1982 Bordeaux ?

Would like know what others think of 1982 Bordeaux at this point in time. Most crticis still regard this vintage highly, but as someone who bought a fair amount (mostly 1st Growths), I'm not so sure.

Three days ago I hosted a dinner where I opened Lafite, Latour, Mouton, Margaux, Haut Brion, Ausone, La Mission Haut Brion. Leoville Las Cases, Cos d'Estournal, and Gruaud Larose. These were my own bottles that I'd gone to get care to acquire and store (from many different sources). All have been stored since purchase (mostly on futures) at a constant 49-50 degrees (with proper humidity). Most had low neck fills with corks still in very good shape.

All were rather oaky and though the bouquets were forward and complex, mostly they were made up of scents that were related to the relatively high use of new oak. None showed any signs of being off bottles and/or victums of TCA. If any thing, most appeared more like old CA wines that did not have enough fruit to begin with.

As has been the case in recent years, the two most fruit filled wines were Mouton and Margaux. Haut Brion was perhaps the most dense, and also the 2nd most oaky wine. Ausone was it's usual self. Dried bracken (almost forest floor) with decidedly overripe (almost port-like) fruit...well in the background.

I actually was surprised that all of them showed as well as they did, but at the same was again disappointed. I had hoped that 82 would turn out more like 1959 or 1970...but they are not remotely in that class. I've had many 59's and 70's and they show much more fruit (even though they are older). Instead it appears that 1982 will not end up much better than 1978. Certainly my bottles of the 78 Margaux (and even the 79) top the best bottles I've had of 1982 Margaux. And even my 75's show more fruit.

So what happened?

These wines seemed so dense and extracted when I first opened them to try (back in 1985). I knew there were low inid, certainly in comparison to the best wines of 1966 and 1970...but I was not expecting the fruit to fade so quickly.

And in comparison to my collection of older BV's, they just are no match. They don't have the fruit, the balance, the fineness of tannin, or the potential for further aging. They're not falling apart and they've actually held fairly well since I opened them (which is rarely the case with the 660's or 70's)...but they are not what I had hoped for.

I find it hard to believe that my bottles are the exception, since (as I'd said) I'd acquired them from so many different sources. And they all are so similar now in their oakiness and lack of fruit.

Any thoughts on this?

.

.

I"m really confused by your experience with the 82 Bordeauxs. The overoaked aspect is something I've not experienced. I think my favorites have been Latour, Mouton, Leoville, Pichon la, Gruaud La, Puy La Coste, Lynch Bage, Cos,. I don't think they are "great" wines but my own personal palate would prefer Burgundy, Barolo, Brunello, Rhones, so I have my own prejudices.
Hey! The price sure as hell was right. I've still got a couple of mixed cases left. Held up well.

Gosh Steve, I don't know what to say. I've not had nearly the breadth of experience you have with 1982 Bordeaux, but what I've had has been almost always fantastic. The Lafite, Mouton, Margaux, Latour, Pichon Baron, Pichon Lalande, Leoville Barton, Leoville Poyferre, Lynch Bages, L'Evangile...all absolutely spectacular. Most of these I've consumed in either a vertical or horizontal tasting context. When they have been verticals, the 1982 has almost always stood out among the top vintages. I've never had a '59, but the few '70s I've had don't hold a candle to these. I have a fair amount of experience with 1978's (which I like a lot) and 1975's (which I don't like that much) and I have to say that to my taste, 1982 is in another league.

I guess it's a case of differing tastes. Fortunately for you, I'm sure you could easily trade your remaining stock of '82's for multiple bottles of 70, 75, or 78.

Matt

Hi Steve,

In a separate thread I had posted a request for recommendations for 1959 (and 1984) vintage wines. I noticed you saying you have tried many 59s - any you've tried recently that you would care to recommend?

Thanks in advance.

Matt summarized my view pretty well (although I like '70 better than he does overall- some great wines, though some significant underachievers like Margaux and Lafite). I generally find the top '82s great but young wines (I haven't had LMHB, Ausone, or Margaux from your list). '82 Haut brion is one my favorite wines of last year, and '82 Mouton (admittedly exotic) one my faves of all time. We did a "midlevel" '82 tasting last year where I found wines like Poyferre,Leo Barton, Pichon Baron, Magdelaine, etc quite excellent.

I'm a bit surprised at oaky comments, as I've generally found the oak to be integrating, and didn't really think most producers changed their oak (I know Haut Brion has used 80% as long as the Dillons have owned it, since the 30s).

As Matt said, you can easily double your wine for vintages you prefer.

Hi Steve,

In a separate thread I had posted a request for recommendations for 1959 (and 1984) vintage wines. I noticed you saying you have tried many 59s - any you've tried recently that you would care to recommend?

The Montrose is very good and the Margaux is also excellent (Dale is right - the 1970 Margaux was crap, but the new Ginestet ownership hadn't yet had its deleterious effect on the 59).

I like 59s - a lot. In fact offered the choice bewteen a 59 and a more highly touted 61, I'd often opt for the 1959.

The 1982 Latour and 1982 Margaux were among the best wines I've ever had. I would rate them both at or near 100 points if I used such a ratings system. The Mouton and Lafite are close behind for me. The 1982's of the next tier are among my favorites as well, and I even find much to enjoy with lower level wines of the vintage like Branaire and Sociando, although they are far from cheap these days.

I have found the 1970 Latour fantastic, but otherwise I'm unimpressed by the vintage. The 1970 Mouton is plagued by extreme bottle variation, and even when 'on' is mediocre in my opinion. Or perhaps I've never had a good bottle of it.

Matt

Steve,
Sounds like you just are not a Bordeaux fan. I think '82 is a great year, drank early and still going strong. Never found oak as a negative and I really dislike oak when it is obvious. Drank an '82 Cos last night at a Chef's table and everyone thought is was excellent.
Walt

I have found the 1970 Latour fantastic, but otherwise I'm unimpressed by the vintage. The 1970 Mouton is plagued by extreme bottle variation, and even when 'on' is mediocre in my opinion. Or perhaps I've never had a good bottle of it.

Matt, I have had quite decent bottles of 70 Mouton, but I agree it is hit and miss.

There are other wondeful 1970s though. See my notes at

http://www.wineloverspage.com/user_subm ... /1801.html
http://www.wineloverspage.com/user_subm ... /1813.html
http://www.wineloverspage.com/user_subm ... /1820.html

Bear in mind that with other than perfect cellaring, you won't get the same results as my 10 year old notes indicate, but there are still quite a few very pleasurable 1970s. If you need specific ones, I can check my more recent notes for them.

Matt, the last 59 I've had was about 3 years ago. It was Montrose (purchased from Chicago Wine Company back in the late 80's) and it was quite wonderful. Soft and generous (nose & palate) with very fine tannins and plenty of richly complex cherry-like fruit. Mostly old, perfectly ripe cherries with tobacco & old cedar shavings. That bottle would have aged, gently fading for another 20 years (or more). I'd actually purchased 2 bottles of the 59 Montrose and opened the other bottle in the early 90's...and it was also quite nice (though not quite a good). I have one more bottle of the 61, which is even better.

About 5 years ago I opened both a 59 Lafite and Latour. The Latour was an off bottle (and not worthy of mention). The Lafite, however, was magnificent...and best Lafite I've had. Loaded with some pretty concentrated fruit (mostly older cherries) with cedar, sandlewood, and dried herbs. Perfect balance with a very long finish. One of the two best wines I've had...the 61 Latour being the other one.

And about 9 years ago opened a 59 Mouton, which though not in the same class as Lafite & Montrose, was still none the less a fine wine and loaded with fruit. Just a bit sour and perhaps it had been exposed to some heat somewhere.

And back in the late 80's I'd purchased and opened 59 La Mission and Palmer. Both were quite nice, but that was quite a while ago.

The point being that none of these 59's showed that much oak. It was always in the background.

I've attended many vertical & horizontal tastings...though none in recent years. What I generally found (with older wines) is that most were in relatively poor condition and often showing lots of oak and mushroom. I normally have not found these characteristics in wines I've purchased and opened.

But I was in for a surprise. The crowd was small and so I had a fair amount of 82's left. I gave away Margaux & Leoville to good friends (for them to finish off). I kept the rest...except Haut Brion (which was gone) and the Gruaud (which seems to have disappeared).

The wines only got oakier the 2nd & 3rd nights. But amazingly on the 4th night (yesterday) they woke up...showing a lot more fruit and less oak. Mouton was quite nice and reminded me more of a grand old BV Reserve from a top vintage (of similar age) than any Bordeaux. Latour was big with some fairly dense, and somewhat overripe fruit...and quite nice. A little like the 61, but with a lot more oak. The Cos had also revived and was showing some pretty nice fruit (along with a fair amount of oak). Since Lafite had shown fairly well on Sunday, I'd finished it off then. And will see how Ausone is doing tonight. It too is rather overripe...and was the oakiest of the bunch. I also had some La Mission left. It was pretty good last night, but still a bit oaky.

The facinating part is that I'd never encountered a group of wines from the same vintage that were this old and that had held and even improved for this length of time. I'd opened them late afternoon on 10/5. Last night was 10/8.

I did nothing special. No gas, no vacuum. Just the original corks partially stuffed back into the bottles.

Steve

Haut Brion has been one of my favorites from this vintage, along with Margaux.

Lafite, Latour, and La Mission has been variable. A prior bottle of Latour showed a distinct weedy character, and some bottles of Lafite have shown noticeably less fruit. And the prior bottle of La Mission was somewhat disjointed.

One thing I just remembered. I had Lafite, Mouton, Leoville, and the Cos sitting in my garage storage unit for several months. The other wines had been brought up north (from the main storage) only the week before. Since these 4 seems to show less oak and more fruit, perhaps some of what I found was from the shock of being moved.

But I have lot of these wines left. Perhaps 18 of Mouton (plus 3 magnums) and perhaps 16 of Lafite, along with 6-8 of most of the others...except Haut Brion (4 left) and Margaux (5 left).

I've had 70 Latour 3 times and have 3 more bottles. The last 2 have been marvelous wines...but it's not mature yet. Lasted tasted 2 years ago.

The other great 70 I've had (and still have 2 bottles of) is Palmer. It's perfectly balanced with marvelous fruit and a very long finish. I had a bottle only 2 years ago.

Lafite is not great, but the bottles I've had seem to have been much better than those Parker's parents gave to him.

I've also had Haut Brion (wonderful fruit and balance) and La Mission Haut Brion (a bit volitile, but marvelous fruit).

I've tasted Mouton several times, but not recently and none of them were in particularly good shape.

Oh, but I am. I've had a great many wonderful Bordeaux. Though I've not liked many of the wines being made in the last 20+ years. Just way too much oak for my liking. Sure there are exceptions, but they are very expensive compared to what I paid for 82 Bordeaux.

$32 for Mouton ($70 for the magnums)
$14 for Leoville
$42 for Lafite
$35 for La Mission
$38 for Haut Brion
$50 for Latour (bought a bit late on futures)
$42 for Margaux
$21 for Cos (on pre-release)
$30 for Gruaud (after it was released)
$47 for Ausone

I also bought some Certan de May ($35), but after tasting it several times (before opening the case), I sold it. I did not like it at all and generally don't care for most Pomerols (including any vintage of Petrus I've had).

Favorites include;

1959 Lafite, 1961 Latour, 1961 Montrose, 1959 Montrose, 1953 Haut Brion, 1926 Calon Segur (only a brief taste, but twice), 1966 Latour, 1966 La Mission, 1970 Palmer, 1970 Latour, 1975 La Mission, 1966 Palmer, 1966 Lafite, 1970 Haut Brion, 1978 Margaux (best of a so-so vintage), 1979 Margaux, 1983 Margaux...and 75 Lafite when young...

By the way, I consider 66 a most underrated vintage and was able to get many older wines at great prices...mostly thanks for Parker. I think the only wines he remotely liked were Latour and Palmer.

So far none of the 82's make my best of list. They are so different from any other vintage that preceded them (that I've tasted from). Perhaps 1989 is of a similar bent and perhaps also 1990. But these vintages showed even more oak from the git go and less fruit. The 82's were such big, extracted wines upon release...showing relatively little oak. Certainly in comparision with any recent good or better vintage.

The same problems plague CA Cabernets (not to mention the increasing alcohol levels and absurd ripeness)...and I mostly stopped buying those when they switched mostly to using 100% of mostly tighter grained oaks. I perfer American oak. It may start out seeming oaky, but the oak fades much faster. Old BV and Monte Bellos would surprise most by how little oak is left. Not so with older Bordeaux. Even the 61 Latour and Montrose show more oak than the 66 or 69 BV Reserve...and have for years.

And keep in mind that I've tasted these 82's many times, including sitting with them on numerous occasions and drinking them over several days. One thing I do now remember (from when I first opened bottles back in 1985). Of all Bordeaux, an ounce left in the glass held longer and did not grow mold. Just slowly evaporated. I used to do this a lot...and at the time, I considered this a great sign of their potential longevity.

But I'm still waiting...

1982 was a very controversial vintage when it was first released. On the one hand you had critics such as Robert Parker praising it as one of the best vintages ever. On the other hand you had many traditionalist Bordeaux critics saying that the wines were atypically ripe and Californicated, and cautioning that all that up-front fruit present from barrel and when the wines were young might not last.

Your experience would seem to bear out what the nay-sayers were predicting.

I quietly sold off my remaining 1982 Mouton on the auction market after being profoundly disappointed by it, compared to what it had been like upon release.

On the other hand, 1982 Pichon-Lalande has continued to delight every time I've tried it.

Given all the hype, it would be hard for the vintage NOT to end up overrated. Does it deserve consideration in the same class as 1970, 1961, and 1959? Not sure.

-Paul W.

Paul,

Yes. I know. And you're probably right.

The 82's were anything but classic Bordeaux. But I was not in position to taste the 45's, 59's, or 61's when they were released. I recall Broadbent (and others) recounting some of their early thoughts on those vintages...and how ripe they were and how they were not "Classically Styled" Bordeaux (particularly the 59). And since I had already bought quite a bit of the 82's (and since they were being compared to 59), I just crossed my fingers and hoped. I thought the 59's I'd had were terrific. When I finally tasted them, I could see the extreme ripeness and lack of acidity. Certainly in comparison to the 66's (that I was drinking with great zeal back then). But still, I hoped.

I don't like Parker or the Wine Specator...and I did not buy the 82's based on their advocacy. I bought based mostly on John Tilson's reccomendations (with the old Underground Wine Letter/Journal). Tilson kept a ton of wine where I currently keep most of mine...and I would talk with him from time to time. Last I heard, he still thought they were great...but that was many years ago. Then again at one point in time, he thought the 79 Du Tertre was nearly the equal of the 79 Margaux. A few years later I found him carting off cases of that wine, saying he was wrong. Fortunately it was cheap...and not a bad wine.

So the question (for myself) is whether to try and sell some of the wine. I still have unopened cases of Lafite and Mouton. But considering how long they held (after opening) and how they actually seemed to improve (last night)...I'm still wondering about it.

Oh...though I like Pichon Lalande, at that time it was not one of my favorite Bordeaux...and I chose to buy the other wines instead. When I finally tasted it (in several tastings) I thought it tasted too much like a CA styled Merlot...and I've never been a great CA Merlot fan. But I had last about 5 years ago (at a tasting) and it was quite nice.

The night before I opened the 82's...I opened a 96 BV Reserve. And though it was a bit reserved (also transported the prior weekend), it still showed a lot of fruit and relatively little oak. It's a very nice BV, and fortunately I have a good supply. I have a 94 on hand that I'll be opening soon.

Oh. Last January I paired a 61 and 66 Latour (for a dinner with a friend). That particular bottle of 61 was not as dense as the prior bottle, but was oh so good. The 66 is a fabulous wine (and very consistent), but it's not quite a match for the 61. But it's a good companion. I have one more bottle of each and I'll try them again in 2011.

So the question (for myself) is whether to try and sell some of the wine. I still have unopened cases of Lafite and Mouton.

Two questions:

1) What would you do with the proceeds from the sale? Spend it all on different wines, or spend it on something else [like the NYSE/NASDAQ]?

2) If you would spend the proceeds from the sale on different wines, then do you enjoy anything other than Bordeaux?

1982 was a very controversial vintage when it was first released. On the one hand you had critics such as Robert Parker praising it as one of the best vintages ever. On the other hand you had many traditionalist Bordeaux critics saying that the wines were atypically ripe and Californicated, and cautioning that all that up-front fruit present from barrel and when the wines were young might not last.

Your experience would seem to bear out what the nay-sayers were predicting.

Exactly. 82 Bordeaux were highly controversial among experienced critics, but you wouldn't know it from the popular press at the time (or the macho-pointchasing-enophile chatter since). It was conspicuous at the time for several critics lining up early to praise it, and this driving up futures prices (a friend boasted he sold off a fraction of his early futures, thereby paying for the rest). One Rather Popular critic achieved his principal fame to that point by categorical praise of the vintage, and it was easy for others to join the bandwagon. (Some of them had notably little experience, then, with young Bordeaux and their aging.) Other voices, more diverse in their comments, were less enthusiastic. One of them told me in recent years "the jury is still out" on this vintage, and aging would tell.

I didn't buy any to speak of. I bought 78s and 83s when new, based on tasting them, and they did well in general.

The older BVs never used new oak so they always had (at least to me) a resemblance to an old style Rioja. This was something told to us by Andre Tchelistcheff, who with his wife Dorothy, we would have to dinner when they were in SO CA. He said the different wood approach was how that particular wine obtained it's unique flavor profile.

1982 was a very controversial vintage when it was first released. On the one hand you had critics such as Robert Parker praising it as one of the best vintages ever. On the other hand you had many traditionalist Bordeaux critics saying that the wines were atypically ripe and Californicated, and cautioning that all that up-front fruit present from barrel and when the wines were young might not last.

Your experience would seem to bear out what the nay-sayers were predicting.

Exactly. 82 Bordeaux were highly controversial among experienced critics, but you wouldn't know it from the popular press at the time (or the macho-pointchasing-enophile chatter since). It was conspicuous at the time for several critics lining up early to praise it, and this driving up futures prices (a friend boasted he sold off a fraction of his early futures, thereby paying for the rest). One Rather Popular critic achieved his principal fame to that point by categorical praise of the vintage, and it was easy for others to join the bandwagon. (Some of them had notably little experience, then, with young Bordeaux and their aging.) Other voices, more diverse in their comments, were less enthusiastic. One of them told me in recent years "the jury is still out" on this vintage, and aging would tell.

I didn't buy any to speak of. I bought 78s and 83s when new, based on tasting them, and they did well in general.

One of the popular wine journals at the time was published by Robert Finnegan who disliked the vintage and blasted Parker who loved the vintage. The rest is history, Parker became Mr WINE CRITIC and Finnegan faded away.

Steve,
your story re the way they opened over couple days makes me wonder if your 50° temps just retarded things a bit, and these wines are in the closed period that some were at 10 years ago from more typical (55-60) storage.

BTW, are you the Steve who used to post on alt.food.wine 5 or so years ago? Same area.

Other thoughts
I like '66 too, haven't had the ones you list but liked Ducru and Montrose recently.

Certainly preferences come into it. If you don't like ripe vintages, you won't like '82s. But I don't find any overripeness like I do in some 1990 (a vintage I mostly like a lot), 2000, and especially 2003 wines.

Re '79 du Tertre- its not the equal of the Margaux, but it is actually still a fine wine! Probably cost $6 on release, could recently still pick up for $50 or less. Kicks the butt of many more expensive wines. I find there are lots of good '79s, if you don't mind acidity.

Please post notes on the '94 George de la Tour. I have one remaining bottle, lots of disturbing posts re it falling apart- please reassure me.

While the jury might be out as far as '82s aging as well as say '59s, there were folks saying 10 years ago they were showing age. That has not been my experience- I think top wines need time, midlevels are drinking beautifully, and even real cheapies like Gloria and Potensac are holding on. I've drunk most of mine, and they are too expensive for me to buy, so now my interest is academic. But I have to say if little wines can make 25 its hard to say vintage didn't age. The last '82 HB I tasted was with Gilman, probably the other extreme re ripeness and oak to Parker, I see he gave it a maturity range of 2015-2075.

I've always liked '83s, but recently prices on those have spiked too. '83 Cheval has doubled in a couple years. Way out of my range now.

Dale.

Years ago (before I got busy with other things), I used to post on Alt.Food.Wine as the Wine Heretic. It should show that now (The Wine Heretic), but somehow is showing Cellar Rat.

And I just tasted the 94 at BV (last Friday) and it was quite nice. Can't say the same for the horribly overripe (and rather closed) 2004. A little over a year ago I opened a bottle and it too was in top shape. Just what I would expect of a 12 year old BV. I also brought home an 85. I'll be trying that soon as well. Last tasted 3 years ago...and it was wonderful, though no match for the 84. And I'll also be opening a 97 soon. The last bottle was tasted against the 97 Cardinale. Both were VERY subdued.

As an FYI, my favorite BV Reserves are (in descending order)...1969, 1974 (the best bottles), 1984, 1968, 1970, 1995 Clone 4, 1995, 1996, 1994, 1985, 1966, 1980, 1997 (still too young), and 1973. I also recently had a rather amazing bottle of the 1981, which was nearly as good as any bottle of the 1970 I'd opened. And was even better the 2nd night. The bottle was given to me and based on everything I'd read, I expected almost nothing.

And yes. My wines (stored at a place in Montclair, CA) are kept very cool and consistently so. The whites age quite well at those temps. And the reds do seem to age more slowly. I like it that way. And if that is the problem, then I would not be worried. But I plan to bring up anouther round and drink these myself (given each my full attention over at least 5 days).

Steve,
I see the "Wine Heretic" sig, but the little "ranking" will change based on posts. Rather tongue-in-cheek (I think!) way to mimic the "rankings" of other boards based on # of posts.

I really liked the '68 BV Reserve a few years ago. I have one bottle of the '60, waiting for my 50th.

Hope your '97 isn't corked! I'm running about 30-40% in the problem years, and don't consider myself very sensitive.