Agree on both counts. Love doing 1989 PB/LB comparisons.
Sorry, I didn’t expand the vintages to 89. I was looking at 89 though the lens of cost. I assumed that 89 would be outside of what I wanted to spend. That said, if I had to do it over, I’d at least go back to 81 since there are likely several stellar values for vintages not 89 & 90 as you go further back in the 80s. And, actually for what your getting, even the 89/90s are a decent value at today’s market rate considering they come with 30yrs btl and represent PB at is very best. I’m pretty comfortable pulling the trigger on btls under $200 but my palms start to sweat at $200+.
Anyway, thanks all for you feedback!
Craig
I once had a case of the 96, just a few bottles left. It never shut down or disappointed.
1989 & 1990 for me
In my mind there is no question that 2010 is the finest wine this estate has ever made, not unrelated to Latour doing likewise…after that the pecking order on that 1990-2010 span would be 2005, 2000 then 1990.
The non-trophy vintages are worth a look and in my experience the 2002 comes up trumps ahead of the 2008, 2004 and 2001, all better than anything between 1991 and 1999.
1 Like
Gosh, the Purple Baron has gotten spendy. The 02 and 04 were so cheap, eg <$50.
1990
1996
2000
2005
2009
(Not tasted 1989)
We’ll find out when the 2010 is 30 years old like 1989, won’t we?
Then I’ll through in the ‘86. I’ve only had it twice. Both times were single-blind with the ‘89 and ‘90. On those nights, The ‘89 and ‘90 were better, but only slightly so. The ‘86 held its own and is a very nice wine.
Kris in my opinion and in that of some other BWErs, the jury has already decided. Christian Seeley thinks the 2010 is the best wine he has ever made. Being English he is too modest to boast that the 2010 is probably the greatest Baron ever made. In 2015, on the BWE tour, we tried the ten, nine and eight at the estate and the ten was head and shoulders above the nine, which was similarly h&s above the eight.
I have had mixed experiences with the 1989. One we had this year was blocky and came last in a 1989 big gun horizontal we held (where Latour was voted wotn, but I had Cheval Blanc as numero uno). It is still backward. The 1990 I had this year showed very well, but both are big wines, and if one to criticise them maybe a bit too big and blocky and short of elegance and finesse. Like Lynch Bages in 1989 and 1990, also made by Jean-Michel Cazes.
I’d love to have that confidence, but I am not convinced how modern BDX will age vs. great modern vintages like 82, 86, 89, 90…and don’t get me wrong, I was 10 - 18 years old when those were released so I only have experience with them when they were 15 - 25 years old.
I hope you are correct as PB is one of my favorite BDX.
Parts of this thread already feel a touch out of date by excluding the 2014-15-16 trio. That may exceed 08-09-10 as the greatest consecutive trilogy of Bordeaux vintages in our lifetime, and it appears that Pichon Baron excelled in all three vintages. I am already hearing people claim that 2016 tops 2010, and given how imposing the 2010 tannins/structure are there may not be that much of a gap in when those two vintages drink well.
On the 1990-2010 topic, I feel like Pichon Baron is incredibly reliable in “average” vintages, e.g. the 2008 is absolutely fantastic and despite some comments above I would prefer it for drinking today over the 2010. Unfortunately the market has caught on to this and it’s notable that with the exception of certain total stinkers like 2013 PB prices don’t show all that much vintage variation (i.e. they are now uniformly high). I am glad I already set some aside before this happened.
Pichon Baron, conspicuously unlike Pichon Lalande, was punching well below its weight until the 1988 vintage when the quality stepped up, and there was another step up in quality in 2000. We attended a vertical tasting with Christian Seely in London in November 2017, and he recounted how the property was transformed to its current ‘super-second, punching-above-its-weight’ status.
After the estate was purchased by the AXA group in 1987 they set about renovating the property and appointed Jean-Michel Cazes, proprietor of Lynch-Bages, as administrator (Lynch-Bages was never owned by AXA). This as noted coincided with a step up in quality from the 1988 vintage. However, arguably after 1990, the quality was somewhat variable. When Cazes retired Christian Seely was appointed with a brief to devise a plan to take the quality one step higher, and present his plan to the board. Ever since he has implemented this plan and arguably achieved his goal, reflected in Baron’s consistently strong performance in blind tastings against its super second peers.
Pichon-Baron’s vineyards are quite disparate, intermingled with other properties, but the plan in a nutshell was to concentrate input into the Grand Vin from their large plot neighbouring Latour and Leoville Lascases, arguably the greatest patch of soil on earth for growing Cabernet Sauvignon - next to the famous kink in the D2 - on which noble old Cabernet vines thrive. He also introduced another second wine called Griffons, which is primarily made up of Cabernet from other plots further north, while Tourelles is predominantly merlot. The production of the GV has been reduced from a peak of 395k bottles in 1995 to about 170k bottles. Seely’s ultimate aim is to make a wine which is comparable to Leoville Lascases and Latour, and arguably he is significantly along the path to achieving that objective.
I have been lucky enough to try most of the vintages since 1988 on more than one occasion. In this tasting Seely espoused the virtues of the cool year vintages, but the wines to buy are the top vintages because the price differential does not, in my opinion, compensate for the quality differential. Notes from that tasting two years ago covering 2001 through 2014:
2014 - a cool year with an Indian summer. Once you get past the unintegrated oak this wine has fabulous balance, freshness, elegance and precision. It has rich fruit and a fabulous line and finish. 94
2012 - another cool year. Unlike in 2014 a warm Sep/Oct did not fully make up for the cool, early summer. Nevertheless this is a beautiful, classy wine with precision and balance, which will age well. It does not quite have the richness of fruit of the 14. 92
2010 and 2009 - the difference between 2009/10 and the previous two wines is that these two vintages had all the sunshine they could ask for. However 2010 was on average two degrees cooler than 2009. You immediately notice the step up in quality, with the 2010 being fresher than the rounder, more opulent, 2009. The room marginally preferred the 2009. I still prefer the 2010, which was a little more shut down than the 2009 on the day. The difference was more noticeable when we tried them side by side at the Chateau two and a half years ago. In my opinion the 2010 Baron is the equal of LLC and Montrose and all the FG 2010s I have tried (not tried Latour). On the day I would give the 2010 98/99 and the 2099 96/97. The 2010 is still a bargain at £1400ib.
2008 - a pretty hard act to follow but it showed brilliantly, and has become more accessible since we last tried it at the Chateau. After a frosty spring the vintage was saved by a lovely end of season as in 2014. The 2008 doesn’t have the ripeness or power of the 9 & 10, but has a wonderful entry and rich berry fruit carrying through to a marvellous finish. 93
2007 - according to Seely there is too much negativity about the cooler years and this wine is a great effort considering the difficult growing season - cool, wet summer and not enough warmth in September to compensate. It lacks the richness and depth of the 2008 but is already drinking very well. A perfect savoury luncheon claret, but will not keep beyond five or so years. 89-90
2006 - Seely and his staff believe this wine has enormous potential, but admit it is ‘bad tempered’ and it remains quite tannic and reserved. It had the highest acidity of all the wines on show and has ‘enormous matter.’ This classically styled wine is however starting to come round, with high quality fruit and freshness. This still needs patience, but you can see the potential. 92 for now.
2005 - another notoriously backward wine this is also finally coming round, and is fuller, riper and richer than the 2006, with wonderful minerally gravelly earthy notes, it has a thick powerful core and a wonderful finish. The step up from the 2006 is palpable. More accessible than the 2010 right now it will be interesting to watch these two develop. This wine is a steal at £1200ib because it is easily FG in quality. 98
2004 - a ‘seriously good’ cooler year according to Seely. Silky, velvety with freshness it is still young. However it is a noticeable step down from the 2005, with noticeably less ripeness, and is not in my opinion as good as Leoville-Barton in 2004. 91-92
2003 - a ‘vintage with no parallel’ said Seely, they were deeply worried with 40 degree heat and trees wilting. Seely tried to big this up but it conspicuously lacked the freshness and balance of the other wines on show. 88
2002 - this is a wine which has consistently impressed but there was bottle variation on Sunday. The second bottle was better. This was another cool year, but is a brilliant wine, now showing very well. 93
2001 - showing some secondary development with cedar and cigar box, fresh and well balanced, but neither rich nor full. Lovely claret for current drinking but prefer the 2002. A rare example where the 2000 trounced the 2001. 91-92
Pichon Baron of course will never become a first growth but in this showing deserves its enhanced super second status. The vintages to buy are 2005 and 2010, and possibly the 2014 from this selection. As noted there is not sufficient price differential between the cool years and the great years. For example the 2005 is the same price as the 2003 and 2001. That makes no sense whatsoever. The 2015 and 2016 are very highly rated and critics like Neal Martin think they are on a par with 2009 and 2010. Seely prefers his 2016 to his 2015.
Post script: when you look at prices in the UK today the trophy vintages after 2000 continue to trade at only a small premium to the non-trophy vintages. The 2005 hardly trades at a premium to the vastly inferior 2003 which is nuts. If I were starting out now I would buy the 2016, 2015 (significantly cheaper than the 16), 2014, 2010 and 2005. The best value mature non trophy vintage is 2002, but it has gone up considerably in recent years.
I thought this was true as well, but we just had the 81, 89 and 90 together and accounting for the style of the vintage, I think most people felt that the 81 was of similar quality. It was the favorite of some tasters and I think almost everyone agreed it was in the best drinking spot of those three wines. Now I’m not sure if that statement about PB underachieving before 1988 is just a Parkerism.
Craig I am prepared to concede that I have been too willing to buy into the conventional wisdom on this late 80s transformation narrative, having myself tried an engaging and delightful 1982 and having only limited albeit mixed experiences of other pre-88 vintages. I drank through a case of the 1988 which was a beautiful wine and already drinking well aged five. More elegant than the clunkier, and yes possibly somewhat Parkerised wines made in 1989 and 1990 which for me perhaps lack a little bit of elegant and finesse. That’s in part why I think Seely’s best wines take it up another notch.
Just for info, I had a bottle of 2003 last night - it was good, but nothing special. I enjoyed the effortless suavity and the thick, velvet mouthfeel but not the lack of elegance and I prefer the Duhart and PC 03s, which are quite a lot cheaper.
Chateau Pichon Baron 1989-2010 and Krug 2000 - WINE TALK - WineBerserkers I do note that I had a bad cold that night and I am not sure how much that impacted my tasting ability.
Pontet Canet 2003 is an absolute gem though. Rightfully touted as one of the best bottles of the vintage and one of the best years of PC.
I just had Pichon Baron 2010 (and Pichon Comtesse 2009) at a tasting and I was similarly impressed (by both wines) as other Berserkers in this thread. It was my first taste of both Domaines, nice treat.