1999 Burgundies at their Peak?

I was surprised by this comment by Steve Tanzer in Vinous:

“While many of the ‘99s I sampled with the producers this winter in the course of my tastings of ‘16s and ‘15s have gone through sullen stages in bottle, most of them have launched into their periods of peak drinkability.”

This is not what I have been experiencing. The major wines are a long way from being ready, and even village wines are barely out of diapers. In fact, I have not found one premier/grand cru which would not benefit from another decade plus of cellaring. In fact, it is a feature of the vintage’s quality that they remain so backward after nearly twenty years.

I think everyone would agree w you—except Nathan—who finds them all too expensive and not worth drinking! Premier crus starting to open . . .

Of course, it depends on producer (e.g. Engel’s 1999s are drinking very nicely), but I agree with you, Mark. Having waited so long, it seems like a pity not to wait a few more years to really catch the wines at their peaks.

White burg yes.

Red burg still barely waking from the most recent sullen stage.

Wine reviewers and wine makers drink their wines far earlier than most of the rest of us. The vast majority of the wines they put in their mouths are either not yet bottled or have just been released, so they are conditioned to appreciate much younger wines than the rest of us. for most of the rest of us, the majority of the bottles we drink have been aged.

I think you are right John

At peak? That one leaves me scratching my head.

Definitely not my experience…when a wine shows its best 24 hours after opening…it’s not at peak, IMO. (Had a '99 deMontille Volnay “Mitans” that did just that last week.) They’re not even 20…and likely need 25 to reach their peaks, I think.

On the other hand, I have recently had some 2001s that seemed to be approaching that level, surprisingly. Maturing colors, harmonious fruit and structure. And, enjoyable, though a tiny bit hollow on the finish…which is , I think, the 2001 vintage’s achilles. But, very good showings…

+1, most 99s need a fair bit more time to round out.

Don’t even think white burgs are

very good point John, and I only skimmed through the notes on wines that I have, but he pretty much states with most of them that they need another 10 years to unfold. Strangely for me I find Mr Tanzers end dates for the vintage to be about when the wines normally come around.

I just read a bit of it, and he actually said that most of the wines have finally entered a period of “peak drinkability”. I think if he had it to do over again, he’d find another word other than “peak”.

agreed

It’s turning out to be a really underrated white vintage. Ramonet’s BBM and, I guess it goes without saying, Coche’s CC were both stunning last month.

I always thought 99 was a well regarded white burg vintage but with a high premox rate:

http://oxidised-burgs.wikispaces.com/1999+Vintage+Assessment+Dinners

Looking through my notes and current notes on CT, Bouchard MP, Pierre Morey MP, Bouchard La Cabotte, and Raveneau Valmur were underwhelming and on the decline. My Leflaive notes have been consistently good. Really liked a 99 Coche Enseigneres.

I get John’s general point about wine reviewers.

That’s why it’s good to have ones like William!

I’d like him a whole lot more if he didn’t have an avatar in the form of my gardening nemesis

Wow, you must be really slow if you can’t catch a snail.

Jean-François Coche likes it a lot and draws certain comparisons between it and 2008, another favorite of his.

I guess the appraisal of the 1999 white Burgundies simply came in an era when wines were scored more conservatively. If you juxtapose notes and scores you could easily conclude that, e.g. 2009 was the better year.

That’s a snail in the Musigny!

After wine, the ultimate “slow food”.