WineLovers Discussion Group

In sharp constrast to conventional wisdom over the past few days I opened two different '00 wines from Pauillac, The LaFleure Peyrebon and tonight the Moulin DuHart. The LaFleure was decent upon opening but really did not get any better (86 pts) where as the second lable from DuHart Milon was "up close and personal" right from the start. Just beautiful with Alton Brown's version of a pan seared NY strip with mushroom gravy and a side of baked sweet potatoes (90 pts). These wines cost about the same ($20) but showed completely different. I usually prefer the first wine of a Chateau to a "second" but in this case the pedigree showed out. Can't wait to open the few bottles of the DuHart Milon that I have. The LaFleur Peyrebon is a sister lable to the Haut Medoc Peyrebon. I have not tried this Cru Bourgoise but suspect that it might be better than the Pauillac. This could have been an off bottle, but absent ony other posts, I will never know.

Château Duhart-Milon Rothschild seemed to have it all together in 2000 -- their best since the 89 & 90 offerings IMO.

You are correct that Peyrabon is a Haut Medoc Cru Bourgeois, but has some land holdings that cross the border into Pauillac. Your thought that the Lafleur is a sister label should not be taken that the wine is a second label and inferior to the Haut Medoc. In fact, if you trust in the mapmakers, the Pauillac should be the better wine. It is certainly pricier. As I have never visited the property, or even tasted either wine, I do not know if the Pauillac is in fact a more favored terroir than the Haut Medoc. I think that it would be interesting to taste the two side by side.