Lipstick on a Pig

Chateau Greysac is not a good wine. At its best, its a mediocre early drinker that doesn't live up to the "superior" quality implied by the Cru Bourgeois Supérieur classification of its label. Greysac is both ubiquitous in US market and cheap and, therefore, leads generations of young wine drinkers to think of Bordeaux as lean, fruitless and without charm. What if, however, you let this sad excuse for a wine alone for 25 years? Would it get better? Is age a palliative for an insipid wine?

It is with those thoughts in mind that I approached a 1983 Greysac. How does one end up with a 1983 Greysac? Aren't they supposed to have been imbibed within 5 years? I'm glad I asked these rhetorical questions. I picked up this bottle incidentally as a paired ugly stepsister to the wine I really sought at auction, an '81 Haut-Bailly. The 2 bottle lot being less than what I would have paid for the Haut-Bailly itself (Véronique Sanders, the lovely general manager of H-B, had wistfully remarked to me that the '81 was not the type of wine that would be made today), so I thought of the Greysac as a free bottle of wine.

I knew I had to open this bottle, this succubus, eventually and, rather than inflict it on my friends, I decided to try it at home. Alissa had suggested we make lamb and I love Bordeaux with lamb. It seemed as good a time as any. With great trepidation, I removed the foil. Under the capsule, the cork had a think layer of muck on top. I'd opened enough beautiful bottles with worse and the cork came out very well, albeit completely soaked through, so I still held out hope. I poured two glasses and the color was disappointingly light, not a good sign. I tasted a sip and looked left and looked right. I put down my glass and walked away. Many wines need air to right themselves. I went back to it after a little while and the color had darkened. The nose had picked up some mushroom and some licorice, nice additions. It was still lean and charmless in the mouth though. I needed a second opinion. Alissa took a sip, paused, paused, and then scrunched up her nose, rendering an opinion. "I know, I know," I said and went to the cellar to pull out a 2004 Rivers-Marie Cabernet Sauvignon. As we ate our lamb, I looked over at Alissa and asked, "Better?" She nodded with a smile.

NYers Drink Xpensive Wines

This night had a good feel to it from the start. Work was no impediment to timing, I caught the subway quickly and I was walking across Madison Park on a beautiful night. The Summer has gotten later and later in New York City, sometimes carrying with it the humidity of August. Not this night. The air was crisp and clean and I was heading to a restaurant on top of its game to drink some of the finest wines that Bordeaux has to offer. Eleven Madison Park is tucked into the corner of a beautiful art deco building just off the park. A heavy revolving door gives way to impressively high ceilings that give a sense of openness that is harbinger of the friendly service. The clean lines of the décor were to match the modernity and purity of the food to which we then looked forward. We arrived in waves and the credenza behind our central table started filling up with wonderful bottles of wine. The last to arrive was Steve Elzer, a real life Xpensive Wino and our guest of honor.


We settled in with an aperitif from Mâconnais, the soft underbelly of Burgundy, a 2003 Guffens-Heynen Mâcon-Pierreclos. It was a pleasant enough wine with a generous nose of white peach, popcorn, a touch of lemon and a bunch of smoky oak. It was soft and a bit unfocused in the mouth with lots of fruit on some decent lemony acidity. The vintage showed in that it had more body than a typical Mâconnais and I couldn't decide whether I liked that aspect or not. Certainly an attractive wine for the price, but nothing to get too excited about. The 2000 Raveneau Butteaux, on the other hand, was a wine to get excited about and we moved onto that after giving up on a tragically corked 1993 Tattinger CdC Rose. The Raveneau was all white flowers; the floral aromatics were so relaxed and relaxing. There was also some lemon and Leo, with his sommelier's nose, picked up some Chamomile tea as it expanded. It was surprisingly subdued on the palate and seemed very tightly wound around itself. I had a hard time getting a sense of the fruit. Nonetheless, it had clean lines from a defining acidity and an appealing minerality. We debated a bit where this one was going to go in the future and I'm erring on the side of age. In stark contrast was the effusive and friendly 2003 Jadot Charlemagne (not Corton). Frokic and Jadot have become synonymous in my mind and Leo delivered again with an excellent wine. While the Raveneau drew you in, this wine came out to meet you with ripe apples and a rack of spice, primarily cinnamon, but let's not debate spices amongst friends. In the mouth, it was a real feat of engineering. The acidity couldn't hold the ripeness of the fruit and, instead, the focus is created by lack of malo, which provides a natural boundary for the wine. Not that it lack acidity, it doesn't, but the malo helps keep the focus and tension of the wine. A heavy maceration creates great weight in the mouth to finish the structural integrity. Add in the gravelly minerality and this wine adds up to a winner.

With the preliminaries out of the way, we moved West and a touch South to the main attraction, Bordeaux. We began with a trio of Ducru-Beaucaillou. The reputation of Ducru has gone up and down partially because of serious taint problems in their older wines and partially because the wines are so ungenerous in their youth that critics may mark them down for their rank austerity. That makes for some wonderful bargains for backfilling older vintages as the wines come out of their tannic shell and show a generosity of spirit that the younger wines lack. Their reputation seems properly restored, but values abound for this classy Second. As for the wines, Gary began hedging the performance of the 1966 early on, correctly noting that it can be a crap shoot with older bottles. He needn't have bothered. The 1966 Ducru was a magnificent wine. Poor Neal Martin, he would have enjoyed this immensely. I am younger than this wine, yet I could not match its vigor. I can match its charm, but I am in fact very charming. The aromas were textbook St.-Julien with smoky cassis, wet earth and spice expanding to reveal leather, cigar box, graphite and a hint of mushroom. I know there are those that decry "I spy" descriptors, but this a wine that wants its story told. The tannins were resolved, but there was still enough extract to lend some heft to the mouthfeel. The finish was long and lingering as it drifted on some welcome acidity. A surprise and a great experience. In contrast, the 1983 Ducru was a mess from the start. This wine was not supposed to taste this way and the volatile nature of it really destroyed all of the charm and most of the Ducru character. Tinny tomato eventually gave way to some smoky cassis and licorice, but by that point who cared. The finish was like Hobbes' life of man in the state of nature, nasty, brutish and short. I initially thought the 1996 Ducru was flawed as well, but notes of creamed corn quickly blew off and revealed layers of black currant, smoke and spice. The wine had similar damp earth characteristics to the 1966, although it lacked much of the nuance. It is not hard to imagine, however, this wine evolving into a wine much like it's older relative; there is clearly a family resemblance. While an admirable wine, I would say the elements of the wine still outweigh the sum. It started a bit angular and coltish at first, but righted itself admirably, smoothing out considerable with air. I would sit on these for a good 10 years as the fruit and structure can support it and time will ameliorate any disharmony that can be found in this youthful state.

We interrupt this Bordeaux tasting for a bottle of 1996 Harlan Estate. We will return to your regularly scheduled Bordeaux tasting shortly. I expected the best California Cabernet I had ever had and, while I'm not sure it passed that low bar, it was a truly profound and compelling wine. I always rail against the comparison of Napa to Bordeaux and the description of something in California as a First Growth, but I get it here. A wine of incredible concentration and precision, this wine is only beginning to unpack. The nose is a touch primary with onrushing sweet black fruit, vanillin and spice later sharing space with some tobacco, cedar and herbs. It enters the mouth seamlessly and the flavors intensify. This wine possesses great tannic structure to balance the great mass of sweet fruit and a wonderful acidity that drives the length of this wine. That always gets me, when the finish of a wine is not purely fruit driven, but ushered by acidity. It needs time, but ultimately may prove to be perfect. Now back to your regularly scheduled Bordeaux tasting.

Onward and back in time to 1982 and 1990. Those two vintages have produced some of the finest and most complete wines that I have ever tasted and drive my love of Bordeaux. Our first foray was with the 1982 Léoville Barton, a powerful, manly wine. This wine is such the personification of Claret, you can almost smell the tweed suit. I love these old school Clarets and this one had all the hallmarks with the reserved, but attractive, fruit standing aside for mature nuance of gun metal, bloody game, cedar and licorice. It is burly in the mouth with great weight and grip and the fruit fleshes out a bit, showing sweeter and more concentrated. The finish is sneaky long and runs along like the hum of a machine. We married this wine with its opposite, the gorgeous, sexy 1982 L'Evangile. The nose is generous with seductive black fruit sharing the stage with exotic spice, cedar and licorice. Silky, silky, silky with amazing concentration, this wine could be in the dictionary picture for Pomerol. On an evening of phenomenal wines, this stood out as a star and was my wine of the night. Next, we moved to the 1990 Cos d'Estournel, which was excellent, but suffered for its flight. Where as the 1982 Léoville Barton was a staid and stately wine, I found the Cos to be a bit standoffish and aloof. The black fruit was a touch of sweaty in an interesting Merlot sort of way and the nose had some really nice mature elements of wet earth, leather and tea. The wine is absolutely massive in the mouth with lots of fruit and tannin. My reaction to this wine is somewhat similar to the 1990 Léoville Barton, which is showing as a massive wall of wine right now, but should become a beautiful Claret in the style of the nicely realized 1982. I feel like I'm picking faults with this excellent wine simply because it wasn't as generous as the others, but do not forget the word excellent nor the word patience. In the other corner, a wine that requires no patience is the 1990 Lynch Bages, a bottle that fights well above its Fifth Growth weight class. I long ago fell in love with this wine and it turned out to be a first love for Ben Goldberg and Steve as well. It is one of the friendliest wines I've ever met. It is the Labrador retriever, it is the friend that lets you crash at his place, it is the girlfriend that tells you to go to Vegas with your buddies and means it. From a wine perspective, the thing I love about it is how it pops. I could go through the deep cassis, the dollop of vanilla, the extravagant weight in the mouth, the lush rich waves of dark fruit mingling with tobacco, earth and spice, if you'd like. Instead, I say enjoy. This wine wasn't the most profound wine of the night, but its impossible not to be seduced. Clearly, Brad fell in love as this was his wine of the night.

While we pondered this last wonderful flight, our glasses were pushed deeper to the middle of the table and three more were placed in front of us for some wines of lesser maturity if equal pedigree. What would an evening of Bordeaux be without a little infanticide? For example, I've already drunk through my stash of 1998 La Mission Haut-Brion, so I was glad that the other Ben brought one around. Massive, primary and a touch linear at this stage, it has a ton of personality and personality goes a long way. A modern and lush LMHB, it still retains classic Graves elements of charred wood and tar. It has amazing heft without any flabbiness. Lots of structure for sure, but this wine is about opulent fruit today and greatness tomorrow. I've had this wine several times and it has been a consistent performer. It was less sexy though than the 1999 Palmer. I'm really coming around on Palmer, a wine that I had written off as not to my taste. The last several Palmers I've had have been excellent and this was no exception. The nose was a heady blend of kirsch and chocolate with notes of licorice and herbs. It was very soft and surprisingly showy on the palate with opulent dark fruit. The second half of this wine was pretty fruit driven and I was a little surprised that there wasn't more tannin to frame the fruit. It wasn't flabby by any means, but I wonder where its going to go. I like it where it is though. I like as well the extremely youthful 2000 La Conseillante, the drinking of which was like interviewing a college kid for an intern job and trying to figure out whether they'd be an asset a few years from now. It was true Pomerol and very La Conseillante with pure dark raspberries, cocoa, licorice and spice. It had an appealing gentleness to it given its youth and prodigious structure. I thought I owned this wine and was very disappointed to find that I don't. This will be a star.

We finished the evening with a 1999 Rieussec. It has an appealing character of poached apples and spice, yet lacks the acidity to pull off its size. It starts wonderfully, but turns ponderous as there is no acid to cleanse the slate. Not a bad wine with some sharp cheese. I'd stay away from anything sweet though.

Bordeaux-where to start?

Someone recently asked the question as to where to start their journey with older Bordeaux. For me, I bought part of a cellar of perfectly stored, mostly 1990 Bordeaux with a few other vintages thrown in for good measure. I must say that I didn't fully appreciate my good luck at the time and wasted quite a few bottles that I'd now treat with care. I was lucky and, absent good fortune, one has to pick a place to start. The best scenario would be to be introduced to it by others with more experience. Mature Bordeaux is, after all, an acquired taste. One has to kiss quite a few frogs due to storage issues and bottle variation, so it takes some doing to learn what is a bad bottle as opposed to what is shut down as opposed to what is just plain austere and lacking charm.  Of course, one should drink as much as one can to learn about a region and Bordeaux is wonderfully diverse, which makes it both easy to find and hard to choose.  Plus, the excursion requires quite a capital commitment.

So, where would be a good place to start?  My first reaction was Pauillac because that is my favorite region and the wines are so classically Claret.  However, these wines aren't with obvious charm for someone used to drinking California Cabernet or Australian Shiraz.  They have a power driven not by fruit, but by a structure that provides an elegant frame for exquisitely pure fruit (in the best of times).  Instead, I thought of Graves.  Other than Domaine de Chevalier, the wines often display great sweetness that would attract a California wine lover, while not (necessarily) bending to a more modern style.  Many can be found in the $100 range at retail.  Even older vintages of the great La Mission Haut-Brion can be had for a reasonable price in "off" vintage.

Where would you start?

Analyzing Napa Cabernet

I started a discussion over on the Parker Board yesterday, which I figured I'd link to here. My point is that people are quick to judge California wines in their youth in a way that we are trained not to do with Bordeaux. We had a '98 La Mission Haut Brion at the Pratt's lunch and people judged it for what it would become. Much younger California Cabs were judged for what they are now. I'm not sure this is fair to the wines. Yes, they are monolithic and rambunctious, but is that any different from many young Bordeaux, even traditionally styled ones. What was the gorgeous and massive 1986 Margaux like at release? I would guess pretty damned big and I'm sure someone can tell me for certain. Bordeaux is Bordeaux and Napa is Napa in a whole lot of different ways and I love that dichotomy. Still, to the extent that we try to look at wine objectively in terms of our intellectual analysis, should we not be consistent?

There's some interesting replies over there.  Check it out.

Bordeaux on the Hudson

I was lucky enough to again be at the Bordeaux table at the 3rd Annual Peter Pratt's Lugeresque extravaganza in Yorktown, NY.  The event, organized by a member of the Wine Advocate Message Board, was a wild indulgence into two of my favorite:  steak and mature Bordeaux.  My two wines showed on opposite ends.  The 1998 La Mission Haut-Brion was wonderful, but the 1990 Figeac underperformed.

The Year was 1982...
...and the wines were excellent. Ah, the beauty of mature Bordeaux. The GL, a generous gift of our sick friend Mark Golodetz, had a lot of fans at the table and was quite a well-made wine. My distaste for GL being well-documented, let's just say that there were plenty of people that would happily pick up the slack in drinking that wine. The LP was probably the favorite of the table, but I had a big spot in my heart for that La Conseillante. All in, a fantastic flight and probably the most consistent.

• 1982 Château Gruaud Larose (St. Julien) - A very nice Gruaud Larose, if that's your thing. The nose started out with some tomato notes that I find common to GL and has really prevented me from embracing this producer. The nose is quite complex with charred wood, slightly stewed black fruit, leather and earth. It was pretty substantial in the mouth with some fine grippy tannins and tart acidity framing smoky cassis. It faded a bit in the end although not significantly. Overall, a very good wine that will have its fans, but it did nothing to make me love GL any more than past bottles.
  
• 1982 Château La Conseillante (Pomerol) - This is a wonderful wine for lovers of mature Bordeaux. A complex and evolving nose of earth, leather, gunflint and licorice. It also possesses a pretty herbal quality. The palate is gentle and the sweet cherry fruit rolls on a balancing acidity past the skeletons of resolved tannins. It just got better and better.
  
• 1982 Château Léoville Poyferré (St. Julien) - Sorry, boys, the secret is out on this wine, which showed even better than the bottle we had last year. The nose is all delicate beauty and finesse with some light cherry fruit intermingled with cedar and eucalyptus. The real magic is on the palate though where one finds the marriage of power and elegance. The delicacy of the nose shifts as the fruit turns darker, more tarry and, ultimately, more savory. The ample fruit is wonderfully framed by great structural acidity and fine tannins. This bottle showed broader and more complex than the previous one and I'd recommend holding it for a while; this wine will last forever. A superb, effortless wine.
  

A Wide Variety
The wine that stands out here is the '98 LMHB, so let me explain why it was in there in the first place. Rich, Bill and Paul (and the absent Mark Golodetz) had to suffer through a corked bottle that I brought to our LMHB vertical, so this was to make amends. The wines were so disparate that I don't think its fair to say there was a favorite.

• 1989 Château Palmer (Margaux) - Here is another repeat performer from last year's lunch and, unlike the '82 LP, this was a much poorer showing. To quote Wilfred, there was nothing wrong with this wine, but nothing particularly right either. Nothing really stood out about this wine other than an edgy steeliness. The nose was reticent with some slight floral notes and graphite. The fruit was so delicate as to be an afterthought and so all you were left with were the structural shell. Still, it wasn't a bad wine, just perhaps a slightly off or under-decanted bottle, and I certainly wouldn't panic if I owned any. It just was outclassed today by some great wines.
  
• 1985 Château La Mission Haut-Brion (Pessac-Léognan) - A classic Claret in an old school Graves style. LMHB seems to have different faces which show from vintage to vintage, but always with a certain style and remarkably consistent. This version displayed the elegant side of LMHB. A wine of finesse with an intriguing nose of dark cherry fruit, herbs and earth. The fruit turns redder on the palate although delicacy remains from the nose and carries all the way through to the finish. A wine that stays within itself and maintains impeccable balance and charm. I wonder if they still make wines like this.
  
• 1998 Château La Mission Haut-Brion (Pessac-Léognan) - A young buck of a LMBH with lots of potential. A bit out of place with its older neighbors, it nonetheless showed tons of personality and was quite wide open and expressive. The fruit is really quiet primary, but is beginning to show some classic Graves elements as it jumps from the glass with opulent black fruit, tar, wet earth and charred wood. It is quite substantial in the mouth, although not heavy, with plush, luxurious black fruit buffeted by silky sweet tannins. The finish is pretty much fruit driven at this point with the ample fruit overwhelming the structure. Overall a bit simple today, but I'd say on revisiting in 5 to 10 years, one will find a profound LMHB.
  

A Visit to the Right Bank
The Angelus' were stupendous and head and shoulders above the Figeac (which I think just tasted like Figeac but others thought it corked). 

• 1989 Château Angélus (St. Émilion) - Every once in a while, a wine just buckles your knees. While the sheer powerful joy of the nose on this wine is the attention grabber, it is the wonderful balance displayed that keeps you coming back. A complex intermingling of sweet black fruit, spices and smoke meet you on the way to the glass. In the mouth is shows wonderful weight and concentration with an undercurrent of acidity and strong tannic backbone that keep the fruit in focus. A nice reminder that power does not have to mean over-the-top. The best is yet to come for this wine.
  
• 1990 Château Angélus (St. Émilion) - Not much to not like about this wine. A three dimensional wine with the alluring richness of its vintage. A compelling and exotically fragrant nose of dark fruit, spice, chocolate and smoke. Soft and sexy smooth from start to finish it has a decent structure that frames rather than dominates the fruit. Don't be mistaken, this is a fruit story and the story is long and complex as the fruit spreads out over the palate. A bit more acidity would have brought this pretty close to perfect.
  
• 1990 Château Figeac (St. Émilion) - Again this wine shows controversially. There were numerous cried of corked, but I think that people are thrown off by the Cabernet Franc dominated herbal dustiness on the nose. As it is, I find a delicate perfume with dry cherries, herbs galore and leather. The palate is similarly gentle with a refreshingly high level of acidity. This is a counterpoint to the open and generous wines of the Right Bank in 1990. A wine in a minor key that clearly didn't appeal to many at the table.
  

A Couple of LLC's to Finish
These wines suffered for being the last flight in terms of attention, but not in terms of quality. Clearly, the 1985 was the better wine today.

• 1985 Château Léoville Las Cases (St. Julien) - This is a wine they don't make much any more. It had a quietness to it that I don't usually associate with LLC reflecting the finesse-driven 1985 vintage. The nose seduces rather than wows with concentrated cassis, anise and graphite. Silky in the mouth, I loved the striking acidity which carried the remarkably fresh and vivid fruit along through the finish. A classic.
  
• 1989 Château Léoville Las Cases (St. Julien) - Not without some charm, this wine is years away from being ready. A wine of similar weight to the '85 LLC, it lacks that wine's calm presence. There is a quiet anger lurking underneath the placid exterior. Still, it is a wine of distinction with pure compact cassis at its core and a nice fleshy mouthfeel all of which is somewhat obscured at the moment by its own impressive architecture. The wine today has an unrelenting steeliness and I don't think it wants to be that wine. I'd expect that some time down the road those tannins will integrate and the fruity core will explode and we will have a truly compelling wine.
  

A Rare Double Vertical-4 Decades of Haut-Bailly & Pape Clément

This event was a great way to kick off the year. I love Bordeaux and I love drinking it in the context of a vertical tasting. One of the strengths of the wines is that each vintage tells a different story and we were lucky enough to be joined by the owner and manager of Haut-Bailly, Robert Wilmers and Véronique Sanders, to weave the tale. I had the good fortune of sitting across from the charming Mme. Sanders, whose family owned the chateau and made the wines for years. The idea for this dinner germinated in a conversation between wine writer Panos Kakaviatos and the real Jay Miller (i.e., not the Wine Advocate critic) about the changes to Pape Clément in recent vintages. The plan essentially was to taste a vertical of PC to see the changes since Magrez took power using HB as a classical control. To that end, it was a smashing success.

Both Haut-Bailly in the heart of Léognan and Pape-Clément in Bordeaux suburb of Pessac (it is within the BDX ring road) showed very differently, owing perhaps to their unique soils, although both showed the classic elements of traditional Graves. The wines were wonderful (other than a couple of early hiccups), especially the HB which showed a consistent style and quality. I own some HB, but never really sat down with it as seriously as this and really fell in love with the freshness and purity of the fruit common to these wines.

Thanks to Jay and Panos for organizing and to Veronique for her generosity and unique insights that pepper this report.

Mature Clarets
We had much more luck with the HB in this flight. The '88 HB was in particular a revelation, as expectations were pretty low. Véronique particularly enjoyed it as they have none at the chateau and this was an unusually good showing. She indicated that in the past in had shown "square" and this was much more "round" and complete. She also noted that the '78 was the last vintage of her great-grandfather. How nice it must be to have that much personal connection to a wine!

• 1978 Château Haut-Bailly-A beautiful mature Claret. The nose was a delicate perfume that evolved gently showing graphite, ash and loamy earth. The fruit was fresh and pure on the palate and I was surprised by the sneaky persistence of this wine: it rippled slowly on and on. The freshness of the fruit was a nice counterpoint for the spritely acidity leaving the overall impression of balance and delicacy.
  
• 1978 Château Pape Clément-I kept thinking this bottle was going to right itself, but it never did. It was musty and musky with some varnish notes (VA?). Not much relief in the mouth as it was pretty thin and diluted. It must have been an off bottle.
  
• 1988 Château Haut-Bailly-This wine started out a touch angular, evincing nothing more than cedar and graphite, but with a little aggressive swirling it blossomed in the glass into a charming Claret. Popping from the glass were aromas of sweet and slightly sour cherries mingled with orange peel and some Asian spice. The fruit in the mouth was slightly darker than it showed on the nose and was full and broad across the palate. If there were ever seams to this wine they have since hidden themselves admirably. This wine has years of life ahead and will only get better.
  
• 1988 Château Pape Clément-This wine was pretty dirty. I think brett can be a character enhancer, but clearly a fine line was crossed. The nose of wet diapers masked whatever charm was underlying this bottle. The bottle looked good, so I would think it's something in the winemaking. A real shame.

Flight of the Night
These wines were very fine. Any of them could have put up an argument for wine of the night. The '89s are all about finesse and the '90s about power. Véronique noted that to combat the hot harvest of '89, they kept the fermentation cool (<28ºc/82ºf) in order to tame the intensity of the fruit.

• 1989 Château Haut-Bailly-A wine of brilliant finesse, the '89 was probably the favorite wine of the night for the group. The nose was of exceptionally pure cassis and it gained complexity in the glass displaying touches of spice and cocoa. Wonderfully broad in the mouth, it had an alluring minerality and mouthwatering acidity to balance the ample fruit. The tannins to a certain extent contribute to the weightiness in the mouth, but I expect that they will step out of the way as the fruit matures. Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful.
  
• 1989 Château Pape Clément-A very good if somewhat incomplete wine. I wasn't wild abouty the nose, which was pretty reticent. A hint of fruit, but mostly lead pencil and earth along with a touch of VA. It was much more pleasant in the mouth, with a full mouthfeel, well-delineated fruit and an interesting steeliness. It had a nice acidity that carried the finish nicely.
  
• 1990 Château Haut-Bailly-A stikingly powerful wine, it seems to have more of everything. A deep, dark nose with notes of graphite, ash and roasted herbs. A full mouthfeel that showed impressive depth and breadth. Perfect balance between the ripe, ripe fruit and underlying acidity. It is a great example of the richness of the vintage that I so much enjoy. Perhaps it will have a lower apogee than the '89, but I thought it was the better wine for today.
  
• 1990 Château Pape Clément-A powerful wine that speaks to the richness of the vintage and the character of its place. Soaring aromatics of dark fruit, scorched earth, spice and licorice. It had a nice minerality and purity to the fruit although the palate could have used a touch more focus and it lacked some of the complexity that it showed on the nose. Plenty of structure left here, so it will be interesting to revist this wine in 5-10 years. This isn't a classic wine, but it is quite excellent.
  

A Soft Landing
I found these wine to be somewhat unusual compared to the others in that they were much softer wines. Not making a value judgment, just noting the facts. For the HB, the '98 has 43% Merlot and the '00 had 50%, which are some high numbers for these wines. I would assume that the PC blends were similar. I was fairly well impressed by the '98s which were very open wines that could be drunk now, albeit a little simple. The '00s on the other hand were fairly closed, but were more complex, I thought, which runs counter to the logic that the '98 vintage was the better one for Pessac-Léognan. These wine also proved out the point for Pape Clément saw a real change to a more "modern" and aggressive style of wine. Not that that is a bad thing, the wines were much cleaner and were very well crafted. I could see many people finding them a bit of an anathema however. On the other hand, the HB wines were true to their historical style with very clean, pure performances. The '98 PC was probably the one PC that I liked better than its HB analogue, however, I could see someone easily perferring the freshness and true Graves character of the HB.

• 1998 Château Haut-Bailly-Plush and soft, this wine is a little too fruit driven at the moment. The fruit is pretty primary on the nose and there is an ample amount of it. It is quite full-bodied and weighty in the mouth, although by no means heavy. There is nice acidity there, but the finish is more fruit driven at the moment. It's open knit and ready to go now notwithstanding that age will certainly help in develop some more complexity.
  
• 1998 Château Pape Clément-This one was open and ready to go. Lots of plush, round dark fruit mixed with a bit of dark chocolate and a ton of licorice. Full in the mouth and bordering on heavy, it has decent concentration but is a little short on focus. The tannins are fine and the acidity merely adequate. A really juicy, chewy, fairly simple wine that has a nice "please like me" personality. I don't think it's going anywhere for a while but it certainly is enjoyable now.
  
• 2000 Château Haut-Bailly-While I usually prefer more Cabernet driven wines, I liked this quite a bit. That said, it is way too young for a proper evaluation of the details as it doesn't show much nuance. The beginning and end of this wine are fruit driven and the palate is balanced but somewhat uniteresting at the moment. That said, it is impressively crafted. It is a very soft wine (about 50% Merlot) notwithstanding the impressive tannic structure. While other vintages of Haut Bailly seem to use the acidic structure to balance the fruit, this one appears to rely more on the tannins. Accordingly, this is going to need some time to show what it's got. A very impressive value for the vintage.
  
• 2000 Château Pape Clément-This wine is an inch wide and a mile deep. The color, the fruit...black and deep. However, it isn't showing any breadth at this stage, so its a little bit of a waste. Made in a soft, round, modern style, the nose is dominated by black fruit, semi-sweet chocolate and oak-driven roasted espresso. There's lots of pure, concentrated fruit there and a huge architecture framing it. It's more of the pieces of an excellent wine than a good wine now. Hopefully, time will tie it up into a great package because it does have potential.

Sandwich Vintages
I tend to ignore these two vintages, sandwiched between '00 and '03. I did like the '01s as being good every day drinkers and continued my general dislike for the hard '02 vintage.

• 2001 Château Haut-Bailly-I am sort of torn about whether this is a sleeper of a wine or just an everyday drinker. It is pretty much textbook Léognan with deep cassis, smoke and earth. It's slightly on the thin side of medium-bodied and doesn't have much architecture, but it is wide open and impeccably balanced. A wine with an amiable, easygoing demeaner that will neither disappoint or set the world on fire. A nice wine to drink while you're waiting for your other vintages of Haut Bailly to age.
  
• 2001 Château Pape Clément-This wine is packed, but shows itself in a fairly restrained way. Not to say that this isn't made in a modern style, it is. The fruit is sweet bordering on jammy, but I didn't feel that it got out of hand, as there were ample tannins and good acidity. Common sense says to wait on this one, although it is certainly drinking well now with some fine secondary characteristics of spice and licorice. The style of this wine is not going to appeal to everyone, yet there is no denying the talent that went into making it.
  
• 2002 Château Haut-Bailly-While others seem to enjoy the '02 vintage, I have not and this wine did not convert me. It's a hard, steely wine that reveals little on the nose. It is pretty angular and doesn't give much more than structure and the slight astringency that I've found common to the vintage. Perhaps age will soften it up as it is well-made.

Young Pups
We finished with some great youngsters that show great promise. The star of the night though was the '05 HB. An absolutely stunning wine and I put my money were my mouth was the next morning by purchasing a case.

• 2004 Château Haut-Bailly-This wine seemed to be in a bit more modern style than other vintages. It had some nice fruit and some Graves undertones, but it had a bunch of oak as well. The results are much better in the mouth where you get a little bit more of the purity of the fruit. It's pretty big boned and quite tannic that should give it some structure to age and integrate, but it was somewhat lacking in acidity and that worries me a bit. Still not a bad effort for a vintage that hasn't warmed my heart.
  
• 2004 Château Pape Clément-A big and juicy wine. The nose is all about power with waves of cassis hitting you with little subtlety. It is not without complexity however and it already is showing some nice secondary element of Graves. It doesn't seem to be going for elegance, but may acheive it in spite of itself if it can shed its youthful exhuberence. It also may veer off into pure decadence. For now though, it comes across as a bit blowzy despite some good structural elements.
  
• 2005 Château Haut-Bailly-Wow, what a wine. The nose is explosive, yet precise, filled with pure, fresh fruit and typical Graves notes and baking spice. This wine is a dream in the mouth with so much fresh fruit that you don't mind the ample but super-fine tannins. An undercurrent of acidity knits the package together. Exquisitely put together, this wine was a star that should easily top the wonderful '89 and '90 vintages.
  

Parker Incapacitated-Last Call on '05 Bordeaux

Eminent critic Robert Parker is currently dosed up on drugs following back surgery and not drinking any wine. Normally, he'd be tasting in Bordeaux in advance of his third and definitive rating. Meanwhile, the Bordelais with their very expensive product must be waiting with bated breath for his recovery and his final scores. This may be the last opportunity to get your hands on the "vintage of the century." After the scores come out (and I'd be shocked if they are anything but up, up, up), the wines will most likely go from outrageously expensive, to astronomical to gone baby gone.

Quite frankly, the only reason I follow Parker's advice on BDX is that you know the prices are going to skyrocket on the best rated wines and get out of reach. As an actual guide based on the taste, rather than pricing trends, I much prefer Neal Martin's reviews. He's been a real breath of fresh air over at the Wine Advocate, bringing a disparate view to a publication that has long been dominated by one voice (and one palate). I find the most useful thing is to try to triangulate between the two of them, as a truly great wine will appeal to any palate.

Underrated Bordeaux Vintages

Generally speaking, I'm a big fan of buying "on vintage" for Bordeaux. That said, I've really fallen in love with the 1981 vintage. The Wine Advocate completely ignores the vintage entirely in his Vintage Chart. Ignores it. Not that I'm complaining, it makes for some easy pickings in the secondary market. Recently, I've had some effortless bottles of La Mission Haut-Brion and Ducru Beaucaillou. Classic Clarets both. They share delicate, sophisticated aromatics and glide with a gentle finesse across the palate.

Maybe it's time to rethink my vintage bias? Probably not, given the prices of Bordeaux these days. Better to be safe than sorry, but when you find that hidden gem...

St. Emilion Back on Track!

Decanter reported today that a Paris court decided the suspension of the most recent St. Emilion classification had no legal justification. The classification was challenged by four chateaux of whom I have zero familiarity. Panos Kakaviatos, with whom I will be breaking bread in January (name dropping), noted that the Bordeaux court still needs to reach a final verdict on the fairness of treatment, which could take a couple of months, but that this ruling goes a long way towards ending the madness.

(http://www.decanter.com/news/155587.html)

La Mission Haut-Brion Vertical (03/96/95/92/90/88/86/85/81/78/75/62)

Great athletes can't all win championships, great actors can't all win Oscars and great wines can't all be First Growths. My ultimate impression from an evening of 5 decades of La Mission Haut-Brion was of a wine that had its own personality, showed amazing consistency and was occassionally stunning. It could be alternatively powerful and elegant, but there was always the leitmotif of concentrated fruit, herbs, cedar and graphite. Textbook Graves. Perhaps the highs aren't as high as with a First Growth, but I didn't get much in the way of real lows and shouldn't consistency and longevity count? Isn't LMBH the Don Sutton of the wine world? It is easy to see buying year in and year out without much risk of disappointment. Great stuff.

Gentlemen, start your engines...
2004 Château Lynch-Bages Blanc - France, Bordeaux, Bordeaux Contrôlée
Clean and tight without much interesting going on. Light lemongrass on the nose and nice acidity. Nothing offensive, but nothing to recommend it at its price point.

Lessons Learned
2003 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
A bit like a barrel sample, it showed a hint of what it could become and then disappeared. Very powerful and extremely well structured, it showed good depth with sweet and smoky blackberry, roasted herbs and graphite, giving way to more and more graphite as the tannic bite took over and it clamped down tight. I don't think this will be a profound wine and should show austere for a while, but I think that it will eventually be a compelling offering.
1998 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
Horribly corked. (flawed)

Wines in a Minor Key
1992 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
A good wine for an off-vintage, all the pleasure of this wine is in the nose. Funky cherries (which is going to be the name of my new band) mix with herbs and cigar smoke to hold your interest until you put it your mouth. It's soft on the entry and hopes are high, but it turns reedy on the midpalate and certainly finishes short, which may not be a bad thing all things considered. Smoke 'em if you got 'em.
1985 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
A classic Claret that, while perhaps lacking some of the power of other vintages of LMHB, displays wonderful elegance and finesse. Delicate aromas of dark fruit, herbs and earth show great continuity through the finish. The palate picks up a bit more of a red berry quality that layers in nicely. It doesn't have a tremendous amount of palate presence, although it was by no means thin. Just a well-balanced effort in which everything seems to fit together beautifully. Mark wonderfully described it as a wine in a minor key.

Yin/Yang
1996 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
One of the most accessable of the '96s I've had, this wine will certainly split the crowd. A dead ringer for a well-made California Meritage, it is loosely knit showing expansive sweet, dark fruit and cedar with a nice earthiness to it. While it lacked the depth of some of the other vintages, it was one of the most open and inviting. It had excellent weight and presence in the mouth, but perhaps lacked the acidity to match the fruit and tannin that the wine possessed. Certainly a great QPR for LMHB that was reminiscent of the '96 Insignia (thanks to Mark again for that insight), but it might not be for those that demand a more classic style to their Graves.
1995 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
A classically-styled Graves that displays a high degree of class, but is a touch aloof. A fragrant nose of wild mushrooms, cassis, roasted herbs and graphite gives way to a somewhat austere steely palate. More power than pleasure at this point, it was fabulously structured and will require considerable patience. Just a bit to tightly wound for me at this stage, this wine will be middle of the fairway for some.

The Power and the Glory
1990 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
A beautiful, beautiful wine. Classic Graves elements on the nose keep expanding and opening new doors with dark fruit, herbs, graphite and tobacco. It has a wonderful presence in the mouth with a perfect ripeness matched with silky tannin. Great acidity gives it a sneaky persistence on the finish. Seamless. The vintage is really hitting on all cylinders right now.
1988 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
An appealing, large bodied wine that has a great deal of personality, but lacks a bit of focus. More of a fruit centered wine with expressive ripe, dark fruit and nice secondary floral elements. Rich and weighty with a long finish, it nevertheless comes across as a bit fat. There is ample stuffing for aging, so perhaps this is just at an adolescent stage. I think this wine may sneak up on people in a few years.
1981 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
My lucky streak with the '81 vintage continues with this elegant effort. A complex nose of flowers, earthy mushrooms and lead dominate over the delicate cherry fruit. Silky in the mouth it glides across the palate with ease. Pure finesse, it will likely go on in this gentle state for years to come, although I don't expect it will get much better. Very classy.

Great Graves
1978 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
Simply a beautiful wine. Classic old Graves with cassis, cedar, tobacco leaf, herbs...really, you could go on and on. It was surprisingly spritely but intensely focused on the palate it showed both great breadth and length. Nothing out of place. This is why we drink Bordeaux.
1975 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
A stunning bottle of wine. If you are lucky enough to have this wine, you will be welcomed by an inviting, complex nose of black fruit, roasted herbs and cigar box. This wine had tremendous presence and weight without an ounce of fat. It reminded me of a professional athlete with its strength and grace. In a word...wow.
1962 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
While corked, at first only the nose was ruined and the palate still showed some great fruit. Really impossible to analyze, but clearly this wine is very much alive (well, not this bottle). (flawed)
1986 Château La Mission Haut-Brion
A young beast of a wine that hasn't even sniffed its peak. The nose was dominated by spicy cedar and tobacco with dark fruit lingering languorously in the background. A touch backward, it is tight, concentrated ball of energy. When it explodes, watch out. The real question for me is whether it can attain the elegence of other vintages. Popped and poured to replace the corked '62, this would have benefited with some air.