When I tasted the wines en primeur, I recognized there was quality there, but the winemaking was so Parkerized at that time, that I also found plenty of aggressive oak much of it from overly brûléed barrels and some serious extraction. I have tasted a few since then, most recently Malescot and Pichon Baron, and while good wines, showed oak that was not as well absorbed as William said the Palmer was. Magdelaine 2000 marched to its own drum, and is just not ready.
Sorry I missed this thread…we did a 2000 first growth (mostly) tasting last October, the last time we’ve done an in-person offline. We had the whole restaurant, seven of us were tested and each had their own little table spread throughout the room. Still better than sharing little bottles over Zoom.
Knowing we were opening bottles way too early, it was still something to look forward to. Notes follow:
-
Deep dense bull’s blood color, with an appropriately matching first taste. Quite young, hiding all but the most overt flavors. Some seashore and green pepper, baked red fruits. Tannins are firm but not stonewalling the fruit. The sensation is more tanned leather, less graphite. It’s a nice profile, needs time to develop further but a pleasure to drink. Chateau Ausone 2000.
96 PTS -
Similar dense ruby color. On the nose was even more seashore and some iodine. The palate showed red fruits, less baked than the first wine. The tannins were milder and silky. Some Asian spices and graphite on the finish. Retasted later, the tannins had firmed up and the wine was a little more closed. This needs much more time and will improve greatly. Chateau Latour 2000.
98 PTS -
All the wines were showing deep and dark, no exception here. The nose shows tobacco and some garden herbs, but very muted. Soft tannins, some Indian spices, tobacco, cedar. This was the most like a New World cab in flavor profile. Really delicious now. Chateau Margaux 2000.
98 PTS -
Very muted nose, a brooding profile showing great reluctance to expand. The palate is lighter weight than the previous wines, very smooth and classic Bordeaux. Tannins are not dominant, the wine shows flavors of hoisin and jammy blue fruits. A terrific wine that will improve for many years. Haut Brion 2000.
97 PTS -
Similarly muted nose, some pencil lead and dense fruit. The palate is also muted, the tannins are bold and reluctant to reveal much. But behind the tannins is a solid classic Bordeaux well proportioned with hints of saddle, savory smoke and blackcurrants. Will go for ages, I’d hold off on opening for some time. Chateau La Mission Haut Brion.97 PTS
-
Great first impression, the nose is more open for business, revealing some green pepper, spice, cedarbox and brambles. The tannins are silky and provide a perfect backbone of support for a palate of cedar, garden herbs, and chewy black fruits. Really a wonderful wine, it puts me in the middle of a bustling steakhouse surrounded by sizzle and laughter. Chateau Mouton Rothschild 2000.
99 PTS -
Dark and dense, the theme of the night, the color of blood with the thickness of cherry pie filling. Very rustic profile, an old leather baseball glove, a packet of Red Man tobacco, just a massive wine. The tannins are screaming don’t touch, but the fruit is dense enough to make a stand. This wine will improve for decades, but the flavor is prominent enough that with an all-day decant it would be memorable. Interesting I found the bell pepper in others but not this one! Chateau Cheval Blanc 2000.98 PTS
I felt a little like Suckling with these scores, but the wines were really that good.
1 Like
A bottle opened last year was stunning. I have another in the queue.
Looking forward to your thoughts, Glenn.
I can’t figure this one out. Something struck me as a bit disjointed (for lack of a better word). Not sure it has to do with its age. It’s a decent wine, but something seems slightly off center preventing me from really loving it.
1 Like
At this age - even with perfect storage/provenance - there is going to be some natural bottle/cork variation. It does seem like its a bigger problem with some properties than others though.
Opened Brane-Cantenac and Léoville-Poyferré the other night. Brane was fleshy and sumptuous (I think 2000 had the highest percentage of Merlot they ever used IIRC), rather Palmer-like actually; Poyferré similarly round and giving, with a bit more sapid nuance and cigar ash (more brettanomyces, too). Both quite nice, though the Poyferré wasn’t on the level of e.g. 1995, 1990.
1 Like
Funny to flash back to this concern/perception of Parkerization for the 2000s. While it was an admittedly minor-to-nonexistent concern (at least in the wine press), after the wines were released it did come up on the boards like BWE especially for the right bank.
Of course, these thoughts were quickly subsumed and essentially forgotten by the five-alarm concern over the 03s and 05s, which by and large made the 00s seem restrained.
I had a 2000 Leoville Barton this past weekend. I found it a bit flat with subdued fruit and not much else. Maybe a bad bottle? I much preferred the Poyferre last week. I have a few more standing up to try (Gruaud Larose, Talobot and Pichon Lalande).
Had the 2000 Lagrange and Leoville Poyferre on successive nights last week, and while both showed brilliantly, I think they will continue to improve with additional cellaring. I didn’t pick up any brett on the LP, and thought it was quite pure.
1 Like
I’ve had a few recently, two good, two less so:
Domaine de Chevalier - Pessac-Léognan
Slightly underwhelming. It’s a good wine, no doubt about that, but I was expecting more. The nose was promising, with red cherry, earth and spices, as was the attack - lush, immediately impressive red berries and blackberry, but there’s a lack of body, a lack of grip, and the glossiness of the fruit becomes rather tiresome.
I preferred the 98 and the 01 in their youth but always supposed that the 00 would pull away once the former started to tire. This has not happened and honestly, I prefer the 02 or the 04 today, for half the current price of the 00.
Boyd Cantenac - Margaux
This had clearly declined since last year. The nose gave the game way - quite tart, over-cooked strawberry and redcurrant, very jammy. In the mouth, much the same, the sweetness of the fruit is sliding into a rather syrupy mess. After a couple of hours, there was some improvement, a little fresher red cherry in the middle section and a more elegant finish, but I would advise checking one of your remaining bottles - my last two could have been flawed but better safe than sorry, because at this rate, time is very much of the essence.
Ferrière - Margaux
Totally different compared to the Boyd. The nose was much fresher, with spring flowers, blackcurrant and raspberry, plus roses after a few hours, like previous bottles. A soft, fresh attack of blackcurrant, blackberry and raspberry, with a creamy second wave of vanilla, and a long, persistent finish. It’s refined, elegant, velvety and typically Margalais. No hurry but I can’t see it improving.
Rauzan-Gassies - Margaux
After a slightly underwhelming bottle last year, this one was back on track. Perfect fill level and I could see why on removing the very tight cork, which showed no sign of seepage at all. The bouquet hit as soon as the cork was out, fresh flowers and blackcurrant, which of course were even better in the glass, with now a little earth and tobacco, plus a rich seam of raspberry. I didn’t decant, which was a mistake, since it really needed aeration - unlike all the preceding wines, this one is still an adolescent.
There is quite a brooding, tannic structure, it’s a big, full bodied, classic wine, with blackcurrant, leading into dark cherry, then blackberry and a touch of leather, before finishing on a dusty, elegant note of typical Margaux finesse. After a few hours, the raspberry arrived too in the middle section and overall a very impressive wine.
Normally, RG is not on the same level as RS for obvious reasons, but on the basis of the bottles I’ve tried until now, 2000 is the exception - the Gassies is a lot bigger, better structured and for the long haul. I wouldn’t say it is quite as good as Brane or Giscours, nor BAMA, but it isn’t far off - so very good value.
I felt the '04 DdC was too young still and as of now nothing impressive but not a bad wine.
I used to love DDC, and if you can find pre 1990 wines, you should buy them (except 1982). A few years ago, we did a vertical where the wines showed as well as estates with much bigger reputations. I have had the 1953 several times, and it is still a glorious wine.
The modern ones suffer from consultivitis, Dererencourt in this case. The wines are perfectly nice, totally unrecognizable, and somewhat innocuous but somehow the critics seem to love them.
1 Like
very nice update
i had the 00 Boyd - C some years ago, but was a little less enthused
http://www.bordeauxwineenthusiasts.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=6765&p=65946
i’ve been quite enthused about the 00 Rauzan Gassies over the years, a real outlier for them by reputation
http://www.bordeauxwineenthusiasts.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1378&p=88230&hilit=rauzan+gassies#p88230
Rimmerman has been hawking the latter in the last day or so, supposedly a pallet from France, for $120/per.
Great notes as always, Julian. I have had the 2000 Ferriere and the Rauzan-Gassies both within the last several months. Your notes are spot on. I have always been a fan of Chateau Ferriere, a classic drinker.
2 Likes
I’ve had mostly good experiences with the 04, but it’s certainly a bit on the juicy side!
Love the term “consultivitis”! I don’t personally dislike what Derenoncourt does as much as Rolland - I still enjoy Prieuré-Lichine, for example, and my jury is till out on DdeC. I’m not sure when he started working with DdeC - I believe it was 2003, but the 2000 did taste as if he had had something to do with it. The 2002 doesn’t taste remotely spoofy.
I remembered that you were a fan of the RG 2000! But I can’t imagine you spending $120 on one - that’s a silly price. It’s worth half that. The whole point of RG 2000 is that it’s good value.
We drank Leo-Poy Sat night. Delicious but still on the upslope.
For my wife’s birthday celebration last summer we opened a few magnums of Leovile Poyferre 2000, and they were all drinkly magnificently by comparison to 5 years ago, when they were still closed and forbidding.
Looking at how the 2000’s turned out, perhaps the more modern ones will come around yet? Could Robert Parker reach out from his “figurative” grave and grab those critics of his reviews by their lapels and say, “I told you so!”
Wine aging and “eating” or “digesting” oak flavors are an interesting topic no?
2 Likes
I had the 2000 Lynch Bages last night. Good with some upside but not quite up to the 1989 at the same time frame in its development.