interesting wb thread on bdx

[AKR]

https://www.wineberserkers.com/forum/vi ... 1&t=156007

[William P]

This is note on WB was written by BordeauxNut of this board. I find it very accurate and mirrors by conclusions. Though oak has been increasing for decades. Good read.

[stefan]

I like Jim's remarks about 1996 Leoville-Barton. After 12 or so years the quality and structure was apparent but it was still hard to drink. Now it is excellent and will continue to improve for my taste.

[JimHow]

I too generally agree with BN's sentiments.
These modern wines just aren't agining like those 1980s Bordeauxs.

[robert goulet]

Make 12.5% great again

[marcs]

Have to say, I agree with Pat's post on the thread which says that contemporary Bordeaux are developing more slowly:

https://www.wineberserkers.com/forum/vi ... 7#p2619800

I am less of an expert than others because I really don't have much experience with the 80s vintages. And unlike Pat I do feel like the 96s are drinking at an optimum point right now. But the 2000-2005 vintages are getting into that 15-20 year zone and the more prominent ones still have plenty of tannin left to shed. It's like picking only perfect grapes and extracting for size gives you more tannin as well as more fruit...go figure.

[Claudius2]

Folks
I have been drinking Bordeaux (plus other wines) for well over 40 years now, and recall the often disastrous decade of the 70's well.
My initial thoughts of even highly valued estates back then were not good. Far too many unripe, thin, acidic and fruitless wines.
Surprisingly, some poor vintages turned out to be better than expected (73 comes to mind) but give me a choice of 2005, 09, 10, etc any day.

There were not a lot of good vintages in the 60's or 70's and only one outstanding vintage (61) until 1982.
Yes, Bordeaux has got warmer and sometimes (eg 2003) is simply too hot, but the quality is now better than ever before.
Will all 2009's age well? No, but neither did all wines from any other vintage in history.
And it isn't true that the younger vintages do not shut down. I went to a Bordeaux tasting here in Singapore yesterday put on my one of the big importers of wines from 2008 to 2015.
Some 2009's and 2010's were quite closed, even the 08's were to some extent.
Having said that, with the examples available, 2010 stood out as better than 09 to my palate as the wines have a better balance overall, and the wines are not as patchy in quality.
Masses of fruit per se do not mean a wine will age either - there has to be structure to the components in the bottle.

Contemporary vintages are more fruity than they were 40-50 years ago, and most are better for that.
I tried a few 2011's yesterday that were actually quite nice wines and if that vintage had of occurred say, 50 years ago, we would almost certainly had mainly thin, bland wines.
2011 by the way showed a lot better than 2013 - that vintage I think is better avoided altogether.

The perception that more fruit intensity means that wines do not age is folly.
The great years in Bordeaux have all been riper vintages and their ageing ability was argued about when young. That even applied to 61.

In relation to Cordier funk, the company did have financial issues before Gruaud Larose was sold (I think in 88) and brett is a fault. I do recall discussing this in detail some years ago, with a little inside knowledge thrown in.
Okay, a slight touch of it can be acceptable yet brett generally worsens with age.
A similar example was mercaptans in Hunter Valley (Australia) res, especially shiraz.
It was ignored as "regional character" yet left the wines with tarry, dirty, leathery characters with little fruit.
My last trip there showed me that mercaptans have been eradicated for some time now and the wines have never been better.
And there is more individuality in style than ever. Mercaptans led to many wines all tasting similarly unpleasant.

Given the number of estates and producers in Bordeaux, if you can't find numerous wines that you like, I'd be very surprised.
My only gripe is that some are too high in alcohol, and I do not accept that high alcohol (15%+) is manageable.
It can be in some wines and in some vintages, but too much throws the wine out of balance.
In relation to oak treatment, I'd agree that some are overtly oaky particularly young, but that it more common in several other regions than Bordeaux.

[BordeauxNut]

Claudius,

There's little in your post I disagree with. I didn't say that the more modern and riper / higher alcohol modern vintages don't or won't age. I do believe, however, that they age differently and personally, I find some of them less interesting and often comparatively monolithic as they get older. I'll offer a case in point...

At the end of an evening with old wine friends, I opened two wines to test the theory of my post:

2000 Haut Bages Liberal
2003 Pontet Canet (had I been really thinking, I would have opened something like a 2000 Smith Haut Laffite or Branon).

In any event, the 2003 was preferred by my friends for all the reasons I would expect many people would prefer it. The wine was more lush, it was certainly oakier. The aromatics all arrived from two places -- really ripe fruit and oak. The HBL, on the other hand, was lighter and much more aromatic. Yes, it featured a good dose of greenness -- and it vaguely reminded me of a coarser version of PLL or of Sociando Mallet. In the end, I gravitated to it, finding it more interesting.

In this case, the Pontet Canet is a fine wine and I don't doubt it may be a better wine in a few years (and, not an especially good example of what I am lamenting here). But, it sort of illustrates the point. I am skeptical that wines that are all Uber-fruit, high-ish alcohol, and heavy toast are better old than young. But -- enough time hasn't elapsed to really make the case definitively. We're getting there, though.

As for wines shutting down -- I didn't buy much from 2009/2010 -- but, it's rare IMO to see wines shut down like the 1994s, 1995s, or 1996s did, for example. The 1990s and 2000s really didn't shut down. The 2005s did in patches, though not as severely.

Cheers.

[DavidG]

Jim, I had a similar take on the 2003 Pontet Canet recently. No real complexity at age 15. I didn’t find it over-ripe or roasted, but it wasn’t showing the complexity I look for. Monolithic is a good word. I’m hoping it will blossom in another 5 years, but I’m not as confident as I used to be.

[Claudius2]

Folks
My last 2 bottles of 2003 PC are slated for 2023.
This wine has always been an enigma and I hope some day it blossoms into something I hoped it would 10 years ago.
I was temped to open one over the weekend but thought better of it.

[BordeauxNut]

Claudius, 2023 sounds like a good idea. I have 10 left, having only had it twice now since release. I'll check in then and likely sell it if it's not getting better. I agree with David that the wine didn't scream 2003. I don't think I would have pegged it for that vintage.

Again -- if a wine is all heavy fruit and toasty oak (the PC isn't that -- but, it's ripe and oaky), from where will the complexity we like materialize? If it isn't in there in the first place -- I'm not sure we can expect it to emerge and my thought is that it might not be in there.

Also -- food for thought for those inclined to go to 1982 as a point of reference: wines like PLL and Beychevelle had/have a notable pryazine component. I'd argue that the interplay of that and all of the lushness of the fruit is what makes that wine so special. And, while I wouldn't make it a poster child for grand vin, that 79 point 1990 PLL isn't so 79 points anymore.

[DavidG]

from where will the complexity we like materialize? If it isn't in there in the first place -- I'm not sure we can expect it to emerge and my thought is that it might not be in there.

I don’t know where the complexity comes from. I could blather on about chemical reactions involving complex organic compounds but I don’t really have a clue. I do know that the complexity we love in the 1982s, 1986s, 1989s, and 1990s wasn’t there at 5-10 years of age. I don’t think it’s a certainty that if it’s not there now it won’t develop. Although at 15 years the lack of even beginning complexity in a wine like the 2003 Pontet Canet is getting worrisome. And I agree with you that the fact that the starting conditions are different enough from the Bordeaux of yore makes it reasonable to project a different outcome with aging.

I guess where we differ is in our degree of concern and approach to that uncertainty. I’m willing to wait these out. I can probably sell them without much of a loss if they don’t turn out. I was even bold enough to buy a couple of cases of 2015s and 2016s, which carriers the additional risk that I won’t be around in 20-30 years to enjoy them even if they do turn out.

[JimHow]

I started drinking Bordeaux wine in the late 1990s. I remember drinking those "young" Bordeauxs then like 1989 Lynch, 1986 Gruaud Larose, 1988 LLC, etc.
Those wines at age 10-15 tasted different than the wines I drink today that are 10-15 years old. They were better, with more complexity.
The wines of today are still technically correct -- indeed, more so... see 2005 Domaine de Chevalier -- but they lack the nuance and character of those wines -- at the same age -- that I was drinking in the late '90s.
Don't ask me to explain why, I'm just telling you I know what my palate is telling me.

[DavidG]

Jim, I agree that 1989 Lynch, 1986 Gruaud and 1988 LLC tasted much different at age 10-15 than their modern counterparts at the same age. Less nuance, agreed. What you’re calling complexity, though, must differ from the aged complexity I’m talking about. The 1989 Lynch and 1988 LLC had zero complexity at that stage. Well-stored bottles still haven’t developed completely. The 1986 Gruaud was complex by age 10, in part due to the Cordier funk/Brett and in part due to the start of the aged complexity I’ve been talking about.