After tasting a fair number of 2005s, Antonio Galloni wrote an interesting take on the vintage.
“ Critics are often accused of score inflation, sometimes rightly so. But the reality is that there is no comparison between the quality of the 2005s and more recent vintages of a similar overall level, meaning from 2015 to the present. Today’s wines are just consistently better across the range. That does not change the fact that the finest 2005s are phenomenal, absolutely thrilling wines. The best terroirs are the best terroirs, after all. But it is the wines in the middle and lower tiers that show the greatest improvement.”
I did taste them in barrel, but with very few exceptions, I have not dared to taste many recently. I remember going home and writing what an utterly brilliant vintage it was, and apart from some of the satellite Right Bank wines, the quality was extraordinary across the board. The more recent vintages (with the exception of 2016) that I have tasted are missing the clarity and precision I saw in 2005. Thoughts?
2010 is better than 2005. 2016 is a better version of 2010. That being said, 2009, 2015, 2018, and 2019 are all better vintages than 2005. As for 2020, I am 100 wines in with about 700 more to go. But even this early, my bet is that 2020 is better than 2005.
I do not agree that 2016 is the only vintage with clarity and precision. I find those qualities all over the place at the better estates.
Bottom line, Bordeaux is better today than ever. Yes, there are some folks longing for the past, and that’s fine that they see it that way. There is a wine for every palate. But because you asked, my view is Bordeaux and probably the majority of the wine world is making better wine than ever.
I haven’t touched nearly any of my 05s — I bought a bunch en premier — but Antonio’s thoughts are squarely at odds with how Parker felt in 2008, namely that 2005 was the best year for less heralded chateau since 1982. Supposedly, nature gave wine makers everything they needed in 2005.
That said, like many of us, I have had some very over-extracted 05s, which I guess proves the adage “producer, producer, producer”. But I have no reason to doubt that in the hands of the right chateau (the ones I like), 2005 is/will be in time at least an outstanding year.
At the time, that was correct. That’s over a decade ago.
I taste hundreds of petit chateau every year and at least to me, there is no comparison between the level of quality and the number of estates making outstanding petit chateau today, compared to what was produced in 2005.
I have been trying my 2000’s and enjoying what I have been trying. Have not really dug into 2005 but it was the first vintage where I bought (relatively) wide and deep. Are others trying 2005’s and finding them worth trying?
Second thing I wonder about … I have been sporadically been trying and enjoying wines from 83, 85, 86 and 89 - I am really enjoying wines with this much age. (I was not buying wine at that point, rather drinking Milwaukie’s Best probably). Wondering if more recent vintages 2000 onwards (where I have been buying and cellaring in fair quantity) will develop as nicely
This part is fairly easy to believe. The less favored sites must benefit a lot from consistently riper years.
I’m not as sure what to think about the classed growths. They probably had all the ripeness they needed in 2005, 2000, 1990, and 1989. In addition it seems like it could be a bit of a difficult time to judge 2005s. Having said that, I don’t doubt that on the whole the period from 2015 (or even 2014) through 2020 will be a great time for Bordeaux.
Depends on your definition of petits Chateaux. The weak spot for 2005 were the satellites and lesser wines round Saint Emilion, where many but not all the wines were over extracted and bitter. Not so in the Medoc and Grave where a perfect growing cycle resulted in gorgeous wines across the board. It was the mantra of the vintages that the grapes were so good that the wines practically made themselves.
The fact is I agree that neither 2009 or 2010 were completely successful, but that wasn’t your point; you started with the 2015 vintage, and having tasted this extensively, the wines were pleasant enough, the best ones very good, but so many of them were overly rich, and I doubt whether they will make old bones the way that most Medocs and Graves from 2005 will. We will skip
2016, as we both think it is a fine vintage and for me a real throwback, also 2017 a pleasant enough year with nice balanced wines but not profound and far too expensive.
I can’t comment on the other years, although I understand from my friends in Bordeaux both from the chateaux and negotiants, that 2016 is better than either 2018 and 2019. The fact that you will say you have actually tasted the wines doesn’t help because our palates are so different. I do know how much they loved the 2005s, and see no reason why they would think differently now.
It’s a lot more than just riper vintages. There has been considerable improvements in farming, greater selection, upgrades in the cellars just to name a few. Competition is fierce today, which forces all levels of estates to make better wine.
As an example, how many really good wines were being produced on Castillon, Fronsac, Lalande de Pomerol or the satellites? IMO, not that many. Today there are stacks of great from all those appellations.
Both banks. There are more Cru Bourgeois and simple AOC Bordeaux making better, more complex and interesting wines today. I was shocked by how many small left bank wines I loved in 2018 with price points of under $30.
I can’t comment on the other years, although I understand from my friends in Bordeaux both from the chateaux and negotiants, that 2016 is better than either 2018 and 2019.
2016 is better. But there are numerous thrilling wines in 18, 19 and probably 20, each with their own characteristics. And some estates made better 18 and 19 than 16. It’s also a matter of style. However I thought the point here was 05?
I do know how much they loved the 2005s, and see no reason why they would think differently now.
I’m thinking as 2005 has aged, the vintage is mixed. Done wines are breath taking. Others are firm and less forgiving, with more tannic character than elegance. And yes, as these are closing in on 20, the wait is owe to know what they are.
Yes, this is my impression so far. I have been dipping my toe into 2005 over the last year and finding a lot of disparity. AG’s report has given me some encouragement but I think that 2005 is a divisive vintage. Some will like it more than others, unlike 2000 for example, because the fruit profile doesn’t strike me as being particularly fresh. I live in hope because I’ve got a lot of 05s but I really have no idea if they are going to be to my taste. It’s basically a question of waiting for the tannins to finally recede and hoping that the remaining fruit will still be…well…fruity!
One recent example was Sociando-Mallet, which I found very impressive, but only after eight hours of decanting, and even then I was not sure that it will ever be a wine I will particularly like.
As for more recent vintages, well, we will see, but as always it’s down to individual taste. Technically, I have no doubt that they are better than their forebears but we each have our own definition of what is “better”. I’ll believe the hype when I taste modern Bordeaux from a ripe year with 12.5°. Rather like 1982.
Anyway, it is entirely understandable that anyone ITB is going to tell us that every year is “better” than the previous ones!
Very much enjoying the back and forth here between you and Mark. How much of the relative revaluation downwards of the 2005s is due to the fact that they’re in that awkward phase where they’re still not ready to drink but it feels like we’ve had them in cellars for so long that they should be (or at least showing more than they are)? They aren’t like 2000 where yes, those still need time but are enjoyable to drink today. 2005s probably won’t be as enjoyable in 5 years as the 2000s are today. However, I have faith that they’ll ultimately be the better wines at peak - how useful that is or isn’t depends on your age! Whilst I’ve certainly purchased a number of wines from 2015-19 and believe they will also be wonderful, I don’t have a lot of experience drinking such young Bordeaux so can’t make the same comparison here.
I am more of a Burgundy drinker and feel the same thing has happened specifically with the 2005 Burgundy vintage there and in general with certain very good vintages. Vintages like 05 are interesting and impressive to taste young before they shut down. Then they undergo a significant period in bottle where they’re tight and not fun to drink. We all complain that the vintage probably isn’t as good as we thought it was and that some of the supposedly weaker vintages that mature faster were ultimately better. Then, we give it enough time and finally realise that we were right in the first place, we just need to wait for the tannins to resolve and the wines to open up. Obviously this is a generalization but it’s certainly a parallel here and has happened with a number of vintages.
I also wonder if people will become frustrated with other more classical years like 2010 and 2016 in Bordeaux and will similarly complain at 15 years old when the wines still aren’t ready to drink.
There seems to be a reasonable correlation between warmth and quality of the vintage (although there are exceptions)… So, does it mean you believe Bordeaux is going to further improve with global warming?..
I think the climate change aspect has been discussed at decent length in another thread. A key point is the frequency of extremities, not the average temperature. If events like the frost of the last couple of weeks happen more regularly, Bordeaux could find itself often screwed for producing wine, even if the rest of the growing season is good (was one of my takeaways from the thread)
Also, remember, its not just about warmth, but things like rainfall and currents. If global warming kicks off killing key ocean and wind currents, Europe’s gonna be a very different weather.
Perhaps the only concern for the 2005 was the one of tannins which were powerful enough, but unlike vintages such as 1986, were slightly riper and more refined. It’s the reason I have held back, and in recent months have only tasted a couple, a really backward half bottle of VCC, and a lovely one of Branaire Ducru. I had the Branaire at a vertical a few years ago and was very impressed by it, buying a case that week.
I love the Branaire 2005… not pretentious, just excellent… still plenty to go. Had Clos de l’Oratoire 2005 yesterday and while it was initially tough, after a couple of hours, it was pure Blackcurrant juice…