The place for all things wine, focused on serious wine discussions.

WTN: 1966 Bordeaux

Moderators: Jenise, Robin Garr, David M. Bueker

no avatar
User

Bill Spohn

Rank

He put the 'bar' in 'barrister'

Posts

9507

Joined

Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:31 pm

Location

Vancouver BC

WTN: 1966 Bordeaux

by Bill Spohn » Sat Jan 13, 2007 3:27 pm

Notes from a very enlightening tasting of the 1966 Bordeaux vintage arranged by Albert Givton.

This vintage, along with the 1961 and 1964 was a star of the 60s, yet if you read reviews of many of the wines (there is a marked difference between Parker, who described many wines as being essentially dead decades ago and Broadbent, who held out more hope and proved to be more accurate in this case) they can come off as mediocre over the hill wines not worth bothering with, when in fact they can be vital interesting wines if cellared well.

Make no mistake, I am not saying you should rush out and but 1966s on the internet. These wines had long been stored in a very cool (7 deg.) cellar, and other bottles less carefully stored would probably be dead by now. But this tasting turned out to be a longing goodbye to this vintage rather than a wake. It was held at Vancouver’s Wedgewood hotel, and although I often omit details of the menu, the chef did such an exemplary job with this one that I feel obliged to insert descriptions of the food that was offered with the wines.

We couldn’t just plunge into old Bordeaux, we needed a palate adjustment interval, so we started with:

1997 Champagne Paul Bara (Grand Cru) – not a house I had ever tasted but a very pleasant wine with a yeasty fruit nose, bright acidity, and a perfect palate cleanser to start with.

With poached Nova Scotia lobster w. shaved vegetable and herb salad, and chilled lobster/yoghurt dressing:

1997 Meursault Genevrieres, Remy Jobard – this wine had a pale straw colour seemingly with a hint of pink! Excellent nose of vanilla pears, a hint of cocoa in the mouth, and good length. While it is well balanced now, that will not last and this is a wine for early consumption.

We then plunged willingly into the Bordeaux, the first flight of which was served withpot roasted pheasant breast poached in foi gras fat, with an ethereal light boudin blanc made in-house.

l’Arrossee – this was sadly corked, but fortunately this was the only bottle.


Gruaud Larose – this was the last really good vintage for Gruaud until 1981. The nose was a lighter style with some cedar and mature Bordeaux notes, there was still significant tannin, it was smooth with good length and while not a knock-out by any means it presented surprisingly well and was pleasurable to drink.

Cos d’Estournel – this was back in the old days when Cos was still around 80% cab sauv, and hadn’t started adding as much merlot to the wine. Also fairly dark, with a well integrated nose, good fruit and soft tannin, ending smoothly with good length, this was the clear winner in this flight for me.

With roasted tenderloin of veal and slow braised cheek, parsley puree, roasted porcini, shallot confit, Bordelaise sauce:

La Lagune – I have tasted this wine before (I once did an extensive vertical event that included it) but had given up on ever again finding a bottle in good shape and had consigned it to fond memory, so it was a delight to taste it in fine form one last time. Last tasted by Parker in 1978 and marked in his 3rd edition of “Bordeaux” in 1998 as “probably in serious decline” this shows how unreliable the usual sources can be for older wines. If the reviewer had a small sample size (tasted once or twice) and had the bad luck to get poor bottles, that will forever damn a possibly good wine to oblivion. This bottle was superb. The oak in the elegant nose was well balanced by mature fruit notes – a truly attractive quintessentially Bordeaux nose. Medium weight with a nice hit of spice coming in anear the end of the lengthy finish, this was a delight.

1986 La Lagune – offered as a mystery wine from two decades later, this failed to win supporters. Not much nose at all, medium body, somewhat tart at the end. it was a disappointment after the 66, and we weren’t sure how it would eventually turn out..

Lynch Bages – darker colour, sweeter nose with a decided riper pruney touch to it, not really forthcoming until it had some time in the glass. It was a bit leaner than the La Lagune, which may be attributable not to a lack of fruit but rather to the greater presence of tannin in this wine. I rated this slightly below the La Lagune.

Haut Brion – a slightly floral vanilla nose, medium colour, medium weight, supple and smooth with well integrated tannins and very good length. I finally decided that it was the best of this flight, but the fact that the humble La Lagune made me stop and really think about it was remarkable.


With roasted loin of venison, caramelised chickory and juniper and thyme jus:

Margaux – this 1966 was the last good Ginestet vintage – the wine deteriorated from here until the chateau was sold to the Mentzelopoulos family. It didn’t rebound until the very respectable 1978. Good colour, pale edges, decent nose, but the fruit was lacking and the slight astringency hinted that this one had seen better days.

La Mission Haut Brion – one of my favourite producers, back before it was bought by the owners of Haut Brion and was never again allowed to rival that wine. It had a fantastic nose of spice and toast and dark fruit, and there is an explosion of flavour in the mouth, smooth and supple with a balanced lengthy finish. This wine is clearly superior to the Haut Brion, and if this was the end of the event, would have been the clear wine of the tasting.

Latour – oh my! Dark, with a wonderful cedar and fruit nose, very big and intense in the mouth with substantial but fairlt soft tannin, and what I can only describe as extreme length, lingering on for minutes. What a wine! This one is just getting on form and will last for decades – a wine built in the pattern of the juggernauts of the 1920s that will still show as vital lively wines long after the men who made them have passed on. Wow. The fact that you can buy this wine for less than twice what you’d pay for the current vintage is ludicrous.

With Stilton, Asiago and Epoisses:

1966 Sandemans Port – this house always produces a lighter style and I’d not expected too much from this one, chosen to match the vintage of the other wines, but it was quite pleasant, with an appearance of a Bordeaux in colour (though not as light as some 1963s have become), a warm, but not hot nose, medium body and silky mouth feel with adequate length. Very nice.

A final interesting experience was a liqueur, made in the 1890s and presented in the original hand blown bottle, brought to BC by rail car in the 1904 time frame:

Crème de Violettes – the colour did show some violet but it had faded to add a bit of orange tinge to it as well. It was viscous syrup in the glass and extremely sweet, with a floral perfume. This was apparently just the thing for the ladies when they retired to allow the men to indulge in cigars and Port, but to me it seemed sweet enough to gag a hummingbird. Different times, I guess.
no avatar
User

James G. Lester

Rank

Wine geek

Posts

69

Joined

Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:37 am

Location

Buchanan, Michigan

Re: WTN: 1966 Bordeaux

by James G. Lester » Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:09 pm

Bill,

Wow! Great notes and what a wonderful experience. You caught my eye as the third wine I ever tasted and the first great wine for me was a 1966 Chateau Lascombe. Having been raised Seventh-day Adventist, I had never tasted anything with alcohol in it until I was 30 years old! I was fortunate to bump into a wonderful gentleman who became my friend who had a fine cellar and decided to take me under his wing. The wine bug bit me, and now after many years of dreaming, I now own a small winery where we make our own version of Bordeaux from our own fruit.

I concur about Latour! We had a 64 a few Christmas's ago that was exactly as you described the 66. Unbelievable density while remaining elegant, complex and interesting for hours once opened. One doesn't have to know anything about wine to understand greatness with just one taste of it! There was a young woman at the table, a guest of our son, who wanted to learn about wine, but hadn't tasted much. She was overwhelmed by it and still talks about it.

Also concur about pricing. And what about those California ports they pass off as Cabernet for $150.00 opening price! I can buy a bottle of Lynch Bages at my local store for $60.00! Don't get me wrong, there are many excellent California Cabernets. I am talking about the "late harvest" style that runs up to 15% alcohol!

Jim Lester
Wyncroft, LLC
no avatar
User

Bill Spohn

Rank

He put the 'bar' in 'barrister'

Posts

9507

Joined

Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:31 pm

Location

Vancouver BC

Re: WTN: 1966 Bordeaux

by Bill Spohn » Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:32 pm

The 64 Latour is one I recall with pleasure - had it with the 1970 in magnum and it held up really well. I haven't tasted it in far too long....
no avatar
User

Saina

Rank

Musaroholic

Posts

3976

Joined

Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:07 pm

Location

Helsinki, Finland

Re: WTN: 1966 Bordeaux

by Saina » Sun Jan 14, 2007 5:07 am

Despite your advice, I actually have bought all moderately priced 1966 that I have seen. I have loved them, and find them to be just perfect drinking now. Also I love their savoury, acidic profile rather than the fleshy and fruity 1961s'! They're cheaper, too. :)

We recently had a Montrose that seemed immortal. There was no way to guess that it was 40YO and it was tannic and very young seeming, so would have been a perfect ringer in a tasting of 1986 Bordeaux - sort of the antithesis of what you had with the Lagune! ;)
I don't drink wine because of religious reasons ... only for other reasons.
no avatar
User

David Creighton

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

1217

Joined

Wed May 24, 2006 10:07 am

Location

ann arbor, michigan

Re: WTN: 1966 Bordeaux

by David Creighton » Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:07 pm

this was the first vintage i bought in quantity - as a result of intense pressure from the press. i have ayways been able to identify the vintage because of the really remarkable amount of bell pepper in the nose on virtually all the wines. there were some exceptions - giscours and las cases and marquis de terme come to mind but..... it was a rather charmless but nevertheless serious vintage. i wonder nwhy anyone ever found it attractive. my guess is that the wines were so tannic in their youth that writers thought it MUST be a great vintage. afterwards; noone had the courage to admit that the king was naked.
david creighton
no avatar
User

David Lole

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

1433

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:49 am

Location

Canberra, Australia

Re: WTN: 1966 Bordeaux

by David Lole » Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:56 pm

Thanks for the great write-up!

I also got great pleasure from a 1966 Haut Brion in 2006 - just so fresh, smooth with such a velvetty texture - can still smell and taste it as I type here now - got 95 ponts (exceptional) from me on the night. Now you've got me going to find a La Mission from the same year! :twisted:
Cheers,

David
no avatar
User

Jenise

Rank

FLDG Dishwasher

Posts

42632

Joined

Tue Mar 21, 2006 2:45 pm

Location

The Pacific Northest Westest

Re: WTN: 1966 Bordeaux

by Jenise » Mon Jan 15, 2007 4:38 pm

Wonderful report, and I'm full of envy. From this vintage, in the last five years I've tasted Latour twice, Lafite twice, Pichon Baron twice, Palmer at least once and maybe one other. The only in the bunch that was lacking was the Palmer, and one of the two Pichons was the best of all. The lesser bottle, from another source and on another occasion, stole the show the night it was opened alongside 75, 83 and 85 Lafite. In short, not much experience but all good. The 66 Mont Belair I just picked up will likely deliver the first underwelming 66 experience but, call me a foolish optimist, for $30 I couldn't NOT buy it.
My wine shopping and I have never had a problem. Just a perpetual race between the bankruptcy court and Hell.--Rogov
no avatar
User

Bill Spohn

Rank

He put the 'bar' in 'barrister'

Posts

9507

Joined

Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:31 pm

Location

Vancouver BC

Re: WTN: 1966 Bordeaux

by Bill Spohn » Mon Jan 15, 2007 4:50 pm

Jenise wrote: The 66 Mont Belair I just picked up will likely deliver the first underwelming 66 experience but, call me a foolish optimist, for $30 I couldn't NOT buy it.


Hmm - sounds like a dinner rather than lunch wine, if you catch my drift.... :P

You never know, though. I've had at least decent Grand Puy, Pontet Canet, De Pez, and Batailley, but they were sandwiched between the 1921 and 1955 Rayne Vigneau so I may not have been paying attention....

BTW - the search on the OLD site isn't working for me - you have to go into search a different way than just selecting it and hitting Go.
no avatar
User

Jenise

Rank

FLDG Dishwasher

Posts

42632

Joined

Tue Mar 21, 2006 2:45 pm

Location

The Pacific Northest Westest

Re: WTN: 1966 Bordeaux

by Jenise » Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:12 pm

Bill Spohn wrote:Hmm - sounds like a dinner rather than lunch wine, if you catch my drift.... :P


Oh Bill, I thought you'd never ask! :P

You never know, though. I've had at least decent Grand Puy, Pontet Canet, De Pez, and Batailley


That's promising, in light of some others I have.

BTW - the search on the OLD site isn't working for me - you have to go into search a different way than just selecting it and hitting Go.


I'll take a look, it was working okay for me last week, though.
My wine shopping and I have never had a problem. Just a perpetual race between the bankruptcy court and Hell.--Rogov

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AhrefsBot, APNIC Bot, ClaudeBot and 1 guest

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign