Why do old Bordeaux's not follow vintage charts

A recent thread about Mouton 73 has me confused

In the early 80’s bad recent years like 72,73 were already written off, now im not doubting the recent tasting note but how can it be that a wine written of 35 years ago can still be good ?

Ive not tasted Bdx of that age, only Californian cabs and they without exception have been undrinkable

Is it people like me who enjoy fruit and energy in wine will just never like ultra aged wines ?

Send the old California reds to me, for…disposal.

Alan, I also wonder if I just don’t have a palate that fully appreciates wines aged over 30 years. But I am definitely willing to do lots of experiments to find out.

Maybe if you ask this question monthly instead of just quarterly you’ll get an answer you want.

Vintages are written off by people who don’t understand that most wines live a lot longer than what the general consensus is. Wines from so-called off vintages can look a lot better, or come together with extended cellaring. Great terroir and a great maker will generally drink well at some stage of its life, despite a poor year.

What vintage chart is Bordeaux supposed to follow?

And why?

And would a “bad” vintage mean that every single wine from that year sucks?

Bordeaux is a big place and you can have a hailstorm in one part that doesn’t affect anything somewhere else, or you can have a frost that only affected the grapes not yet picked, etc.

And “Bordeaux” is plural.

Why do people use apostrophes incorrectly?

We may never know.

Good job on picking your picture, matches your grumpy miserable personality perfectly

Or care

Really? What’s the singular form?

Pomerol

Not for nothing, but '73 Mayacamas out of mag a couple of years ago was the best Cabernet I’ve had from California (and I’ve had a few). It had plenty of energy and verve and could have lasted another 10-20 years. It was miles deep and broad as the open sky. There was no lack of fruit.

Great straw man though, Alan. Grist for the mill in a forum like this!

It’s always challenging to rate an entire vintage, no? You can look at recent threads about some CA vintages and realize that there are plenty of ‘exceptions to the rules’. And as usual, your enjoyment of things may not match one or even a dozen different reviewers.

Cheers.

Bordeaux.

But Pomerol can be substituted.

But everything i understood about wine say pre 90’s was that a bad vintage was just that, a bad vintage with little to redeem. Back in 82 a First Growth Bdx from 68,69,72 would be worth maybe 10 GBP a bottle. 82 Lafite came out at 40 GBP EP in 83.

Should I be shocked that all Bordeaux from a given vintage are not equally good or bad and they do not all age the same length of time? Does anyone really believe that a vintage chart is anything more than one person’s view of the overall assessment of a vintage that is not applicable to any one wine?

And, anyone who thinks that California wines from the 70s are undrinkable today needs to drink a 1974 Sterling Cabernet or a 1978 Diamond Creek or Chateau Montelena, just three examples of wines from that era that are fabulous today. I would not expect Gallo Hearty Burgundy from that era to have aged as well.

1973 was not a bad year in Bordeaux in the way of '72 or '74. The wines were generally charming when young, although light.
I did get a taste of a '73 Mouton about ten years ago, and though it was not dead, it did fit that mold.
Well sealed bottles kept in cool cellars can stay stable for a long time.

P Hickner

Well said! Vintage charts are at best a thumbnail sketch of the growing season. You still have to evaluate individual wines.

You can add 1978 BV Georges de Latour to you list of late-70s wine that are still drinking great, even out of half bottle.

+1
And this applies not only for Bordeaux, but for all the great appelations in Europe. Thank Parker for the misjudgement. It saves you money and provides you great wines. Think: there are no bad years (okay a few), only interesting years.

First of all, you cannot go off just one persons note. I drink a lot of older Bordeaux. For my palate, very few wines from the entire decade are still showing well. I love a few wines from 1970, and even less from 1971, but off the top of my head, there are not many wines from the decade that are better today, than they were 10-15 years ago.

1972, 1973 and 1974 are atrocious vintages and those wines should have been drunk up quite early in life. But that’s just me. If you, or others think those wines are great today, that’s how they, or you see it. We just do not agree.

Few wines are better at 40 than they were at 20, or even 10 years of age. But those few offer IMO, unparalleled tasting experiences. YMMV.