WTN: Mature and maturing Bordeaux (1982, 1990, 1993, 1995)

• 2001 Karl Erbes Ürziger Würzgarten Riesling Kabinett - Germany, Mosel Saar Ruwer (2/21/2008)
  A slightly petrolly, attractively ripe yet typical Mosel Riesling aroma, some red tones to the fruit. Pleasantly tart, slightly sweet yet enough acidity to be refreshing and bright, fairly weighty - a good Spätlese!
• 1982 Château Branaire (Duluc-Ducru) - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, St. Julien (2/21/2008)
  A lovely wine, showing some mature elements, yet surprisingly with a rather primary and fruity nose. Lifted, leafy yet sweet. The palate is more acidic than I expected from such a hot year, but it is more of the fruit than of secondary nuances. A joy to drink now, probably a joy for some time still.
• 1990 Château Giscours - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Margaux (2/21/2008)
  Dark and primary, very fruity, even a bit raisiny. It got better with air and gained some redder tones that I expect in Margaux, but the raisiny notes still annoyed me. Tannic but the acidity isn't very lively, opulent in fruit. A good wine, even though it was the least favourite tonight!
• 1990 Château de Fieuzal - France, Bordeaux, Graves, Pessac-Léognan (2/21/2008)
  A very sweet nose at first, but it gained some earthyness and vibrancy with time. Sweet but attractively structured palate, very open and voluptious, yet still attractive. Nice!
• 1990 Château Cos Labory - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, St. Estèphe (2/21/2008)
  A very harmonious wine with a more classic profile than the two other '90s tonight: cassis, dark fruit with some red high notes, slight earthy and aged notes are starting to develop but it is still a fruit forward wine. Strong tannins, but equally strong fruit - this is a rather masculine style, a bit foursquare even, but I liked it very much.
• 1993 Château Pontet-Canet - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac (2/21/2008)
  A classic Pauillac style: cassis, leafy, elegantly herbaceous. A lighter style, elegant and very lovable for me. Not a fruity wine at all. Lovely!
• 1995 Château Pontet-Canet - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Pauillac (2/21/2008)
  Vastly different from the '93, this was a modern styled wine with dark, glossy fruit, oak but with some attractive cassis and herb aromas underneath. Soft palate, oaky, not so much a personality as the '93 but nice enough.
• 1994 Beringer Vineyards Cabernet Sauvignon Private Reserve - USA, California, Napa Valley (2/21/2008)
  Dark, jammy, blackcurrant (as opposed to blackcurrant leaves as I hope to find in Cab Sauv based wines), oak. Fair structure, but very sweet and jammy and un-nuanced when compared to all others tonight. Good in its style, but I seem to care less and less for this style as time goes by.
• 1995 Château Poujeaux - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Moulis en Médoc (2/21/2008)
  A rather tough and masculine wine, with a strange citrussy and almost chemical note to it. Yet it also had an attractive herbaceousness and classically dark and savoury profile underneath. Tannic and dark, masculine and ungiving. Possibly nice, but this bottle wasn't in a good spot now. I wouldn't mind trying it again in a few years.

Posted from CellarTracker

[David M. Bueker]

It's very interesting that you clearly identified the change at Potet Canet. 1994 was the point at which the wines became more fleshy and rich, with corresponding higher scores. It still strikes me as very Pauillac, and I buy, cellar and drink it (until 2005 priced me out) with great pleasure. It still has a tough tannic backbone which IMO will enable it to evolve in a positive way for decades, eventually coming to a more civilized place.

As for the kabinett/spatlese - that's just an '01. Tried any 2006s lately? Your note would read: good beerenauslese. How I wish we could go back to 2001 ripeness levels.

Thanks for the notes Otto

I only know 2 of the wines really well: the 90 de Fieuzal [just finishing the last of 3 cases and the 89 was very nice too] and the 95 Poujeaux and your notes reflect a consistent view I have had of both wines over several years.

The de Fieuzal was excellent value and still requires some air time. The Poujeaux 97 [several cases over the years] is very close in quality terms to the 90 de Fieuzal and is still good but the 95 has always been a tougher nut. Poujeaux usually needs age to bloom but I don't think the 95 will ever be as sweetly savoury and elegant as the 97 – overpriced en primeur but outstanding value when prices were reduced after the 2000 vintage was launched.

I haven’t had the 95 Pontet Canet recently but have had the first of my 96s which IMO is at the front end of its drinking window and will become more complex compared to the rich, bright modern Pauillac it is today. Very tasty but will be even better in a few years.

[David M. Bueker]

I haven’t had the 95 Pontet Canet recently but have had the first of my 96s which IMO is at the front end of its drinking window and will become more complex compared to the rich, bright modern Pauillac it is today. Very tasty but will be even better in a few years.

I opened a bottle of the 1996 Pontet Canet last November, and it was still a tannic, brooding monster. I have 2 more left, and neither will see the light of day for at least 7-10 more years.

1996 Lagrange is drinking rather well now though.

I haven’t had the 95 Pontet Canet recently but have had the first of my 96s which IMO is at the front end of its drinking window and will become more complex compared to the rich, bright modern Pauillac it is today. Very tasty but will be even better in a few years.

I opened a bottle of the 1996 Pontet Canet last November, and it was still a tannic, brooding monster. I have 2 more left, and neither will see the light of day for at least 7-10 more years.

1996 Lagrange is drinking rather well now though.

Interesting differences on the 96 Pontet Canet and your experience is much closer to Robert Parker's last note than to mine [and some of the 31 others in our Club who each bought a case 8 years ago]. On the other hand Parker’s note is 9 years old and he suggested 2007 initially then 2010 as a start point.

Mine was no brooding monster even allowing for differences in taste – big yes, tannic yes, but in a full, round approachable way with the fruit covering the structure adequately. As I said though, even this bottle would have become more complex than the somewhat brash wine it was some months ago and it certainly needed air. Food [roast lamb] probably enhanced the experience too.

I have seen many TNs on this wine dating back to 2002 and most fall closer to your experience than mine but some suggest that, though young, the wine was drinking well.

However, those who only like their claret fully mature should definitely wait although for reasons of MY age all of mine will be gone long before your 7-10 years is up. No doubt it will still be a nice wine at around 20+ years of age.

We bought a case of the 96 Domaine de Chevalier at the same time and it is already drinking well and is considerably more advanced than the Pontet Canet.

[David M. Bueker]

We bought a case of the 96 Domaine de Chevalier at the same time and it is already drinking well and is considerably more advanced than the Pontet Canet.

That does not surprise me at all.