TNs 2002 Ch. Haut Bailly, 2003 Ch. Lagrange St. Julien

[AlohaArtakaHoundsong]

Two different wines each showing quite well.

The Haut Bailly has acquired some chocolate or cocoa overtones as it matures. Very well balanced, medium-plus weight, good cut, fine finish, this is right in the strike zone.

The oak blew off, the acidity crept up and the Lagrange was juicy, grapey, smoky and just delicious--my wife said so and I agreed. This wine has plenty of stuffing and is on the bigger side, but is quite balanced. Very enjoyable. I'm aware of some criticism of this wine. Others can have the criticism. I'll take the wine.

[JimHow]

Mmmmmmmmm.

[Comte Flaneur]

I have had 2003 Lagrange twice. The first time it was bloody awful. The second time bloody marvellous. The first time it was hot, clunky, unbalanced and awkward. The second time resolved and mature. So much bricking in the glass. Blind I would have guessed early 80s. I think I had a case of this but sold after the first experience. The shocking thing was how advanced it was.

[AlohaArtakaHoundsong]

Ian, I would describe the Lagrange's texture as resolved. What surprised me on this go was how juicy the wine became in the glass.

[AKR]

http://www.bordeauxwineenthusiasts.com/ ... t=0#p45539

[Nicklasss]

I had the 2003 Chateau Lagrange twice, and liked it very much both time. Not so 2003 to me, a bit like Cantemerle.

Talking abour regularity, did Lagrange had any big fail since 1982? I would say no, even if I did not tasted all vintages.

Nic

[Blanquito]

I've not had the 03 Lagrange since shortly after release, when it was awful on 3 occasions. It was brought to a tasting last month and I was excited to try it again, but alas it was corked. Sounds like it has come a long way since 2005/6.