Leroy Beaux Monts vertical, 1990-2002

Dr Grenley has spent a number of years painstakingly assembling a vertical of Leroy Beaux Monts, hoping one day to share it with treasured companions, perhaps on a momentous occasion. I think, though, that he finally lost patience and gave up, opening them for the usual rag-tag group of us. (It was actually somewhat of a celebration of his 65th BD).

Although there was a lot of burgundy experience in the room, our Leroy experience is pretty light, so this was a bit of an excursion into unknown territory for us. The wines overall were beautiful, and it was a fine evening basking in a fairly continuous flow of fine burgundy. I believe wines were double decanted 2-3 hours ahead of the tasting, but I could be off by an hour or so.


2002 Leroy Vosne-Romanee Les Beaux Monts–

OK, this one really does explode from the glass. Forward seductive cherry, dark red berry fruit, slight smokiness, wonderful complexity in the higher tones. There is an interesting pause in the middle–not really a hole–then incredible length. This is actually a typical 2002 in that most of what is happening is in the upper registers, but it is so good that one really doesn’t notice. It was hard to get oneself to move along to the subsequent wines. Tied for WOTN with the 93.

2001 Leroy Beaux Monts–

A different wine with a less effusive nose, a minty/wintergreen component to the fruit on the nose. Softer entry on the palate, a little more dark berry to the fruit, but actually a little more complexity than the 2002. Still impressive length. This is more of a dark-horse, in comparison with the rock-star 2002, but still a wonderful wine.

1999 Leroy Beaux Monts–

Much darker fruit on the more subdued, refined nose. Considerably sweeter on the palate than the previous 2 wines, and the palate length is clearly shorter. In some ways the wine still feels too young. There was discussion of the high yields in 1999, but this estate has such incredibly low yields that I don’t think this applies. Not quite in the same league as the first two wines, but perhaps more time will help.

1996 Leroy Beaux Monts–

More high toned cherry fruit, underbrush, clearly more acid. A little edgy and the fruit feels sort-of fragile. Doesn’t have the same depth as the other wines. Next to last of the wines tonight (we’re all 96 fans in general, but this one suffered from some of the detracting elements of 96 without the redeeming features.

1993 Leroy Beaux Monts–

This wine is clearly in the burgundy sweet spot. My notes say “lots of stuff going on”. How’s that for a tasting note? Complex dark and red fruit, and underbrush on the nose. Asian brown spices for the first time in this line-up. Great length and interplay of the above elements on the palate, but the overall impression is incredible balance of all of these complex elements. This wine is a joy, and what burgundy is all about. WOTN, tied with the 2002.

1990 Leroy Beaux Monts–

Dark wine with what some of us thought was a hint of TCA. However, this came and went and didn’t progress, making TCA unlikely. Darkly fruited wine that yet seemed somehow a little off. At times, I got a few reductive notes, and in fact it did improve somewhat with a copper stick. Not sure if an off bottle or just an off vintage. Last in line tonight.

Nice!

Glad you got in! :grinning:

Thanks for the notes John.

I suspect that '99 needs a fair but more time.

Yes, lovely notes. Many 1999’s seem to me not ready yet; 93’s a different story.

Our conclusion, as well, was that the 99 was too young. The short finish however was a puzzle.

Excellent notes, and a nice write up John.

Nice notes. Not often we see TNs on Leroy.

I purchased two bottles of the 2002 Beaux Monts at release. They were more expensive than Rousseau Chambertin from the same vintage. I still have them and was wondering when to open them.

Happy Birthday to Dr. Grenley!

Cheers,
Doug

You probably won’t see any more notes from us. This was a one-off thanks to the generosity of the celebrant. i don’t think any of us have or will be buying these wines at the prices they are going for.

With regard to the 2002, it was a great pleasure for current drinking, admittedly still young, although not too young. I would think any time over the next 10-20 years would be fine, including now.

Thanks for sharing. My experience with 99 has been similar–solid but young.

It sounds to me like you had a troubled bottle on the 90. I’m embarrassed to say but I’ve popped 3 bottles of it over the last month, and 2 have been absolutely excellent. When it’s on, it can be really good.

Thanks for the input. I’m impressed by the three bottles.

Yes, I think our bottle of the 90 was indeed troubled, and troubling. At first there was a question as to whether it was mildly corked, but then that notion was dismissed as the vague questionable whiff never worsened over the evening as one might expect, and there were no further indications of TCA on nose or palate. Just a bottle that was not tasting oxidized or roasted or old, just off.

Sounds like a great night guys, thanks for the notes. Any night with multiple bottles of Leroy is a good night!

The vintage which is perfectly ripe now is …





1992 !

I would certainly believe it. Too bad we didn’t one of those to throw into the tasting.