As Bordeaux prices sail into the stratosphere for top vintages -- a D. Sokolin New York Times ad today listed a bottle (one bottle) of 2003 Ausone for $1,499 (!) -- these great wines become more and more inaccessible for the average wine fan. This is a terrible tragedy, really, because these are the finest red wines in the world on a consistent basis -- as good as great Burgundy can be the inconsistency factor there, especially at $100-plus a bottle, can be supremely disappointing.
So can non-Rockefeller wine fans bid great Bordeaux adieu? Not at all.
The same NYT food section had an ad for 2004 Bordeaux from Zachy's. 2004 is a classic "tweener" vintage -- between the deep-baked grapes of the 2003 heatwave that make, apparently, massive fruit-bomb type reds and the 2005s that everyone is having orgasms over (I must say that the 2005s from Beaujolais are dazzling, so maybe the vintage was great all over France).
People with more money than sense will fling their dollars after 2003s and 2005s -- forgetting the perfectly good 2004s. And the prices in the ad reflect this - classed-growth Pauillac under $28, Grand-Puy Lacoste under $40, Cos d'Estournel at $85, Leoville Les Cases at $90. This is Zachy's too, which is not known for low prices (indeed the opposite).
Believe me, the 2004s at those prices will give immense pleasure.
As an example of what pleasures non-marquee vintages can bring, I drank my last bottle of the 1997s the other day, from Calon-Segur (St. Estephe), one of my very favorite properties, with a roast beef, roasted veggies, Yorkshire Pudding dinner. It could not have been better -- an exotic aroma; rich and racy on first taste, with heady eucalyptus scents roaring up to the nose. Then came light cassis, leather, tobacco, followed by a refreshing finish with a touch of that eucalyptus flavor. Spectacular -- and 1997 was considered a very shaky vintage. (Having said that, it's time to drink up the 97s; a Lafon-Rochet I had in December was sturdily good at first but faded as the night went on.)
In short: skip the overpriced 2000, 2003 and 2005 vintages and go for the off-vintages: there are treasures out there.
22 March 2007
The beauties of the off-vintages
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
An excellent point that gets overlooked when it comes time to discuss the 'affordability' of Bordeaux. The 04 the Branaire (Duluc-Ducru) was offered as a future at @ $24 a bottle. Compare that to the 03 Leoville Barton at some crazy price near $150. Both from St Julien, in fact the 04 Branaire might taste more like St Julien. One can be served with dinner, the other is squirreled away like some particularly opulent Faberge Egg.
There are lots of examples from the 02 vintage as well – Pichon Lalande comes immediately to mind. In fact there are lots of good left-bankers in 02 -- Pauilliac and St Julien present an a non-Faberge Easter Egg hunt.
But sadly some favorites seem to be sailing over the horizon of common sense, irrespective of vintage, Palmer and Angelus leading the list. I remember putting aside a sixer of the 98 Palmer at less than $60 per.
This vintage madness takes away that once or twice in a lifetime experience for many. Namely; putting aside a spectacular bottle from a regal property for a lavish dinner 20 years down the road. People did that once upon a time, $600 per (as a starting price) for 05 Latour makes that the business of the ultra wealthy.
It would be interesting to see the initial prices for a string of Bordeaux vintages from, say, 1947-1961. Is there as much variation for the legendary 59s and 61s (compared to the 60s) as there is between 04 and 05? I bet I know the answer, maybe you can illustrate it in a future blog entry.
Post a Comment