But entertaining nontheless… 
1 Like
![[winner.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/07ec25c9fd71159fe15d7f1ba5fad64e91238d0e.gif "winner"){kind=small}
Post of the thread for sure.
It’s a god-damned 2000 HBL for crying out loud. One bottle of a middling bdx that by all rights should be entering adolescence. Novels have consumed fewer words!
Let it go. Alex said what he thought about a particular bottle. Maybe we all would agree if we had been there; maybe he’d be out on a limb. But his note is 100% accurate in reflecting his opinion at the time about that bottle. Right or wrong, how this can be construed as a crime against nature or some sort of felony that needs to be “called out” is beyond me.
Neal. How about if you and I go halfsies and split the cost of buying and shipping Alex a 2000 HBL from Chateau?
1 Like
Time for the ignore button. I’m out.
If it means that much to you, you should buy a bottle and send it to Alex!
If that is not with it to you, after all the time you’ve spent posting about it, perhaps you can open this up to Kickstarter.
Don’t get discouraged, Christopher!
Jeff, Kickstarter is a great idea. TY as it did not come to my mind. With Kickstarter funding we can get Alex a full day at HBL, a complete immersion experience, including a tasting of the 1990, the 1996, 2000 and the 2005 HBL.
Neal, Alex did not commit a felony. Nothing close. It’d only an unclassified misdemeanor of the Unified Wine Code (UWC) that has no potential under the statute for incarceration or probation.
It’s wine philosophy (at least that’s what art philosophy is).
I have exactly one person on ignore, but you’ve got me thinking.
The best HBL I’ve ever had was the 1985. Never had the 90, but I tried most years from the 80’s. The 85 had this wild green streak (fresh herbs, not bell pepper) which gave it a terrific, zesty freshness and great aromatics. Good fruit too.
The 1975 HBL was also a winner and super cheap for a long while, very 75 with a hard, ironesque quality but great depth in an austere, medieval package.
Hmmm…
1 Like
Alex you wrote
There is a “comments” section on my site. As far as I know it is active and functioning.
You are incorrect Alex. Take a look. You have a no comment blog as no one can respond to or provide input into what you post on your blog. Here’s a link to your blog post on the 2000 HBL It was a no comment blog back in 2016, and still a no comment blog today.
http://www.bordeauxwineblog.com/2000-chateau-haut-bages-liberal/
1 Like
I looked at the title and thought how could a thread on Haut Bages Liberal be interesting? So many posts, that I clicked and have been richly rewarded. To see the unlikely combination of Jeff and Alex smacking down Chrisk; now that is a first. Let me add to the smack down.
What a truly pompous, self important ass Chris has been throughout this thread. A wine you love, well 93 points worth at least, and Alex doesn’t, that you post publicly that he MUST retaste, and retract. How dare he write his opinion in his blog. Then he (Chris) questions Alex’ integrity and abilities, and whether he is a professional etc. I think by page 3 he will be demanding pistols at dawn.
I did taste the 2000 twice in 2001 in barrel, and once at a tasting in the City a couple of years ago. En primeur 88-90, and in bottle at a 2000 horizontal, a 89, mid to low in the pack. Decent, solid but not brilliant. Would I buy some based on that tasting, possibly, but only at a knockdown price. Looks like there are a myriad of opinions about the wine.
Mark, I will wear your label of pompous, self important ass, and whatever label you want to throw at me as a badge of courage. I know I am being controversial. However, I am NEVER going to take the position that wine bloggers and other wine professionals (bloggers of consumer goods which certainly includes wine ARE considered professionals by the FTC and are subject to FTC regulation) should publish reviews of flawed bottles of wine and fail to indicate within their review what should be obvious to everyone that this was a FLAWED bottle of that particular wine that is not representative of what a properly stored bottle of this wine will taste. Reviews of wines, particularly older Bordeaux, that indicate that a wine is showing tertiary characteristics and should be drunk ABSOLUTELY should be published because we wine drinkers are consistently asking the question "“when should I drink this particular bottle of wine”. However, the beginning part of an analysis when reviewing a wine that was released years ago and storage will dramatically affect the taste should be, how was this wine stored, what’s it’s provenance, is what I am tasting a REPRESENTATIVE bottle of this particular vintage of this wine or is it a flawed bottle that doesn’t add to the meaningful discussion about the wine. Alex double fumbled on this. If Alex’s post was a CT review, and someone gave the 2000 HBL all of those descriptors that Alex used and then graded it with let’s say a 62, I am willing to bet that its likely that constructive feedback would have resulted in a non-professional review being altered to FLAWED with the rest of the comments certainly having validity but only in the context of how a flawed bottle of 2000 HBL would taste.
BTW Mark, I did not grade the 2000 HBL. The original poster of the TN did. (I actually do agree with his scoring based upon the last few bottles I have had of the wine as my bottles are still showing positive evolution…addition to rather than typing correction in original post)
So if you think my criticism of a wine blogger is harsh, so be it. But my motivation for doing so is pious. I worked in a winery many years ago. I was stung by bees during a couple crush days. I worked some late hours with people during crush and ferment and have incredible respect for those who do the “hard work” and not the easy and cushy task of years later tasting their devotion to their craft and trashing it because the writer doesn’t realize or doesn’t care that he or she is trashing their wine based on consuming a flawed bottle of their wine.
If someone wants to buy some 1953, it is less than $100 bones; a sure sign that it’s a genius wine and you plebs are wasting your money on those Moutons and Lynch Bages:
I think you crossed way too many lines to justify that kind of incendiary attack by saying that you are an earnest pious soul trying to correct a wrong.
You are entitled to your opinion Mark. Calling me out on it is fine by me.
So my good bashers, ye who are wine professional, wine blogger, or WB member and poster. Am I delusional or hallucinating? Is there such a thing as “wine review ethics” in relation to the review by bloggers and/or wine professionals of older wines that would be greatly affected by storage conditions? I guess I am just imagining that there are wine review ethics that could somehow be broken?