A nice lineup

Château Figeac may be somewhat of a conundrum for neophytes to Bordeaux. Even for some who work in wine. While sampling three white wines at the trendy Vino Volo airport wine bar at Dulles International Airport last week, just before a flight to Frankfurt, Germany, I told the wine salesman there about Figeac being a top notch St Emilion. And he replied that he adores the Merlot from that appellation and recommended a glass of Beau Sejour Becot, also a premier grand cru classé, he stressed.

Yes, but Figeac is made from vines that grow on more gravely terrain and thus includes very little Merlot – it is composed typically of 70% Cabernet Sauvignon and Cabernet Franc… To complicate matters still further, Figeac never followed the drumbeat of the Garagiste Movement on the Right Bank in the early 1990s, sticking to a policy to pick somewhat early, al dente if you will, to retain freshness. And as we reach levels of 15 degrees alcohol and more with many Merlots on the Right Bank these past few years, Figeac to me represents something more authentic and more mineral from Bordeaux, rather than big, bold and sometimes drying aspects from the high alcohol-soaking new oak.

What is perhaps even more surprising is that since the mid 1970s at least, Figeac has been aged in 100% new oak. Even Petrus has not used 100% new oak since 1990. But Jean Claude Berrouet of Petrus explained to me that the high degrees of alcohol in Merlot are not well suited to so much new oak.

Starting with Krug

Cabernets, on the other hand, can be. And for Figeac owner Eric d’Aramon, the time spent in new oak varies according to the vintage character. For example, the 1997 harvest only saw 12 months in new oak while the 2009 counted 18 months…  D’Aramon, who does not like over fruity and over plump plum flavors – see my video below – explained that the new oak he uses is generally low to mid toast, so the purpose is not to impart oak flavors but to more efficiently age the wine – and new oak tends to be more efficient in that regard, he stressed.

So, combine the fact that this is a St Emilion from a unique terroir with mostly Cabernet that is picked somewhat early, and you can see that it will not win many beauty contests when compared with what many tasters expect from beauty contests: a kaleidoscope of plum, raspberry, strawberry, cherry and whatever other (often bordering on over) ripe berry and high-alcohol Merlot derived sensations.

St Emilion and Figeac? A false sense of peerage? It is not an accident that some people call Figeac the Medoc of St Emilion…

Setting the table

In any case it was with great pleasure to organize a tasting of 11 vintages of Chateau Figeac at Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse in Washington DC with wine educator and sommelier Maria Denton. Many thanks to her and her team for preparing a magnificent five course meal to match the wines.

Just before he was to join scores of other Bordeaux chateau representatives to tour the United States to have their 2009 vintage tasted from bottle – in Los Angeles, Chicago and New York – D’Aramon flew into Washington on 18 January exclusively for this tasting dinner – and he generously donated 10 of the 11 vintages. The Parker numbers have never been to high for Figeac, so he wanted to have this wines tasted by American merchants and sommeliers and bloggers, to see what they thought of his wines.

For the most part, all participants were impressed, as was I.

Sommelier Maria Denton tasting the wines before dinner

One of the more controversial bottles was the 2000, and to a lesser extent the 1990. Robert Parker had recently downgraded the 2000 vintage from a mid 90s score to a mid 80s score, professing to have “blown it” in his initial judgment. That was a revealing remark, because D’Aramon does not seek big styled St Emilion wines. But he also admitted to having perhaps gone too far in the other direction in 2000. To avoid having too much richness, he may have picked a bit too early, he told participants, who noted some green in the 2000. In defense of the 2000, which I have tasted on several occasions since 2004, it reminded me last week of how the 1995 was about two years ago. Last week the 1995 showed better, somehow having incorporated its greener aspects. As D’Aramon said, the 2000 represents an older style of Bordeaux, and with time, will probably be fine if not delicious.

The 1990 promised great things but proved a bit underwhelming because it lacked some freshness, and I think we just had bad luck with two of the three bottles. One bottle was fine. Interestingly enough, some participants raved over the third bottle which Maria Denton and I had set aside because we thought it to be the dustiest. And even D’Aramon did not want to include it. Perhaps we misjudged it? Perhaps it was a question of more contact with air (although all bottles had been double decanted three hours before the dinner).

The Wines

I was able to taste before the dinner with sommelier Maria Denton. Wines in bold, I liked particularly; in red and bold even more. When underlined, the very best.

2009. Oak still on the nose and palate, a very opulent wine, somewhat mammoth like at this stage but displaying ripe Medoc like cassis and primary fruit, more black than red. It tastes like a barrel sample and has much weight on the palate, with finely grained tannin, albeit just a bit monolithic now. Long finish. 92-95

Cheers to Figeac

2006. Cooler nose. Red rather than black fruit, with a touch of violet aromas that are also offset by a bit of iron, lending a just slightly rustic aspect. But the palate is medium plus in body and packs quite a punch, balancing both richness and verve. Do not touch for a few years… 91+

2005. A lovely nose of ripe cassis and cooler blueberry like fruit, this wine exudes a warmer profile on the palate than the 2006. It also has greater volume and depth, nicely balanced with brisk acidity, with a touch of oak derivation slowly receding. I like the very pure cassis aspect to this wine on the palate, which seems more focused than the 2006 and more nuanced than the 2009, although rather tightly wound for now. Potential for a higher score. 95

2004. A mix of graphite and lightly sweet red fruits, plum and cassis. A very smooth medium-bodied palate, just a touch of vanilla flavored with cedar and brambly red and ripe fruit. An appealingly fresh lingering finish with mint. I can understand why so many people liked the 2004 at the dinner. 93+

2001. Pleasing red cherry, more mineral than mentholated freshness here mingle with a certain olive like flavor on the palate. If I had to choose between 2001 and 2004, I would pick the former because it seems to show a touch more depth, a touch more substance on the mid palate especially. Although the finish is similar, the 2001 adds an extra dimension of toffee-like sweetness. 94

2000. Amazing how this wine has transformed from being a super star in 2005 when I tasted it twice (once in a vertical in Germany in February, once in a blind tasting with most of the other premier grand cru classés) to a bit of a question mark in 2012. Eric d’Aramon admits to having picked perhaps too early to preserve freshness, his greatest concern in general. How will this evolve. Some, like critic John Gilman, sees this as a “positive herbaciousness” while others, notably Robert Parker, say he “blew it” when he graded this highly early on and downgraded the wine more recently. My feeling is that it will develop into a better wine, and taste like some of the more appealing 1970s Bordeaux. But there is not guarantee here… 89 for now.

Lamb with Figeac 1999 1998 1995

1999. When I first opened this with sommelier Maria Denton, we both marveled at its floral aspects, but there was a bit of VA that showed itself later à table. Whatever the case may be, it exuded a certain freshness and minerality that pleased my palate. Medium bodied, and perhaps somewhat hollow in the middle, this may have been the weakest of the evening. 88

1998. This had to be one of the two or three best wines of the dinner. It certainly wins as the most sumptuous. Whoever thinks Figeac is thin in the 80s and 90s needs to drink this, or has been drinking too many fruit bombs…. Sorry but that is my subjective opinion. This wine reflects a natural concentration due to a hailstorm, d’Aramon explained. Whatever the cause, the result is magnificent, with focused flavors of red and black fruit, nuanced richness and a fine underlying freshness. A great wine indeed. 95

1995. My how this has improved. When I last tried it with Ben Giliberti in Washington DC two or three years ago, a certain green aspect annoyed me. But that was pretty much gone at this dinner, where I noticed a mélange of stony mineral notes, baked plum and hint of cardamom spice. The tannins were not completely melted, displaying a 1995 “solidity” that one encounters in wines of quality on both sides of the Gironde, indicating yet again that 1995 is a vintage to be reckoned with in Bordeaux. 92

1990. The nose seemed like it needed dusting… but then came a mixture of forest floor, tobacco,  light leather and blackberry and plum flavors. The palate was rich, but not as exciting as the 1998. There was a dusty tannin aspect to the palate as well, that was even worse in one bottle. Later however, some tasters drank from that bottle and thought that that dusty aspect had gone. I am not so sure. Even d’Aramon felt that the 1990 was not showing its best from at least two of the three bottles he brought over ex-chateau. 92, but could have been higher.

Beef Wellington with Figeac 1990 and 1986

1986. Here was perhaps my wine of the night, because I just absolutely adored a certain crushed mint leaf flavor on the nose and on the palate, coupled with faded flowers and pencil shavings. Fully tertiary and yet of high intensity and precision chiseled by brisk acidity that kept this wine quite youthful in fact. This is not a wine for people who want evident fruit or low acidity… In an eloquent address to dinner participants, Burgundy lover Maureen Nelson compared Figeac to fine Burgundy, and I think that the 1986 certainly illustrates that comparison. For me, a beautiful wine. 96

Ready for fun, from left to right: Ian, Keith, David Ehrlich, Faryan and David White

Here we are! Nearly 2012. For wine lovers, the end of a year seems to increase the need to taste superb wines.  At least, I feel that rush. And thank my lucky stars for having fellow wine lovers to share such experiences. As much as I am increasingly enamoured by the freshness of Burgundy as some modern Bordeaux approach 15 degrees and more, my heart still beats for Bordeaux. At least from the “enlightened” Old School (meaning, traditionalists who have adapted to positive change to make wines that are clean, but neither over-high in alcohol nor over-high in new oak, for example). So it was a real pleasure to start two nights of Bordeaux, mainly from the 1980s.

Bordeaux 1980s, part 2: 1982 vintage, 30 years on – and still going strong!

What better way to count down 2011? With a group of wine geeks and fine bottles? A resounding yes. Many thanks to Ian Lipner for hosting – and preparing a superb meal, with all the trimmings, on 28 December. It was great to see Ian and Faryan Amir-Ghassemi again. And to finally meet Keith Levenberg, whom I have “known” as a blogger since 2004, back when the famous Parker board was public. Great to meet David Ehrlich and David White, who publishes the excellent Terroirist blog.

Things started off with a fine Henriot 1998, whose softer nose of subtle stone and mineral did not quite hint at the increasingly citrus-infused palate. I liked the acidity, but it was not a particularly brutish brut.

Beaucastel 2006: as fine as can be from the southern Rhone

David (Ehrlich) brought a white Chateauneuf du Pape 2006. The vintage was rather dry in the summer, so September rainfall which compromised other parts of France was rather welcome – for the reds. Here we have as fine a white Southern Rhone as one could expect. Not much beeswax, David noted. The nose was subtle, with white fruit, apricot and some pear, and the palate expectedly thickly textured but not overbearing. Over time, it became just a tad monotonous, but not a bad drink – also given its intriguing spice overtones.

Ian prepared tasty leek soup, made from leeks cooked in butter and red wine before being pureed and augmented with cream. I liked the acidity in the Champagne as a better match for the soup.

Nice match!

Flight One

Chateau Ducru Beaucaillou 1990. This great estate from St Julien we all agreed had the best label of the night. In spite of TCA problems in the mid-80s which marred the 88-89-90 trio here, this bottle was fine. David (Ehrlich) sourced it from a relative with a pristine cellar. Deceptively soft, because it tightened up a bit in glass, it was still a rather light expression from this vintage, and not among the top Medoc 1990s I have had. A certain dusty aspect reminding me of the 1970 blew off, and then the wine just became a soft pleasure to enjoy, with moderate floral aromatics and jam, and some black licorice on the palate. 92+

Chateau Pichon Baron 1988. Two years older, and yet it looked (less bricking) and particularly tasted younger.  Lovely precision and focus on the nose and palate, which had “more going on” and although we encounter tertiary notes, they are as fresh as ever. Although prominent acidity betrays the vintage nature – this is not the greatest balance one can obtain – the wine is now in a sweet spot, and shows certain signs that it will age very well for at least another 7-10 years. If the price is right, one to seek. Thanks to David White for letting us in on this information. 94

The softer side of 1990

For these two first Bordeaux, Ian allowed a “soft entry” – a salad with a thoroughly tasty mix of various mushrooms. The meat was on its way…

Underrated Pichon Baron 1988? Lovely stuff!

Flight Two – Best overall flight

For this superb duo, Ian served perfectly prepared strips of rare duck, ladled with a delectable sauce of port and cherry…

Floral and elegant - but with much underlying substance.

Chateau Ducru Beaucaillou 1986. My, my. Now this illustrates the often used phrase to describe the chateau as the “Lafite of St Julien”. Sheer elegance. Where the floral aspects in the 1990 were muted, here they come to the fore, with lavender and spring flowers. The palate exudes a contained power, with finely grained tannins that have come to a certain maturity but can last a long time yet. Tobacco aspects pleased me in their subtlety. Rounded and elegant. Does it get much better from 1986 Bordeaux? Perhaps there are wines that out power this one (see below), but this has feminine charm, and I like women. 96

Foreboding Gruaud Larose 1986

Chateau Gruaud Larose 1986. Whiffs of brett. I was thinking, trouble looms. But it blew off, over time. Keith may have double decanted beforehand but this needed more air. I have had this vintage over several years between 2005 and 2010, and always conjured up the image of Led Zeppelin’s When the Levee Breaks. Not for the meek this wine. Not big in a modern sense, with sweet tones of (over) ripeness in the mix. Ney, this wine is Old School and damn delicious, but it needs time to open up, its tannins still foreboding, and enrobed in saddle leather and cow hide and some notions of poop that are not – thankfully – overwhelming. At least not with some time in glass. Indeed, this became even more poised and clean on the palate over time. What it lacked for in elegance, it made up for in earthy power. 96

Delicious duck, aromatic wine. Hard to beat.

 Third flight

A 1986 pair from the Northern Medoc

Chateau Montrose 1986. In spite of my best efforts to ah-so the cork out, with careful coaxing, the thing fell in, so I poured the wine into a decanter and back into a just-finished bottle of Haut Bailly 2004, which no one in their right mind should drink today because it needs more time… But that is another story. Montrose 1986 has shown better from other bottles, but this was darn good. The color was light ruby and transparent, and I had the feeling that it was on a faster evolution than other bottles I have had. Still, tobacco infused, smooth integrated tannins, a pleasing even somewhat sweet yet refined aspect, with a definite 1986 acidity that matched perfectly the roast lamb that Ian also had prepared. 94+

Chateau Lynch Bages 1986. Most of us raved over this wine. I did, too, but perhaps not as much. There was something somewhat stolid about it, but, yes, it was very youthful – a much darker core than the Montrose to be sure – and showed more primary fruit. Lots going on here, too. Did I get a slightly drying finish? Going back to it, I could not but be amazed with its downright youthful mid palate, with an intensity of “compacted power” that reminded me also of the superb 1989. More proof of Lynch Bages as the “Poor Man’s Mouton” – or is Mouton the “Rich Man’s Lynch Bages”? 95

Perfect lamb with all the trimmings

The lamb was superbly prepared, with roasted potatoes in one bowl, and a mix of Brussels sprouts and broccoli in another. It was interesting to try both wines with the lamb. While the more mature Montrose seemed more to “accomodate” the food, the more robust Lynch Bages gave it a greater accent. Both went well with the serving, basically.

We finished dinner with a trio of “dessert” wines and obligatory Washingtonian political discussion that was quite civil. It is possible.

Chateau Gilette in Sauternes has the curious habit of holding its fermented wine for up to 20 years in concrete vats before release. Some say it preserves freshness, others call it a gimmick. The truth lies somewhere in between. This 1983 from a half bottle promised nice things, with orange rind and cinnamon spice. The vintage was successful for Sauternes, given a fine late summer that lead to late pickings and a rather slow spread of botrytis. But I have had better 1983s, such as Fargues and Raymond Lafon, both of which pack more punch. In any case, an enjoyable sticky!

A 2002 Quarts de Chaume Les Varennes from Jo Pithon was a bit too honeyed for my taste. I was expecting more acidity from the Loire. But de gustibus non disputandum est…

Finally, the Dow Vintage Port 1985 was as good as I have had from this estate and vintage. A fine bottle, exuding soft tannin, red fruit and a fine smokiness. Will not win any first place awards for high flavor intensity, but it certainly lulls the palate into a relaxed state of mind. Certainly ready for a metro ride home… Don’t drink and drive!

Many thanks to Ian, our host and master chef !

Master chef Ian Lipner preparing mushroom assortment

A fine trio of decades ending in "5" from Pichon Comtesse

Tasted on 19 November in London, at Decanter’s Fine Wine Encounter Master Class. Yet another superb tasting by Decanter. 

Six vintages of Pichon Comtesse de Lalande spanning over 30 years  pleased many a palate in a master class hosted by Sylvie Cazes and Mark Bingley MW.

Participants enjoyed a charming 2007, a seductive 1989, and a series of Pichon vintages ending in “5”, from a rather imposing and not ready to drink 2005 to what Cazes called a “classic Pauillac” 1975, with cigar box aromas and flavors. “A wine for British palates,” remarked Danish wine consultant Kayne Steadman, who preferred more youthful 1995. The tasting offered something for everyone.

In addition to the six Pichons, participants sampled four vintages of Chateau de Pez and a pair of Reserve de la Comtesse, the second wine.

Chateau de Pez 2007, 2006, 1999 and 1998

This was one of only nine chateaux (out of some 500) to be named exceptional in the short-lived 2003 classification of cru bourgeois. Of those nine, four were St Estephes. The 2007 (60% Merlot, 35% Cabernet S, 5% Cabernet F) was OK at first – a touch of phenolic? – but then a tad dilute and somewhat attenuated on the finish. The Petit Verdot was not ripe enough, so none in the mix.

A riper vintage, the 2006 displayed a more “voluminous” nose, and evoked a more substantial and tannic palate; with time in glass, it gets better – and shows promise for the future.

The 1999 displayed a sweeter nose than the previous wines, albeit slight dilution on the palate, if easier to drink than the 1998. Too fragile and not as interesting, this 1999, to me at least.

The 1998 was the better wine of these last two, with more substance on the palate – if a bit of tannic hardness on the finish. Still, some spice and more substance makes the 1998 better for me than the 1999.

Reserve de la Comtesse 2007 and 2003.

The 2007 was very suave on the palate although the nose evoked some under-ripe notions if fresh as well. In any case, it compares well to the de Pez 2007, because the second wine of Pichon is silkier. The 2003 was, well, too 2003 for me. The nose was very marmalade like, and the palate smacked of strawberry jam. Not my style of wine.

Taking careful notes

Six vintages of the Comtesse: 2007, 2005, 1995, 1989, 1985 and 1975. (in bold, I liked; in red, even more; when underlined, the best)

My overall favorite? The 1995. The 1975 also gets lots of credit. The 1989 was a bit problematic: we needed another bottle given an over-horse like aroma in the first sample. The 1985 was somewhat dilute but good. The 2005 far too closed for now, and the 2007 just good.

2007: Having enjoyed the Palmer 2007 just two days before, I can say with confidence that Palmer is better in 2007. But then again, this is Pauillac, even if you are a Comtesse. Perhaps it needs more time. I recall tasting this with the 2008 and 2009 with Gildas d’Ollone and Thomas Do Chi Nam before he was hired by Chateau Margaux. It is an elegant wine, with subtle richness, but now somewhat austere on the finish. Just OK for now…

2005: A controversial wine. I recall not liking it much en primeur, and the from bottle tasting was marginally better. But this time, I found a rather closed yet pleasing cool fruit aspect, with a tight and shy palate, but I felt a fine texture and sensed potential. For now, a question mark. 64% Cabernet Sauvignon, no Petit Verdot.

1995: Here I put a big check on my tasting form. This was cracking good. The Merlots were very successful in this vintage, the Cabernets perhaps a tad tough… But this wine is getting better each time I try it. Sylvie Cazes called it Pichon’s “archetype Pauillac” (whereas the 1996 was “archetype Pichon Comtesse”, certainly softer). The nose exuded hints of truffle and tobacco, with sheer elegance and finesse. The palate was still displaying tannic bite, but overlaid by ultra fine chocolate powder like sweetness, cigar box and plum like spice. Much substance, much going on. Speaking with a Danish wine consultant who has come to these encounters in the past, we wondered if the 1995 will overtake the 1996 with time… In any case, a relative buy, given the crazy pricing for the 2009 and 2010, and also cheaper than the 1996. Wine of the tasting.

Classic - and delicious - claret

1985: Strangely, we went straight to the 1985, instead of tasting the 1989. First bottle displayed band-aid aromas. The second was better. Open knit and elegant. I liked this wine the most, at first, but it lost some verve with time in glass – while the 1995 only gained in prominence. Still, if you have a nice bottle of 1985, you will get much pleasure: charming wine, with tannins completely melted.

1989: A very early harvest. This reminded me of the 1995 but on a faster evolutionary track. Rich and seductive, with the expected charm from a Comtesse, the wine was a real pleasure. But I get the inkling that the 1995 is at once slightly more pure and shows more the result of a slower-ripening season – always a good sign for both complexity and longer term ageing. Third place.

1975: Here my inner Englishman obtained great pleasure. What can one say about classic old Bordeaux, when it is coming from a superb terroir? Amazing? Well, the cigar box aromas seduced me to be sure. But it was not a foursquare aromatic profile: cedar and fine Cuban cigars. The palate was iodine infused freshness, complete with a smooth Cognac like feel on the palate.  This was probably tough as nails back in 1979 or 1980. The tannins have integrated marvelously. And the result is “Hallelujah first class Claret”. Give me more! Second best of the series.

And detailed tasting notes on Pessac-Léognan and Graves 2008, 2009 and 2010

A return to Bordeaux late September, and as the harvest was coming to an end, I discovered a rollercoaster season, as written in my report for decanter.com. Botrytis-affected grapes left behind on the vineyard like so many battle casualties after challenging pickings. Unripe grapes within bunches. All the result of crazy weather swings that began at first calmly with a very dry spring, and a precocious flowering. I recall the dry heat in early April, when I tasted the 2010 vintage from barrel – and marveled at the advance of the vine. By mid-June, because of such dry weather combined with warmth and sometimes high heat, everyone was talking about an inevitable earliest harvest of the century, across France almost – whether for Bordeaux and Burgundy, the Loire or Champagne.

Harvesters on 27 September at Château Picque Caillou in Merignac

In Bordeaux at least, what turned out to be a major influence on the harvest: above-boiling heat levels reached in late June and early July (as high as 42°C / 107.6 ºF) that shocked many vines that had been deprived of water already. “You have but two days to remember for 2011,”  said Paulin Calvet of Château Picque Caillou in Merignac: “June 26 and June 27 because the heat was such that you could see bunches where one side was burned and the other side OK. We almost had a catastrophe on our hands.”

Rejected grapes - note the botrytis - at Château Venus (Graves AOC) in Preignac on 27 September

What made things even worse was an unseen secondary effect of an organic liquid – terpène de pin – whose purpose was to protect grapes from rot. When the sun shined ultra brightly in late June and early July, that liquid, applied on grapes, served as a magnifying glass and made the heat all the more intense. That is what vineyard manager Karin Dubois Reyes told me at Chateau Haut Bergey in Leognan. But this excellent estate, like some others in Bordeaux, employed an optical sorting machine that assisted pickers to sort more exactly unwelcome grapes out from any fermentation vat.

Château Haut Bergey (Léognan) vineyard manager Karine Dubois Reyes with a just arrived harvest on 28 September

But before we get to September, what saved the day was July – Henri Lurton at Château Brane Cantenac in Margaux said it was the coldest July in 30 years – which helped vines recover from the heat stress and got grapes to develop again. See video below:

But even the cold and rainy month of July did not help all grapes from the heat shock. Harvesters in September discovered unripe pink-colored grapes in bunches that were 90% healthy, and this was the case across appellations, all because of the intense heat earlier.

Optical sorting machine screen at Château Haut Bergey

So the rollercoaster went from dry and hot to cold and wet… then came August which had bookend rains: in the beginning and in the end, but normal hot weather in the middle. Rain continued into early September, and then a mini roller coaster developed in somewhat tropical conditions: alternating rain and sunny heat: a perfect climate for rot, or botrytis. The only reason botrytis did not ravage the vineyards, said Bordeaux oenologist Nicolas Vivas, is because enough dry heat in between the rain put the breaks on it spreading too much. But spread it did in many vineyards, from high end classified growths such as Brane Cantenac to humble growths like Château Venus and Château Grand Abord in the Graves region.

Variable grapes in single bunches before the optical sorter at Haut Bergey

For smaller Bordeaux estates – and let’s face it, just barely 5% of all Bordeaux is classified growth and its equivalent – the challenges were even tougher. Mechanical harvesting is more the norm. The key to mechanical harvesting in 2011 was to have workers pick out poor grapes before the machines did the harvest – and then have another look at what the machine brought in, before the grapes went to ferment. Such was the case at Château Venus for example, a recently established five-hectare estate outside Preignac. Owner Bertrand Amart showed me botrytis-affected grapes (see photo) left behind before the machine began its work.

Rejected grapes from the optical sorting machine

He and others said that Merlot in particular did not ripen as much as its potential, so what seemed unheard of back in 2010 and 2009 is back: adding sugar to reach adequate alcohol levels. Known as chaptalisation, the technique was long a tradition in Bordeaux – and is still practiced – but less in the last few years given later pickings and the probable effects of global warming.

Bottom line: if you did not sort, sort and sort again, then you ran the risk of making less than fine wine.

In any case, production will be below average for those estates that took the time to get rid of the nasty bits. As veteran Bordeaux consultant Jacques Boissenot told me when I was in Bordeaux in late September: “There are some excellent maturities, and there will be some excellent wines in 2011, but it was hard work.”

What is interesting for lovers of later harvest sweet wines – Sauternes and Barsac being the most famous – is that the spread of botrytis was of course welcome. Although there was uneven ripening here as well because of the roller coaster weather, resulting in less ripe grapes having unwanted grey rot as opposed to noble rot, 2011 turned out to be a very fine harvest for Sauternes. And one of the earliest in memory, as Denis Dubourdieu told journalists at a tasting at Château Carbonnieux in late September. In some cases historically, what is a difficult year for reds turns out to be a very fine or even superb vintage for Sauternes (and vice versa). Vintages like 1982, 1996/1998 and 2000 were very good to great red vintage years, but not particularly great for Sauternes. While vintages like 1983, 1997 and 2001 were quite good to superb for Sauternes but merely good overall for reds. Will 2011 end up being another such “example of opposites”?

Why I love Bordeaux. Or, yes, there IS inexpensive Bordeaux that is tasty and pleasurable.

Tasting often tasty and affordable Graves at Château Haut Selve

As much as I love the charm of, say, Beaune or Dijon, Bordeaux is a big city by comparison – and loads of fun. The weather is more agreeable, as we are in the South more or less, and there is lovely architecture. Sunday evenings some shops are open, even nice wine shops open until 10 pm. This is unheard of in stricter Strasbourg – by comparison. The people are out, the evening is balmy. I met with friend Alex Rychlewski, who has been living in Bordeaux since 1978. He has raised his two children here. “Every public school has bilingual classes in English and in French,” he said. For English speakers, Bordeaux has a long history of association. At least back to Eleanor of Aquitaine and Henri Plantagenêt… In is an important trade centre, still with direct flights out of Merignac.

And there is also the wine. And what Alex told me is true. One cannot say that Bordeaux has the classed growths … and the rest is crap. Some people still do. And they are dead wrong. Take our dinner Sunday evening at The Café Regent, for example. This is a rather legendary Bordeaux brasserie that will sadly be replaced by some chain pizza store. Alex was very upset. But at least we got a chance to have a nice meal of duck breast with a bottle of Château Chasse Spleen 2006 for just €27. An excellent restaurant price for fine Bordeaux. In fact, that is not much more than what one would pay for the bottle in retail. And in the US, it would have been more expensive. Chasse Spleen is a very well known cru bourgeois from Moulis, but not a classified growth. Much Merlot in the mix and 2006 is an above average vintage. Youngish of course, the tannins were present on the finish, but overall very smooth with the corpulence and tannin serving as a fine foil to the richness of the duck.

But as you will hopefully discover, dear reader, my excitement over Bordeaux’s wine does not end with cru bourgeois. There are many other wines in the Graves region for example that cost less than a wine like Chasse Spleen and that merit your wine loving attention: see complete notes HERE.

Many thanks to Marie-Stéphane Malbec of Lettres de Château for inviting me on a press tour of the Graves region, where I not only visited and tasted top wines from the recently established (1987) Péssac-Léognan appellation but also wines from more humble estates in the southern Graves. And this visit was a discovery of both lesser known Graves estates and one or two in Pessac-Léognan…

Tasting aromatic and fruity just fermented white 2011 at Château des Places, with co-owner Fabrice Reynaud

Some of the more humble estates visited included Château des Places, belonging to the Reynaud family in the southern Graves. Brothers Philippe and Fabrice Reynaud sell to large supermarkets and use that money to invest in better equipment, such as finer thermoregulation for their stainless steel vats. They thanked a wine buyer at Carrefour for his business, showing him the new vats when he visited recently for example.  Their second wine – Les Charmes – is aptly described as a charming bistro wine, and for €5 per bottle, the fruit forward taste was just fine. The flagship wine, Chateau des Places, has more Graves character, with tell-tale tobacco aspects, although the oak is perhaps a bit too present at this stage (2009 vintage). Still, for an €8 bottle, just fine.Having said that, they make a special cuvee called Agora, which I find somewhat superficial: modern and made with 100% new oak. It is on one level the caricature of a “Parker wine” because it is over rich. Hardly Graves. They also use some American oak for aging (and flavor). Someone said it reminded him of a Spanish wine! But I have to admit when I tasted the 2010 from cask – almost all Merlot – it reminded me of a very well made Garage wine from the Right Bank: with intensity of flavor and even good acidity balancing the jammy fruit. Maybe Mighty Bob will discover this and send prices sky high, much to the delight of the owners. I prefer their standard cuvee, and their white Graves… which even in 2009 was pretty good, rather thickly peach flavored, even though it contains far more Sauvignon Blanc.

At Château Grand Abord with co-owner Marie-France Dugoua

At Château Grand Abord, one can procure a lovely 2009 vintage Graves for easily under €10 per bottle. But even better is the 2010 vintage. The wine is mainly Merlot but exudes energy and freshness and plum flavors. What I noticed is the difference between 2009 and 2010 in several domains and it seems to me a similar story at Chateau des Places. I think it will be interesting to re-visit some of the top Pessac Leognan properties and make a comparison again, especially at Domaine de Chevalier, which at the time of en primeur, I liked 2009 more.

Dining experiences in Bordeaux, long and lovely aftertastes

Dinners and lunches were memorable, as usual, when I visited the region in late September 2011.  How about a nice à la bonne franquette Monday evening dinner at Chateau Picque Caillou, where owners Paulin and Isabelle Calvet served freshly cut cured ham with a ratatouille and two pan-fried eggs, sunny side up, that came from chickens in their garden. All this talk about organic free-range chickens is true. Just taste eggs from these chickens and you will be a convert.

Owners Sophie and Olivier of La Gare Gourmande

Just before the press tour in the Graves, I enjoyed a delectable lunch at  day for lunch was amazing, too, with Henri Lurton and Corinne Conroy, at La Gare Gourmande in Labarde, just near Château Brane Cantenac.  It used to be the train station for Labarde but has been converted into a charming bistro with a natural country rustic feeling and excellent cuisine.

Lunching with Henri Lurton, owner of Château Brane Cantenac, at La Gare Gourmande

Customers can also buy local produce from jams to cured hams. The stuffed cannettes were divine, as was the wine: a lovely tobacco and licorice flavored Brane Cantenac 2001, which has softened just a bit but still needs more time to age.

Another highlight was dinner at Château Smith Haut Lafitte. Owners Florence and Daniel Cathiard have put the entire Pessac Léognan appellation – and by extention the Graves region – on the map since constructing a villa like ambiance at their château since arriving there almost 20 years ago. I thought I had seen every nook and cranny of their property, but dinner was served in a lovely white walled room upstairs in one of their many attractive buildings.

Co-owner of Smith Haut Lafitte Daniel Cathiard, seated in white shirt, with Paulin Calvet, standing, of Picque Caillou, serving his fine 2000 red

Dinner was delicious,  prepared by one-star Michelin chef Nicolas Masse of the Restaurant La Grand’Vigne, aux Sources de Caudalie. We started off with a fish tartare of what seemed like cod, served with a bit of spicy thick orange-colored sauce from fresh chili pepper. Hats off to Château Smith Haut Lafitte 2008 white, which was at once crisp and focused and rich. A white that will demand time and yet is enjoyable now too. The Château Latour Martillac 2007 white is also a fine wine, but perhaps a bit more gras. Served the next day at Château Carbonnieux from magnum, it is even better. Other wines that impressed over dinner included a fine Chateau de Roulliac 2009 white, which exuded iodine freshness.  We had magnum bottles of Château de Rochemorin 1998 white, a bit tired but showing fine acidity along with the leafy earth.

Heavenly meal at Château Smith Haut Lafitte

One of the highlights proved to be Château Picque Caillou 2000, served from magnum bottles, revealing subtle aromatics and a very pleasing palate with notes of tobacco and plum that went very well with the delectable roated duck, that was served with a perfectly prepared potato au gratin in a rectangle format and a carrot based legumes du moment (photo above). The Château Smith Haut Lafitte 1995 red from magnum was also very enjoyable.

Paul Garcin with an ingenious decanter at Château Haut Bergey

During a visit to Chateau Haut Bergey, I had the pleasure of meeting Paul Garcin and his mother who had purchased the estate back in the early 1990s. Also interesting was to note that a terpine de pin, which had been used to prevent rot actually magnified the effect of the burning sun in late June (everyone used it, said viticulture manager Karin Dubois Reyes) so that it accentuated the heat stress on the grapes, explaining why some grapes in bunches never recovered.

Special cuvee from 2002

After a tour of the chateau – during Paul showed me how special water was being used to keep regulate temperatures of the steel vats  (the water freezes at minus 4°C), how the château plans to increase the density of plantings, how the pneumatic press is kept oxygen-free – I tasted some wines. We started with the second wine, L’Etoile, from the 2002 vintage. I liked the cranberry freshness, chipper aspect and smooth palate. A fine drink and a second wine to seek in 2002. It was a challenge to taste Haut Bergey 2003, but the wine lived up to the challenge as one of the better Graves I have ever had from this difficult vintage. Its nose was marked by black sweet licorice and dark fruit, the attack was OK, a tad thick, but the mid palate was fine and flavorful. A pity that the finish was just a bit abrupt. Overall, however, considering the vintage, a fine effort. I appreciated the Chateau Branon 2002, which is always aged in 100% new oak… I wonder if it would be better to use less new oak, but it was a very fine drink. Very Graves with tobacco notes. Kudos for a very fine Chateau Haut Bergey white 2009, which at 14% did not seem heavy, and seduced me with notes of white peach and apricots. Semillon like even though mostly Sauvignon Blanc. From memory, the 2008 white is also very good.

Another fine white from 2009 – no hesitation – is the Chateau Sartre. Nothing to do with the philosopher but named after a nearby river not far from Leognan. This wine was very fresh and rich and flavorful. I was very surprised by the quality of many white 2009s, even though some – such as Chantegrive in Graves Cuvee Caroline, which I normally like, tasted a tad heavy. Not so for the red Chantegrive in 2008, which was one of the better 2008s from Graves. Some red 2008s were a bit tough to taste at this stage, with a closed in character, such as La Louviere, which I could not score. Neighbor Rochemorin however was far more approachable and tasty. Other reds I liked included Chateau Magence in the Graves region, which I will seek out to be sure, along with Larrivet Haut Brion and Latour Martillac… COMPLETE NOTES HERE.

Lunch with Philippe and Ghislaine Lacoste at Château Ferran

Relaxing lunch setting at Château Ferran with owner Philippe Lacoste (standing)

My first visit ever to Chateau Ferran on Wednesday 28 September, after the Larrivet Haut Brion tasting of Pessac Leognan wines, near Larrivet Haut Brion. Philippe Lacoste, who is part of the Mahler Besse family – and part owner of Chateau Palmer – along with wife Ghislaine welcomed us for lunch.

Fine white 2010

A delicious 2010 white was accompanied by foie gras de duck on toasts. Delectable in a delightful country farmer like environment, encased in stone walls that kept us cool from a rather hot afternoon sun.

Hostess and chef Ghislaine

We then started lunch with a delicious courgette and shrimps in a light cream sauce. The Ferran 2005 red was drinking very well as was the 2001, although that vintage tasted older than its years, it was still very good.

2001 at left, with a superior 2005

Served with filet mignon de porc in a light honeyed sauce, with string beans and carrots. Delicious.

filet mignon de porc

But what perhaps stole the show was an amazingly good chocolate mousse based cake topped with salted almonds, which because they were baked, had a slightly caramelized aspect… I really wanted to have another piece but I glanced at my waistline and declined, politely with some remorse.

Supremely delicious chocolate mousse with almonds

A lovely dusty tannined Magence red in 2008: hidden Graves gem

Many thanks to Marie-Stéphane Malbec of Lettres de Château for a press invitation to the Graves region in Bordeaux late last month. I tasted some well known wines in the northern part, known as Pessac Léognan (but also some unsung heros there), and some truly fine (and less expensive) wines from the southern part.

I will soon post a far more detailed account of my visit, plus my impression of the 2011 harvest, with photos, stay tuned…

In the meantime, let’s get down to the tasting notes, divided into Graves and Pessac-Léognan Red and Pessac-Léognan White.

Most reds were 2008s, most whites 2009s, unless otherwise noted.

Pessac Léognan – tasted on 28 September at Chateau Larrivet Haut Brion

Red Pessac-Léognan 2008 (wines in bold are very good, in red and bold even better, and when underlined divine)

1. Agreeable nose, cassis and bourgeon de cassis, although some unripe aspects creeping through. A bit tight on the palate although nose is more promising. There is substance. 85 (Chateau Bardins)
2. Darker fruit on the nose. Seems to have more body, perhaps more maturity, at least from the palate. Slight edginess, but overall a warmer drink and not disagreeable. Smooth. 88  (Le Bruilleau)
3. Some oak derivation? A hint of green? Like above, medium intensity on the palate but there is a nice fruit-driven focus on the mid palate, with cohesive tannins. Somewhat tight on the finish, a bit austere. 87 (Cantelys)
4. Noticeable step up, with more polish on the nose than the first three. Ripeness: red and black fruit. Some leaf but nice leaf. 91 (Couhins)
5. Darker color. Some oak derivation but also dark cherry notes. Palate is ripe, a tad tight, but there is good tannin and fruit. But I think I prefer the lighter touch of the above.  90 (Couhins-Lurton)
6. Chipper nose. Certain floral elements. Juicy, but edgy, more so than two previous two wines. Somewhat hard on a shorter finish, although there is ripe fruit…  89+ (de Cruzeau)
7. Smooth nose. Fruit. Decent attack. Verve. A bit short on the finish, but there is fine mid palate presence not without freshness. Red fruit, some darker fruit, too, but not rich: more disciplined. 89+ (Ferran)
8. Somewhat darker in color but the nose is slightly greener. Palate shows medium plus intensity, de la mache, but like the above trails off on the finish. OK. 88 (de France)
9. Riper notes here, not quite jammy but ripe. The palate is a bit of marmalade. Not sure I like the style because it is too sweet for my palate. Still, score higher if you like this style, even though tannins are a tad drying on the finish… 88 (La Garde)
10. Expressive nose of ripe fruit, more black then red but not jammy… Finesse on the nose. A solid attack and a tannic mid palate that is of medium plus intensity, the tannins never hard but present. A bit closed in, not quite tasting well now, but one senses potential… (Haut-Bergey) 90+
11. Clement somewhat toasty nose with red fruit, the attack is brisk enough, with freshness and the mid palate cohesive and agreeable. I sense some earthy tobacco leaf notes, and a feeling for lamb and rosemary to go with this. Moderate intensity. Could perhaps use more freshness but this is 2008. A lovely wine for the vintage. (Larrivet Haut-Brion) 92+
12. Inviting nose of cassis. The palate is more closed in….a certain tannic austerity that seems to overwhelm the fruit at this stage. To revisit! (La Louviere)
13. A bit chien mouille on the initial nose, but then sweet fruit, too. The palate is of light intensity, a bit second wine like… agreeable and rather fresh if lacking some matiere. OK. (Léognan) 87
14. Some decent fruit but also a hint of green on the nose. The palate is better, it has a light attack and then a medium intensity, agreeable on the palate. But we are not experiencing a very ripe vintage here… OK. (Le Pape) 88
15. The most subtle of this flight. The nose is floral and the palate exudes a certain complexity that takes the best aspects of the vintage. Tannins are not soft, but not hard either, there is a light to medium aspect that invites drinking with no under-ripe aspects.  Fine tonicity on the finish. (Picque Caillou) 90+
16. More expressive than La Louviere and softer. Medium intensity, light red fruit expression, soft in fact. Polite finesse. Tobacco on the finish. Fine.  90 (Rochemorin)
17. Stolid on the nose. The palate is a bit closed in, not edgy but without much expression. To re-taste. (de Rouillac)
18. Oak derived notes? Medium body on the mid palate, some beef blood. There is matiere to be sure, and the finish is authoritative although slightly gum staining – just slightly! Not bad. (Seguin) 89-90
19. Nose is a tad closed but the palate is rich, fruit-packed. Medium to full intensity on the mid palate, with a certain tobacco earthiness that pleases. Fine job. (Bouscaut) 92+
20. Tobacco elegance on the nose. The palate is a tad lighter than the above, but refined! Is it just a bit short on the finish? But flavorful throughout… Tannins need time to settle. (Carbonnieux) 90+
21. Voluminous nose here. One senses blackcurrant. Almost Medocain! Attack is brisk and mid palate borders on thick, but nicely contained. A young Domaine de Chevalier red that will merit some years in the cellar because the tannins are ripe and not hard, but present now. An almost cool expression of ripe fruit. Much matiere. Needs to come together. 93, with higher potential in the future. (Domaine de Chevalier)
22. Pleasingly open knit nose of tobacco with a Graves like fruit expression (I mean even slight notions of chocolate mixed with berries) introduces a fluid yet moderately concentrated palate. Fine definition, not quite tonic here, but certainly drink inducing. Lacks perhaps nuance but certainly delicious. Will it make old bones? At this stage, I am just happy to drink it, the tannins are ripe and the flavor pleases. 92+ (Latour-Martillac)
23. Minty nose. The palate is thicker than the above. Not really stolid but with greater heft. Concentration to be sure, with black fruit, if noticeable tannin. Overall quite good, but not tasting so nicely today. Needs time. 90+ (Malartic Lagraviere)
24. Leafy tobacco on the nose. The palate is rich yet also plump with fruit and earth. A pleasing mix to be sure. The tannins are present – as they well should be. Here we have concentration but also a certain drinkability even now. I like this wine, I would like to drink more. But it will age well, too. 93 (Smith Haut Lafitte)
25. Lovely chipper aspect, exudes freshness. Perhaps lacks concentration and depth of some of the other crus towards the end, but nicely expressed fruit and freshness, bravo! 91+ (Olivier)
    

    With Emilie Gervoson at Chateau Larrivet Haut Brion: fine reds and whites

Pessac-Léognan 2009 whites (wines in bold are very good, in red and bold even better, and when underlined divine)

1. Peppermint nose. Nice spice, with subtle fruit. A fine nuanced attack, no hot thickness discernable. The palate is of medium intensity and serves as an excellent diplomat for white Graves in 2009. Early picking? (Latour Martillac) 92.
2. Slightly sweet notes here of peppermint candy. The palate is invitingly rich, not sweet but perhaps not quite as much verve as the preceding wine, although may have more volume on the mid palate. Slightly warm on the finish? (Malartic Lagraviere) 91
3. Pineapple on the nose. Some grapefruit. Sauvignon driven at this stage. The palate is fluid yet pronounced with sprightly nature. Nice acidity. Tonic even. I like this. Get me some oysters. Now. (Olivier) 92
4. More apple than citrus on the nose. Some floral elements. Lovely attack on the palate. Rich yet fine acidity. Balanced white that invites drinking, but also displays a certain concentration for the longer term. Very fine job indeed. (Smith Haut Lafitte) 93+
5. Lime and melon at once on the nose. A revelation wine. There is such a fine freshness that is balanced by a concentration that is subtle – not evident. A primary minerality that is a prologue to something special. Once again, Domaine de Chevalier displays its breed, currently (somewhat) tightly wound up, but oh so much potential. Almost ready now but really a waste to open this bottle at this stage. I am not a technician and do not understand how they do it, but they do it. Rivals the Haut Brion stable for whites. Buy this now: a Rolls Royce but not as onerous.  95 (Domaine de Chevalier)
6. Lime and lemon nose, some grapefruit. The palate is simple yet very pleasing. Almost tart. Could it have used a bit more richness? Will that come with aging. I say: YES. Based on experience… this is going to be a fine wine with time. (Couhins) 91.
7. Smokier aspect on the nose, with the citrus. Oak? The palate is fresh and inviting. Nice job, I think more complex than the preceding wine, although somewhat gun flint like… (Couhins-Lurton) 91
8. Lanolin and peach? The palate is peachy. Not cloying but a hint of inviting warmth. Inviting. It lacks a bit of verve but is… delicious. Buy this now for early drinking. (Larrivet Haut Brion) 91
9. Bourgeon de cassis on the nose. Fine acidity on the attack that gives it backbone. Does not taste like a caricature of 2009. Grapefruit on the palate. Not incredibly complex but pleasing indeed. (La Louviere) 90+
10. Here we have a more evident cat pee aspect, but let us not be impolite. A more evident Sauvignon Blanc character. Not quite New World variety but getting there. Take La Louviere. (de Rochemorin) 88
11. Confit de grapefruit. Sweet peach. Palate reminds me of a Pinot Gris from Alsace. Can one imagine trying this with lobster? A bit too simple for my palate but has character. Nice job. (de France) 89
12. Far more subtle nose. I had tried this earlier at the chateau for a visit… More polish on the nose and on the palate.  Peach. Yellow but not overripe. The palate exudes a certain thickness with a slight warmth but one would not immediately guess that it is … 14 degrees. Nice job, in the context of the vintage. 91+ (Haut-Bergey)
13. A Sauvignon Blanc nose… with smoke. The palate is better, fresher. Invites drinking. It has verve and energy and I want to eat scallops with this. Grilled. Not bad at all. (La Garde) 91
14. Apricot nose. The palate is medium plus intensity… rich yet fine acidity. Very nicely done. I am enjoying this, if a tad volume like. (Brown) 91
15. Orange rind aspect. More nuanced than the above. This is a special wine, grapefruit and yet delectable mid palate. Drinkable. A tad choppy on the finish but a pleasure to drink. (Cantelys) 92
16. Very Sauvignon Blanc. A bit one dimensional but not displeasing. More proof that 2009 is not 2003 for whites. This has freshness, if not complexity. (de Cruzeau) 89-90
17. Nicely aromatic. Hint of pepper. Subtle and fresh. Slightly lactic? Iodine freshness like an oyster with some lactic aspects. Overall very nice. (de Rouillac) 90+
18. Toasted nose. Palate is smooth. Citrus and gunflint. Smooth certainly. (Bouscaut) 91
19. Sea shell nose. Oysters conjured. Freshness Fine focus. This is a revelation for whites… Perhaps not as complex as a few other classed growths but darn good. (Carbonnieux) 92+
20. A wine to seek because it cannot be too pricey and yet… the nose is rather fresh Sauvignon and the palate is green apple and lime. Not a complex wine, but, again, to drink with seafood without hesitation. (Le Sartre) 91 Tasted again at dinner at the Bois Martin estate and confirmed: probably an excellent price/quality ratio.
    

    Tasting Graves at Haut Selve

Graves tasting at Château Haut Selves on 27 September: reds 2008 and whites 2009…

Reds 2008

Chantegrive. Chipper and flavorful, good spice, oak derivation but integrated. Medium fruit. Some leafiness but pleasant, lends earthy freshness.

Venus. Transparent and looks older. A bit of cardboard. Mid palate is OK but tails off on the finish.

Le Bonnat. Another light and somewhat cardboard like flavor. Thin palate, lacking flavor intensity. Ho hum wine.

Haut-Selve. Lovely nose, there is fine fruit, good attack, with sap on the mid palate, concentration that makes me wonder if it is almost trying too hard. At least it asserts itself, although a touch of heat.

Ferrande. This is sometimes an under-performing estate but here a fine toasty nose, with a smooth palate entry, medium intensity, fine concentration (stuffing even), and a finish that is moderate but pleasing.

Lusseau. Not a bad nose, but a hint of green. Mid palate is better than the attack, offering up a decent drink.

Cabannieux. Fine fruit, chipper freshness, albeit with oak derivation and a tad warm, but pleasingly  dusty tannins.

Roquetailladela Grange. Here another recommendation, with fine floral nose and a medium intensity palate just integrating oak-derived notes into red fruit flavor.

Haura. Made by Denis Dubourdieu. Aromatic. Attack that emphasizes stuffing, but smooth entry and mid palate feel. Just a touch of heat on the finish.

Clos Floridene. Dubordieu’s flagship. Finesse on the nose. Red fruit on the medium plus intensity palate that is marked by very pleasing, almost crackling, cranberry. Mark of the vintage? Tannins are a bit edgy however… Give it some time.

Haut Maray. Somewhat stolid nose that precedes a somewhat thick attack and entry. There is flavor and fruit but a tad … thick. And slightly hard tannin. Not sure.

Magence. One of the very best reds of this tasting. It seems to have taken in the limits of the vintage and expressed the best possible wine: plum and cassis fruit, medium intensity, a smooth attack and mid palate, some cherry flavors on the finish, supple tannin. One to buy. Today.

Whites 2009 and 2010

Clos Floridene 2009. Fine apple and grapefruit on the nose. Good freshness. Acidity is there, too. Not bad at all. Is the finish just a bit short?

Magence 2009. Creamier on the nose and palate. Do I feel just a bit the alcohol? But there is a pleasing peach aspect, Semillon seems to dominate. Like this but some vague heat detracts – it is after all 2009…

Ferrande 2010. A somewhat closed nose. Although the palate exudes stuffing, presence, I feel that it lacks brightness for the vintage. A disappointment.

Roquetaillade la Grange 2010. This has … 20% Muscadelle and 60% Semillon. Very clear color, matching its youth. Somewhat floral aromas. Light yet flavorful on the palate. But I get the feeling that the finish is almost fleeting… Too polite?

Chantegrive Cuvee Caroline 2009. I was expecting a lot and came away with heaviness and oak. 2009 was too sunny for this estate? Too warm? Alas, a deception.

Cabannieux 2009. Better, less oak. Still, a certain thick aspect that informs you that this was too hot a vintage for Graves.

A very fine white Graves in 2009

Fougers Clos Montesquieu 2009. Here we have a fresher 2009, not thick, with citrus fruit and a bit of zip on the mid palate, and yet a touch of heat on the finish…

Grand-Abord 2010. There is something a tad ho hum about this wine. I had visited the chateau just before this tasting and was impressed with the dynamism of the owners, but the 2010 lacks intensity and focus, although it is not bad.

Magneau 2009. Tasted again at the estate the following day and I must say this is one of the best white 2009 Graves I have had. I did not take notes for some stupid reason…. The 2010 is even better.

According to news reports, these wines have been coined the “magical 20″, wines that do not include the superstars like all the first growths or wines like Petrus but rather representing some sort of Super Second list… And many have already been recognized as such by the market, as their prices sometimes reach up to €200 per bottle or more, depending on the vintage. So you might expect further price increases for each of these wines as more Chinese hear about this list.

What can one say about these wines? The list is a sure thing. I think it is great that Chateau Haut Bailly made the list. For me, it represents a rival to Haut Brion. Haut Bailly has become one of the most consistently delicious wines in the last 15 years or so, and it also displays impecccable elegance. You see also the recent success of wines like Pontet Canet and Smith Haut Lafitte, as well as legendary wines like the two Pichons, the great Leoville Las Cases. Other choices seem obvious, including Trotanoy and La Fleur Petrus, while some may wonder why certain wines were left out. Leoville Barton, Montrose and Ducru Beaucaillou come to mind…

In terms of pricing alone, one wine on this list remains a steal in terms of quality-to-price ratios: Château Brane Cantenac, which has been making fine and elegant Margaux for many years now, but the market has never really caught up with the quality. The wine is never thick, never modern. Always a stress on aromatics. I think their 2005 was among the very best overall in Bordeaux in that great vintage, for example.  In any case, I certainly bought some in recent vintages. It may be in your interest to grab some, too, before the prices head north.

At the Wine Future event, a limited selection of 1,000 participants will taste the highly-touted 2009 vintage for each of the 20 wines, so certainly much coverage is expected in the Hong Kong trade press.

The “magical 20″ (in no particular order, I think, just copied from a list from the Hong Kong Future event)

1. Château Cos D’Estournel St Estephe 2nd Growth

2. Château Pontet-Canet Pauillac 5th Growth

3. Château Pichon Lalande Pauillac 2nd Growth

4. Château Léoville Poyferré St Julien 2nd Growth

5. Château Léoville Las Cases St Julien 2nd Growth

6. Château Palmer Margaux 3rd Growth

7. Château Malescot St.Exupéry Margaux 3rd Growth

8. Château Pape Clément Pessac Leognan Cru Classé

9. Château Haut Bailly Pessac Leognan Cru Classé

10. Château Angelus St Emilion Premier Grand Cru Classé B

11. Château Trotanoy Pomerol

12. Château La Conseillante Pomerol

13. Château Pichon Baron Pauillac 2nd Growth

14. Château Lynch Bages Pauillac 5th Growth

15. Château Smith Haut Lafitte Pessac Leognan Cru Classé

16. Château La Fleur Pétrus Pomerol

17. Ch. Clos Fourtet St Emilion Premier Grand Cru Classé B

18. Ch. Rauzan Ségla Margaux 2nd Growth

19. Ch. Brane-Cantenac Margaux 2nd Growth

20. Ch. Le Gay Pomerol

And now, after I bought a bunch of wines at the Foire aux Vins at Auchan near Strasbourg. And Chateau La Louviere Pessac Leognan 2009 is great. Black fruits on the nose and palate, but excellent acidity. I was deciding between a 14 degrees wine and this one at 13, and I am glad I bought this. Lovely Graves. Not super complex but for €20 per bottle, an excellent purchase. And that is indeed 2009 Bordeaux

I am in Bordeaux now for about 10 days for Vinexpo, and as of this writing – past midnight on 16 June – I have heard from a negociant that even the negoce is scratching its collective head: why are the prices so much higher than last year? Headlines from decanter.com give us one example, HERE.  But many more abound. For many of these wines, you can find in-bottle versions for just as much if not less, so what is the point? According to this negociant, who cares not to be named, the chateaux may be taking a big gamble. They are not selling as much of their wine, he says, as they did last year, because the negoce does not want to bother. So what will happen with these expensive price tags in the long run?

For now, some merchants in the US have already told me – in quotes that I did not use in THIS ARTICLE - that the very top wines will sell, no matter what the price, but other wines from other regions that offer just as much quality for less will threaten many Bordeaux in 2010. Yes, Bordeaux remains unique, but at some price points, many customers are no longer going to pay for that. Furthermore, you have merchants like Calvert Woodley, which have been in the futures business for many years, explain to their clients in a polite way that the prices they see for Bordeaux EP 2010 are nutty: HERE. And Mark Wessels at MacArthurs, also in Washington D.C., has told me how difficult the prices are, too.

From Smith Haut Lafitte to Calon Segur, from Montrose to Pichon Baron, prices are higher, sometimes much higher, than they were for the 2009 futures campaign, and I happen to think that 2009 is just as good a vintage and even friendlier… less evidently tannic and structured but just as long lasting. So, again, what’s the point? Heck, you could buy a Pichon Baron 2000 for less money that the Pichon Baron 2010 future.

The late campaign had been frustrating merchants who said that summer vacation will interrupt purchasing (an argument I cannot understand because anyone with an I-Phone or remote internet access could order from the beach). In the US, the dollar-euro exchange rate is worse than it was last year, so higher prices are compounded by that sorry state. By last week, some merchants I know had only purchased three wines of all those released thus far. Another yawn.

Point being: many comparable wines are available in bottle and for comparable and sometimes lower prices. So why tie your hard-earned cash down for 2+ years, when you have little or no guarantee that the already high prices will not increase by the time your wines reach the shelves? The greater likelihood is that the prices will stay the same and perhaps even decrease… And provenance is no longer an issue, because if you know a good retailer/importer, you can be assured that the bottles will arrive in temperature controlled shipping when they are ready. The only reason to buy futures now is for smaller estates and in difficult-to-find formats, such as magnums.

FURTHER FOOD FOR THOUGHT… 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/wine/8564288/The-Bordeaux-wine-bubble-is-fizzing-up-up-and-away.html

http://www.sokolin.com/Blog.aspx?articleid=317&sectionid=4

Or, if you are an economically minded Bordeaux lover, check out the cru bourgeois level wines which have not increased in price but have done so in quality. As I wrote in Wine Business International recently, cru bourgeois make their mark, cru bourgeois level wines are increasingly appealing in the US market for mere mortals. Take a wine like Sociando Mallet, which in magnum 09 or 10 EP costs less than Sociando Mallet magnum 2005 or 2000. Generally speaking. Some retailers are discounting 2005 bottles to a comparable 2010 or 2009 EP price, but mags? Nope.

Finally, those who justify the very high EP prices in 2010 are talking about Brazil and China and markets that have more recently shown interest in Bordeaux. For them such high prices are normal, it is said. But if you talk to merchants, they will tell you that they honestly do not know if the very expensive bottles are being bought to drink or for speculation. They have a feeling it is the latter. Take for example the words of John Visser, French wine buyer for Gary’s Wine Marketplace in New Jersey, into account. He told me that most people who spend $1,000 for a bottle of fermented grape juice will not likely drink it. They seek to re-sell later at a profit. Now that was happening when the release prices were lower. The bar is now so high, that the bull market could turn bearish… If you are looking for investments, perhaps better to follow the advice of Francois Mauss of the Grand Jury Europeen and invest in an apartment in Berlin. Or something else. Of course like gold the prices can head further north. But for every Lafite Rothschild, there are scores of wines whose prices will not be much different once they are to be found on shelves. Indeed, they may be discounted later.

COMING SOON

Please stay tuned for my notes from VINEXPO, the bi-annual wine fair next week, during which I will dine at some of the greatest Bordeaux estates and will taste back vintages you may have of great wines, from Cheval Blanc and Haut Brion to Domaine de Chevalier and Brane Cantenac. No matter what the prices for Bordeaux 2010 futures, I remain a Bordeaux wine lover!

THE VIDEO – See text and photos below

Dating back to at least the 17th Century, Domaine de Chevalier is a jewel in the Bordeaux crown. It produces some of the very best wines of the Graves region and perhaps the best white wine of Bordeaux. Producing both red and white wines, Domaine de Chevalier – located in Leognan – enjoys an interesting microclimate, surrounded by forest.

Since 1983, Olivier Bernard has owned and run the estate. Much has been done to improve the quality of the wines. And while the whites had always been appreciated, he has – along with Remi Edange and a faithful crew – improved the red wines and maintained the high quality of the whites. So much so that red Domaine de Chevalier has become a benchmark for a fresher, more classical style of Bordeaux, never over-rich or overdone.

Just some of the bottles from the tasting

It was thus very interesting to see how a group of sommeliers, restaurateurs, wine merchants and wine lovers evaluated 10 vintages of red Domaine de Chevalier: 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001 and 2000, followed by lunch with three more reds (1991, 1981 and 1961) as well as three whites (2001, 1991 and 1981). The event took place on Saturday 29 January. Most everyone came away impressed with the wines.

Tasting notes HERE.

The white has always enjoyed a great reputation. It is perhaps surpassed by the whites of Haut Brion and La Mission Haut Brion (formerly known as Laville Haut Brion), and can be rivaled in some vintages by the whites of Pape Clement and Smith Haut Lafitte. I do not have the vast experience of other Bordeaux wine lovers, but since tasting en primeur in  2003, I note that the whites of Domaine de Chevalier are generally the most crisp and precise of all the wines tasted blind in tastings organised by the Union des Grands Crus de Bordeaux, which do not include Haut Brion and Laville Haut Brion. These latter two tend to have more opulence, but are no better in terms of precision and focus. And longevity. Domaine de Chevalier whites tend to last a very long time. One fine memory was a blind tasting in 2010 of  the 2000 vintage. While that vintage proved generally excellent for reds, it was not quite as good for whites, which have a tendency to be a bit flabby. Not so Domaine de Chevalier, which revealed itself to be very firm and fresh and with the longest lasting potential.

Olivier Bernard with the magnificent 1981 white.

The tasting and lunch took place at Black Salt, a well known Washington D.C. restaurant known for its fish and seafood, but also capable of offering fine meat-based dishes. Many thanks to Mark Wessels of MacArthur Beverages for assuring safe passage and stocking of all the bottles, which were sent directly ex-chateau for the tasting. Mark also helped out with decanting and serving the wine! Participants included various wine bloggers in the Washington D.C. area; Dave McIntyre, wine writer for the Washington Post; Maria Denton, sommelier and director of the Society of Wine Educators; Kathryn Morgan, sommelier of the celebrated Citronelle Restaurant; Ben Giliberti, Education Director of Calvert Woodley Imports and many others.

Owner Olivier Bernard is a wine lover and is very passionate about what makes great wine. Much was said about the importance of patience in the vineyard, obtaining optimal maturity yet maintaining excellent acidity, reduction as opposed to oxidation when it comes to aging wine in bottle, about wine-food pairings, about winemaking styles and viticulture. Bernard engaged his audience with information and his methods of winemaking, including paying extra for harvesters to come at the last minute. By the time the tasting and lunch ended – we started about 11.20 am and ended things about 4 pm – we all came away feeling warm on a cold, January day at the nation’s capital.

I was pouring a lot and did not get as much a chance to sit down and note my impressions of every wine tasted, but here – from memory – my notes, using the Decanter five-star rating system, express an opinion as to how the wine is drinking today, although its ultimate potential is qualified with “going on”. The 10 red vintages were served in flights of three, starting with the oldest wines, and then we enjoyed the 2009 alone as a barrel sample. Red and bold means a wine I really loved.

First flight: 2000-2001-2002

2000 red: This wine was full bodied and despite decanting, it needed time in glass to open up. Though not primary, it was far from ready to drink, in my opinion. Much potential, perhaps big in some respects, but also containing superb aromatic complexity that is not yet expressing itself optimally in glass. It will certainly gain from more time in bottle. 4 stars going on 5

2001 red: Here we have a wine that is more open than the 2000, with a bit more elegance on the palate and yet not quite as much body. A lovely, rather herbal and olive expression, also some red fruit aspects, but just a tad closed, again despite double decanting (Olivier had asked me to double decant just the 2000 and 2001 among the 10 reds in the tasting before lunch). Needs time in bottle to open, like the 2000, but perhaps with not as much potential. 4 stars going on 4.5

2002 red: My favorite of the first flight. A real charmer, exhibiting red fruit freshness and with excellent body and a fine texture on the palate. It does not have the scale of the 2000, but it has real nuance today, and provides much pleasure. Talk about an underrated vintage, this wine can still be found for under $40 a bottle. 4.5 stars

Second flight: 2003-2004-2005

2003 red: Quite nice. Of the three wines in this series, only two or three people voted it as their preference. This was understandable, because 2003 was not that good for Graves-based reds. Already generally of warmer climates than, say, St Estephe in the Medoc, Graves terroirs did not react well to the very hot 2003 vintage. But the Domaine de Chevalier did not have that evident raisin, cooked fruit taste that one gets from many 2003s, and that is a good thing. One of the better 2003s from Graves I have ever had. 3 stars

2004 red: This reminded me a lot of the 2002, but perhaps with a tad more body and, yet, a bit more closed. Overall, I think that the 2004 may prove to be the better wine of the two, but both have a lovely red fruit freshness, and good sap. Still, one could open a 2004 today and enjoy it. 4 stars

2005 red: This wine was large scaled without being big. Rather primary, the wine exhibited a lovely expression of red and black fruits with spice. There was a real freshness and lift to the palate that was not as evident in the 2000 – the first “vintage of the century” over the last 10 years… Indeed, I think the 2005 will prove better than the 2000 at Domaine de Chevalier because it seems to have just a bit more freshness and seems to have a better finish. 4.5 stars going on 5

Third flight: 2006, 2007, 2008

2006 red: This wine could have used with a decant, because it was rather closed aromatically. On the palate, one senses impressive body, but also the tannin. I was left with the impression that it had more tannin than the next two wines, but that was not the case… It should be fine later, but not drinking well today. 3.5 stars

2007 red: Here we have a very fresh and elegant wine, with brambly fruit and yet also showing fine minerality. The 2007 is also a charmer, I suspect with a tad less body than the 2002 or 2004, but it is drinking nicely today. 4 stars

2008 red: Perhaps better than the 2007, with more body – and more (potential) nuance, but not as easy to approach today as the 2007. It is certainly more approachable than the 2006 and seems to have more potential complexity than either the 2006 or the 2007. 4 stars going on 4.5

The 1961 red: fifty years young.

2009 barrel sample red: From barrel, this is an amazing wine – the third Bordeaux “vintage of the century” in the last ten years. I can see how it can be considered somewhat of a bargain among the über-expensive 2009 Bordeaux. Very primary, more so than the 2005, the 2009 seems to be on the dark fruit register, whilst the 2005 a tad fresher. It will be interesting to compare these two wines over time. I had previously favored the 2005, but I think both will excel in their respective manners: the 2009 will end up being richer while still balanced, while the 2005 will have a bit more freshness and lift. In any case, the 2009 merits a very high rating. 4.5 stars going on 5

1981 white Here a wine with floral aromatics, hints of orange blossom, pear and mineral. Served just before the first lunch plate, it showed  superb depth and richness on the mid palate, before a long, lingering finish. I came away from the tasting and lunch with a revelatory feeling for this 1981, which tasted 20 years younger than the 1991… 5 stars and then some.

1991 white. Perhaps this should have been served before the 1981. A difficult vintage. Far less wine was produced than the average, Olivier said. It was a challenge and the estate rose up to it. Still, it paled in comparison to the 1981. A nutty, rancio aspect. Not bad but certainly do not wait for this. Olivier said that it would have been better to have served from magnum, as was done with the 1991 red later. Perhaps. This was the only bottle of the tasting which was not finished at the end. Here a carpaccio of Nantucket Bay scallop and organic salmon proved a bit mismatched, but delicious. 2.5 stars

2001 white: A beauty. Beeswax, lanolin, pear, white peach. More Sauvignon Blanc in the mix in recent years, because of the acidity one gets from Sauvignon Blanc, Olivier explained, so while the 2001 is closer to 80 percent Sauvignon Blanc and 20 percent Semillon, the earlier vintages clock it more like 70-30. Many agreed that this will age as slowly as the 1981 did, but may offer even more body. Certainly a benchmark vintage. It certainly paired well with the Atlantic Bigeye Tuna, white beans, local turnip puree: the texture of the meaty tuna was matched against the subtle richness of the 2001. 5 stars.  

Thomas Duroux meanwhile at Chateau Palmer enlightens Elin McCoy – author and Bloomberg journalist - and wine writer Mark Golodetz on the differences between 2009 and 2010 as two styles of women. Chateau Palmer has to be one of the very top wines in Bordeaux. Alas, it too has become quite expensive…

Finally, just after en primeur week, veteran Bordeaux seller Bill Blatch – also known for his superb harvest reports – gives us a fine dose of realism when talking about Bordeaux 2010… I think he makes much sense in his take on the vintage, on how it was not all that easy to taste. Take a look!