Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts

Which Bordeaux vintages are you worried are fading and need to be drunk now?

My personal view, for my tastes, is that everything pre 1995 should be drunk now.

The last few years those have been mostly consumed, only a scant handful are left.

Of the last 20 years, it's harder for me to tell.

It would be interesting to hear what people's thoughts are on more recent years, and what they feel are not improving with age.

After 1969 I would say '97, '92, '91, '87, '77, '74, '73, '72. I don't see any of the others changing much for the worse in the near term, and, in fact, only the '97 is likely to decline further quickly. '93 perhaps belongs on the list.

I think that virtually all Grand Cru Classe left bank wines from other vintages '95-now are still improving (for my taste) even if there are many that are very pleasant to drink. I have a low tolerance for unresolved tannins, and I appreciate secondary and tertiary characteristics so much that I am willing to trade sweet fruit for them. One thing that everyone should keep in mind is that when a good Bordeaux hits maturity it changes rather little over a five year period, so you don't have to finish your stash when one hits what you consider the peak. Burgundy is different. Burgs can live as long as Bdx, but they change more rapidly in the first 20 or 30 years than do comparable Bordeaux. When a Burg hits that magical phase, I tend to drink up most of what I have in 2-3 years and expect that those that I drink later will not match up. That is just one of the many reasons that Burgundy is more difficult than Bordeaux.

I would take Professor Stefan's advice to the bank. 1980 and 1984 were never any good so I suppose if you still have any of those, might as well uncork them and pour them out. I'm not in any hurry to finish my 1986s, 1988s or 1989s, and if I had any left I wouldn't be in any hurry to drink the 1990s or the '81s, '82s, '83s or '85s.

Yes, I should have included 1980. Strangely enough, I do not include 1984, which is arguably the worst vintage in the entire period! The reason is that the '84s never had any fruit to fade but had a ton of tannin and are likely to improve (not that any sane person would have cellared many of them).

Overall, I am akin to Stefan in my maturation preferences. Still, no reason to hold anything pre-82 in my experience (excluding the odd 1975 or two I suppose).

I am drinking my 83s and 85s as well, but I'm in no hurry as most (but not all) are holding strong. Still I don't think there are many left that will improve further (from what I've had of course). So no upside to holding them further.

That all said, some 82s are still getting better for my mileage and the best of 86s, 88s, 89s and 90s will improve for years.

I still consider the 95s, 96s and 98s young, babies even, but I probably need to update my thinking on that score. The 95s are really just starting to impress, Left and Right.

Post 1995 are people skeptical of anything? The only 97s I have left are maybe one or two Sauternes, which are actually pretty solid that year.

Using my own criterion of 1982 on, and excluding vintages which are clearly duds - 1984, 1987, 1991 and 1992 - my direct answer to your question would be 1983, 1988 and possibly 1993.

A lot of the 1994s are going nowhere having shed fruit faster than their tannins.

I have no worries at all with the remarkably good 1985 vintage.

However some wines in the 1983 and 1988 vintages really do need drinking, for example 1983 Pichon Lalande.

This is what I recently wrote very recently in relation to the 1988s, when asked about our La Conseillante:

I am favourably disposed towards 1988 Bordeaux, because it really is a claret aficionados vintage. However some of them are starting to decline, and I think if you are buying provenance/condition is important. As an example I felt I had to drink through my remaining Pichon Barons, some of which were showing early signs of declining. However a pristine bottle at the Chateau in May was stunning. The only journey that wine ever made was up a few flights of stairs. Pape Clement was another one I had to drink up. I suspect it is a similar story for the very lovely Pichon Lalande: only go for pristine bottles.

Leoville-Lascases, on the other hand, is in the perfect place right now, and probably pips the 1985 for current drinking because the latter will be even better in five years from now. I have more confidence in the longevity of the 1985 vintage, which we enjoyed ten days ago. Having said all that the first growth 1988s are a pretty safe bet. The best two are Lafite and Latour. Mouton is a bit obstreperous still, Margaux a bit mute.

The La Conseillante was indeed lovely, and in a good place. Tasted blind I would not have picked it as a La Conseillante, however, and despite its easy going charm it clearly does not quite challenge your vocabulary of superlatives in the same way as the 1989 or 1990 do, or the 1982 and 1985 for that matter. It was totally ready, and that impression I suspect would be stronger if it was in a bottle rather than a magnum. Of course it was a great year in Sauternes-Barsac, as the 1988 d’Yquem we drank last night confirmed.

Not too worried about the wines I own.
Cold storage. And Bordeaux declines very very slowly IMHO.

Had 1990 Haut-Bailly a week ago. Wonderfully smooth and rich. I love Grave, Pessac Leognan.
The stepping stone between the left and right banks.

What do people think of the 07 Red Bordeaux in the aging/consumption dimension?

I have not tasted any I can think of.

This is fun.

The 83 Pichon Lalande is in danger of decline, with only the best-stored bottles showing as well as it did 5-8 years ago (but when it is on, it is still killer).

But in general, which will fade first, 85 or 83? I have had more 83s in recent years, and I think many of these have a ways to go before really fading (though doubtful many/any are improving still). The 83s just have a lot of stuffy and somewhat clunky tannins still, whereas the 85s are more refined with less structure. Case in point are the Lynch Bages and Gruaud Larose-- I bet the 83s of both last longer than their 85s, even if one prefers the 85s right now.

The '83 that Danny brought to France was well past its prime.

Patrick

No question the 1985s - as a generalisation - for this is what we are talking about - will outlive the 1983s.

I will give you a parable. (Perhaps more an anecdote!). For my 50th two years ago (yeah, yeah, I know I only look 40), two days before in fact, we did the Latour trifecta. 1983, 1985 and 1982, in that order.

The 1983 was totally a point and resolved, maybe approaching the end of its plateau, while the 1985 was much tauter and grippier, with much more underlying grip and nervosity. The difference was quite striking. The 1982 was of course magnificent, in a different league and timeless.

That is just one among many anecdotes...as I mentioned the 1985 event we did a few weeks ago was most reassuring vis a vis the longevity of the 1985 vintage. The bottle of Lynch of the other table was a revelation. But boy Gruaud and LLC were special.

FWIW I think Margaux appellation is an exception in 1983. Palmer and others are still in fine shape.
But as previously stated, hard to generalize.

Agree in general that '85s will outlast '83s.
Also agree with Rob that top '83 Margaux are an exception.

I beg to differ Jim. I think that your impression may be related to when in the evening that you tried the 83 PLL. Early on I thought it was superb. Went back to it about an hour later and it was well on the downward swing. Yes this may have had a longer life a few years back but in the early moments I thought it was in my top 3-4 of the evening behind the 75 Cheval, 93 Haut Brion and 98 la Mission. Older wines are unpredictable at best. Some rise from the ashes and others crash and burn with too much air. So many great wines but only a few leave a lasting impression....good and bad.

That's possible, Danny, I'm not sure when I sipped it during the dinner, that's always been one of my favorite PLs.

I'm like a prophete, and I'm saying that the 2013 are already "fading away-ay-ay"...

Nic

2013 will be like an Iron Maiden...literally impenetrable unripe tannins and little fruit to fight through. Won't fade because that implies you started with something better. No interest in this vintage at all.

2013 for me is about the price point.
I actually kind of liked that hard-as-nails 100% Cab 2013 La Lagune, could easily envision drinking it with a nice juicy ribeye. If I see it in the $25 range I'll buy a couple bottles.

The 2013 Sauternes did seem to get decent reviews, however that category never goes up in price, so no hurry on buying them and if anything, if they pick up the taint of the reds, perhaps they will be sold on the cheap one day. (eg K&L had some 2011 Sigalas Ribaud today for $37/750 ml, pretty well regarded)

EDIT: added later, maybe the 13 Sauternes end up like 97 Sauterenes in the general schema of things. A good vintage. And the pall of the rouges holds their prices to release pricing for a couple of decades....

Comte Flaneur wrote:Patrick

No question the 1985s - as a generalisation - for this is what we are talking about - will outlive the 1983s.

I will give you a parable. (Perhaps more an anecdote!). For my 50th two years ago (yeah, yeah, I know I only look 40), two days before in fact, we did the Latour trifecta. 1983, 1985 and 1982, in that order.

The 1983 was totally a point and resolved, maybe approaching the end of its plateau, while the 1985 was much tauter and grippier, with much more underlying grip and nervosity. The difference was quite striking. The 1982 was of course magnificent, in a different league and timeless.

That is just one among many anecdotes...as I mentioned the 1985 event we did a few weeks ago was most reassuring vis a vis the longevity of the 1985 vintage. The bottle of Lynch of the other table was a revelation. But boy Gruaud and LLC were special.

I'm sure you're right, Ian. I haven't had enough 85s to really compare. My curiosity comes from having had both the 83 and 85 from 4 chateau recently in close proximity, and while I usually preferred the 85 right now, it seemed like the 83s had more stuffing still. Lynch being a case in point, but our bottle of the Lynch was probably not one of the good bottles.