We’ve almost reached the point where the riper years are underrated. While there is such a thing as too ripe, sometimes the riper vintages really are great and it’s best not to overthink things.
These are excellent for my country bumpkin palate. I have lots of these three vintages. I am very heavy in 2014 Bordeaux.
The Wine Spectator rates 2003 at 94 in the Northern Rhônes. ‘Nuf said.
And Jeff Levi’s palate leans toward bigger, riper wines.
I don’t think those can be considered “conventional wisdom” — just two opinions.
I hope you aren’t making buying decisions based on WS.
Bought a lot of nice Bordeaux from 01 and 04 and it was drinking well five years from vintage and beyond.
1 Like
In Barolo, I’d say 2012 among recent vintages, 1998 if you go back further.
Barbaresco escaped the rains and hail that Barolo suffered in 2014, but suffered the same reputational damage.
UMM yea,
you also buy Range Rovers and seaside property in Florida…
16 is a much more classic and (very likely) longer lived vintage (north, I don’t follow south). 15 is a voluptuous, rich, intense vintage. Very good wines, personal preference will dictate which someone prefers. For me 16 is an easy call.
Either way, neither 15 or 16 are undervalued or under appreciated
1997 Chardonnay in Champagne (especially the Cote des Blancs)
2003 Champagnes that saw normal (disgorged 2008 or later) or extended lees aging - especially Roses. Disgorging 2003 earlier than normal was a huge mistake that many made.
Napa/Sonoma cab from 1998-2000 was quite underrated.
1999 is a truly great vintage, good cool fruit, balanced, very ageworthy.
98 and 00 were considered bad but many wines aged into a cool vintage elegant wines and wines with more old school styling.
View from France is that 15 and 16 definitely accepted as top notch vintages for Northern Rhone. Different styles as has been mentioned but each lauded accordingly.
I’m not sure about putting 14 N Rhone as an under-appreciated vintage, for red at least. This was the year of the drosophila fruit fly that affected some grapes and led to acid rot. I’ve found wines to be quite light and early drinkers.
Agree though that bdx (especially northern half of medoc) and Barbaresco are sneakily overperformers in 14
The best 14s will never reach the level of the best 15s. There’s not remotely the same level of complexity.
Nevertheless, the 14 is certainly drinking well these days (especially right bank, left bank still needs time to soften), it’s a cool, clean and fresh vintage. And it will provide pleasure for a long time.
But I don’t think it’s that much underrated, lots of praise here and on other platforms and I think the critic ratings are quite spot on (Decanter with 4/5 for the left bank and 3.5/5 for the right bank; Parker rates it around 93/94 pts, WineSpectator 93, Enthusiast about 94/95).
underrated, perhaps not, but QPR-wise I think its really cracking value for money?
True, certainly at the time of the En Primeur campaign back in 2015. Many of the best 2014s had quite an impressive performence (+40%-ish I would guess) since then, however, they still trade around 50% discount to the 2016s. It all comes down if you find that excessive or not: the best 2016s can reach 100 pts perfection, the 2014s probably 97 pts. I’ll pay that 50% (and more) premium every day for that extra potential but not everybody would.
Yep, agreed with you. This is where QPR versus sheer quality is the key thing right. QPR, to me, is 2014 - given the discounts to potentially perfect wine, and also the realistic drinking timeframes. If you can afford sheer quality, go 2016/18/19/20 every day of the week, but I think within a year of being bottled those are appropriately rated and at fair prices, whereas 14 still looks very keen
1 Like
I think the best 2014 northern Médocs, e.g. Montrose and Pichon Lalande (which were my two favorites, along with seemingly everyone else’s, at the Southwold tasting), are likely to surpass their 2015 counterparts in the fulness of time.
As for “underrated”, I took it to be a reference to market prices rather than scores per se.
Disagreed, I barely bought any 15s. Now had you said 16, I might concur.
I have always loved the 1999 vintage, probably more so than any vintage since then except maybe 2013. Probably drank more of it as well. Down now to just a few Dunn and Togni left. I agree that the 98 and 00 vintages are better than the rep but also more hit or miss. I bought a good bit of them as they were priced right but rarely had a wow experience with one. The 2011s on the other hand is the vintage I wish I had bought more of when people were desperate to move it. Those I have tasted recently are turning into something really special to my taste.
1 Like
wouldnt say its a memorable vintage obviously…and ive had a few meh offerings…but every 1er ive had in the last year from 2011 volnay has surprised to the upside. perhaps expectations are so low but ive been very pleased…especially with the price discounts versus other vintages.
i wont fight to defend 2011 but it is unnecessarily maligned for volnay…perhaps cdb?
It is interesting how those under-appreciated vintages stand the test of time. Especially in Bordeaux. The 1979s were balanced on release, and have been lovely wines over the intervening forty years. Only now are just beginning to turn. The vintage that reminds me most of it is the 2004, impeccable balance without perhaps the concentration of more heralded vintages.
I was glad to see that just being ripe does not mean a vintage is great, and some of the barely ripe years have a pretty vocal following. I too love 2008 and even more 2014, but 2010 Right Bank and 2015 generally need very careful selection.
Agree re prices and I also agree for Montrose 14 vs 15 and I tend to agree with Pichon 14 vs 15 (although the last comparison showed both neck on neck).
But, I wasn’t referencing to a winery by winery comparisons as there are indeed some superior 2014s vs their 2015 counterparts. My point was that the best 2015 will reach heights no 2014 will ever reach (no 2014 will ever match the quality and complexity level of the Margaux, Cheval, Yquem or Haut Brion… and I can safely say that having tasted all first growths and other big names (but not Petrus or Le Pin) in the bottle in both years). It’s not a question of preference, it is just a question of what mother nature allowed.
Not sure how you should be able to judge that, when you didn’t had a lot of 2015s. 
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}