenever if tests prove +ve for TCA. Where else do you purchase something for over a $1000 and product is flawed from the get go with no guarantee of quality in place.

[RDD]

Where else?
White burgundy of course.