Last night 8 good geeks gathered at Mortons to sample through some 1983 Bordeaux. This was originally supposed to be a Barton/Poyferre comparison,but a couple crucial people couldn't do this month, so we had a horizontal instead. A good group, with strong (sometimes divided) opinions, but all fun to be with. I quite enjoyed myself- the company was better than the wine, but the wine wasn't bad at all!
Served blind, a white. Someone thought white Rhone, but Brian and I were both thinking Chardonnay. I thought Burgundy from a producer who like oak, but it was CA. The 1999 Peter Michael "La Carriere" Chardonnay had good Fuji apple and Meyer lemon fruit, a streak of minerality (that and a bit of acid was why I thought Burg), decent finish. That vanilla sticks out just a bit, but a pretty nice version of Cal Chard for me. B+
On to the reds, not served blind:
1983 Ch. Canon (St Emilion)
Great nose, red fruit with cedar and cigar smoke. A bit of a disappointment on the palate, high acids seem unintegrated, tannins a bit tacky, dark fruit is fading. Mortons was generous with stems and I saved a bit, seemed to round out on palate. Did I say great nose? B
1983 Ch L'Evangile (Pomerol)
Lusher and lower acid than the Canon, nice black plum fruit with a smooth Pomerol texture. Nice wine, wished I had saved some. B+
1983 Ch. Boyd-Cantenac (Margaux)
Truly funky/weird nose, menthol/eucalyptus meets meat. Fruit on palate is actually fairly full and forward, but can't get past nose. Someone (Matt?) suggests in would be better holding nose (or maybe in a small glass). C+
1983 Domaine de Chevalier (Graves)
This probably has as much acid as the Canon, but it seems more integrated. Red fruit, bright, some pencil lead and smoke. A bit held back is better with the steak than alone. B+
1983 Ch. Gruaud Larose (St Julien)
I get that Cordier funk right away. When I remark, someone says "what brett?" while Paul is pushing away his glass saying too much brett. Ah, the variabilities of brett sensitivity. This amount (and strain) of brett doesn't bother me at all. It's more cow pasture than bandaid, more animal than sewage. The fruit is rich and dark, the wine structured and virile. Cassis, tobacco, barnyard, and spice. A-
1983 Ch. Palmer (Margaux)
I liked most of the wines, but this was my WOTN without question. I've had some '83 Palmers that made me wonder what the fuss was, but the last 3 I've tried have been marvelous. Beautiful, full, lush, very young fruit but with lovely secondary aromas of cigarbox and leather. Some cocoa mixed in with that lush fruit, too. Iron fist in velvet glove, etc. A/A-
1983 Ch. Rausan-Segla (Margaux)
Good red and black fruit, fully integrated tannins, nice balanced acidity. Lots of tobacco, some allspice. Doesn't have quite the length or power of the Palmer, but a nice wine. A-/B+
1983 Ch. Lynch Bages (Pauillac)
Really nice nose - forest floor, floral, and dark fruit. Complex and exotic. But fruit is a bit flat/tired on palate, this seems just a tad past it to me. B/B-
1983 Ch. Pichon Lalande (Pauillac)
Higher acid, bright, good cassis fruit and a lot of graphite. I think I liked more than the rest of table. I have liked this before a bit more on other occasions. B+
Ben suggested our own blend, a Pichon Bages. It certainly brightened up the Lynch Bages fruit, but I still gave a slight edge to the Pichon Lalande.
In our little "vote for your top 3", Palmer walked away,followed by a tight grouping of Gruaud, Evangile, and Pichon Lalande.
One sticky:
1983 Ch. Rieussec (Sauternes)
Waiter asked if we'd like new glasses, we said sure. Wish we hadn't - they brought out those little pony glasses. Seemed to make the alcohol prominent, but underneath there's nice honied apricot flavors. Nice. B+
Good night, I enjoyed my steak, I enjoyed my wine, but mostly enjoyed the company. Thanks Matt and Paul for organizing and making reservation, and everyone for bringing nice wines.
Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency.
