As I mentioned in my previous
note, beyond 1996 my knowledge and experience is a bit sketchier than for the older
vintages I earlier wrote about in more detail.
2001
Overall vintage rating ****
This rating is conservative.
Potentially...probably...2001 is worth four and a half stars. Qualitatively it is not far
behind the 2000 vintage, and arguably it is better on the right bank, but those
arguments probably won’t be resolved for a while. The 2001s are clearly much more
accessible than the 2000s, but it is hardly a ‘restaurant vintage’ like 1997. Whenever I have
looked for value and to back fill I have been more active in buying the 2001
vintage than any other. The 2001 vintage definitely
suffered from a post Millennium hangover coming, as it did, on the heels of the
vintage of the century/millennium/millennia, and in my opinion is the most under-rated vintage of the new millennium.
The smattering of wines I have
tried on the left bank below first growth level have generally been excellent, typified by outstanding
wines made by Pichon Baron, Leoville Barton, Gruaud-Larose and Giscours. An
excruciatingly tannic Leoville-Lascases, and an over exuberant Pape Clement in
Pessac, as that estate tried to reinvent itself, seem to be exceptions to this
general rule. Below first growth level, 2001 left banks are generally superior
to 1998 and 1999. You can buy 2001 left banks confident in the knowledge that
you are getting what for today’s buyer is surely an ideal combination of accessibility,
fair price point, and classic claret attributes. For me at least, this is a
winning combination. As for the first growths, I instantly fell in love with Chateau Margaux when I tasted it this year. It is a restrained style of Margaux, but ever so classy.
But the excitement is really on
the right bank, where prices dropped to bargain basement levels for a while. I
picked up some incredible wines in the last two years including bottles of La
Conseillante and Trotanoy both @$75 and Petrus @$1295 in America; and cases of Figeac
@ £438ib, Certan De May @£360ib, Berliquet @£210 all in and Cheval Blanc @£1800
all in. Prices of 2001 right banks have
risen lately as the market has belatedly recognised the superb quality of these
wines. All of these right banks mentioned here compete head to head with the
best wines these estates have produced.
As for 'wine of the vintage' it would be tough to choose between Chateau Margaux, Cheval Banc and Petrus. Finally it is worth mentioning that 2001 was
probably the best year in Sauternes and Barsac in living memory. Good as the
red wines are in 2001, nothing comes close to Chateau D’Yquem.
Favoutite clarets in 2001: Chateau Margaux, Leoville-Barton, Cheval Blanc, Figeac, Certan De May, Petrus, Trotanoy
2002
Overall vintage rating *** ½
This vintage was also somewhat
under-rated from the beginning. It is a cabernet vintage which at least matches
2001 on the left bank, but cannot compete with it on the right bank. In some
respects 2002 is like a toned down version of 1996, but without the same degree
of power and opulence. The left banks are classically styled wines for true
claret aficionados. They err towards being too lean for some tastes, for those
weaned on modern fruit bombs. Some of the wines are actually quite thrilling,
with St-Julien being the outstanding appellation, though Pichon-Baron deserves
a special mention because the 2002 is even better than the 2001, though it does
not quite match the power and authority of the 2000. Mouton-Rothschild in
Pauillac is outstanding.
In St-Julien Leoville Lascases is
absolutely out of the top drawer, and clearly superior to the surly 2001.
Leoville-Barton is outstanding, but if you put a gun to my head I would opt for
the 2001. Lagrange is another beauty. Ducru Beaucaillou is good but
surprisingly accessible. In Pessac-Leognan the wine that really stands out for
me is Smith Haut-Lafite. It is modern, but it ticks all the boxes. I have
limited experience of 2002 right banks.
Favourite clarets in 2002: Pichon
Baron, Leoville Lascases, Leoville Barton, Smith Haut Lafite
2003
Overall vintage rating **
This is perhaps the most
controversial vintage of the noughties, possibly in living memory; and it was
certainly the hottest. In 2003 the whole of France and its vineyards got
scorched. A lot of the burgundies got cooked, you can taste the excessive heat
in the northern and southern rhones, and the same can be said for Bordeaux too unfortunately.
But this is a vintage that divided opinions and some of the optimists like to
draw comparisons with the searingly hot late 1940s vintages, notably 1947 and
1949 which produced incredibly long-lived and some legendary wines with
port-like characteristics. However silly talk that this vintage might be wine of
the century material soon dissipated.
No doubt it was a difficult
vintage on the right bank. The biggest disaster I have tried was Rouget but
that is a lowly Pomerol. On the left bank the general rule of thumb is that the
further north you go up the Medoc the better. It is no coincidence therefore
that Sociando Mallet is one of the top wines in 2003. Some of the wines further
down the Medoc I have tried have been troubling. In St-Julien Lagrange was a
disaster, and likewise some of the wines from the Margaux appellation, like
Lascombes. However Ducru Beaucaillou made a good, albeit Napa-like wine, and so
did Leovilles Barton and Lascases apparently. The normally reliable Grand Puy
Lacoste in Pauillac struggled in 2003. It was recognisable but blighted by
heat. You can buy it quite cheaply these days.
Cos D’Estournel was impressive
tasted in 2012, and and Montrose is even better. So far, my wine of the vintage. Lafon-Rochet in St-Estephe is also a very good wine, which coped well with the heat. But the second wine of Cos, Les Pagodes, was more obviously heat tainted,
especially tasted side by side with the 1996 Pagodes. A lot of the 2003s come across
as being really gawky and unbalanced, with harsh tannins swamping in some cases
fading fruit. I only own two cases of 2003 claret: Giscours and Pontet-Canet. I
don’t remember what I was thinking when I bought the Giscours, while the
Pontet-Canet came highly recommended from a source I now regard as dubious; I
must confess to being nervous about both. It was a good year in Sauternes &
Barsac, however, and I own Yquem and Rieussec.
Favourite clarets in 2003: Montrose, Cos D’Estournel,
Sociando-Mallet, Lafon Rochet
2004
Overall vintage rating *** ½
My early impressions of this vintage are based on a horizontal tasting in
New York City in late 2007, and none of the wines, mainly left banks, impressed
me very much, with the exception of Lafite, which was streets ahead of
everything else. A lot of them had the leanness of the 2002s, but tasted more
modern and seemed to lack the classical charm of the T-2 vintage. However, I tried Latour in Nov 2011, and it is clearly an extremely competent effort.
My most recent experiences of the vintage have, however, been positive, and I think I have underestimated the 2004s, based on very competent, well made wines by Prieure-Lichine and Grand Puy Ducasse, which illustrated the care that goes into making wines these days. Pontet-Canet is a very good wine but is too clinical for my liking. I own cases of this, Langoa Barton, which was highly
recommended from a reliable source, Malescot St-Exupery, which I found a bit soulless, modern and anonymous when I tried it at a very young age, and La Conseillante, which is evolving very slowly but will be exceptional.
In Pessac-Leognan, super wines
were made at Pape Clement (a huge improvement on the 2001), Haut-Bailly and
Smith Haut-Lafite. On the right bank 2004 is a promising vintage, especially in
Pomerol, but some of the wines still need quite a bit of time: wines like La
Conseillante, L’Evangile, Gazin and VCC. In St-Emilion, Belair is a wonderfully cerebral and misunderstood wine.
Favourite clarets in 2004:
Lafite, Grand-Puy Ducasse, Pape Clement, Smith Haut-Lafite, Belair, La Conseillante
2005
Overall vintage rating ****(*)
I would rate 2005 above 2000
judging by my somewhat limited experience. For example Pichon Baron is even
better in 2005 than it is in 2000; or 1989 and 1990 for that matter. As
Christian Seeley remarked at his Pichon Baron horizontal in London last November, it is the
best wine that he and that estate had ever made. The 2005s exude class and are
outstanding across the board. It was probably the greatest vintage ever
made...until the 2010s came along...but that is another different story.
Everything I have tasted from
this vintage has been absolutely top drawer, apart from a strangely
short-on-the-finish Figeac. The picture above is from Jacques Levy's Bordeaux tasting dinner in Chappaqua, New York in 2011, where this bottle of Trotanoy showed extremely well. It was big thick and dense, but remarkably finely balanced. This wine has everything in abundance, not least an incredible future. It’s packed with fruit, cassis and other nuances; it is enrobed in silky smooth tannins. Enjoyable now it will be stunning in the decades ahead.
Sadly I don’t own much 2005 save for a couple of cases of
Belair and some Sociando-Mallet because I was convinced at the time that the wines were significantly
over-priced. Initially the 2005s lifted the whole Bordeaux price structure, but
on now they have retraced, and are generally trading below release prices, so bargains appear to be materialising. Beyond this I have little to say.
Favourite clarets in 2005: Pichon
Baron, Montrose, Grand Puy Lacoste, Trotanoy
This is the last of my claret vintage series because I just don't have enough on the vintages 2006-2011 to write a separate piece on them.
The only things I would say are the following, based on limited exposure:
- 2006 looks like a good vintage, possible even rating four stars. It probably competes with 2001, 2002 and 2004 on the left bank but is probably stronger than 2002 on the right bank. I tasted quite a few 2006s at Lords in 2007, and the ones that I tried to buy as a result of that tasting were Batailley, Haut-Bailly and Pavie Maquin. I ended up buying just the first two. At the Pichon Baron horizontal the 2001 and 2002 were better than the 2006 but Christian Seeley really likes it and it did show well at Lords in 2007. At the Figeac vertical the next day the 2006 Figeac was excellent, and I already had a few bottles in my cellar in New York. It was better than the 2003, 2004 and 2005 Figeacs. At the Chateau Margaux vertical in May the 2006 was pleasant but not 'great' and a long way behind the 'great' 2001. Les Forts Latour is very lovely.
My fave wine: Haut-Bailly
- 2007: I have tried very few of these. From what I can gather it may be in the mold of 1997, a useful vintage with early maturing wines, or what might unkindly be described as a 'restaurant vintage.' The Figeac was quite lovely, but not as good as the 2006. Still it would be a lovely wine to own. The 2007 Baron was not shown. From what little I know I would peg 2007 as a three star vintage.
My fave wine: Figeac
-2008: Another potential four star vintage. The Figeac was outstanding. I rated it slightly above the 2006 and preferred it to the 2009 and 2010 Figeacs, which are clumsy and in my opinion both significantly below par in the context of these vintages. It was perhaps the last ever classically styled Figeac and for that reason alone should be worth hunting down. The 2008 Pichon Baron was excellent to outstanding, in a very classic style. It may eventually match the superb 2002. The 2008 Chateau Margaux was, like the 2006, good but not great, but it had a bit more class than the 2006.
My fave wine: Figeac
- 2009: Clearly a fantastic vintage; clearly a five star vintage featuring some extraordinary wines. The wines are extremely voluptuous and sexy, but have the structure to age well. The tannins are fine and the texture silky. It is an open question as to whether this is a better vintage than 2005. Only time will tell. One of the most extraordinary wines is Pontet-Canet, while GPL is unbelievably lush and sexy and some people don't like it for that reason. When we visited Chateau Latour in November 2011 we were served the 2004 Grand Vin, the 2006 Les Forts and the 2009 Pauillac Latour, i.e., third wine. It was quite honestly difficult to pick them apart qualitatively, though the Grand Vin was the densest. But the Pauillac was extraordinary for a third wine. By all accounts 2009 is equally strong on the right bank, but I have only tried a few.
My fave wine: Pontet-Canet
- 2010: When I tasted the 2010s last November I was simply astonished at the quality of the wines. In my opinion the 2010s are a step up from 2005 and 2009, which hardly seemed possible before I tried them. Even though I turned 50 this year I did not hesitate to buy five cases from five estates which unequivocally made their best ever wines: La Conseillante, Pape Clement, Leoville Barton, Gruaud-Larose and Branaire Ducru. If I could afford Chateau Margaux I would buy it. Just extraordinary and probably the greatest Margaux ever...if not then certainly in the Mentzelopoulos era.
My fave wine: Chateau Margaux...joint runners up: La Conseillante, Pape Clement
