Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts

95 Branaire Ducru [St Julien] Double decanted, served cool. Has to be one of the bottles I must have personally cellared the longest still in my clutches; purchased on/about release. (Back then I used to write in tiny script on the back label optimal drinking windows -- this bottle had the 'best before 2018' suggestion!) A hint of murkiness, lighter red, medium bodied, and a couple of mm of lightening at the rims. Color and hue suggest full maturity. Forest, mint, vanilla on the nose. Tannins fully resolved, and some acidity is coming to the forefront. Not very fruity on the palate. I like the 03 better for drinking today. Perhaps this was better when younger; I don't remember it much from before. I found it disappointing while the SO loved it, and carped when the bottle was finished, perhaps with me taking a pour more than my fair share. At age 20, bottle variation is just much more than it is at age 5, so perhaps this is an outlier. It's a bit thin overall, so I'll give it a B-. If this was my one and only experience with Branaire, or aged Bordeaux, it would be hard to reload on this underfruited example. Luckily 2000 (now gone!) and 2003 are counterexamples. And I remember a wonderful case of 82 being poured by a generous benefactor at one convention.

Sorry to hear it was thin Arv...must say I am somewhat surprised at this wine's poor showing. The fruit deficit was the most disturbing part of your note because we have all been sitting patiently thrumming our fingers waiting for these 95s to come round.

Arv, I had a similar experience with a bottle of 96 Lagrange that I drank over two days this past week (Lucie was practicing abstinence; why is beyond my understanding). This is a very good wine that I have enjoyed several times. This bottle was very good but somehow disappointing. The tannins were resolved, the acid was noticeable, and the cranberry & raspberry flavors shy. Secondary and tertiary characteristics had not yet developed. It surprised me that the Lagrange did not stand up to steak the first night and paired better with grilled chicken thighs the next day. Good, but as François would say, the Lagrange "lacked emotion", worth maybe 89/90 on my scale while I expected 92/93 from my previous experience with the wine.

I need to start digging into the 96 Lagrange, been a while since I've some.

I'm not too fussed - as time goes on there are no great wines, just great bottles.

As long as a mercurial substance like cork is used for sealing up the wine, consistency will be an issue as wines get to the multi decade points....

I have a love hate relationship with 1996 Lagrange. I remember a dinner in NYC 7-8 years ago, graced with the presence of The BD and Patrick, where it ran a 1996 LLC neck and neck all night. I have had other good experiences too, but the case I bought had so many sub-par and corky bottles, that I decided to let it go. I just think it can be highly variable from bottle to bottle - proving the old adage as Arv noted...but quite young to show so much variability.

Branaire Ducru didn't start realizing its potential until the later 90s, say 1998. 2003 was my eye-opener!

Since the bottle of 96 Lagrange was less good than previous ones, I worked hard to find TCA, but could not detect any.

Harry C. wrote:Branaire Ducru didn't start realizing its potential until the later 90s, say 1998. 2003 was my eye-opener!

2000 was pretty solid from the get go.