6 Bordeaux with Sunday lunch
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 12:03 pm
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.
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.