2005 Cantemerle: serious juice

[Blanquito]

Sipping on an 05 Cantemerle tonight. Bought a bunch of this for $28 from WineX as futures. So I check in on it once or twice a year, and boy is this the best showing yet.

Ok, for tasters like me with preference for tertiary wines, for this isn’t ready, nowhere near it. The profile is totally primary, heck the color is almost a Napa purple still (alright, not that purple). But the texture has opened up considerably and we can now see what this beauty has to offer.

[dstgolf]

The 2017 at weekend UGC was one of the better wines of the eve. 70% Cab which is about 20-25% higher than norm as they lost most of their Merlot to late frost in the Spring. Depending on pricing may be a value play.

[OrlandoRobert]

Cool to hear as we share some serious palate alignment.

Surprisingly, a 2005 out of 375 did not show well for me two years ago. Had an odd astringency to it.

I grabbed a lot of 09 and 10, perhaps I should grab a few backfills on the 05. Generally a very consistent estate.

[marcs]

This one got a lot of good reviews when it first came out, so I bought a bottle thinking that it would be a low cost entry into the 2005 vintage. This was about 2009 or 2010 I think. Anyway, it was such a total brick that I wasn't interested in getting any more -- just a solid impenetrable mass that wasn't much fun to taste. Glad to hear it's starting to come around.

TBH I go back and forth in my head about whether 2005 is an overrated vintage or it just needs five more years.

[Blanquito]

What I liked about the 05 Cantemerle was its easy balance and savory, mineral-infused profile. It’s medium bodied with a distinctly tarry note from the soft, ripe tannins. Nothing forced or over extracted here. Restrained and classy, but too tannic for be full-on elegant. After a few hours of air the structure ramped up, and in the process closed down the fruit and aromatics. Probably around 90 pts today, but once mature this could go higher especially if there’s some more depth hiding behind the tannins. This is definitely in How territory still — I need to leave these alone for 10 years — but enjoyable now with a steak.

This struck me as very 2005, with its big yet soft tannins, which still dominate the wine. Lots of ripeness in a dark fruit profile but having good acidity, just like the pros said. An usual (unique) vintage signature to be sure.

[marcs]

It's that "tarry" quality that I sometimes don't like in 2005s. You say it's not forced but it is a quality that feels clumsy and overly heavy to me. Especially when combined with sediment it feels like there are coffee grounds in my wine. I generally don't like it whatever the vintage, prefer a lighter body. With that said not all 2005s have it.

[Blanquito]

The tannins in 2005 are definitely tar-like, which if you don't like should make most of 2005s unattractive at present. For whatever reason, most of the critics seem to think soft, ripe tannins are a good thing, a la 1982 or 1990. I think, if the best case scenario works out, those two heralded vintages might be a good analog for 2005 given the amount and quality of the structure, but I agree it is way too soon to tell. Plus, there is a certain dark-fruit, earthy quality to the 2005s that is probably closest to 1982 to 1990 in profile, although the 2005s lack the obvious fruit of those years and I don't find any 2005s roasted like some 1990s can be. 2005 is also by and large a high acid year by Bordeaux standards, which combined with ripe tannins and big fruit, makes it an unusual vintage.

One thing that sold me on 2005 futures was it seemed like every critic out there, no matter their stylistic biases, was super high on 2005. Ironically, it was Parker who was tapping the breaks on the 2005s in barrel, though he was much higher on these one finally released. The fact that Gilman remains so high on 2005 Bordeaux gives me faith, not because he is some savant (though he might be) but mainly because our palates align extremely well when it comes to claret.

Of course, styles in Bordeaux were a mess by 2005 and many Right Bank wines went off the cliff into modernity in 2005 with over extraction and high alcohol. But this Cantemerle gave me faith that the traditionalists in Bordeaux made some serious stuff in 2005, but it will be another 10+ years before they're ready. As a counterpoint, the precocious 2000 Cantermerle was already drinking splendidly by 2006, although I think the owners may have changed between those years.

[DavidG]

I went long on 2005s, based mostly on the critics love for the vintage. There were some cautionary tales about over-extraction back when they were first bottled and then released. One of the BWE alumni whose palate I trusted (Steve? - the stockbroker from CT, nice guy, came to a couple of conventions, wonder what happened to him) warned that most 2005s, and not just the St Ems, were too extracted to age well. I bought a bunch anyway. I started trying them 10-12 years out with varying results, and ended up selling about 2/3 of them when we moved and downsized the cellar.

Maybe I bailed too early. None had had time to develop that aged tertiary complexity I go for. I don’t mind the tarry notes as long as they aren’t overwhelming. Some just had too much of that going on or were too fiercely tannic to convince me that they were headed for glory. I’m still waiting on most of the rest. One that’s drinking well now is Lanessan.

[dstgolf]

Like David I went fairly deep on the 05 futures basing purchases solely on reviews. Most are still a long ways out but starting to come around. One of my favourite surprises has been the 05 Dauzac. Delicious at the moment and will continue to improve. Duhart Milon I've had a few times and most recently Saturday night against the 06 which is tough as nails but the 05 is showing a Lafite like elegance starting to show well. Canon la Gafaliere is superb. La Tour Figeac is gross showing greenness, overpowering tannins that I'm sure will outlast the fruit and this may be a right banker that people feared as being the typical 05. All in all I'm very happy with how the 05s are coming around and they mostly have been a hit unlike the 06s we've tried to date and the 04s aren't much better at the moment. I'd take 03 for drinking right now over the 04/06.

[OrlandoRobert]

I still am confident about the classic left bankers. Most of the modern right bankers are a kinky hot mess. I got rid of almost all of them. I will admit to having enjoyed a 2005 Clos Fourtet last month, paired with a lavish Italian dinner.

[DavidG]

Clos Fourtet is one of several right-bankers I did hold onto. Glad it showed well for you. Might be worth a look soon.

[Comte Flaneur]

I was wary of the 2005 vintage to begin with convinced that pricing was too ambitious, but the launch of that vintage basically raised the whole level of prices. There were some buying opportunities a few years after the initial release which I bought into. My main concern about this vintage is over-extraction, but otherwise I think it is going to be fabulous with the a few infamous exceptions on the RB - yes Pavie and Angelus, the former an over-extracted train wreck.

Late last year we did a tasting of miscellaneous Bordeaux and the wotn was 2005 Gruaud. It is a big wine for Gruaud but drinking surprisingly well already.

Re Cantemerle, seems promising but of the 2005/09/10 triumvirate my money would be on the 2010, which will be a rock star.

[Blanquito]

I loaded up on 05, 09 and especially 10 Cantemerle. Hope they develop like the 80’s vintages did (you can apply this statement to virtually every post-1990 bordeaux in my cellar).

Leaving the subject of 05 claret, that Cantemerle and Lagune vertical I went to at Dale’s place in 2014 was so instructive. To wit, I found out that Cantemerle is a much better wine than I thought. At a minimum, select years from the 60’s, 70’s and the 82, 83, 85 and 89 are terrific, world class wines in a winsome, age worthy, elegant, complex, refreshing, Burgundian style. They’ll never make you forget the 86 Mouton, but these aren’t wimpy wines. And when you factor in price, wow I love this chateau. Cantemerle is to the southern Medoc what Sociando is to the north.

Here’s the link to that vertical:
https://www.cellartracker.com/classic/e ... vent=25304

[DavidG]

But has Cantemerle gone over to the dark side* in 2015, 2016...?



*Remember back in the early days of BWE when "going over to the dark side" meant being seduced by Burgundy, and worthy of an exorcism? How times have changed!

[Ognik]

Loaded up 09 amd 10 Mags.
No need to search any further.

[JimHow]

I've been a big fan of Cantemerle and I've been a big fan of the Margaux area from 2015, but I don't know about those 2015 Cantemerles, they seem abnormally big to me.

[Chateau Vin]

Sipping on an 05 Cantemerle tonight. Bought a bunch of this for $28 from WineX as futures. So I check in on it once or twice a year, and boy is this the best showing yet.

Ok, for tasters like me with preference for tertiary wines, for this isn’t ready, nowhere near it. The profile is totally primary, heck the color is almost a Napa purple still (alright, not that purple). But the texture has opened up considerably and we can now see what this beauty has to offer.

IMO, 2010 version is even more serious juice....

[Nicklasss]

I agree blanquito. 2005 Cantemerle, serious like all other 2005, great wines for the next 30 years.

The 2009 is excellent, and 2010 even better, but in 20 years, it is the 2005 I would like to try back the most.

The 2015 was in "one block" when I had it. But promising for sure. Bigger than the little Margaux, but will turn on very Cantemerle in the next 10 years.

And like dstgolf wrote, the 2017 was very satisfying in the context of the vintage.

Nic

[Racer Chris]

Last year I drank a bunch of '15 Cantemerle from 375. My 750s will sit for a few more years before I start on them.
The two 2015 Margaux' I have that are in the same price/quality range are Siran and Labegorce.

[Comte Flaneur]

Has anyone tried the 16? It showed well at a tasting a couple of years ago and I bought a case of halves.