TN: 2000 Reignac, Bordeaux Superior

A plank of wood. Undrinkable. Cellared since release. Gross. Why is Rolland and Bordeaux trying to kill us with splinters? 75 points.

Too bad. I had one about 9 months ago that was pretty decent. Not stellar, but very drinkable. Still have about 10 in the cellar…

Interesting note, Drew. Two weeks ago, I opened a bottle of 2000 Reignac, bought on release. This was an outstanding wine, with a knock-out nose, and tremendous richness- as impressive as all previous bottles. Of course, made in a modern style, but not over-oaked. My score: 93 points.

Has anyone had an enjoyed the 03 Reignac lately? I local store has them on sale for $12 or so.

Thanks

Scott

It may be not the Vatelot wine.

Pity. I quite liked this when I tried it some time back. Here’s the note I took:

29/12/2007 rated 90 points: Drank at home, decanted for 1/2 an hour before pouring - it was tight and reticient before that but opened up with time. Large proportion of Merlot in the blend, up to 80% I think, with the rest being Cab Sauv. Strangely new world - a rather muted nose but with plush plum jam and spice on the palate, and strong but nicely integrated vanilla and toasty wood from an obviously high percentage of new French barriques. Apart from the nose, an extremely Pakerised wine. Just that bit of oomph in the structure points to it being a Bordeaux Merlot and prevents it from being one dimensional. Very Very nice wine for a Bordeaux Superieur, but certainly not priced like one! Still good QPR though, and an excellent quaffing wine.

Just thought I should add that I found the 2001 leagues ahead though.

Keep in mind that there are two wines: The “Reignac” to which most people refer in a tall, non-traditional bottle. And then the Chateau de Reignac in a traditional Bordeaux bottle. The latter is a second label.

I think its the Reignac – it has a tan/brown label that only says “Reignac.”

How’s the 03 version of that wine?

Thanks

Scott

You have the right one. Not sure about the 2003 other than what is on CT: 2003 Reignac, France, Bordeaux, Bordeaux Supérieur - CellarTracker" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow, that’s a high score for an extremely Parkerised wine (I read that as extremely manipulated/spoofed?) with tastes of vanilla and toasty wood.

I do try to be as “fair” as possible in my notes. Toasty oak notes aside, I recall having the impression that the wine was well-made, balanced and quite yummy. It may not be styled according to my liking, but I am aware that someone or another who uses CT as a reference may like the style.

I haven’t had this one, but this note reads exactly like an 03 Fombrauge I had about a week ago. I was embarrassed because I brought it to a dinner party. A few days later I opened another and it was very nice. So…

This wine has developed significantly since you wrote your note, Paul. Nevertheless, a fair note… even though I have little use for the demagogic term ‘Parkerised’…

The 2000 is on its peak now, and NOT a cruel, over-oaked, and over-extracted caricature of a Merlot dominated wine… as, unfortunately, so many modern Bordeaux today. This is an elegant wine with great balance and magnificent opulence. Since 2005 I tasted it at least twice a year.

As for other vintages, the pre-2000 wines from this estate, labelled “Cuvée Prestige”, were very balanced wines too, but the 2001 Reignac is a more obtrusive, unbalanced wine, and certainly not to my licking… just as the 2003. But even those wines have a lot of admirers…

Scott,

I think the '03 is a solid wine and well worth the <$15 price that is common today. I rank it in the 88-90 range today.

Drew,
I’ve had much better luck with this wine. My last note mentioned oak, but no splinters were found.
As for the 2003, its very ripe and fruity. The 2003 is a bargain, but it’s profile is more Dry Creek than Bordeaux. If you’re looking for Bordeaux flavors, look elsewhere.

I’ve enjoyed each 2000 Reignac a little less than the previous one…about a half case-worth. Definitely none in the ‘wood hell’ category.

My last note: 8/14/2010 rated 89 points: This was good, not great. I did enjoy the nose at first, but that blew off. Big time tartness to go along with the fruit, it might develop some secondary characteristics, but maybe not. I’d probably drink up in the next year or two. One left for me.

I’ve liked the 01 better than the 00 each time I’ve had it.

As for the 03: 9/4/2010: Pop and pour. Big roasted stink on the nose. Blew off, but was still there with each subsequent glass. other than that, a nice 03, drink it up, no need to wait…if you do probably more stink.

I’ve only had one of the 03’s, so take it with a grain of salt

Yes. Wine connoisseurs are supposed to hate these, even if they like them.