2018 has not yet been designated a VOTC yet, and I am not sure it will be. If one bank is felt to be weaker than the other, it won’t be. If there are too many underperforming wines it won’t be. Jury is still out.
Also it is only fair to go back to 2000, and then you have a fairer picture. Nobody would accuse 201-2004 to be VOTCs, so that brings down the percentage.
Did somebody claim this is the vintage of the century? I didn’t hear or read something like that so far. So why this debate? Due to the weather in 2018 I am pretty sure some Chateaux made superb wines. For those who like less ripeness 2008, 2012 and 2014 are good options. So why all these complaints, the drama and the sarcasm?
![[winner.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/07ec25c9fd71159fe15d7f1ba5fad64e91238d0e.gif "winner"){kind=small}
I’m about to hand out tampons here.
We have almost 0% detailed info and we have a debate. I see no point.
Hmm.
![[drinkers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/8/82916bed5ad74ac8470bc04089d9758b0c80c9fa.gif "drinkers"){kind=small}
For Bordeaux wines, it seems alcohol will be very high and style is not my favourite… so an easy pass for me although I appreciate it will mean missing some great wines…
For Burgundy wines, having read the decanter article, it will also be an easy pass for many wines as I am not getting any younger plus this often means buying the wines you have an allocation without tasting them.
However, I will still buy a few top producers I cherish… probably going down in range whenever possible.
(I don’t fancy 16 degrees Bonnes Mares… hope my favorite producers picked up early…)
I’m out.
My wife says we already have too much Bordeaux in the cellar.
Alfert tells me I’m too old. A least my wife isn’t telling me that.
It can’t really be a blanket statement of support if I said it was uneven.
Having actually tasted close to 400 wines, there are some wines in this vintage that set a new standard for Bordeaux! There are wines in this vintage that are clearly the best ever from some estates.
This is not only at the high end. There are stunning wines that will be under $50 and several gems will be under $40!
I missed something. The only ppl I see talking about “vintage of the century” are those making fun of people calling it the vintage of the century. So who has proclaimed it the Vintage of the Century? The article at Victor’s blind link certainly didn’t.
Jeff,
what do you mean when you say a new standard for Bordeaux?
Can a Bordeaux wine be better than a pristine 1961 Latour on the Left Bank and a pristine 1982 Lafleur on the Right Bank? Isn’t this claim a bit overdone because the wines are still not in bottle? Not to speak about the test of time? As I said I am sure due to the weather some very fine wines must be produced but to say a new standard for Bordeaux is something similar to vintage of the century so feeding hype.
I think I have read people calling 2003 a vintage of the century. Don’t agree, but I also would not agree on 2009 and 2010, at least.
We should have a poll on what vintage from 2000 forward is considered by the majority of Berserkers to be best.
I doubt very seriously anyone (anyone of any account that is) has ever called 2003 a vintage of the century except for those who like to make fun of the bordelais by saying (without evidence) that they call every year the vintage of the century. It seems to be a favorite parlor game of people who don’t much care for bdx wines
2018 is more than any year before it.
One more than 2017.
Eighteen more than 2000.
Fifty-seven more than 1961.
A new standard.
Kidding aside, the century is young yet.
And there are differences in what characteristics people prefer.
I like Alfert’s idea of a poll. Will go set one up…
Yes, the wines are better today. You might not agree and a few others here don’t see it that way. But the changes taking place in the vineyards and the cellars are for the better. You can taste and feel it in the wines.
As for 61 or 82 being the pinnacle, it was in its day. But it’s not the case today. Changes and improvements have taken place throughout history. 61 is better than 29. 82 was above 61. 00 topped 82. 09/10 took a step forward and it is clearly taking place in Bordeaux with 2018 and all over the world.
There are numerous reasons for this. Essentially it’s called progress which comes from knowledge and experience.
Keep in mind, this is all Bordeaux on a global basis. Some wines have their ups and downs, and for long periods of time, but overall, is my point.
It’s heading closer to 1am so I’m going to bed. I’ll catch up with the thread tomorrow night.
I agree technology, vineyard practice, vine management etc all are advancing…
i do have to ask… is Rolland considered improvement? i think he’s been a complete disaster for the region. In that case, a 2018 may be far worse than a 2000 for example… if he started consulting in 2008 let’s say… (making up dates).
2008? Rolland has been consulting in Bordeaux since the 70’s. And despite the hand-wringing of the Robert Alferts of the world, he hasn’t ruined it yet.
You can pick out individual wines whose style has changed and it may be for the worse according to a given person’s taste, but the overall influence of the consultants has been pretty positive.
FWIW, James Molesworth from WS went high at the top end; scores look higher than he gave for 2016.
No offense to Molesworth, but:
A) suggesting these are “blind tastings” is frankly silly. Single-blind only. He’s not tasting Bordeaux superieur or Lalande-de-Pomerol here. There’s hype, there’s knowing what wines you’re going to be tasting, and there’s expectation. It’s all part of the self-serving Bordelaise machinery.
B) Does Molesworth really sell wines? Hell, does Neal Martin even sell wines, as he seems to be the closest thing to Parker’s heir apparent. Obviously, I think that Suckling’s got enough of a reputation for inflation that no one here trusts him. I know I don’t always agree with Jeff Leve, but I trust his impressions more than anyone else basically.
Critics and the Bordelaise scratch each other’s backs, which annoys a lot of us because it keeps the prices inflated for products that have no scarcity at all. Many critics have come out public ally and suggested a correction in en primeur pricing which hasn’t happened, but as long as they give every classified or name-check wine 95-100 points, who are they kidding? They perpetuate it. Of course, we buy it, so it’s on us.
Or maybe on the Negociants. But I have no clue how much clout they have, how they manage to get rid of 2013 and 2017 and 2007. They certainly don’t get together and demand lower prices from the wineries in any manner that’s effective.
Also, I don’t have the experience that many of you have, but I get that today’s wines are made more consistently, in better conditions and with more knowledge than in the past. But also styles have softened, extractions are different and tannin management is quite more nuanced than it may have been in the past. I agree with Jeff on that to be sure. But does it justify the widespread point inflation of the last 20 years? As someone who speaks nationally on research study design, ceiling effects in an outcome measure are awful to deal with and really make saying anything useful difficult. Having a 100pt scale where most wines sit in the range from 89-98 and the difference between a 98 and a 100 is fairly minimal is the definition of ceiling effect.
While I will concede that there were many poor wines made in the past, I am always a little surprised when I open a 1961, from even the most humble such as Potensac, Chasse Spleen etc, that the quality is so high. Few disappointments and then, they tend to be more storage related than wine related.
Winemaking obviously has to deal with current challenges, and the current challenges today are all about dealing with the effects of global warming. A nineteenth century First Growth averaged around 10% alcohol and was routinely chaptalized to 12-13%. Now the problem is getting the grapes ripe and keeping alcohol levels down. My arbitrary number before wines lose typicity is somewhere between 14 and 15%, but even below that figure, the wines being made today are very different to those made in those great vintages 1945 and 1961. Jeff likes these today’s wines more than those of yesteryear, I prefer those great vintages and would drink them any time over today’s bigger wines.
Lots of generalizations here, for which I apologize, but I think the overall gist is correct.