Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts

TN 2012 Leoville Poyferre: Red and dark with nice fruit, it is round and soft but if this is the new style of Bordeaux wines, count me out. I can't get any secondary aromas or even flavors. It's all a little extracted and monotonous, and could have been just a good cab blend from anywhere in the world. Not my cup of tea as it is devoid of personality, but still quite nice in its own way. I can't score this, and I'll open the remaining two bottles with friends who appreciate that style more than Bordeaux.

Hmmm, another casualty of the "lost generation" of HWSRN?

We drank the 2003 Poyferre last night. Unlike some other '03s, it seemed not completely formed, lacking in overtones, but it was not like a cab from the new world or from Israel. I did like it much more than the 1998 Beausejour, which, like some other 1998 St Emilions, including Beausejour-Becot, had a lot of Merlot funk. Lucie and others did not object to that, but I found it off putting.

What's the acidity level? Does it feel like a food wine, or a sipping/reading/relaxing one?

The '03 did not pare well with grilled tri-tip with a chipotle rub. 2013 Ridge Zins were a better match. The Poyferre was fine by itself.

Most of those descriptors sound about right for a shut down 5 yo Bordeaux, though heavy extraction is worrisome. I'll quote Blanquito and say it needs 5 years. Maybe 10. Then again, if it's not giving you any hope for the future, no point in keeping it.

It's possible, David. Though usually shut down Bordeaux gives me almost no fruit and this had opulent fruit. I'll lay off for now

Yeah that doesn't sound right Jacques. And not a particular characteristic of the vintage, either.

It is Leoville-Poyferre...it suffers more than most from the dead weight, heavy hand of Michel Rolland...even with the 2016 you noticed it, though that was a great wine.

Yes Ian, it felt like some Rolland inspired high end Chilean blend.

When did Rolland start pulling the strings at Poyferre?

I think he came in around 1995. The 1995 Poyferre was a pretty unfriendly wine a decade or more ago. BA used to have in business class and it was a curmudgeonly beast. Someone sold me a couple of mags of 1994 for a song...I can see why he wanted to get rid of them...the wine was emaciated. So there was plenty to work on. I think it is safe to say that by the mid-2000s Rolland was well and truly calling the shots. When we visited the estate, our last call in a gruelling schedule on 18 May 2015, Madame Cuvelier was quite open about it...I asked her if Rolland calls the shots and I got no push back whatsoever. So in 2009 you get a Parker 100 point stunner and in 2012 you get a Deluxe Chilean Cabernet Special. Couldn't imagine Lilian Sartorius allowing Michel Rolland to set foot in Leoville-Barton.

I still have a 3L of 1996 Leoville Poyferre that I got from Premier Cru back in the day.

Arvind, to answer your question, we had it with a beef filet but it would have been better in its own.

Ian, United business class from Israel last week served a Greysac with lunch. I didn't catch the vintage, but it was head and shoulder above the Poyferre. I usually despise United and their wine selections but this one was fantastic; earthy with leather, cedar, and some mocha notes. A revelation.

2005 Greysac is a winner!

=======

That history of Rolland and Poyferre makes some sense. In 94, the wine was much leaner than it ought to have been. 95 and 96 were solid/good, but by 98, they made a wine that was to my tastes better than many of the peer Medocs. So perhaps they were doing some of his right bank magic then and it was making the wines show better younger.

Even though it may be made in a way that drinks somewhat better younger, I still think this is an estate that benefits with age, perhaps not as much as Ducru or LLC, but let's say a decade plus.

Comte Flaneur wrote:I think he came in around 1995. The 1995 Poyferre was a pretty unfriendly wine a decade or more ago. BA used to have in business class and it was a curmudgeonly beast. Someone sold me a couple of mags of 1994 for a song...I can see why he wanted to get rid of them...the wine was emaciated. So there was plenty to work on. I think it is safe to say that by the mid-2000s Rolland was well and truly calling the shots. When we visited the estate, our last call in a gruelling schedule on 18 May 2015, Madame Cuvelier was quite open about it...I asked her if Rolland calls the shots and I got no push back whatsoever. So in 2009 you get a Parker 100 point stunner and in 2012 you get a Deluxe Chilean Cabernet Special. Couldn't imagine Lilian Sartorius allowing Michel Rolland to set foot in Leoville-Barton.

Interesting. The 2000 was a big hit at BWE '14, beating out 2000 Pichon Baron and Calon Segur and their 2002 counterparts in a blind tasting. It was ripe and a bit oaky but hardly a soulless wine from anywhere.

Had the 1999 yesterday with lunch.

It was time to drink up. Not one of the better examples of LP.

I have tasted the wine en primeur the past several years and it is altogether to my taste, and the price is reasonable.
I see it as a sure bet these days.

Alex R.

I have no doubt that the 2000 like the 2009 - and the 2016 - is a fantastic wine. I enjoyed the 2001 and 2002 which were quite accessible early on. But when you taste this wine next to the other two Leovilles as I did about a month ago at the 2016 tasting, there is no question that they are souped up and I can understand why some people prefer this style to the more classical style of Leoville Barton. But in a vintage like 2012 you can't really get away with it. Remember how good Leoville-Lascases 2012 tasted on our visit? Tasting all three 2012s together would tell you much about the intrinsic qualities of the three wines.

Good perspective/explanation Ian. Thanks.

AlexR wrote:Had the 1999 yesterday with lunch.

It was time to drink up. Not one of the better examples of LP.

I have tasted the wine en primeur the past several years and it is altogether to my taste, and the price is reasonable.
I see it as a sure bet these days.

Alex R.

1999 I'm not sure was ever good, 2003 has been a failure to launch, 2010 was sexy beast, but pushing too far into the new world realm, 2012 was closed when I tasted it

With these over extracted bordeaux caricatures receiving 100 points....I must ask....

is Rolland the devil????

Michel Rolland is going on 70. Parker is already 70.
These people are history, for the most part.
What they have done in the past is interesting, but largely academic.

So, who will tomorrow's whipping boy be ? ))

Alex R.

Jal,
I wonder if it is the style of the vintage you don't like much.
I tasted various 12's in Bordeaux a few yrs back and didn't think much of them.
Rather light, simple, plain reds, which over here in Singapore I'd describe as supermarket wines. And that ain't much to go on.

I tried the 2012 Ch Ferriere Margaux last week and have to say it wasn't much of a wine.
It offered a muted nose with dark fruit, tobacco, some dusty French oak and tobacco, but was light to medium bodied, and rather plain.

Izak Litwar gave this wine a rating of 91, and I would give it a much lower rating (in any case I won't use points as they are meaningless).
On a normative scale, I'd rate it as merely good.

The supermarket Aust Cabs and blends I buy in Singapore such as Ashbrook cab Merlot and Alkoomi CS are much nicer.

Having said that, I rarely buy LP as I find it too variable in style and quality.
So I don;t have a single bottle of it, and the last one I bought was the 2004, which wasn't a great wine in any case.

we tasted the LP 2004 recently....so unremarkable that I forgot I tasted it recently

Interesting Claudius, I have only had five or six wines from the 2012 vintage and most of those were from the right bank. I will not generalize, but so far, those 2012 right banks were fine and performed exactly as expected.

I just want to add that the wine is not bad per se, it is actually quite good. It just didn't taste like I expect a St Julien should taste.

Interesting discussion going on here and where to start. Maybe the best place to start is the fact that I generally like the wines of Leoville Poyferre and even visited the estate when I was in Bdx back in 2014. Regarding the 2012 Poyferre, I tasted it at the UGC in NYC upon release and I was underwhelmed and as such did not buy and have not retasted it. That being said, I have had good to great btls of the 2001 - 2005 with 03 and 04 being the more variable of the bunch. The 2005 is a rock star and is already drinking very well so if you are looking for something to pair with a juicy steak, let me recommend this.

Claudius

Don't write off the 2012 vintage. I do sympathise with your view. I was underwhelmed by a bunch of them when I first tasted them in 2014, but ever since then my experiences have generally been very good.

At the top end of the spectrum LLC 2012 was BWE wine of the year in 2015. And for good reason.I remember Jim How's face literally light up when he tasted it at the estate. We were all blown away by it.

Earlier that day we had a wonderful lunch at Du Tertre. Before we tasted a few Du Tertre and Giscours. The 2012 Du Tertre stood out as a delightful, precocious wine. That was my first case purchase after the tour for just £195 ex. taxes.

While the 2012 vintage is no 2010 or 2015 there are some really good early drinking wines. Two that immediately spring to mind are D'Issan and Haut-Bailly. I scoffed at Parker's 96 point rating of these wines...until I tasted them. He was right. And then there is La Conseillante.

At the 2016 EP tasting I attended a month ago each producer showed another vintage. Generally speaking this execise showed how good the 2016s are. Like Haut-Bailly, La Conseillante paired their 16 with their 12. The Conseillante 12 was so good I ranked it 9th best wine of the evening, with 50-60 wines tasted. Conseillante 16 was ranked #1.

Rauzan-Segla is another absolute stunner. And already drinking beautifully. Sure there are probably some duds, like Jacques's Leoville-Poyferre, but overall this strikes me as a pretty useful vintage. IIRC the group generally agreed that many of the 12s we tried on tour were a revelation.

My impression from the Cru Bourgeois 2012s that I've had is that the vintage is sort of between 2010 and 2011. Not quite as ripe and full bodied as 2010 but definitely bigger and more tannic than 2011.