La Conseillante with Marielle Cazaux

[OrlandoRobert]

Your bugaboo about Rolland is IMO, just plain silly. You might not like many wines, OK, no problem. But in most cases, especially at La Conseillante and Figeac, as well as at other high-end estates, he is there mainly for the blending. How is that an issue?

Jeff, in lawyer speak, we would say you are a bit loose with the facts here. Conseillante is undergoing change. Your own website notes that. Who made the decision to start micro-vinifying in wood in 2015? I really doubt Rolland comes in like the God he is and advises solely on the blend. I’m sure discussions evolve well beyond that. You are also overlooking the change in 2015 to bring in Marielle Cazaux, who was at Petite-Village for some years working with the other modernist consultant, Derenoncourt. I’m not a fan of Petite-Village, own none of it.

[Comte Flaneur]

She was at Petit-Village prior to Conseillante.

Yes nobody will change their minds on this but it is a bit unfair to characterise Rolland critics for their irrational hatred. Like I suspect Robert I have been drinking Bordeaux for over 30 years and I have seen what he has done to estates like Pavie, most egregiously, but also Pape Clement. Like Robert I have a great preference for Barton over Poyferre. I am sure Lillian Barton would not let Rolland anywhere near her estate. A point I have made previously on this topic is that it appears that his influence is not the same for each estate he consults for. I have continued to buy Conseillante and Figeac because I take Cazaux and Faye at their word that Rolland only advises and doesn’t decide. That could be a bit naive but I judge these wines on what I taste and they are still very good, and I don’t really detect a discrete change in style in either. Rolland advises on the blending but also, perhaps more controversially, when to pick, and I was heartened to hear Marielle say that in her opinion he has a preference for over-ripeness, as we saw when he had free rein in 2015. The 2016 is a much better wine, indeed a great wine.The impression I also have is that he is a disruptive influence, which appears to be why Laporte left and now recently why Jean-Michel Comme resigned from Pontet Canet. Comme conveyed to me directly in 2015 that he was not happy with Rolland’s involvement at Pontet-Canet. The good news is that the tide has been turning inexorably away from the most grotesque wines of a decade or more ago, and a poster child was of course Cos D’Estournel 2009.

Here is another interesting article from UK wine writer Joanna Simon

https://www.joannasimon.com/post/2018/0 ... -1982-2011

[Musigny 151]

I wish Joanna did more; she is a very fine writer.

You have got me curious. I did buy some 2015 Conseillante, I will get a bottle out of storage when the weather cools and report back.

I love Jean Michel Comme. A passionate man, and brought PC out of the dark ages. The wine was already skirting the line of tolerability, before Rolland. Clearly crossed it now. I bought some disappointing 2014, and immediately sold them to a friend. In a vintage that honored terroir, I found none.

So far so good at Figeac. Will probably retaste all the post D’Aramon wines in four or five years.

[JimHow]

I have two bottles of 2014 La Conseillante that I will hold.
I'm debating whether to buy a bottle of the 2016 at $228.

[OrlandoRobert]

I have two bottles of 2014 La Conseillante that I will hold.
I'm debating whether to buy a bottle of the 2016 at $228.

The 2016 vintage is so strong that it is tempting. I know you love this vintage. I did buy Figeac for shits and giggles.

You are no longer a youngster my friend, so the question is, are you better off paying roughly the same for 2010, 2009 and 2005, assuming you do not have these already? Or, even better, grab the 2000 or the 1998. I’ve had both recently, they are beautiful, and can easily be found between $190-$225. I know Leve and Izak will wax rhapsodically that the Conseillante of today is the best ever - pure opinion that I interpret to be as much hyperbole - but given the choice even if they are right: Would you rather drink a 94/95 point wine at or near maturity or a baby fresh 96-99 point wine. Easy choice for me. I’m not paying $225+ to wait 15+ years, in my dotage, to see whether Rolland and his followers are right. And I have always said that I would rather drink a nice mature Cru at apogee than a new release CG. Figeac was an easy buy as I got it for $100 off!

Of course, that’s all logic talking, and as we know, Bordeaux buyers (hoarders) are not always rational. Look at Doc Glasser buying 2019 futures!

[OrlandoRobert]

She was at Petit-Village prior to Conseillante.

Yes nobody will change their minds on this but it is a bit unfair to characterise Rolland critics for their irrational hatred. Like I suspect Robert I have been drinking Bordeaux for over 30 years and I have seen what he has done to estates like Pavie, most egregiously, but also Pape Clement. Like Robert I have a great preference for Barton over Poyferre. I am sure Lillian Barton would not let Rolland anywhere near her estate. A point I have made previously on this topic is that it appears that his influence is not the same for each estate he consults for. I have continued to buy Conseillante and Figeac because I take Cazaux and Faye at their word that Rolland only advises and doesn’t decide. That could be a bit naive but I judge these wines on what I taste and they are still very good, and I don’t really detect a discrete change in style in either. Rolland advises on the blending but also, perhaps more controversially, when to pick, and I was heartened to hear Marielle say that in her opinion he has a preference for over-ripeness, as we saw when he had free rein in 2015. The 2016 is a much better wine, indeed a great wine.The impression I also have is that he is a disruptive influence, which appears to be why Laporte left and now recently why Jean-Michel Comme resigned from Pontet Canet. Comme conveyed to me directly in 2015 that he was not happy with Rolland’s involvement at Pontet-Canet. The good news is that the tide has been turning inexorably away from the most grotesque wines of a decade or more ago, and a poster child was of course Cos D’Estournel 2009.

Here is another interesting article from UK wine writer Joanna Simon

https://www.joannasimon.com/post/2018/0 ... -1982-2011

Great post, and really great read there. I had not seen that one, so thanks for the link.

An interesting side-note, again to Leve’s normal response that Rolland only helps with the blending:

He was instrumental in the decision to do a five-day cold (8ºC) fermentation in 2015 to lengthen what promised to be very quick fermentations.

[JimHow]

Boy NH has cases and cases of the 2016 La Conseillante, OB, it's $228 when on sale.
I'll buy at least one bottle.

[greatbxfreak]

OrlandoRobert,

I haven't heard that Derenencourt is a modernist consultant?? And I don't recall people criticizing here on BWE Canon-La-Gaffeliere, La Mondotte, Clos de L'Oratoire, Pavie Macquin, Beausejour Duffau.

I don't understand why you're questioning what Michel Rolland is paid to do and make a silly postulate that he overtakes all the vinification process. He is paid to help with harvest date and blend, he's not involved in vinification in the cellar. I have been drinking Bordeaux for 37 years now, travelled to Bordeaux for 36 years now. I actually know some things about Bordeaux.

It surprises me greatly that you're not interested in Petit Village who enjoys a big renaissance since 2015 vintage with new winemaker/technical director Diana Garcia Berrouet. You lose a lot of great experiences.

She decides 100% on vinification even Stephane Derenencourt is consulting oenologist.

Marielle Cazaux is fully educated oenologist!! I'm pretty sure Michel Rolland's work at LC is concentrated on to give his input concerning blend.

ComteFlaneur,

I accept that you don't like Michel Rolland but you give us link to English wine writer in who's article she cites Marielle Cazaux and Valmy Nicolas for their comments on Michel Rolland. THen you write in your post - "The impression I also have is that he is a disruptive influence, which appears to be why Laporte left and now recently why Jean-Michel Comme resigned from Pontet Canet." Do you have som real inside news or is it just a postulate? I don't believe JML left LC because of Rolland.

2009 Cos made by JGP didn't have Michel Rolland involved. It was Pascal Chatonnet, who advises Vega Sicilia and Chateau de Beaucastel among others. I believe however on the basis of tasted bottle of 2009 during Cos vertical in Copenhagen, November 2017, that Mark's half bottle was a faulty one.

Technical director is a winemaker, who takes important decisions together with the owner(s), consulting oenologist is a consultant not a winemaker. This is for having a some fresh input(s). According to some here on the forum, he makes wine at hundreds of properties, overrides the decision of technical director/owner. Which is not correct. I have heard some people say - "Oh, Oh, he makes a copy of Bon Pasteur all over the world!" The problem is, he neither is involved in vinification nor consults it!

He advises Lascombes and in 2019 this property imho have produced maybe the best modern age vintage ever. I think he's only helping with the date of the harvest. in 2004 prior to harvest, I was in the vineyard of Lascombes and watched his work when he inspected it together with the technical staff of Lascombes. No overextraction, no overripeness, pure elegance and finesse in 2019!

[Comte Flaneur]

Izak, nobody was claiming that Rolland was involved in Cos, which did not stop the 2009 from being a poster child for the ultra spoofulated wines which were fashionable at the time. Neither is anyone claiming that Rolland has a monopoly on presiding over spoofy wines.

As for Lascombes that has been an estate I have been avoiding after some disasters in the 2000s. I think it was the 2004, as an example.

But overall I think all this is ending quite well because the tide has been moving inexorably away from wines souped up in the cellar or overoaked. Very few estates use 100% new oak these days.

[OrlandoRobert]

Izak, nobody was claiming that Rolland was involved in Cos, which did not stop the 2009 from being a poster child for the ultra spoofulated wines which were fashionable at the time. Neither is anyone claiming that Rolland has a monopoly on presiding over spoofy wines.

As for Lascombes that has been an estate I have been avoiding after some disasters in the 2000s. I think it was the 2004, as an example.

But overall I think all this is ending quite well because the tide has been moving inexorably away from wines souped up in the cellar or overoaked. Very few estates use 100% new oak these days.

The 2005 Lascombes is one of the worst Classified Growths from a quality year that I have ever had.

[Musigny 151]

Izak,

Whoa cowboy! Time to weigh in.
1.I like Dererencourt as a person, but I find his wines are not only spoofed, but often worse than Rolland’s.

2. My bottle of 2009 Cos was not faulty; it was consistent with the other half bottle and the Primeur notes. Less than a week ago, you wrote, “ I didn't like it en primeur either. Extremely overextracted and overripe fruit. One American wine critic, known for his controversial ratings, slated it and called it machine oil! The responsible for this failure was Jean-Guillaume Prats, who totally miscalculated the vinification of the vintage.”

My note is certainty consistent with yours, although I loathed it more than you did.

3. Rolland “helping with harvest date” is why he is do damned dangerous. It is certainly the reason why the wines are too ripe, too alcoholic and almost certainly why it obliterates character. We have discussed physiological ripeness before; I don’t want to rehash, but at a time we are worried about global warming, going for Rolland’s type of ripeness is a recipe for disaster.

4. As Ian points out in his last post, Rolland does not have a monopoly on spoofed wines. There are plenty of sinners to go round.

5. I agree with you that Rolland works with each chateau differently, having greater or less input/impact depending on the winemaker.



4.

[Musigny 151]

Izak, nobody was claiming that Rolland was involved in Cos, which did not stop the 2009 from being a poster child for the ultra spoofulated wines which were fashionable at the time. Neither is anyone claiming that Rolland has a monopoly on presiding over spoofy wines.

As for Lascombes that has been an estate I have been avoiding after some disasters in the 2000s. I think it was the 2004, as an example.

But overall I think all this is ending quite well because the tide has been moving inexorably away from wines souped up in the cellar or overoaked. Very few estates use 100% new oak these days.

The 2005 Lascombes is one of the worst Classified Growths from a quality year that I have ever had.

You lucky lad; you missed the ‘03

[Musigny 151]

Whoa cowboy! Time to weigh in.
1.I like Dererencourt as a person, but I find his wines are not only spoofed, but often worse than Rolland’s.

2. My bottle of 2009 Cos was not faulty; it was consistent with the other half bottle and the Primeur notes.
I initially thought this as your 2009 note, then saw you retracted and said it was your 2010 note. I am very puzzled, since this in no way is close to the 2010 that I tasted, where the wine was dialed back, and way less extracted and ripe. But we are all entitled to our opinions, and I will just put it down to the fact that we not only process the one information differently, but what you and I actually taste and base our opinions on are so radically different.

“ I didn't like it en primeur either. Extremely overextracted and overripe fruit. One American wine critic, known for his controversial ratings, slated it and called it machine oil! The responsible for this failure was Jean-Guillaume Prats, who totally miscalculated the vinification of the vintage.”


3. Rolland “helping with harvest date” is why he is do damned dangerous. It is certainly the reason why the wines are too ripe, too alcoholic and almost certainly why it obliterates character. We have discussed physiological ripeness before; I don’t want to rehash, but at a time we are worried about global warming, going for Rolland’s type of ripeness is a recipe for disaster.

4. As Ian points out in his last post, Rolland does not have a monopoly on spoofed wines. There are plenty of sinners to go round.

5. I agree with you that Rolland works with each chateau differently, having greater or less input/impact depending on the winemaker.



4.

[greatbxfreak]

Mark,

You haven't read my correction. It was Cos 2010 not 2009 I wasn't happy about.

OrlandoRobert

There is no cure for your hatred, I sorry to say. Lascombes 2005 is a great wine.

ComteFlaneur,

Lascombes 2005 is a great wine.Tasted 3 years ago.

There's no point in further discussion. You guys are so determined in your hatred towards Rolland and Derenencourt.

[Comte Flaneur]

It is not hatred Izak it is genuine concern over his methods.

Mark summed it up very well, emphasis added:

Rolland “helping with harvest date” is why he is do damned dangerous. It is certainly the reason why the wines are too ripe, too alcoholic and almost certainly why it obliterates character. We have discussed physiological ripeness before; I don’t want to rehash, but at a time we are worried about global warming, going for Rolland’s type of ripeness is a recipe for disaster.


I mentioned the 2004 Lascombes, not the 2005. Ask Jim and Blanquito what they think of that wine.

When you say ‘no cure for your hatred’ that is disappointing. When you add ‘there is no point in further discussion’ it shows that you have lost the argument.

[JimHow]

I brought a bottle of 2004 Lascombes to the Pontet Canet vertical we did with Alfred Tesseron in Times Square, what, it must have been circa 2007 or so.
One of the difficult NYC twerps who took himself very seriously, I can't remember his name but I can picture him, wouldn't let me uncork it though.
So I brought it with Alfred and the Brothers Blanquito uptown to the Ritz Hotel on the south side of the park.
We drank it in the lobby and I'll never forget the look on the face of that six foot model from Seattle who was there with her pilot when she sipped it, it was literally undrinkable.
It was pretty epically over the top with oak, wow.

[greatbxfreak]

Ian,

No, I just find it pointless to argue with people who are stuck in their hatred.

Ok. It was OrlandoRobert with Lascombes 2005. Very expected anyway.

Btw to finish the discussion I will come with one example. Chateau Corbin is consulted by a member of Rolland team, Jean-Philippe Fort. She herself, Anabelle Cruse Bardinet, is fully qualified oenologist from Michel Rolland class from Bordeaux wine university. Any complaints about Corbin being overoaked, overextracted and overripe? Ausone being overripe and overextracted? Rolland has advised here for 25 years. Anyone?

Things are much more nuanced than you all think.

[greatbxfreak]

JImHow,

You bring 3 years old wine, barely one year and a half after bottling, hmmm, it'd to have a lot of oak. Tannin?

Actually, I haven't tasted this vintage yet. However, I tasted 2005 4 years ago:

2005 Lascombes 94p

Tasted twice - last time in April 2016. Consistent notes. Creamy, sweet fat fruit and tannin, great depth and balance, long lingering finish. Stylish elegance. Very impressive effort.

Me and OrlandoRobert have a completely different taste!

[Comte Flaneur]

Ian,

No, I just find it pointless to argue with people who are stuck in their hatred.

Ok. It was OrlandoRobert with Lascombes 2005. Very expected anyway.

Btw to finish the discussion I will come with one example. Chateau Corbin is consulted by a member of Rolland team, Christian Veyry. She herself, Anabelle Cruse Bardinet, is fully qualified oenologist from Michel Rolland class at Bordeaux wine university. Any complaints about Corbin being overoaked, overextracted and overripe? Ausone being overripe and overextracted? Rolland has advised here for 25 years. Anyone?

Things are much more nuanced than you all think.

I think we understand the word nuance much better than you do Izak.

I have said on more than one occasion that the level of influence of Rolland is not uniform across estates. That is the nuance that you did not pick up on.

The more influence he has the more dangerous he is. Clearly he has limited influence at Corbin and Ausone as reflected in the wines. However, one of my friends here in the UK, who tastes more top end wines than I do, and who has an encyclopaedic knowledge, described 2003 Ausone as a horror show, and has his misgivings about recent vintages.

[greatbxfreak]

Mark,

Stephane Derenencourt has been ruining Domaine de Chevalier since he started to consult there! 2016, 2018 and 2019 are destined to be put down the toilet. Wines of Nicolas Thienpont are down the sink too. A lot of sarcasm here.

Ian,

2003 vintage on the Right Bank is nothing to write about. Imho, recent vintages of Ausone are utterly impressive but at impressive price too.

[Musigny 151]

Ian,

No, I just find it pointless to argue with people who are stuck in their hatred.

Ok. It was OrlandoRobert with Lascombes 2005. Very expected anyway.

Btw to finish the discussion I will come with one example. Chateau Corbin is consulted by a member of Rolland team, Jean-Philippe Fort. She herself, Anabelle Cruse Bardinet, is fully qualified oenologist from Michel Rolland class from Bordeaux wine university. Any complaints about Corbin being overoaked, overextracted and overripe? Ausone being overripe and overextracted? Rolland has advised here for 25 years. Anyone?

Things are much more nuanced than you all think.

Back to the sandbox.

I did see your correction, and responded accordingly. There is absolutely no way you can use the descriptors you did for the 2010 and not the 2009. We may have radically different tastes, but the descriptors should be similar. Even as parodied, Jeff and I have very similar notes on the 2009 Cos. To describe the Cos 2010 as you did is just plain wrong. It is actually quite balanced and a little ripe but nowhere near the overripeness of the ‘09.

I quote “Extremely overextracted and overripe fruit. One American wine critic, known for his controversial ratings, slated it and called it machine oil! (BTW John was writing about the 2009)

The responsible for this failure was Jean-Guillaume Prats, who totally miscalculated the vinification of the vintage.”

But we are all entitled to our opinions, and I will just put it down to the fact that we not only process the one information differently, but what you and I actually taste and base our opinions on are also not the same.

I agree that Annabelle uses the Rolland team only in the vineyards, and sparingly at that, and Rolland will do as much or as little as the winemaker wishes. I have pointed it out in many threads in the past. But many a wine has been ruined by him, and one should careful if your tastes run to classic wines.

As for modern Domaine de Chevalier, arguably one of the best terroirs in Leognan, I am not a fan. There is a sameness to the wines from the Dererencourt stable We did a tasting of wines that Dererencourt had for all his projects worldwide, and there was a distressing similarity to them. A wine from Virginia should not taste like DDC.

So leaving aside your sarcasm, one of the greatest tastings I have ever been to was DDC 1953 to 1989. The recent wines will never reach those heights, will never have the effortless precision and beauty of those wines.

[OrlandoRobert]

Izak -
I’m a simple drinker. I pay my own way. I don’t get samples or insider access. My views are my own. I’m not reliant on anyone for access or wine. I do not seek attention with wine writings and blogs. My opinion is frank, honest. It is me. It’s not hatred, but I will concede that I despise these modernist consultants and many of the sycophantic critics as they have pushed many classic estates to adopt their methodologies to compete with the politicized rankings, get attention, big scores. generate revenue, and perhaps some even to survive. Wines line Figeac and Conseillante flipping to Rolland makes me sick. But I’m just a simple drinker, deep allegiance to Bordeaux for almost 30 years. My first visit was in 1995. I drink Bordeaux every week, most often with my meals. If I wanted a cocktail, I would mix one.

[Blanquito]

As for modern Domaine de Chevalier, arguably one of the best terroirs in Leognan, I am not a fan. There is a sameness to the wines from the Dererencourt stable We did a tasting of wines that Dererencourt had for all his projects worldwide, and there was a distressing similarity to them. A wine from Virginia should not taste like DDC.

So leaving aside your sarcasm, one of the greatest tastings I have ever been to was DDC 1953 to 1989. The recent wines will never reach those heights, will never have the effortless precision and beauty of those wines.

I completely agree on Domaine de Chevalier, and I sold off all of my DDC bottles from 2005-2009. Love the old stuff though.

It may be hard for you to believe Izak, but most of us aren't paying any attention to who the consulting enologist at a chateau is when we drink a bottle. And I can assure you none of us are approaching a wine with "hatred". On the contrary, we buy and open such wines with optimism and excitement. But if time and again these highly rated wines of a certain style turn us off, you then DO start to ask what the hell! Or more precisely, who the hell! A little research later, and we find out that it is the "magician" (as I am told Rolland is called in certain circles) or similar consultants who was behind all of these awful wines.

Reading your posts on this board, I am often left to wonder if you are gaslighting us, because to take your comments seriously is very hard. To tell us that we, who have as much experience with Bordeaux as you do, are filled with "hatred" when we don't like a wine is beyond the pale really. For my palate, and many others whom I know and respect, Lascombes is one of the main examples and a cautionary tale for the worst excesses of modern wine making. End of story.

The only hatred I am detecting on this site is coming from you.

[marcs]

I'm still keeping my fingers crossed for 2015 Conseillante to turn out OK. I have five bottles which is a lot for me at that price. Maybe I'll sell them and buy fewer 2009s, the 2009s have gotten quite expensive (tied for the most expensive Conseillante vintage of the last 20 years, up with 2005) but it is a wonderful wine. Hedonistic and fairly elevated alcohol (above 14) but with the (formerly) trademark Conseillante lightness of touch. I bought the 2015 hoping for a repeat.

[stefan]

I'll have to try one of these modern and spoofilated DdCs. This is an estate that I have enjoyed for 50 years and was happy that it was under the radar. Tonight Lucie and I drank the 1998 with duck breasts. While it will not be mistaken for LMHB or even Smith-Haut-Lafitte, it is a wonderful and true Graves. It saddens me to hear that it has changed.

[Blanquito]

I wouldn’t group DDC rouge with the ooze monsters really, it’s more a mid-modern style with some gloss and a certain homogenous style, but I don’t find them over the top. More boring and I’ve thoroughly cleaned those sort of wines from my cellar over the last few years.

[Nicklasss]

If Rolland did the same thing for the 2015 La Conseillante (that i did not taste) than for the 2015 Clinet (that i did taste), there should be no problem with the 2015 La Conseillante.

Putting all Rolland "high or low" influenced wines in the same lot is kinda bit "excessive".

By the way, I had a 1999 Chateau Meyney lately that would have please lot of people here, that like too old red Bordeaux: still deep red, the wine was a mixture of dead leaves, old leather, some minerals, wet earth, sage and finally blackberries, with an austere and evolved palate, leathery, black prunes, astringent with very evolved tannins. Not for me. But the 2014 is another story.

Nic

[robert goulet]

I believe the modernization of Bordeaux is tragic...whether it's Parker or Rolland or some of their other random progressive ilk. Is it that Bordeaux has fallen out of favor with the wine elite and the estates feel pressure to modernize their practices? Or has Bordeaux become perceived as overrated, and estates felt inclined to create a change? I'm not sure the true catalyst...but what I do know is that it is happening. Estates are seemingly ramping up the alc%, longer hang times or utilizating more new oak... Some will point to global warming as the reason for higher alc.. (but is it?) ...then how come some estates do not carry this signature? So who is to blame because it's happening...is it Rolland? No, I do not think so. It is more on the hands of the chateau owners...they knew what they r getting into...they hired him or someone who has a similar style..They have their reason for what they do but Bordeaux is becoming as OrlBobby said, "souless" and I couldn't agree more...Even our benevolent dictator Jim How made a comment about recent vintages (paraphrasing)>>the wines are improving but they are all beginning to taste the same<< Sounds souless to me.

It's almost as if Bordeaux is becoming more Cali...instead of Cali becoming more bordeaux....ever taste those older early 90's pauillac'esque Dominus? Wonderful stuff, but that style is long gone and I am afraid soon we will be saying the same thing about classic Bordeaux if we do not voice our opinion...Maybe it's all in vain, maybe it's a foregone conclusion...or maybe we just need a reputable critic in there who has a classic palate to right this ship...like yesterday

[robert goulet]

I've tasted the 2005 Lascombes 2x in the past and the 2003 recently. I agree and disagree with some viewpoints...Lascombes is just like when I was drinking 2005 Meyney....some bottles are terribly overoaked and some seemed fine. That was my experience of '05 Lascombes.

I do have another Lascombes 2003 and 2005, I look forward to sharing my thoughts on them in the future.

[Blanquito]

I believe the modernization of Bordeaux is tragic...whether it's Parker or Rolland or some of their other random progressive ilk. Is it that Bordeaux has fallen out of favor with the wine elite and the estates feel pressure to modernize their practices? Or has Bordeaux become perceived as overrated, and estates felt inclined to create a change? I'm not sure the true catalyst...but what I do know is that it is happening. Estates are seemingly ramping up the alc%, longer hang times or utilizating more new oak... Some will point to global warming as the reason for higher alc.. (but is it?) ...then how come some estates do not carry this signature? So who is to blame because it's happening...is it Rolland? No, I do not think so. It is more on the hands of the chateau owners...they knew what they r getting into...they hired him or someone who has a similar style..They have their reason for what they do but Bordeaux is becoming as OrlBobby said, "souless" and I couldn't agree more...Even our benevolent dictator Jim How made a comment about recent vintages (paraphrasing)>>the wines are improving but they are all beginning to taste the same<< Sounds souless to me.

It's almost as if Bordeaux is becoming more Cali...instead of Cali becoming more bordeaux....ever taste those older early 90's pauillac'esque Dominus? Wonderful stuff, but that style is long gone and I am afraid soon we will be saying the same thing about classic Bordeaux if we do not voice our opinion...Maybe it's all in vain, maybe it's a foregone conclusion...or maybe we just need a reputable critic in there who has a classic palate to right this ship...like yesterday

A big amen, brother.

This is BWE and I have a terrible confession to make at last — the bordeaux of today bores me or worse repulses me. The things that once drew me exclusively to its estates are now almost entirely gone. Maybe I’m quitting at just the wrong time, that the tides are turning, but like Monsieur Goulet, I imagine they will get worse not better. For sure, there are a handful of chateau that I still care about in Aquitaine, but the regions that get my heart to beat faster these days are further afield: Beaujolais, Loire, Champagne, Burgundy...

[greatbxfreak]

OrlandoRobert,

I pay everything by myself, wines, hotels, travels, my website is a pure hobby and I haven't ever received a penny to run it. 5 years ago I hired a professional web designer to improve it. Who paid for it, I did. Nobody sponsors me. It's my own money all the way. Getting samples this year sent to Copenhagen was a natural thing because of Covid19 pandemic. It was the first time, normally I taste these in Bordeaux.

Of course, I look over my shoulder to other critics to compare my impressions, it's natural development. I have my own views too, strong ones I admit, but I feel I often get shamed for something, many posters here are not acknowledging.

I discovered some three very good Burgundy producents two years ago. Arnoux Lachaux, Frederic Esmonin and Perrot Minot. So it's not 100% Bordeaux.

Robert Goulet,

Some sensible comments. I wonder if all your bottles of Lascombes 2003 and 2005 you have/had came from same source/winemerchant.


Imho, DdCh made two best ever vintages in 2018 and 2019 since Olivier Bernard took over 100% in 1988. I've tasted D.d.Chevalier back to 1928.

The negative comments here on the forum concerning his estate leave me baffled.

[Musigny 151]

I absolutely agree that DDC is not an @ooze monster”. The wine is perfectly serviceable albeit on a modern style, and is pleasant enough. I find it disappointing because I know what the property is capable of, and I see no sign that the Dererencourt wines can get close. The last vintage I tasted was 2016, so cannot comment on 2018 and 2019, but I have heard of no sea change there, so expect similar wines to the ones made in the last decade. Please correct me if I am wrong.

[OrlandoRobert]

Leve’s notes on the 2005 Lascombes are pretty spot on:

[b]Pungent aromas of vanilla[/b], blackberry, blueberry, licorice, black cherry and espresso. Thick, rich, dense, lush and polished, this powerful, fruit filled Margaux wine demands up to a decade to shed its oak dominated personality.

Tasted Jul 15, 2011

Rich, ripe and opulent. Filed with sweet, jammy black fruit, coffee and vanilla notes. As is the case for numerous Chateau in 2005, this is the finest Lascombes produced in modern times. While oaky at this stage, with this much concentration of ripe fruit, things should come togetheranf the oak will integrate for this wine with time.

Tasted Jan 2008

Read more at:https://www.thewinecellarinsider.com/bo ... lascombes/

Where Jeff and I depart is on scoring, he’s in the low-90s and I’m in the “pour it down the sink” category. I mean really, is that what you want in your Bordeaux? And trust me, if you have not had it, Jeff is spot on with his descriptors. I’ve had it much more recently than Jeff, and that oak remains dominant. It’s milkshake rich.

PS. I had a really elegant 85 a few months ago.

[Comte Flaneur]

I didn’t realise that Stéphane Derenoncourt was consulting at DDC. I had noticed that the wines have become modern and somewhat anaesthetised so they have been an easy pass for me.

I am not as pessimistic as Patrick and the two Roberts because the overarching trend is towards less oak and less extraction, and people like Marielle are so concerned about high alcohol levels that they are considering planting new grape varieties.

A quicker solution would be to give these consultant coves their marching orders and pick earlier.

[Musigny 151]

Yes, the conversation always returns to picking dates. There are of course a ton of other techniques used in the cellar, but it is what comes out of the vineyard that which will ultimately dictate what the wine will become.

The problem is that I always end up returning to John Kolassa who ran Rauzan Segla and Canon. Let’s say John was old fashioned, a bit of a dinosaur even. But come the 2010 vintage, even he couldn’t prevent Canon weighing in at 15.2%. And he tried, but even to get that modicum of ripeness in that year he needed to pick later than he wanted. I am sure as hell not defending consultants, because even in the 1990s Rolland was pushing for extra weeks of hang time, but the situation is not helped by global warming, it is a perfect storm.

The Right Bank wines of 2014 and 2016 continue to buck the trend. I have more VCC 2014 than any other wine, 64 bottles and three magnums. But between the consultants and warming, I fear that that there will be few if any traditional Right Bank Bordeaux left for our children to buy, and they in turn, will be the last generation to enjoy the classical style of Bordeaux. In the end, Jeff and Izak will win unopposed

[Claudius2]

Guys
Without trivializing the role of climate change, I don’t see too many well renowned Bdx wines with 12-12.5% alcohol these days. There has clearly been a move in many areas including my old homeland of Australia to increase alc levels. When I first started drinking wine most Shiraz from the Hunter and the main South Aust regions typically weighed in at a miserly 11.5 to 13% alcohol. When some producers made Shiraz with 13.5% say 40 yrs ago, many of the usual critics complained that it was too high - using hyperbole like “whopping” alcohol or similar.

In 2020 I hardly see an Aust red with less than 14% or 14.5%. Okay they do taste riper but the 2012 Margaret River Cab I drank last night was 13.5% and the maker has commented that he wants elegance and balance rather than overt power. I would have picked it as Bdx from a moderate vintage. So now 13.5% appears to be relatively low.

I am now applying a simple rule of thumb that I will not buy wine at over 14.5% irrespective of the variety or region. I know alc is just one metric but I can’t handle hot alcohol, overt sweetness, heavy oak and tarry, porty flavors in a supposedly dry wine.

Having said that, my memory of 60s and 70s right bankers was not so nice - and I am excluding the top wines. So my appeal is for something half way between the herby, vegetal wines of the past and hi alc. styles. Yet I have no issue if anyone else likes a different style.
Cheers
Mark

[Jeff Leve]

Your bugaboo about Rolland is IMO, just plain silly. You might not like many wines, OK, no problem. But in most cases, especially at La Conseillante and Figeac, as well as at other high-end estates, he is there mainly for the blending. How is that an issue?

Jeff, in lawyer speak, we would say you are a bit loose with the facts here. Conseillante is undergoing change. Your own website notes that. Who made the decision to start micro-vinifying in wood in 2015? I really doubt Rolland comes in like the God he is and advises solely on the blend. I’m sure discussions evolve well beyond that. You are also overlooking the change in 2015 to bring in Marielle Cazaux, who was at Petite-Village for some years working with the other modernist consultant, Derenoncourt. I’m not a fan of Petite-Village, own none of it.

Change is not relevant, What is important is what is in the glass. That is how I look at every wine. The portion of Micro vinification is still quite small. And except for the fact that is bothers you, what is wrong with it? It adds a bit more roundness to the texture in its youth. Once it is blended and aged, you'd never know.

Here my friend, it is not I who is playing loose with the facts. Did you ever taste the wines of Petit Village with Derenoncourt? If you did, you would like them a lot more than I did and do.

As for Derenoncourt? What do you base your opinion on ? FWIW, he is a proponent of bio-dynamics, organic and self-sustaining farming. More so than any of the other consultants. Most of his work is in the vineyard. That is where he shines. So, what is your issue with him?

[Jeff Leve]

I have two bottles of 2014 La Conseillante that I will hold.
I'm debating whether to buy a bottle of the 2016 at $228.

Jim, 16 is a much better wine. It is significantly better than the 14. It will be a legendary La Conseillante in the years to come.

[Jeff Leve]

I am sure Lillian Barton would not let Rolland anywhere near her estate.

Ian... And so what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Over the past 10-15 years, Leoville Barton has changed. The wines are riper, the tannins and softer, the wine shows more polish and drinks well earlier. It is not the same at Langoa Barton. Yet, because it is not Rolland, you and others gloss over that point.

A point I have made previously on this topic is that it appears that his influence is not the same for each estate he consults for.

This is completely true. It varies from place to place. There are some estates that hand him the keys. Others ask for help with blending. A few keep him on for a sounding board and disregard his advice.

I have continued to buy Conseillante and Figeac because I take Cazaux and Faye at their word that Rolland only advises and doesn’t decide

You should buy the wines because you like them. They are different than what you find in other more recent years. Much better in my view. But you should be tasting them.

The impression I also have is that he is a disruptive influence, which appears to be why Laporte left and now recently why Jean-Michel Comme resigned from Pontet Canet.

That is 100% not true in either case.

[OrlandoRobert]

Change is not relevant, What is important is what is in the glass. That is how I look at every wine. The portion of Micro vinification is still quite small. And except for the fact that is bothers you, what is wrong with it? It adds a bit more roundness to the texture in its youth. Once it is blended and aged, you'd never know.

Here my friend, it is not I who is playing loose with the facts. Did you ever taste the wines of Petit Village with Derenoncourt? If you did, you would like them a lot more than I did and do.

As for Derenoncourt?What do you base your opinion on ? FWIW, he is a proponent of bio-dynamics, organic and self-sustaining farming. More so than any of the other consultants. Most of his work is in the vineyard. That is where he shines. So, what is your issue with him?

To steal your language, it “is what is in the glass”.

I simply do not like many of the wines where he consultants now or did before. And I certainly do not like what he has done with old faves, like Poujeaux. He has made some truly horrid wines at Sanctus, Lucia, Gagault, Gaffelliere, et al. I mean seriously, some bad wines. Larcis is better but still doesnt scratch my itch. And yes, some of these I tried, like you did, at release, and then again on my own 10-year retrospective. I own none of them now.

So yes, I judged Derenoncourt, like I did Rolland - way back then - on what they made, i.e., “what is in the glass”. I only learned later that they were involved. I learned enough from these failures to simply not want to buy another single wine that they touch. It does not matter if some of their wines are decent - for example, I liked (but would not actively buy) the 2005 Fourtet that I had recently - as I got burned way too many times. A simple rule for me is, do not buy any Bordeaux made by any modernist consultant, or which has ABV at 15 or higher. Sure, some decent wines my slide by my nose, so they got lost in the wash, but that is ok, as I can buy classics that work every time.

And you know what else I have an issue with? His website boasts that he consults with over 140 wineries, many of which are Bordeaux. That alone sorta grosses me out. Total homogenization of such a storied region.