Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts

https://www.vinous.com/articles/uncerta ... 9-jun-2020#

I briefly scanned this yesterday. It seems that he likes the vintage overall, and flagged a few wines below the level of the big names that he thought produced high quality wines.

I like Neal's musings, but his palate is far more universal than mine - he loves the classics and the modernists equally. I note that he especially highlighted in this report as over-performers, some modernist wines that I simply refuse to buy and do not like: Smith Haut Lafite, Clinet and Leoville Poyferre. For St Em, he highlighted Figeac, which we all know is now under the control of Uncle Rollo and critics are popping 100-pointers all over it! I bought some 2016, but have not really delved - largely because of the cost - into any science experiment regarding whether it has become OTT for my palate. I did like 2014, but that was not a ripe vintage.

Looks like Calon Segur is, again, one of the wines to definitely buy! Loved seeing him highlight a second label as well, from LLC. I imagine the Clos du Marquis is pretty solid as well.

Looks like Calon Segur is, again, one of the wines to definitely buy!

Mmmm this is becoming like my favorite estate. I wonder what it is going for pricewise in 2019?

Is anyone over 50 investing in this vintage? I'm worried I went too far buying 2016s to be honest.

Marcus, I am 75 and just received a couple of cases of 2016 Grand Cru Classe Bordeaux. I don't plan to buy 2019s, but would buy a bunch if I were in my 50s.

marcs wrote:Is anyone over 50 investing in this vintage? I'm worried I went too far buying 2016s to be honest.

Only Stefan.

I'm 54, it is very doubtful that I buy anything except for a few Crus here and there, but none of the big boys and girls. I bought nothing in 18 or 17. I may buy a Maggie of 2018 lafite for a specific purpose. I bought some select 2016s but not a lot (re-thinking that - Jimbo is a big champion). I only bought a handful of 2015s (not re-thinking that). And I bought a ton of 2014s, a classic vintage, and one where I personal declared, "no mas".

My son is beginning to get interested in wine, so better to leave him some younger wines as well as the old bottles. I doubt whether I will be around to drink the magnums of Palmer 2019, but they are something he will either enjoy or sell, and far more fun than the average stock certificate.

I am 49, and I'm only backfilling red Bordeaux at this stage (but naturally I'll scoop up new release stuff when it's +50% off like those recent 2016 Pichon Baron, Cos and Lynch).

Unless modern vintages end up maturing faster than the old ones did, I like my claret best with 30 years on it.

Interesting and i'll be a buyer. Probably not a big one, but will surely sample that vintage that NM wrote "wines that are already approachable" two years before they're delivered to consumers.

For the older BWEers, you should minimum buy lower classification wines (Crus Bourgeois) to taste that 2019 vintage that seems very BWE styled.

Nic

OrlandoRobert wrote:I like Neal's musings, but his palate is far more universal than mine - he loves the classics and the modernists equally. I note that he especially highlighted in this report as over-performers, some modernist wines that I simply refuse to buy and do not like: Smith Haut Lafite, Clinet and Leoville Poyferre. For St Em, he highlighted Figeac, which we all know is now under the control of Uncle Rollo and critics are popping 100-pointers all over it! I bought some 2016, but have not really delved - largely because of the cost - into any science experiment regarding whether it has become OTT for my palate. I did like 2014, but that was not a ripe vintage.

Looks like Calon Segur is, again, one of the wines to definitely buy! Loved seeing him highlight a second label as well, from LLC. I imagine the Clos du Marquis is pretty solid as well.

Robert, are there any such chateaux in Pauillac that you would call modernist and refuse to buy?

61 years of age. 2016 is the last classified vintage I bought, wasn't much but I assume it will lure youngsters to my nursing home.

Patrick, the funny thing for me is that I remember younger Bordeaux (say, around ten years old) as being better when I was your age and younger. There were vintage exceptions, such as 1975 and 1986, but most excellent wines, even second growths, from, e.g., 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1987 were already good and even mature at age 10. I cannot think of any high tier wines from the current millennium that tasted good at age 10. Of wines from classified estates, I find 2010s undrinkable and 2005 nearly so, and I don't remember drinking any Grand Cru Classe wines from 2009, 2008, and 2006 that I thought had entered prime time.

Incidentally, the Bordeaux I enjoyed at age ten and drank again around age 30 were mostly very good, but different. Actually, maybe "mostly" should be "all" as I do not remember an exception.

Yes; this mirrors my experience. I remember on my first trip to Bordeaux in 1985, I attended a tasting of 1979s. They were for the most part delicious, and there was no need to extrapolate what the wines would taste like without all the new oak, as most chateaux could not afford to buy them in quantity. The result for me was that young wines were much more distinctive.They were less ripe, and many from very old vines, so they showed great depth.

There is a fascinating post by William Kelly on the Berserker board, on why the style has changed. I don’t feel comfortable reposting here.

Musigny 151 wrote: There is a fascinating post by William Kelly on the Berserker board, on why the style has changed. I don’t feel comfortable reposting here.

I cannot find it, can you PM me the link?

Dandersson wrote:

OrlandoRobert wrote:I like Neal's musings, but his palate is far more universal than mine - he loves the classics and the modernists equally. I note that he especially highlighted in this report as over-performers, some modernist wines that I simply refuse to buy and do not like: Smith Haut Lafite, Clinet and Leoville Poyferre. For St Em, he highlighted Figeac, which we all know is now under the control of Uncle Rollo and critics are popping 100-pointers all over it! I bought some 2016, but have not really delved - largely because of the cost - into any science experiment regarding whether it has become OTT for my palate. I did like 2014, but that was not a ripe vintage.

Looks like Calon Segur is, again, one of the wines to definitely buy! Loved seeing him highlight a second label as well, from LLC. I imagine the Clos du Marquis is pretty solid as well.

Robert, are there any such chateaux in Pauillac that you would call modernist and refuse to buy?

Mouton!

I kid, I kid. But, for me, it tends to be the more opulent of the FGs.

I cannot think of one of the big boys that has been modernized to the point where I avoid them. Love what Lalande is doing right now.

OrlandoRobert wrote:

Musigny 151 wrote: There is a fascinating post by William Kelly on the Berserker board, on why the style has changed. I don’t feel comfortable reposting here.

I cannot find it, can you PM me the link?

Or give us a hint, like the title of the post, or the date it was posted...

https://www.wineberserkers.com/forum/vi ... 9&start=50

Page 2 post 61

Neal wrote:

“Also, some readers have inquired about the absence of Pontet-Canet, a major growth that I have reviewed and written about for almost two decades. All I want to say is that I hope I will be allowed to return in the future, so long as I can judge the wine with the openness, honesty and impartiality accorded every wine that I taste.

Anyone know what’s that all about?

Alcohol seems high..... Capbern @ 15.1%. WOW!!!

I don't know this for a fact, but it may be NM's "92?" score and review in his 2010s at 10 years article in April -

The 2010 Pontet-Canet is noticeably deep in colour compared to its peers. This is unusually ripe and sweet on the nose, more red than black fruit, maybe a little jammy and confit-like. I would never guess this was a 2010 Left Bank. The palate is medium-bodied with a fleshy mouthfeel, plenty of graphite tinged red fruit. Approachable in style and sensually fulfilling, it just lacks a bit of grip and backbone on the finish. I have fonder memories of previous bottles but I could not identify any specific fault. Tasted blind at Farr Vintners 10-Year On Bordeaux horizontal.

Galloni released his overview too

https://vinous.com/articles/2019-bordea ... p-jun-2020

Cap de Faugeres is $10 as a futures buy....can't remember last time a $10 bottle of wine of this quality being offered....

Guys
I’m in my 60’s and have been trying to reduce EP purchases for yrs.
I bought a lot of both 09 and 10. Since then I bought only a few 14s virtually no 15s and could not resist 2016 and bought about 9 cases. I bought only one case of 2018 EP and no 19’s so far.
At this point I am not in a hurry to do anything and the local importers are spamming me will offers not just for 2019 EP’s but every vintage from 2014 onward.
The Chinese market is way way down. Last year it fell about 30% from its peak a Few years back and this year will be a disaster. While 2019 is looking reasonable value, the Asian traders and retailers are getting stuck with too much stock and reluctant buyers. As such I can sit on my hands and may backfill earlier vintages that are approaching their drinking window.
As for age, a larger issue for me is internal (digestive) issues which have largely forced my hand. The gastro today suggested I avoid alcohol entirely but that ain’t happening but I have had to reduce consumption in recent years.

Since stylistically, I am no longer enjoying Bordeaux younger than 1990 (with some notable exceptions), I am not buying anything from the region.

I'm purchasing White Burgundies, Red Burgundies (mainly reg Bourgogne, Village and obscure producers 1er Cru), Champagne, Nebbiolo and 70s/80s Bordeaux at auction with very strict criteria.

brodway wrote:Cap de Faugeres is $10 as a futures buy....can't remember last time a $10 bottle of wine of this quality being offered....

Not my style of Bordeaux, but it is a crowd pleaser and that is just flat out stupid pricing. I paid more for the 2005 back then!

I remember drinking the 95 Cap de Faugeres for around that price, I might even have bought some vintages around that time as low as $8. It was the kind of bottle I could safely leave in my desk at work, and if we had a good/bad day, uncork in the early evening, rewarding/consoling ourselves as needed.

Ahhh those were the days. NASDAQ at 5000 and gulpable bdx for $10.

stefan wrote:Patrick, the funny thing for me is that I remember younger Bordeaux (say, around ten years old) as being better when I was your age and younger. There were vintage exceptions, such as 1975 and 1986, but most excellent wines, even second growths, from, e.g., 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1987 were already good and even mature at age 10. I cannot think of any high tier wines from the current millennium that tasted good at age 10. Of wines from classified estates, I find 2010s undrinkable and 2005 nearly so, and I don't remember drinking any Grand Cru Classe wines from 2009, 2008, and 2006 that I thought had entered prime time.

Incidentally, the Bordeaux I enjoyed at age ten and drank again around age 30 were mostly very good, but different. Actually, maybe "mostly" should be "all" as I do not remember an exception.

ONE THOUSAND TIMES THIS! A really important point that I never see made. I did not actually have this experience of drinking 80s to mid 90s Bordeaux when young, but I know that folk wisdom when I was starting out collecting in the very early oughts was that 10 years old was a good time to drink Bordeaux and the maturity plateau would be something like 10-25 years old. But I gradually found out how wrong that was for higher level classed growths in the 21st century. Except for a few years like 2002 and 2004 (and 2009 in the sense that it is a vintage that may never really shut down), they seem to open up at more like 15 years old and in the bigger / more tannic vintages like 2000, 2005, and 2010 they don't really open till 20 years old. Then who knows how long they will take to get real tertiary notes -- the big guns among the 2000 vintage wines are now open for great drinking with a decant but the fruit is still very youthful. And 2000 feels like a "traditional" vintage compared to e.g. 2010. I don't think we know how these wines will age. But there is no doubt that the precedent over the last two decades has been for major wines in major vintages to shut down long and hard, for a decade or more after the youthful period of openness. I would assume that will continue until it is proven differently.

Bordeaux now seems to age more like I was once told Barolo would age.

marcs wrote:

stefan wrote:Patrick, the funny thing for me is that I remember younger Bordeaux (say, around ten years old) as being better when I was your age and younger. There were vintage exceptions, such as 1975 and 1986, but most excellent wines, even second growths, from, e.g., 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1987 were already good and even mature at age 10. I cannot think of any high tier wines from the current millennium that tasted good at age 10. Of wines from classified estates, I find 2010s undrinkable and 2005 nearly so, and I don't remember drinking any Grand Cru Classe wines from 2009, 2008, and 2006 that I thought had entered prime time.

Incidentally, the Bordeaux I enjoyed at age ten and drank again around age 30 were mostly very good, but different. Actually, maybe "mostly" should be "all" as I do not remember an exception.

ONE THOUSAND TIMES THIS! A really important point that I never see made. I did not actually have this experience of drinking 80s to mid 90s Bordeaux when young, but I know that folk wisdom when I was starting out collecting in the very early oughts was that 10 years old was a good time to drink Bordeaux and the maturity plateau would be something like 10-25 years old. But I gradually found out how wrong that was for higher level classed growths in the 21st century. Except for a few years like 2002 and 2004 (and 2009 in the sense that it is a vintage that may never really shut down), they seem to open up at more like 15 years old and in the bigger / more tannic vintages like 2000, 2005, and 2010 they don't really open till 20 years old. Then who knows how long they will take to get real tertiary notes -- the big guns among the 2000 vintage wines are now open for great drinking with a decant but the fruit is still very youthful. And 2000 feels like a "traditional" vintage compared to e.g. 2010. I don't think we know how these wines will age. But there is no doubt that the precedent over the last two decades has been for major wines in major vintages to shut down long and hard, for a decade or more after the youthful period of openness. I would assume that will continue until it is proven differently.

Bordeaux now seems to age more like I was once told Barolo would age.

Yes, this is very interesting to recall this pattern. I of course didn't start drinking fine Bordeaux until around 1994-95 (and by fine Bordeaux, I mean chateau like Meyney and Sociando!), but many 80's wines were already delicious by then. Not the 86s and many 88s and 89s clearly would get better in time, but 82, 83, 85 and 90 were all tasting great for my palate.

Then came the 95s, 96s (LB), 98s (RB), 00s, and 05s, and for my mileage none of these years are really close to full maturity and only now have some of the 95s and 96s started to open up really. Now a big part of this is no doubt because I moved much higher up the food chain for these vintages and started acquiring classified growths that need more time. But clearly something changed with the weather, wine making, cepage (lots more Cabernet Sauvignon?), grape clones, cellar practices (stricter low oxygen conditions?), etc.

It's like...what would happen to aging if we let the grapes hang longer on the vine, then selected only the most perfect grapes for inclusion in the wine, then extracted them harder and then maybe concentrated the must a little bit for good measure...hmmmm....

Post-2010 Bordeaux moved away from ostentatious overextraction and used various techniques to make the wines smoother but I suspect some of the same factors apply.

I think you guys are on to something. The better classed growth Bordeaux are taking a LOT longer to develop those great tertiary complexities than the wines from the 70s and 80s, when I first got into them. Hoping that they still will. Maybe all that bigness takes more time to mellow out. Did I really just buy a bunch of 2019s that won’t be ready until I’m pushing 90? Lock me up!

DavidG wrote:I think you guys are on to something. The better classed growth Bordeaux are taking a LOT longer to develop those great tertiary complexities than the wines from the 70s and 80s, when I first got into them. Hoping that they still will. Maybe all that bigness takes more time to mellow out. Did I really just buy a bunch of 2019s that won’t be ready until I’m pushing 90? Lock me up!

Hmmm.

I don’t know. Not that I’m questioning, it’s that I really dont know, and am not sure we are there yet to know.

It’s an interesting shift in the discussion, as we have heard the mantra for years now that the new crop of Bordeaux has actually been designed to mature more quickly, to be more approachable at a more young age. Certainly the critics seem to be espousing that, when they are putting drinking windows on Classified Growths starting in 5-7 years. And we seem to have riper years after riper years, producing softer, fruitier, creamier wines. I think 2005 and 2010 will certainly be the long-haul vintages, but do the rest of you truly believe that the other vintages post-2000 actually mature more slowly than vintages from the 1980s? I find some 2012s quite delicious right now, and while I think 2014 is rather classic in structure, I also think some like Lanessan are also delicious right now. I have not touched any of my big boys from 2012 or 2014, except on release to see what more I wanted to buy. I still think the rule of 15 for starters applies.

OrlandoRobert wrote:

DavidG wrote:I think you guys are on to something. The better classed growth Bordeaux are taking a LOT longer to develop those great tertiary complexities than the wines from the 70s and 80s, when I first got into them. Hoping that they still will. Maybe all that bigness takes more time to mellow out. Did I really just buy a bunch of 2019s that won’t be ready until I’m pushing 90? Lock me up!

Hmmm.

I don’t know. Not that I’m questioning, it’s that I really dont know, and am not sure we are there yet to know.

It’s an interesting shift in the discussion, as we have heard the mantra for years now that the new crop of Bordeaux has actually been designed to mature more quickly, to be more approachable at a more young age. Certainly the critics seem to be espousing that, when they are putting drinking windows on Classified Growths starting in 5-7 years. And we seem to have riper years after riper years, producing softer, fruitier, creamier wines. I think 2005 and 2010 will certainly be the long-haul vintages, but do the rest of you truly believe that the other vintages post-2000 actually mature more slowly than vintages from the 1980s? I find some 2012s quite delicious right now, and while I think 2014 is rather classic in structure, I also think some like Lanessan are also delicious right now. I have not touched any of my big boys from 2012 or 2014, except on release to see what more I wanted to buy. I still think the rule of 15 for starters applies.

I don’t know either, but I’m intrigued by the concept.

FWIW, the "designed to mature more quickly, to be more approachable at a more young age" that’s being touted is not necessarily related to development of the tertiary aged characteristics that a lot of us treasure. They are likely two very different things, and for all I know, they could be at odds. I certainly haven’t seen that tertiary stuff show up any earlier, even though the wines are "easier" to drink young. Riper fruit, glossier mouthfeel, refined tannins, lower acid may all contribute to that earlier approachability while at the same time inhibiting development of the complexity that used to start showing up at 10-15 years. The real questions for me are whether the wines will ever develop their full potential, and how long it will take.

I agree 100% David, hence my preface. I’ve yet to experience tertiary notes in anything post-2005, but these really are still young wines.

OrlandoRobert wrote: I still think the rule of 15 for starters applies.

But when I first learned the "rule of 15" it was actually a "rule of 10"!

Re earlier drinking/glossier -- yes and no. I agree with David. These wines are earlier drinking in that the tannins don't make it actively painful to drink young and there is lots of overt fruit that is accessible young. But some of the left bank 2015s and 2016s I have had are not actually all that "Bordeaux-ish" young. This goes beyond Dave's point about tertiary complexity; they have a glossier, almost Super Tuscan type style which lacks some of the tangy acidity, purity, and structural qualities that I go to Bordeaux for. My question is not just whether they will eventually develop aged complexity but whether they will become more "Bordeaux-ish" with age. I also wonder how long the shut down period will last given that underneath the glossiness they do have a LOT of fruit and tannin, they are funtanndamentally big wines.

It is easy to say that Bordeaux can have its cake and eat it too by making wines that drink well young, also age, and keep Bordeaux typicity. But I suspect it's hard to square that circle in a technical sense.

I think we are all saying sort of the same thing. The jury is still out whether this new crop of wines will express the tertiary notes that so many of us love in Bordeaux wines, perhaps those best expressed in many of the wines from the 1980s. we are all curious whether the up-front movement curtails back-end development. Let’s circle back in ten years.

So to sum up the unwelcome changes in Bordeaux for me the last 20 years:
Wines are a bit more accessible earlier but take a long time to develop any complexity.
Levels of alcohol are higher. While some don't mind, others are turned off.
A lot of the wines have a level of ripeness and sweetness that detracts from their character
Prices for classified growths, especially 1st growths, are much higher

What am I missing?

More new oak and more toasted oak

Maybe I am mistaken but I thought the trend was towards less not more new oak now? Which estates are still using 100% new oak outside the first growths? Not many left.

We will know in the fullness of time but my money is in the modern wines surpassing the wines we tend to revere on here. I think the main two differences are more rigorous selection and later picking.

The former is mainly a good thing but in the 2019 vintage they were adding back a bit of green matter in some cases to add freshness. Later picking is a Rolland thing bit I don’t sense the pendulum is swinging further towards later picking, if anything it might have swung back.

The tannins are far more refined in modern wines which make them more accessible. That is also a function of having less green matter in the mix. Unsurprisingly.

I think 2005 was peak extraction and 2010 was peak alcohol, but I am yet to come across a left bank 2010 that tastes overly alcoholic apart from La Mission Haut-Brion.

I drank a 1996 Gruaud on the weekend. It was nice classical claret, but overly strict and a little lean. Too much green stuff in the mix, more rigorous selection would have made it a far better wine even if that took it up from 12.5% to 13.0%.

Dons tin helmet..