WTN: 1995 Haut Marbuzet, St. Estephe, Bordeaux

[Jenise]

We'd gone two weeks without opening a wine from our favorite area, so to go with a steak and French potato salad, I pulled this wine, my first Haut Marbuzet ever. If I had not known this was a St. Estephe, I would have guessed it at first sniff: it was all barnyard and band-aids. Once you get used to that, plums sneak in and on the palate, there were plums, blackberries, tar, some earth and leather. The tannins are fairly resolved--the wine's definitely at peak. Overall, it's attractively both a little rustic and a little refined, like blue jeans with a Polo sweater. Not elegant nor particularly impressive, but solid and for the $20-25 I paid recently for this, I'd rather drink this than any other red wine that money would buy.

I love this wine myself. The 1990 was just stunning for the price, as are the 1996, 2000 and 2001.

[Jenise]

I love this wine myself. The 1990 was just stunning for the price, as are the 1996, 2000 and 2001.

Nice to hear that. It's a Bordeaux name that, in my experience anyway, rarely gets mentioned. Now that I've made its acquaintance, it will definitely be on my buy list, too.

[David M. Bueker]

I've seen the 2005 for about $42 on futures. With the rate of price increases do you think this is worht it?

[Jenise]

David, I presume your question is directed at Randy since he has long-term experience with this producer. But I'll add that based on my bottle and what he says, which if it addresses the question I'd have about if the wine has changed stylistically since '95 and it seems to, the 05 at $42 seems like a relative bargain for the vintage. I'd buy.

I've generally found this a bit too soft and oaky for my tastes, but glad you liked it. The '85 was ok last year, but a little too low acid for my tastes.

I'm pretty much a Bordeaux neophyte, Jenise. What makes St. Estephe your favorite area? Is it the "typical" profile? A string of favorite producers?

Bill, as you know, St-Estephe is the most northern of the four major communes of the Haut-Medoc. The soils of St-Estephe are gravelly but also have a lot of clay. The soils do not drain as well and can be cooler than their southern counterparts, delaying ripening. This can result in grapes with higher acidity and more robust flavors. This region does better in hot years, so if you purchase 2003 Bordeaux, St-Estephe is a good bet. A very nice value wine from there in 2003 is La Dame de Montrose, selling at discounters for $40.

[Jenise]

I'm pretty much a Bordeaux neophyte, Jenise. What makes St. Estephe your favorite area? Is it the "typical" profile? A string of favorite producers?

Oh, I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. Bordeaux is my favorite wine area, Bill, not St. Estephe per se. I'm not sure what my favorite area in Bordeaux is, actually, though I seem to be increasingly attracted to St. Juliens and Graves.

Dale, didn't find this one oaky or soft at all. Maybe they just need to be drunk in middle age vs. especially young or mature?

Jenise,
Haut-Marbuzet has always been famous for 100% new oak (with a fairly heavy toast). It has unfairly been called Parkerized - unfairly because they went for that style before he was the "emperor." Someone once referred to it as the best Pomerol in St. Estephe. I'm pretty open re styles in Bdx (I can like Bon Pasteur and VCC, Figeac and Pavie-Decesse, old and new style Poyferre), but have never had a H-B that I though held its oak well except the '90.

Dale, didn't find this one oaky or soft at all. Maybe they just need to be drunk in middle age vs. especially young or mature?

Jenise,
I don't know your tastes as well as I do those of Dale, but FWIW the '95 Haut-Marbuzet I've had was indeed quite soft for the region but not overtly oaky at this point. I found it quite appealing, and recognizably Bordeaux, but not as savory or complex as that of many other producers.

Mark Lipton
(Still in posession of one bottle)

Thanks Bucko. I'll give the Montrose 2nd a shot.

[Jenise]

Mark said:

I found it quite appealing, and recognizably Bordeaux, but not as savory or complex as that of many other producers

That's exactly what I meant by "attractively...rustic and refined...not elegant or particularly impressive, but solid". In other words, no complaints for the price I paid, especially since it was an auction buy. I have another bottle, too. As for it being soft--well, maybe we use the word in different ways. I tend to use that word when a wine is lacking a normal amount of acidity or tannins for its age, and this wine wasn't soft in that way, that is not knowing this wine at all and not having a lot of 95's under my belt to judge by. However I didn't think it had a future either, so maybe I should recalibrate my thinking on the use of the word 'soft'.

100% new oak, Dale? Thanks for that information; strange then that Bucko's a fan. He's quite the oakaphobe.

[David M. Bueker]

100% new oak, Dale? Thanks for that information; strange then that Bucko's a fan. He's quite the oakaphobe.

If Bucko's wine tastes are anything like mine, Bordeaux is about the only place where I can forgive lavish oak because it virtually always integrates. Take Lagrange (St. Julien) for example. It's one of the most heavy toast, coffee-laden oaky wine on release, but boy does it taste good down the road.

100% new oak, Dale?

This is something I have never been able to resolve, Jenise. Why do top Bordeaux houses use 100 percent new oak, yet the resulting wines are not oak bombs like so many New World abominations? It has to be the way the wood is handled and coopered, degree of toast, time in barrel, etc., etc., as well as the fruit itself.

Whatever the reason, I find over-oaked Bordeaux much less frequently than local wines (Pavie comes to mind).

First of all, I should be clear I haven't had the '95 Haut-Marbuzet, though I have had several other vintages '82-'03. So my comments on oakiness are about H-M in general, not the '95.

I agree that some Bdx absorb new oak well. I'm on record as scolding some who regarded any hint of new oak as "spoofulated", pointing out various 1sts they had praised were certainly 100% new oak, and showed it young. Why do some Bdx absorb it and others not? A chemical qustion I can't answer. I agree Lagrange absorbs it's oak (not 100%, but a high precentage and welltoasted) well. Ditto the 1sts.

It's worth pointing out that most classic older Bdx other than maybe 1sts were NOT in 100% new oak. Older Poyferre, SHL, Pape-Clement etc were usually probably 20-40%, and aged fine. Will the new versions do as well?