Leoville Lascases revisited

[Comte Flaneur]

Neal Martin hosted three Wine Advocate 'matter of taste' events on Friday night and on Saturday at 67 Pall Mall.

The first one was a six course dinner entitled 'The King of St-Julien: Three Decades of Leoville-Lascases.' We tried seven wines from three young vintages: 1990, 1999 and 2009. This was our second chance this year to try a vertical of LLC. The first was Tim's epic vertical in January, covering 61 years. The Chateau was represented by Pierre Graffeuille the Commercial Director.

The first wine was Le Petit Lion 2009, which is now officially designated as the estate's 'second wine' and was added to the line up in 2007. This 2009 is seamless, pleasant but a bit dumb and frankly anodyne and certainly not remotely worth the £40-50 you would have to part with to acquire a bottle. I would give it something like 86 points. Others would say that is harsh.

Apparently most of the merlot for Petit Lion is sourced from the famous walled vineyard which makes the Grand Vin. Still, Petit Lion is not a worthy second wine of Leoville Lascases in my opinion because the gulf with the first wine is too wide (We tried both 2012s at the estate last year and the gulf was as wide as the Grand Canyon). And given that Petit Lion is typically 70% merlot and the GV typically 80% plus Cabernet Lion should really be considered a third wine. I don't think most first wine-second wines varietals diverge to that extent.

So you would be forgiven for thinking that Clos Du Marquis is (remains) the second wine, and when the 1999 and 1990 CdMs are served the step up in quality is palpable. The official line is that Clos Du Marquis is a separate wine not a second wine, in the same way that Chateau Palmer tries to pretend that Alter Ego (aka Reserve Du General) is not a second wine. It is true that the Clos Du Marquis is sourced from outside the famous walled vineyard further away from the river to the west. Still you can't help thinking that the marketing folks are calling the shots here...

The 1999 Clos Du Marquis is a most satisfying wine which is in a good place. It has a refined bouquet and palate with a touch of dilution reflecting the rainy vintage. Still an honest 90 points.

The 1990 Clos Du Marquis is gorgeous. It is fuller, delicious and seductive with quite a bit of lead pencil and fully integrated tannins. It wasn't far behind the the 1990 Grand Vin. 93 points. An outstanding second wine.

The 2009 Clos Du Marquis is rich, juicy and seems to scream merlot until you detect menthol notes, or more accurately creme de menthe. This is full bodied and exuberant. However I struggled somewhat with the notion of this being a wine from Leoville Lascases. 92 points. These Clos Du Marquis are approximately 70% Cabernet Sauvignon and 30% merlot.

Our bottle of the 1999 Grand Vin was stripped. I got a pour from another bottle which was fine. It seemed to be nicely resolved in a restrained medium bodied format with mineral and tobacco notes. 92 points for the second bottle.

The 1990 Grand Vin was easily the most popular wine in the room. A real crowd pleaser. Not that is a superficial wine. I found it remarkably similar to the 1990 Clos Du Marquis with its exuberant mouth filling presence in a low acid format. The Grand Vin had a bit more oomph that the CdM. Unquestionably a delicious wine, atypical for Leoville Lascases with little of the sternness you have in other years, and which is a hallmark of this estate. 94 points.

The 2009 Grand Vin seems like a modern day 1990. It is seamless, perfectly pitched, dense, powerful, brooding and full bodied. It has a bit more elegance and finesse than the somewhat bumptious by comparison 1990. This was my wine of the night with 96 points.

It was interesting that we drank the most flattering and easy vintages of LLC. The 1990s are delicious and ever so moreish but are not in my opinion the peak of what this estate can produce. The 1999s are precocious by LLC standards. The 2009s are very good but again do not in my opinion represent what makes this estate so special and the king of St-Julien. For that you have to go to 1982, 1985, 1986, 1996, 2000, 2005 and 2010. And the vintages I have buying have been 2002, 2006 and 2012.

This was a fascinating dinner, which served to confirm a lot of my biases. Pierre's exposition was most informative, and Neal provided many interesting insights and was a consummate host. He is as at home hosting an event like this as he is writing for the Sun. I look forward to reading his 15 EP notes.

[AlohaArtakaHoundsong]

Marquis de Calon now is also something like 75% merlot vice the 70% cab sauv in the grand vin. I take it that having the wine be quite different is a way to distance it from the second wine stigma of a "shadow" or "echo" of the grand vin.

[stefan]

Nice report, Ian. What did the WA and 67 Pall Mall charge for a seat at this dinner? Was it a members only event?

[Blanquito]

Fantastic write up, as always. My string of bad bottles of LLC came to an end in 2012 and I'm a believer these days. Had a terrific 83 LLC not long ago, maybe the one vintage that's truly drinking at peak of what I've tried.

[DavidG]

Excellent report Ian. Still waiting on my 1996s. Stopped buying younger vintages of LLC years ago due to its glacial development.

[Blanquito]

Is there a slower developing chateau than LLC? Not in my experience, but I don't get to drink Latour much.

[dstgolf]

Personally have enjoyed LLC but don't see what the hype is. Clos du Marquis is much better value and I have enjoyed the relative QPR. Still have a small vertical of the 1995-2004.

Probably my greatest disappointment was the 82 LLC. Had 2 bottles from auction and for a supposed 100pt wine that was huge disappointment for the $$$. 1990 was good but didn't do anything emotionally for me. I can't say that I have any dislikes but this wine has never wowed me....sorry Nic. ...I know how you feel about LLC. I have some 1999,2001& 2002 in the cellar but not sure when to open.

Great review though Ian and enjoyed reading.

[Nicklasss]

Nice report, on vintages I never tried. Reading the different comments, I feel like Léoville Las Cases is like Poujeaux, performing over the other in regular vintages, and performing ok only in great vintages.

I never had the 86 or 90, and only time I had the 82 was at the 03 NYC convention, but competition was tough (82 Mouton, 82 Branaire, 82 Cos).

I prefer rich but also lightly austere wines, so this is why I like so much LLC. Also, on average, LLC always perform well, with less variation than some other on different vintages. The 96 is really something to me.

Nic

[tim]

Fascinating, but I cannot help but think that these wines are way too young to be representative of LLC.

[Blanquito]

The 96 LLC is an awesome wine. Probably will peak in 2040 or so.

[AKR]

Great notes and thanks for sharing Comte.

LLC is a brilliant wine, especially in lighter years when it seems to stick out above its cohorts so much more.

Everyone's heard my view on how (I think) they throttle the supply.

So it's a wine I admire, yet enjoy rarely.

I have the hunch that as/if/when it gets promoted to the first growths, there will be a huge unloading from the estate's cellars.

[JimHow]

I loved the LLCs between 1975-1989: 1975, 1978, 1979, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1989…. Mmmm.

[JimHow]

And then it continued to excel in the 1990s: 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1998.

I can't really speak to how it has performed in the 2000s, although I really, really enjoyed the 2012 at the estate last May.