NM on the 2010 Vintage

[RPCV]

Vinous published a 10 year retro perspective by Neal Martin. Boy, some very high scores....

[dstgolf]

Just finished reading and it's a great review discussing much of what has already come up on this board and commented during the Zoom sessions comparing 09/10. No surprises that Latour scored his only perfect score and from Jim's perspective GPL received high marks along with Lynch. A long but inclusive review though when discussing the wines only touches the hi lights and some lows from each appellation.

Here's the link:

https://www.vinous.com/articles/squares ... n-apr-2020

[AlohaArtakaHoundsong]

Was just going to post this. Now it seems odd but I think I only have a couple of 2010s--Cantemerle?, Talbot (figures) and Haut Corbin, or Corbin or Grand Corbin or Corbin something. Seems odd considering how hyped this vintage was, and the hype-buyer I am.

[Comte Flaneur]

It was not as flattering as it could have been and surprisingly awkward for NM...the prose just did not flow...do we have access to his scores?

[greatbxfreak]

Too long article and as Ian said, not flowing, I miss Robert Parker's direct writing.

I've a question - should I prefer modern and extracted 2010 Angelus or the flamboyant and magical 2010 Tertre Roteboeuf?? Me, Tertre Roteboeuf all the way.

Btw, he didn't review 2018 Tertre Roteboeuf either.

[Musigny 151]

It’s not a vintage for everybody. Alcohol levels were relatively high on the left bank, and absurdly high on the right bank. Big concentrated wines. I bought a fair amount of the LB some Lafleur on the RB and at a minor tasting a few months ago of Ducru, Lynch and GPL, I was pretty happy with what I tasted.

Despite being very young, they managed the concentration well without losing complexity. The Ducru was the most liked, and GPL the least, but the difference was maybe three points. A Rauzan Segla I had last year would have have scored about the same as the Lynch. Bullish on LB, and apart from the Lafleur, which I loved en primeur, do not have a single bottle of RB, and likely to stay that way.

And to answer, Izak’s question, neither. Angelus has 15.6% and Tertre has 15.7% alcohol respectively, and both wines show the heat.

[greatbxfreak]

Mark,

"And to answer, Izak’s question, neither. Angelus has 15.6% and Tertre has 15.7% alcohol respectively, and both wines show the heat."

So what? It's natural.

I had 2010 TR in October 2017 - alcohol has integrated with fruit! No kirsch soup anymore.

[Musigny 151]

The alcohol does not integrate, it is the backbone of the wine, and it is very present in these two. Natural or not, if your taste runs to alcoholic wines, you will like this, but for me, it is not balanced, and the alcohol will never make for a pleasant wine.

Just for comparison, the Ducru 2010 has 13.8%.

[greatbxfreak]

Mark,

I don't agree at all with you, we've had this discussion with you before.

I won't continue discussing alcohol levels as it's totally irrelevant for me.

[Comte Flaneur]

If anybody could post NM’s scores I would be eternally grateful.

I went in quite hard with this vintage, buying cases on release and more recently half cases (6) of:

Beychevelle (6)
Branaire
Conseillante on release (6) - a clear stand out on the right bank
Ducru (6)
Gruaud
Langoa (6)
Leoville-Barton
LLC
Pavillon Rouge (6)
Pape Clement
Pichon-Baron
Poujeaux

This week supplemented with bottles of:

Cantemerle (2)
Batailley (2)
Angludet (1)
Hortevie (1)

[Musigny 151]

Mark,

I don't agree at all with you, we've had this discussion with you before.

I won't continue discussing alcohol levels as it's totally irrelevant for me.

Sorry you feel that way; your posts made no sense; I thought you would want to correct them.

[Claudius2]

Guys
I bought quite a lot of 2010’s en primeur from the Medoc, Graves/Pessac and Right Bank.
The wines I tried at tastings were very good and I thought the wines were more consistent and had slightly better balance than 2009’s. And I also bought plenty of them too. I sold most of my older wine at auction and some privately as it was too hard to ship here.
I have rarely found any wine from Bordeaux to be overly alcoholic and obviously hot and unbalanced. I think that a few Merlot based wines from 2005 and later showed too much alc for me.
However the older I get the less accepting I am of hot alcohol in any wine.
As a general rule I will no longer buy any wine over 15% alc. it isn’t just the alc that is the problem it is also that I can’t handle overt sweetness (except in botrytised and fortified wines).
At the same time I don’t agree with the Modern Vs Traditional dichotomy. Bordeaux has changed over the years as have wines from just about everywhere. But there are way fewer faulty wines and plenty of wine to suit everyone. even in the Barossa there are still plenty of makers who eschew hi alc wines and make beautifully balanced and long lived wines.

[Musigny 151]

Guys
I bought quite a lot of 2010’s en primeur from the Medoc, Graves/Pessac and Right Bank.
The wines I tried at tastings were very good and I thought the wines were more consistent and had slightly better balance than 2009’s. And I also bought plenty of them too. I sold most of my older wine at auction and some privately as it was too hard to ship here.
I have rarely found any wine from Bordeaux to be overly alcoholic and obviously hot and unbalanced. I think that a few Merlot based wines from 2005 and later showed too much alc for me.
However the older I get the less accepting I am of hot alcohol in any wine.
As a general rule I will no longer buy any wine over 15% alc. it isn’t just the alc that is the problem it is also that I can’t handle overt sweetness (except in botrytised and fortified wines).
At the same time I don’t agree with the Modern Vs Traditional dichotomy. Bordeaux has changed over the years as have wines from just about everywhere. But there are way fewer faulty wines and plenty of wine to suit everyone. even in the Barossa there are still plenty of makers who eschew hi alc wines and make beautifully balanced and long lived wines.

Totally agree that there are plenty of excellent wines out there, and a myriad of styles. And as someone who enjoys classic Bordeaux, I have assiduously avoided Right Bank Bordeaux in 2010, but I understand there are plenty of people of Izak’s persuasion who will enjoy these wines. But I am sorry to see the great Traditional Right Bank wines disappearing, and have watched with dismay, Canon, Magdelaine and possibly Figeac in their traditional form disappear.


My problem though, is when phrases such as integrating alcohol (which is actually a constant and will not change with cellaring) and physiological ripeness is ripeness inside and outside the grape are bandied about without real concern for what is meant. Izak is a wine writer and an authority, and both phrases are used incorrectly, and give a totally misleading impression, hence my comments.

[marcs]

I have fairly consistently preferred 2009 to 2010 when tasting them next to each other (an interesting exception is Leoville Poyferre). As Neal Mollen hints in this article, the tannins in 2010 tend to be raspy and overbearing, That is hopefully a problem that will fix itself with age, but as Mark says excessive alcohol is a larger issue and cannot be expected to go away with age. 2009 is of course somewhat alcoholic as well but in that case the size of the wines feel less "forced"/extracted and more natural.

I view 2010 as the end of the road to "bigger is better" trend that may have started in 2000, increased in 2005, and then was reflected in 2010. Those are all vin de garde vintages but I love 2000 because I feel like they hadn't gone too far down that road and a lot of wines show a good classical balance. In 2005 you started to see really out of balance wines on the right bank. Then in 2010 there is some on both banks.

[greatbxfreak]

Mark,

"My problem though, is when phrases such as integrating alcohol (which is actually a constant and will not change with cellaring) and physiological ripeness is ripeness inside and outside the grape are bandied about without real concern for what is meant. Izak is a wine writer and an authority, and both phrases are used incorrectly, and give a totally misleading impression, hence my comments!"

This is bull....t and nonsense!

I have it all from winegrowers. I didn't make it up by myself!. Please don't drive a personal agenda towards me. It's embarrassing.

As I wrote many times, around 10 2009s I tasted in the last 15 months, showed no excess of alcohol, which means it has been integrated, despite what you think. I also tasted several 2010s with same results. 2005 wines don't show alcohol either anymore. Trotanoy!!

So please, don't insinuate things, thank you.

[Chateau Vin]

Mark,

I don't agree at all with you, we've had this discussion with you before.

I won't continue discussing alcohol levels as it's totally irrelevant for me.

Maybe not with Musigny, but some of us had this discussion before about alcohol. And that’s ok to ‘agree to disagree’...

http://www.bordeauxwineenthusiasts.com/ ... ion#p53420

[Racer Chris]

... As Neal Mollen hints in this article...

Are you spending too much time on Wineberserkers?

[Musigny 151]

Mark,

"My problem though, is when phrases such as integrating alcohol (which is actually a constant and will not change with cellaring) and physiological ripeness is ripeness inside and outside the grape are bandied about without real concern for what is meant. Izak is a wine writer and an authority, and both phrases are used incorrectly, and give a totally misleading impression, hence my comments!"

This is bull....t and nonsense!

I have it all from winegrowers. I didn't make it up. Please don't drive a personal agenda towards me. It's embarrassing.

As I wrote many times, around 10 2009s I tasted in the last 15 months, showed no excess of alcohol, which means it has been integrated, despite what you think. I also tasted several 2010s with same results. 2005 wines don't show alcohol either anymore. Trotanoy!!

So please, don't insinuate things, thank you.

Sorry mate, you keep making the same bloody error. Your perception might be that you don’t notice the alcohol, but it is not more integrated or less; that would require a chemical reaction.

I am not insinuating anything; I am saying it clearly. Please stop confusing your perceptions with actual wine chemistry.

[OrlandoRobert]

Mark,

I don't agree at all with you, we've had this discussion with you before.

I won't continue discussing alcohol levels as it's totally irrelevant for me.

Maybe not with Musigny, but some of us had this discussion before about alcohol. And that’s ok to ‘agree to disagree’...

http://www.bordeauxwineenthusiasts.com/ ... ion#p53420

Yea put me in Mark’s camp. At least for my country palate, alcohol never integrates. Ever. I actually think it’s presence becomes more noticeable on wines as the youthful fruit starts to fade and the wine moves into the secondary and tertiary stages. It is a rare wine indeed, IMHO, that can handle 15%+ without showing it. That number alone causes me not to buy, generally. And 2010 had lots of those monsters on the right bank. I stuck to Northern Medoc in this rather alcoholic vintage.

[Chateau Vin]

One has to dig up the discussion part on the posted thread...Here is the discussion part...

http://www.bordeauxwineenthusiasts.com/ ... ion#p53453

[greatbxfreak]

Mark,

I've actually worked with chemistry as a chemistry laboratory technician for 40 years controlling medicine etc.

You're very much obsessed with alcohol. Once again, stop talking bull....!

[greatbxfreak]

OrlandoRobert,

Your choice.....

I'm perfectly OK with my 13-16% alcohol wines from ALL corners of Bordeaux! I don't discriminate these when they have a perfect balance.

[Musigny 151]

Mark,

I've actually worked with chemistry as a chemistry laboratory technician for 40 years controlling medicine etc.

You're very much obsessed with alcohol. Once again, stop talking bull....!

Oh dear! So once and for all, with all this lab experience, you are telling me that alcohol in the bottle changes over time. This just requires a yes or no answer, not an insulting response so that you can avoid having to reply.

[greatbxfreak]

Niclasss said;

" I'm in the camp that when the alcohol level is 100 % from the grape sugar, and well mastered and integrated, it is a great wine at any alcohol level."

I agree.

[Comte Flaneur]

Mark,

I don't agree at all with you, we've had this discussion with you before.

I won't continue discussing alcohol levels as it's totally irrelevant for me.

Maybe not with Musigny, but some of us had this discussion before about alcohol. And that’s ok to ‘agree to disagree’...

http://www.bordeauxwineenthusiasts.com/ ... ion#p53420

Yea put me in Mark’s camp. At least for my country palate, alcohol never integrates. Ever. I actually think it’s presence becomes more noticeable on wines as the youthful fruit starts to fade and the wine moves into the secondary and tertiary stages. It is a rare wine indeed, IMHO, that can handle 15%+ without showing it. That number alone causes me not to buy, generally. And 2010 had lots of those monsters on the right bank. I stuck to Northern Medoc in this rather alcoholic vintage.

Robert, or Mark, as a matter of interest do you have any specific examples of wines which started off with excess alcohol where it never integrated. I ask because a generation ago wines in general and Bordeaux in particular were much lower in alcohol and good Bordeaux takes the best part of a generation to mature fully. So for a 2010 right bank surely the jury is still out. I have no agenda here, just curious.

[Chateau Vin]

.
.


Yea put me in Mark’s camp. At least for my country palate, alcohol never integrates. Ever. I actually think it’s presence becomes more noticeable on wines as the youthful fruit starts to fade and the wine moves into the secondary and tertiary stages. It is a rare wine indeed, IMHO, that can handle 15%+ without showing it. That number alone causes me not to buy, generally. And 2010 had lots of those monsters on the right bank. I stuck to Northern Medoc in this rather alcoholic vintage.

Robert, or Mark, as a matter of interest do you have any specific examples of wines which started off with excess alcohol where it never integrated. I ask because a generation ago wines in general and Bordeaux in particular were much lower in alcohol and good Bordeaux takes the best part of a generation to mature fully. So for a 2010 right bank surely the jury is still out. I have no agenda here, just curious.

That's surely the question, Ian. I think stefan was also alluding to that in previous discussions.

Some of us are in the camp that alcohol will integrate over a period of time and some of us believe otherwise. As we don't have wines from the 80s with around 15% alc (maybe some of veterans can correct me if I am wrong), it's hard to know which camp is closer to being right. We started to see such high alcohol bordeaux only lately, a dozen or so years ago, and we will have a better answer maybe 20 or 25 years from now. Until we have evidence based conclusion, we can only base our opinions on logical/scientific beliefs...

[Comte Flaneur]

Yes absolutely CV. I am curious to know if there are any convincing examples which might shift the direction of evidence one way or the other.

[Musigny 151]

.
.


Yea put me in Mark’s camp. At least for my country palate, alcohol never integrates. Ever. I actually think it’s presence becomes more noticeable on wines as the youthful fruit starts to fade and the wine moves into the secondary and tertiary stages. It is a rare wine indeed, IMHO, that can handle 15%+ without showing it. That number alone causes me not to buy, generally. And 2010 had lots of those monsters on the right bank. I stuck to Northern Medoc in this rather alcoholic vintage.

Robert, or Mark, as a matter of interest do you have any specific examples of wines which started off with excess alcohol where it never integrated. I ask because a generation ago wines in general and Bordeaux in particular were much lower in alcohol and good Bordeaux takes the best part of a generation to mature fully. So for a 2010 right bank surely the jury is still out. I have no agenda here, just curious.

That's surely the question, Ian. I think stefan was also alluding to that in previous discussions.

Some of us are in the camp that alcohol will integrate over a period of time and some of us believe otherwise. As we don't have wines from the 80s with around 15% alc (maybe some of veterans can correct me if I am wrong), it's hard to know which camp is closer to being right. We started to see such high alcohol bordeaux only lately, a dozen or so years ago, and we will have a better answer maybe 20 or 25 years from now. Until we have evidence based conclusion, we can only base our opinions on logical/scientific beliefs...

I agree an interesting question, and I spent a few minutes trying to come up with an answer. I don’t think I have come across a vintage with as many 15+% wines as 2009 and 2010. I remember the complaint earlier than that was extraction, and the extraction of the bad stuff as well as the good.


So I agree we haven’t seen a vintage go to its final maturity. But it takes a Trumpian disdain of science to think that high levels of alcohol will somehow magically change over time. It is a constant, and the chemical formula c2H6o will be the same year one as year 100.

[stefan]

It looks to me like people are using "integrate" to mean different things. There are chemical changes going on as wine ages, but these do not involve alcohol, so in a sense alcohol never integrates. OTOH, an individual's perception of the alcohol in wine, particularly whether a wine tastes hot, can vary as the wine changes, so one might well say that the alcohol has integrated when the person's perception of "hotness" goes down.

There are more important things about which to argue, such as whether any CA Cab is as good as the average Cru Bourgeoise Bordeaux.

[RPCV]

He tased many twice; once at Farr's and another at BI wines

Beychevelle 93, 94
Branaire 95, 93
Conseillante 97 (2x)
Ducru 96
Gruaud 94, 93+
Langoa 95, 95
Leoville-Barton 95, 91?(blunt finish)
LLC 96, ? (he did not explain why there was no score)
Pavillon Rouge 92
Pape Clement 92+, 95
Pichon-Baron 96, 95
Poujeaux (not tasted)
Cantemerle 93
Batailley 94
Angludet 87
Hortevie (not tasted)

[Comte Flaneur]

RPCV thank you so much for those scores. I am happy to hold but thinking of a B (lower case zero) (Blanquito nought) score of 1.5 to 3.

He seems to be swaying with the view espoused by Stephen Browett, the Farr Vintners owner who organises these tastings, leaning towards the 2009s...and the 2016s...I bought few 09s.

There is altogether another discussion (on WB ) on how the 2005s are evolving.

And Mark thanks for your candid answer regarding my question re alcohol.

[JCNorthway]

There are more important things about which to argue, such as whether any CA Cab is as good as the average Cru Bourgeoise Bordeaux.

Interestingly, a friend just asked me to help choose a two inexpensive wines ($20 +/-) that could be tasted by several couples in a Zoom tasting this weekend. I suggested perhaps choosing two wines from the same vintage, made with the same grapes, but from different regions. I proposed doing a red Bordeaux and and a Cab blend from California. The shop where they sent me to choose was fairly small with limited options. But I was able to find a 2016 Chateau Argadens Bordeaux Superieur (never heard of it) at $16 and a 2016 Sebastiani Cabernet from Alexander Valley at $21. I got invited to participate, so I will let you know how it turns out. (I think that I already know what my preference will be.)

[Comte Flaneur]

Jon
Argadens is a super, glossy wine, very accessible without being souped up, and excellent vfm. I have a 12 pack of 2015 splits on the go, a useful little number for a mid week slurp.

[Chateau Vin]

Yes absolutely CV. I am curious to know if there are any convincing examples which might shift the direction of evidence one way or the other.

Hi Comte, I am in the camp that alcohol levels do not change over time. We all know that fruit fades over time, and tannins recede (as they go through chemical change), but I believe alcohol doesn't change. Maybe the chemists on the board have a better grasp about what happens to alcohol overtime.

Here is what I have written in that post in 2016, and still stick to it as of now. And ofcourse, I am willing change my view once I have definitive answer 20 years from now...

"I agree that a good winemaker can mask the high alcohol with other elements of wine. But the thing is, I am not sure if you can 'integrate' alcohol well over in the long term...when the wine is young, with enough fruit, you can mask it. But how would high alcohol wines fare when the fruit fades in the long term? For aged bordeaux, I think lower alcohol levels in 12 to 14 levels might serve better for aging.

With increased alc levels post 2000, it would be interesting to see how they would fare when aged beyond say 30 years..."

Followed by...

"There is no such thing as integration of alcohol. Alcohol is alcohol. Whatever the wine begins with a percentage of alcohol, it ends up with the same percentage after aging. The other elements like tannins and fruit are a different story. Over age, the tannins undergo chemical change and subside, and hence we call 'integrated'. For alcohol, I don't think we can say they are 'integrated'. Because we have more fruit, tannins and oak initially when the wine is made, we might not feel the alcohol initially, hense the term 'masked'. But overtime after aging, when the tannins mellow down and fruit fades, one should feel the alcohol more easily."

Here is another following post...

"We can agree to disagree...But alcohol getting integrated in wine over a period of time is a myth. 'Integration' is a misnomer. The better word is 'masking' or 'perception'. It does not become weaker over time and that's why it is labeled as ABV or alcohol by volume. In fact, theoretically speaking, it might increase as the volume of wine in bottle decreases with aging...

Alcohol 'perception' is pronounced or not depending on the age of bottle, but the alcohol level remains the same...."

[Chateau Vin]

Jon
Argadens is a super, glossy wine, very accessible without being souped up, and excellent vfm. I have a 12 pack of 2015 splits on the go, a useful little number for a mid week slurp.

"glossy"

[Comte Flaneur]

CV: Thinking aloud you could say the same about Port...people don’t stop drinking port because it is too alcoholic...having said that it has gone out of fashion, and has been easy pick up at auction at a bargain...thanks for digging out your posts...yes I think most of us would agree the idea that the alcohol does not somehow disappear is uncontroversial...the issue is whether the ‘excess’ alcohol detracts from the overall experience as the wine ages...

[OrlandoRobert]

Robert, or Mark, as a matter of interest do you have any specific examples of wines which started off with excess alcohol where it never integrated. I ask because a generation ago wines in general and Bordeaux in particular were much lower in alcohol and good Bordeaux takes the best part of a generation to mature fully. So for a 2010 right bank surely the jury is still out. I have no agenda here, just curious.

I nowhere near have Mark's expertise on Bordeaux, but like most of you guys, drink a ton of it and have for 2+ decades. I actually think we have seen exactly how these higher alcohol, lower acid, toasted oak modern darlings show. We have many of them - especially from the St Emilion - that have been Rollandized, bastardized or whatever terms you wish to use. I had come back from a several year hiatus from wine when these modern wines were coming into vogue and Parker and other critics were gloating over them. So I bought lots of them. I also bought lots of 2007 Chateuaneufs that were Cambified or candied, again choose your terms. Many of these wines like from 2005 are at 15 years, and the 2003s and 2000s and some 1998s even more. Nobody can argue that a decent Bordeaux cannot be fairly evaluated in this 15-20 year old range. I mean really, most major critics do these retros at 10. Many of these wines to which I refer, and I'll list a some below, started showing worse at year 10, for my palate. And yes, I tried most of them on release. At 15 they showed even worse. Now mind you, that is my palate alone. Many of these wines had oak and alcohol at such amped up levels that once the fruit started to evolve into the secondary and tertiary levels - the stuff many of us love - the perception of alcohol worsened. It patently did not integrate. It worsened.

2000 Pavie
2003 Pavie
2005 Lascombes
2002 Pape Clement
2003 Pape Clement
2005 Pape Clement
2005 Smith Haut Lafite
2003 Smith Haut Lafite
2003 Fleur Cardinale
2005 Fleur Cardinale
2005 Pierre le Lune
2005 La Confession
2005 Pavie
2005 Troplong Mondot
2003 Bellevue Mondotte
2003 La Vieille Cure
2005 La Vielle Cure
1998 Barde Haut
1998 Haut Bergey
2000 Barde Haut
2000 Haut Bergey
2005 la Clotte


These are from memory. I know there are a whole lot more. I do not know the exact percentage of alcohol on all of these, but I hated all of them once I started drinking them in windows that should be prime or close to prime drinking. Some I tried multiple bottles. I ultimately got rid of every single modern Bordeaux in my "cellar" - close to it, some stragglers remain.

I did the exact same thing with Chateaunuef du Pape. The Ussegilio cuvees and the Clos St Jean cuvees, and even my once-beloved Ch. St Cosme, etc. The 2007 vintage was a disaster. Usseglio and Clos St Jean, and some others, made rocket fuel. For my palate, the alcohol did not integrate. It patently got worse. I did not find 2009 much better. I gave literally all of it away. I have not one modern CDP or anything made by Cambie. His wines are generally revolting.

I will note, I recently had a 2005 Clos Fourtet. While it was more international in style and a bit opulent, I did not find it OTT, and with a hearty Italian meal, thought it was excellent. A good slutty wine is occasionally a decent drink. The stuff I highlighted above are far from decent, they are sink dumpsters for me.

This is just my story. A very painful, financial lesson learned way back then. I cannot imagine that 15% St Ems from 2010 or 2009 will ultimately integrate to my liking. I bought none of them. The only 2010 St Ems I bought were Figeac and Magdelaine. Bought 2009 Magdelaine as well. BTW, the 2011 was smokin. I don't think I have any Pomerols from 2009, but did buy 2010 VCC and Trotanoy.

[Chateau Vin]

CV: Thinking aloud you could say the same about Port...people don’t stop drinking port because it is too alcoholic...having said that it has gone out of fashion, and has been easy pick up at auction at a bargain...the idea that the alcohol does not somehow disappear is uncontroversial...the issue is whether the ‘excess’ alcohol detracts from the overall experience as the wine ages...

Absolutely. People drink port because they want to drink port, and are not concerned about alcohol.

I can't speak for everyone, but I prefer lower alcohol wines (as I have lower threshold for it), and I do not like high alcohol wines. Having said that, if I can't perceive it (usually because there is plenty of fruit in its youth), that's fine, but my concern is how that perception of alcohol for me will be after ageing...In that regard, I am wary and apprehensive about such alcohol levels...

[stefan]

Ian, of those wines I have drunk two several times, 2003 Smith Haut Lafitte and 2002 Pape Clement. I liked the Pape Clement when it was pretty young but have not tasted it for maybe five years. I very much disliked the 2003 SHL when we when drank it the other night but cannot remember the other bottles, probably because I thought them too young to judge fairly. I have also drunk several vintages of Haut-Bergey many times. I liked the 2006 and 2005. I have a case of the 2010 and opened one 2-3 years ago. It was almost undrinkable. Lucie refused to drink even one glass. She loves the 2005, BTW.

[Comte Flaneur]

I feel exactly the same way CV about alcohol. I am on record for saying this, and echoing Robert and Mark’s distaste for highly alcoholic right banks. I just remain to be convinced that these wines are a write off.

Robert provided an impressive list of offenders, but among the more serious estates the jury is surely still out. When I last tried 2005 Pavie I found it verging on abhorrent. But can I exclude the possibility that this will be magnificent in 20-30 years? Absolutely not. That is the market, which is more knowledgeable than any of us, which doesn’t mean we can’t bet against it. Pape Clement went very modern around 2000: who’s to say how the 2005 evolves?

Edit: thanks stefan: yes the jury is still out.