Poll - off vintages in Bordeaux

Check if you think the vintage is an off vintage in Bordeaux

  • 1962
  • 1966
  • 1967 (right bank)
  • 1971
  • 1975
  • 1979
  • 1981
  • 1994
  • 2001
  • 2004
  • 2014
  • Please check to show you voted

0 voters

I am often amazed when I read threads on Bordeaux as to the vintages people consider to be off vintages. In many cases, these are vintages where I have had a number of good wines. So, I thought I would be a reading as to whether I am way off base here - do I have a different view from the rest of you. So, I thought I would do a poll listing some vintages I have seen posted as off vintages and see who thinks they are off vintages and who thinks they are pretty good. Thanks for your help.

I think there’s a definition of “off vintage” which is basically “any vintage that isn’t massively hyped as a vintage of the century”. That’s the only way vintages like 01/04/14 get included

I chose none of them. These are basically middle-tier vintages, except for 66 and 75 which I believe were considered first-tier vintages at the time. In the 80’s I would say the first tier was 82, 85, 86 and 89; second tier 81, 83, 88, and bottom tier 80, 84 and 87. In the 90’s first tier was 90, 95, 96 and 98; second tier was 94, 97 and 99; and bottom 91, 92 and 93. Of course you could shift these around and it wouldn’t be the same in all places (for example 98 Medoc vs. 98 Pomerol; was 97 middle or bottom?). But generally I think of “off vintages” as being the bottom tier. The middle tier is usually where the bargains are. When I was first buying wine in the late 80’s, quite a few 79’s were still available in local shops and they drank really well at that time. More recently I backfilled a bunch of 81’s, as they were pretty cheap a few years ago.

I’m not surprised that 94 has more votes than the others but I like them. It’s a good vintage for a cold night wearing a scratchy wool sweater.

As Marcus said, these are only off vintages if that means “not in the top tier.” 2001 and 2014 in particular are really good.

1 Like

I agree completely. The poll really should be updated to include more vintages. For me, off vintages would be: 63, 65, 68, 69, 72-74, 77, 80, 84, 87, 91-94, 03, and 13.

1 Like

1965 vintage is missing.
Worst of all…

That’s not the point of the poll. Howard is looking to see if people think good vintages are “off” because they are not “great.”

I voted, leaving all of them blank.

Impossible, since you left out all real off-vintages …

1 Like

1994 and 2003 are not “off”, the latter just not to the taste of several here …

I have one bottle of 1994 Pontet Canet left. It was phenomenal in 2014, and I’m hoping 2024 treats it equally well.

The question is less about the vintages listed than it is about semantics. Is an “off vintage” a bad vintage? A vintage in which it is (or was, for those in the 60s eg) nearly impossible to find a decent wine? Then none of those listed qualify.

Or is it a vintage with broadly decent but rarely exciting or superlative wines? If that is what you’re looking for I think several of those on the list qualify. A vintage like 94 produced a number of really nice wines, but none (that I know of) that are going to be in the pantheon of historic wines.

Or, as Marcus suggested, is the phrase intended to refer to anything that doesn’t get massive acclaim, in which case most of the qualify.

So my answer is “depends.” So like a lawyer.

For me an off vintage is, annoyingly, a few things:

Critically, its one that doesnt extensive attention after being bottled. 2014 is a great example of that. In and of itself, its probably an imminently drinkable and probably one of the best value for money bordeaux vintages going, but its next-to-never going to make anyone money and critics will largely ignore it.

Drinking wise, we also need to consider the category of horse piss - I dont think there’s been one of those, AFAIK, in at least a decade or two? Even 2013 isnt bad, its just a decent vintage.

Unfortunately this all ges muddled together - and what ‘critics’ coonsider an off vintage is then used as a broad label for off vintages.

Is a really good example - the ‘less than stellar’ 2017 is 92 points! That m akes it better than 1985, not far off 1989 or 1990. The last time a vintage scored under 90 points was 2013 with 83, 2011 with 87, 07 with 87. You’d have to go back to 91 and 92 to see anything worse than 80, with 65 and 70 points respectively.

‘Off’ vintages is being redefined in recent years, what was formerly a damn good drinking vintage has somehow become an off vintage

So right, so across the board my views. I cannot imagine anyone thinking 01, 04 and 14 are “off vintages” though I did have dinner with one well-known Berserker - and Bordeaux drinker - that sorta guffawed when I told him I really liked some 04s. I felt small and unknowledgeable, went home and popped yet another stunning 04 VCC to right myself in the world.

I know you, Craig, like some 81s. That was the only vintage I thought I might click.

That’s exactly the response. Roll home and drink a perfect pomerol.

Personally, I cant afford to drink prime vintages - give me the prime-1 all day. Your money goes a lot further, too. Why drink 1 amazing bottle of VCC when you can drink 3 damn good ones

I agree. I think there is a lot of confusion for customers who are interested in drinking wine, not investing in it, but are scared away from buying “damn good drinking vintages” by people calling these vintages off vintages rather than “damn good drinking vintage.” Great name for these vintages.

I am not sure who came up with this list of “Off Vintages”, but most of the years listed offer a lot of good wines. An “Off Vintage” is not a year that is less than perfect. It is a moderate but, not poor vintage, for example, 1987, 1994, 1997, 2007.

Vintages like 1979, 1981, 1983, 1988, 1994, 1999, 2004, 2011, 2012 and 2014 are not off. They are fine early drinking years. They are not vintages I would hold for decades seeking a miracle in a bottle for most wines, though there are a few exceptions even in those years with some wines being truly exceptional and others missing the boat.

Today, with modern viticulture, and the willingness to do extreme sorting, it is hard to have a truly poor vintage. Examples of poor vintages are 2013, 1992, 1991, 1980. Even 2013, which is the worst vintage in perhaps 40 years had some decent wines. They just needed to be tasted in their youth. Today, many 2013 wines are already declining.

3 Likes

[double post]

If I was a bit older and richer when 12 and 14 were on the block, I would have stocked up.
TBF the prices havent really moved since EP - for now I’ve been bedding out on 19 for investment purposes (probably misguided), but I’ll start to backfill on 14 and 12 soon. It’s a toss up between 2014 Lafleur and 2019 Pensees de Lafleur as being my only chance to try that Pom

[cheers.gif] [cheers.gif]

What is a “prime time vintage” is also highly subjective. I’d take a 2011 or 2014 VCC over the 2x pricier 2015 any day of the week. They are better wines, IMHO.

Robert, every vintage I named is a vintage people have called an off vintage on threads on this board. I was floored a couple of years ago when someone named 1966 as an off vintage, but for some others, see, e.g., Off vintages that took you by surprise. - WINE TALK - WineBerserkers