TN: 2000 Chateau Smith Haut Laffite

I say this partly in jest, but this Chateau has always made me question whether a winery should also make its own barrels, perhaps falling in love with them too much. SHL shows so woody to me in so many vintages, especially in this 2000 vintage. The wine overall gives a Napa-impression, fairly large-scaled on the palate, dark fruits, dry earth, smoke, and an omnipresent sense of oak, oak flavors like roasted coffee, and oak-astringency. Solid underlying materials of fruit and terroir that are just masked a bit by the winemaking practice. Decanted for an hour, consumed over the next 2, it never really fleshed out into what I consider Bordeaux. Paired okay with an over-seasoned flank steak, the two battling for primacy.

I just don’t see this wine getting any better.

(85 pts.)

Use the oak to smoke the steak.

I’m with you, Robert. SHL didn’t make the cut when we downsized for this very reason. My bottles went off to auction.

Ugh. I found this wine my inventory. But just one bottle.

So I should hold my magnum for 10 more years and cross my fingers?

I have a few but this producer is no longer on my list. Shame.

Your palate!? You will love this Napa Cab! :wink:

I had a few '00 SHLs and drank them up years ago. Nothing special.

Hear, hear. Lots of Bordeaux fans seem to love this wine, a fact I’ve always been mystified by. This never seems to like Bordeaux to me, and I usually outright dislike this wine. There are some modern style Bordeaux that have a place for my palate, but this isn’t one of them.

However, I think 2002 was an inflection point for SHL reds. In fact 2002, 2004 and 2006 are very good wines in the context of these less lauded vintages. Still a relatively modern style, however.

Couldn’t agree more with your note. I’ve only had a few bottles of this spread amongst various vintages (2000 being one of them) but it’s not one I’ll ever seek out again for the reasons you describe.

Although not specific to the 2000, I have to disagree about the overall impression of SHL. I have a sweet spot for wines of the Graves, and SHL is an example of solid, modern winemaking that captures the beauty of the terroir. Yes, it is different than wines of the Haut Medoc, and that is what I like about it. And although some people disagree, I find the SHL Blanc to be close to the pinnacle of White Bordeaux.

Sounds like I should try another bottle of this. The last one I had was the 04 or 06 SHL that Chasse Spleen brought to a tasting donkey’s years ago, and I was left cold.

But that’s a long time ago.

I have several years of their red and a case of '09 ,which I have yet to open. The owners, Daniel & Florence Cathiard ,are lovely , kind people. I stayed at their spa & had lunch with them in 2012 in their 14th (?) century home in the middle of their vineyard. Definitely the high point of my 2 weeks in France with my wife & close friends. The vineyard was first planted in the 14th century by the Verrier du Bosq family, related to the Duke de VALOIS !
Very down to earth people even though they are multi-billionaires. Parker gave the '09 100 points.
I’ll give the '09 a try soon & get back to you all.

I think they started goosing up the oak in 1998, it was much more prominent than the 1996, when both were young.

Sorry to hear the oak in 2000 still seems to be unresolved.

Years ago I found the 1995 nearly undrinkable, and never tried again. Perhaps I should, but their prices are up a lot from '95.

I have very much enjoyed this wine in “lesser” vintages, 2007, 2008, 2011. Haven’t tried the big years as price exceeds my curiousity for 2005, 2009/10 and 2015/16.

The '09 SHL was 89.99 on futures.

I am in complete agreement on 2000 SHL (I am “Straight outta Iowa” on CT). A perfectly drinkable Napa cab (though getting on a bit in my experience).

If you think the wood is overdone on the red, you should try their white!