Your Favourite First Growth

Discussion of the possibly illegal elevation of Mouton to first growth status raised some opinions about which of these wines had given people the most pleasure.

Vote for the one that has given you the most 4 star experiences over the years.

It would be possible to vote on Second Growths, but not the Firsts. Sorry!

I voted for Haut Brion because that's the only one I've tasted.

Sorry if that skews your poll

[Robin Garr]

I've tasted them all, mostly at the wineries or at restaurants in France, and only wish I got to taste them at home with any regularity.

Still, I think I have enough experience to cast a rational vote: For sheer pleasure, Margaux does it for me.

If you were talking whites, though, I'd vote Haut-Brion in a flash.

I've only tasted Lafite (several vintages.)

Still, I think I have enough experience to cast a rational vote: For sheer pleasure, Margaux does it for me.

If you were talking whites, though, I'd vote Haut-Brion in a flash.

Nope, whites are a pleasant bonus bit not a main focus. I'd agree about the HB blanc but Pavillon is pretty good too.

Anyone that chooses Margaux dates their wine experience to either quite old or relatively recent. When the chateau was run by the Ginestets, it was lacklustre wine that wouldn't have rated a third growth in 1855. The 60s and 70s were a black hole for Margaux. They made an excellent 1961, and then began the great period of mediocrity until the 1978 (which had been made by Ginestet but bottled by Mentzelopoulos).

Anyone that includes the 'bad' years in their personal wine memories has a hard time overlooking them when picking a fave for firsts. Anyone that started drinking them in the 80s will wonder what I am talking about! They've done brilliantly since then.

[Robin Garr]

Anyone that started drinking them in the 80s will wonder what I am talking about! They've done brilliantly since then.

That would be me. I started writing about wine in the early '80s, when Bordeaux was still surprisingly cheap. Most of my early Bordeaux memories are of the '79, '80 and '81, whose fairly traditional character pretty much set the standard for me. I liked '80 more than some of the critics, but when the '82s came along, my tastes were already set to the point that I declared them "California-style" in a 1984 column in The Louisville Times, without having had anyone else put that idea into my head.

I started drinking Bdx seriously about 18 years ago (and seldom 1sts till this decade, more through generosity of others than my own purchases), but I've been "blessed" with enough 60s/70s Margaux to agree with Bill. I'd prefer Mouton to Margaux in those years.
I voted HB, but it was probably a tossup with Lafite. Then close behind Latour. Then Margaux, then Mouton. I'm mostly basing this on period from '64 to '96, when I have been able to taste several 1sts in most decent vintages.

This is a very difficult question. Our tasting group did vertical offlines of each first growth over the last few years. It was fascinating to be able to taste so many great wines and not only compare vintage to vintage, but to be able to recall and discuss the tastings of each Chateau.

Here were my impressions:

Mouton:
Although there is controversy over whether this belongs in the first growth category, I was very impressed with this Chateau. It was our first first growth tasting, so a little difficult to compare, but I found it along with Haut Brion to be least great of the first growths yet generally better than the best second (or equivalent) growth tastings we've done (LLC, LMHB, Palmer, Baron, Lalande, Gruaud, Grand Puy Lacoste). It seems a little stuck in the middle to me, but I'd leave it as a first growth. Particular highlights for me were 1982 and 1989. The 1986, a much heralded wine, was a disappointment for me although many around the table loved it. I found it a bit tight and didn't think it gave much. The 1985 was my dark horse, but I'm a whore for that vintage. Overall I found the highs to be not quite as high as some of the other first growths.
http://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=3171

Lafite:
More herbal and perhaps more complex than the other first growths, I put this right in the middle of the pack just a hair behind the top two. A wonderful wine. My favorites were 1996, 1986, 1990, 1989, 1982.
http://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=3604

Latour:
Along with Margaux my favorite of the first growths. The 1996 was possibly my favorite wine of the entire first growth series. I recall putting my nose to that glass for the first time and just being blown away. The 1990 and 1982 were also amazing wines, as good as anything we had from any of these Chateau. The 1989, 1970, 1971, 1978, and 1994 were also top wines. This seemed the most powerful of the first growths. Very smooth. I was also fortunate enough to have had the 1961 on another occasion, an amazing experience.
http://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=3170

Margaux:
Absolutely beautiful. When this chateau has a good vintage it certainly delivers. The wine is amazingly powerful, silky smooth, and wonderfully elegant. The 1990 and 1982 are two of the best wines I've ever had. The 1983 was just behind, and the 1996, 1995, 1989, and 2000 were also favorites. Neck and neck with Latour.
http://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=3170

Haut Brion:
I think HB reflects vintage characteristics over it's own style more than the other first growths, however the note tobacco was consistent for me. Along with Mouton, I found this just behind the top three first growths. It is notable however that lesser vintages didn't fall off as much as some of the other first growths. I will also note that we didn't have the 1982 or 1986 (which I found wonderful on another occasion). Tops for me was the amazing 1989, followed by 1996, 1990, 1985, 1998, and 1981.
http://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=3167

Although my answer might change day to day, I voted for Latour over Margaux as my favorite today.

Matt, I appreciate you taking the time to reflect on each first growth and detail your favorite vintages of each. That is helpful for those of us who have little opportunity to taste them personally. I may keep your notes as reference in case I have the opportunity to purchase or taste first growths in the future.

JC-

I'm glad I could be helpful, that's why I took the time to do it. I have a lot to learn about wine from the amazing tasters on this forum, I'm just glad I could share some of my knowledge from my area of top interest, Bordeaux.

Please keep in mind I'm no professional taster. Like others on the board, my comparison at a particular event is a lot more reliable than my comparisons from event to event.

I hope you get to enjoy some of these great wines that I've been lucky enough to taste.

Good, thoughtful notes, Matt.

I have had a few disappointments with Haut Brion, but also some really good ones like the 1982 and 89. I've also had a lot of fun with their whites, even in off years for the reds, but as I pointed out, we aren't talking about whites.

I look to Mouton for a decent average, but fewer peaks than the others.

I look to Lafite for elegance and subtlety.

I look to Margaux for delicious wines in the last 25 years and some great memories from the past (the 59 was soooo good, and I was lucky enough to taste it against the 59 Montrose which was also wonderful).

But for all out roll around in it and moan oenological sybaritic pleasure, Latour is the Big Boy that has given me more flat out fun than any of the others.

The 1970 is almost ready to drink, the 59, 61 and 62 (which many people overlook) are fantastic, the 66 is probably wine of that very good vintage, 82 same level, 86 only a bit short of that the 1990 also fine in a slightly lighter sort of way, the 95 again top of the heap, and the set of vintages from 1999 to 2006 (none of which I have yet tasted) are by repute again right at the top fo the heap.

I can see someone preferring Lafite, say, if they simply like that sort of subtlety more than they favour power, but if you value not only power but (with enough patience) also finesse, Latour seems to me to be unequalled.

I've only tasted a very tired 1960 Latour (in 2005), and have nothing even vaguely approximating a legitimate basis for an answer. Can't say how much I wish I had more experience with the 1st's, but being fairly young, but even more so being a grad student, just puts it almost beyond the realm of optomistic dreams. I anticipate getting to taste the '73 Mouton in November (from the same cellar as the '60 Latour). And that same friend has promised I'll get to taste the crown jewell of his collection - one of my three 'must taste at least one of these before I die wines' - let's just say that the '60 Latour probably isn't quite as good as its one year younger sibling!

[Jenise]

Fun topic!

But it forces me to realize that for all my love of Bordeaux, my experience with First Growths has only been sufficient enough to confirm that they got it pretty right in 1855, but not enough to feel super confident when I threw the switch for Latour just now. What about, my brain says, that '53 Lafite, or the '79 Haut Brion, both wines two of the best wines I've ever had, period. What it came down to was the only horizontal tasting of the first growths I've ever been to--a tasting of 14 2000's at Patina Restaurant in L.A. five years ago with 14 tasters present, a tasting I went to thinking Latour my favorite first growth thus far but not at all sure that preference would survive the night. Surprisingly, it did--though the Lafite and Mouton were both pretty closed so it wasn't an entirely fair fight--but I'm bolstered by the fact that Latour was an unpopular choice that night, ranking near the bottom for the majority of the table who made the Pavie the table's WOTN.

Shouldn't this thread really be titled "Monday Morning Troll," Bill? If you want to get a statistically valid data set, you'll probably need to conduct your poll on that other board as I doubt that the WLDG disposable income is sufficient My answer, based on a very spotty data set, was Haut Brion, but I've had some wonderful wines from Latour and Lafite, too (heck, the '90 Margaux wasn't half bad, either). To me, it's a bit like asking who was more beautiful, Catherine Deneuve or Sophia Loren (or choose modern day equivalents, if they exist)? My answer depends as much on my mood as anything else.

Mark Lipton

I guess it's hard to go wrong with any of them.

Close friends have even seen me take small sips of second or third growths. Gasp.

I voted the grand old Irish chateau for top honors.

Based on many, many years of sampling many, many vintages (hey, I've been fortunate in my choice of occupations and my career path), from 1897 vintage (and no, I wasn't around to see the grapes come in, thank you) up to about 2001 (I've slid since then, partially because the costs have become so enormous).

In the long run, it has to be Haut-Brion. Not always the most pyrotechnic; slow to come around, but not as slow as Latour; but for subtlety, depth and breadth, charm and down-deep-in-the-soul balance and harmony, for me it's Haut-Brion. More than any of the others H-B when properly aged can drop down into a dark chocolate, tobacco, then a startling deep, dark plum flavor backed up with violets, that none of the other growths muster in quite the same way.

[James Roscoe]

Based on many, many years of sampling many, many vintages (hey, I've been fortunate in my choice of occupations and my career path), from 1897 vintage (and no, I wasn't around to see the grapes come in, thank you)

Did you get that bottle from Lou? I think he helped with the field work that year.

[David M. Bueker]

I voted for Mouton (confirming my comments from an earlier thread).

For me it all comes down to aromatics. I find the aromatics of Mouton to be the most distinctive. It rarely has the palate presence of say Latour, but then again it competes at a very high level, even in recent vintages (e.g. the 2002 which is my clear favorite of the 1sts from that vintage).

When I look back at the vintages where I have tasted all or most of the current 1sts (1966, 1970, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2002) my preferences have been pretty clear, and most of those tastings were blind, many of them double blind. Older Lafite and Margaux have never done it for me (though they are clearly much better in more recent vintages), and Latour has been up and down. Haut Brion would likely be my 2nd choice with Latour coming in 3rd. Mouton has almost always come in #1 for me.

I'm a huge fan of both Las Cases and La Mission, but would never pick either over Mouton as a personal favorite. Of course my overall favorite Bordeaux is Leoville Barton, so picking a 1st growth is really picking for second place in my personal pantheon.

Cheval Blanc. The other 1st growth.

Excellent post, excellent thread.

I am not a wealthy man, so I taste maybe 3 or 4 first growths a year.
Current prices for a 2005 premier cru are 1,000 euros a bottle - or 30% more than my two way plane ticket from Bordeaux to JFK...

I have 2 cases of various first growths in my cellar.
The oldest is 82 Mouton, which I am saving for my retirement dinner in, let's say, 10 years.

In my experience, Lafite is best of all when all pistons are firing - which is, alas, not as often as it should be.

However, Margaux is my true love.
You'd have loved listening to Paul Pontalier explaining the wine's femininity in flawlless English.
A truly wonderful experience. I wish I had recorded it.

Latour is in an entirely different style, virile and imperious, with an aftertaste to die for.
But I simply prefer the elegance and class of Lafite and Margaux.

Haut Brion has not quite reached the same heights in my experience.

Interesting that no one includes Ausone or Cheval Blanc under the heading "First Growths".

Best regards,
Alex R.

[Robin Garr]

Interesting that no one includes Ausone or Cheval Blanc under the heading "First Growths".

I expect that would be because, at least among English-speaking wine geeks, "First Growths of Bordeaux" is almost invariably taken as those from the Classification of 1855 plus the later-elevated Mouton.

Interesting that no one includes Ausone or Cheval Blanc under the heading "First Growths".

I expect that would be because, at least among English-speaking wine geeks, "First Growths of Bordeaux" is almost invariably taken as those from the Classification of 1855 plus the later-elevated Mouton.

Absolutely. And if we were to include the right bank equivalents, I would have thought, besides Cheval Blanc, Pétrus way before Ausone...

Interesting that no one includes Ausone or Cheval Blanc under the heading "First Growths".

I expect that would be because, at least among English-speaking wine geeks, "First Growths of Bordeaux" is almost invariably taken as those from the Classification of 1855 plus the later-elevated Mouton.

Absolutely. And if we were to include the right bank equivalents, I would have thought, besides Cheval Blanc, Pétrus way before Ausone...

But Alex is looking from French speaking perspective, so Cheval Blanc and Ausone are First Growths (Premier Cru Cru) , and Petrus is unranked. Of course, from that perspective, the class B St Emilion Premiers Grand Cru are also "Firsts", in straight translation. Of course there are a bunch of Sauternes/Barsac "!sts" - but only Yquem is Superieur (sp?)

So one can refer to the "Medoc Firsts Growths" (though Haut Brion is Graves). Or "1855 First Growths" (though of course Mouton wasn't).

I've always liked the term Big Eight (HB, Lafite, Mouton, Latour, ch. Margaux, Ausone, Cheval Blanc, Petrus) because it's simple.