6 Bordeaux with Sunday lunch

[AlexR]

Chris de Weers (ChrisWineEthusiast) and his charming wife Karen were visiting from Holland for the Week-End des Grands Amateurs and came over to lunch at my place.

For the apéritif, we had:

1997 Ch. Nairac - This had an amber-orange color that made it look older than its years.
Very fresh and subtle on the palate, without much evidence of botrytis.
Rich, silky, and medium-weight on the palate with considerable freshness. Not a cloying sort of Sauternes at all.

1983 Ch. Simon : another Barsac, this was brought by one of the guests.
In color, it looked younger than the Nairac!
Nose: pine resin there, as well as pear and other candied fruit aromas
Taste: Less sweet than the Nairac. Less imposing, but lively, and no one, but no one would have guessed the wine's age.

We were hard put to say which Barsac we preferred. I think I would come down in favor of the Simon, but opinions were divided.
This estate is close to Gravas, not far from Climens.

With a chicken risotto, we had:

2005 Ch. Siaurac, Lalande de Pomerol
I don't often buy full cases, but I thought at the time (2006), this wine was delicious.
It had the roundness and fruitiness one would hope for, but also characterful tannin.
Very good value for money.

2003 Ch. de la Grave, "Nectar", Côtes de Bourg.
I had hoped for more from this. Bit one dimensional and a certain hardness there.

1996 Ch. La Tour Haut Brion:
A great growth that Haut Brion decided to put into their second wine or that of La Mission (they leave both options open). Frankly, I don't understand why they did this...
Anyway, the wine was looking its age or a little older. Lovely nose of truffle and earth. Mature, textured, classic, velvety. Lacking perhaps a bit of oomph and freshness, but very good.

1990 Ch. Pichon Comtesse
A noted wine critic from suburban Baltimore apparently rated this wine 78 out 100, i.e. exiled it to Siberia.
I checked on Cellartracker, where judgement is much more nuanced.
Anyway, I had only one bottle, and this was the time to open it.
The color was older than its years.
The nose was very evolved but elegant.
The palate was light, but by no means watery. Elegant but not a heavy hitter. One is perhaps disappoined in light of the wine's classification. But not a wipeout, despite what you may have heard.

Best regards,
Alex R.

[RDD]

Considering the raw materials they had available in 1990, I think they really missed with 1990 Ch. Pichon Comtesse.
At that level the wine should have been stunning instead of just drinkable.

[AlexR]

Hi,

Re 1990 Pichon Comtesse

In fact, if it was far short of stunning, it was far better than just drinkable.

Best regards,
Alex R.

[stefan]

My experience with the 90 Comtesse is about the same as yours, Alex.

stefan

[DavidG]

Same thoughts here on the '90 Pichon Lalande. It's not a bad wine per se, just not up to expectations for a renowned Chateau in one of the many vintages of the century. The disappointment over what one imagines might have been acheived tends to dampen enthusiasm for the '90 Pichon Lalande, and I think some people punish it further because of that.

[JimHow]

My experience is closer to that of the noted critic from suburban Baltimore.

Nonetheless, sounds like a delicious Sunday brunch, Alex....

[aimeedogdogdog]

I had it once, and by blind. Strangely it had the telltale basics of the Pichon Lalande but without all the usual flesh.

I was given a wine and asked to guess what it was. First sniff, it had the Paulliac pencil lead nose, then the taste the smooth lalande frame, but the wine was so simple and as drinkable as any general wines from the restaurants at the beach of south France. I said it was Paulliac and then Lalande, and was asked to guess what year; that I completely drew a blank. It was revealed as the 1990 Lalande. I realized I heard about this particular wine but it didn't occur to me when doing the tasting. Indeed a strange and simple wine from Chateau Pichon Lalande.

Werner

[ChrisW]

Alex,

We had a great time during lunch at your place. The wines and the company were very nice. Thanks again for your hospitality. Your lunch concluded a very nice short stay in Bordeaux. We also very much enjoyed the great tasting event of the Weekend des Grands Amateurs de Bordeaux on Saturday where we managed to taste 130 wines on one day and had great pleasure at an extensive dinner at Canon la Gaffeliere afterwards. We will surely return next year as it also is a great excuse for visiting Bordeaux at least one time a year.

I agree with most of the opinions stated above about the pichon lalande 1990. We tasted it blind and I would never have guessed that it was one of the great second growths of 1990. Yet, it was in no way a faulty wine. It may be disappointingly light given the potential quality at the estate (as when compared to e.g. the 1996 and probably the 1982 which I've not yet tasted), but the wine was elegant and pure. No reason to give this bottle a "faulty" score such as 78, unless one applies a much harder scoring system for the best wine estates than for other wines. A score of 88 points would be more fitting.

It was not the best wine of the lunch, but for a wine enthusiast such as me it was certainly the most intriging given the various opinions which exist about this wine (I had not tasted it before). Thanks for sharing your single bottle with us.

Kindest regards,

ChrisW

PS: we are now halfway between Bordeaux and CdP (near Cahors). We will arrive in CdP on Wednesday for some additional great wine experiences

[greatbxfreak]

Alex,

I think your bottle of Nairac 1997 was an off one. Normally, it should have flattened the other Barsac wine you had. Nairac 1997 has great reputation, is almost as stunning as Yquem 1997 and it certainly doesn't lack botrytis! I don't quite follow your assessment of it.

Tasted it 3-4 times in the past 7 years and it's always been a hit.