Cooked dinner for several of my wine buddies, each of whom brought along a nice bottle. They were all showing great, what a night!
Bruno Giacosa Barolo Riserva Falletto di Serralunga d'Alba 1996
Thanks to Oliver. One might wonder why I served a wine that stands a great chance of being the wine of the night in almost any context first – because I suspected it would be shut down tight as a fist, and it was. Reportedly „made from the plot now known as Le Rocche del Falletto“ – just as we had suspected for a long time. Deep garnet-ruby-black. Powerful, tannic, with great underlying sweetness, complexity and depth. So closed a suggestion of marzipan oak made itself felt. Almost incredibly long on the finish for a wine this closed. Sweeter and seemingly denser with airing, great black tea flavours to the tannin. 12 hours later even bigger, sweeter and more tannic, like a young 1978. In my humble opinion (but I am saying this as someone who could taste this numerous times before it shut down in bottle – difficult to coax much out of it now) one of Giacosa’s greatest wines ever (of which there has been a nice handful). Rating: 96++
Vieux Château Certan Pomerol 1998
My contribution. From a yield of just 34 hl/ha, the one vintage in which VCC contains no Cabernet Franc, but instead consists of an exceptional blend of 90% Merlot and 10% Cabernet Sauvignon. I have said this before, but what an exceptionally beautiful, easy to like and interpret wine this is! Pure liquified silk! “What grandesse!” Christian exclaimed several times, insisting this could not be the VCC, but could only be the Ausone. Opaque purple-black with ruby-red at the rim. Noble tobacco, sweet and thick fruit, beautiful and well-integrated oak. Touch of blackcurrant to the Merlot fruit. Impossibly harmonious, round and satiny. Extremely long, wonderfully noble and subtle on the back end. But: “too perfect and round” Patrick said, and indeed, there are no rough edges here at all. Certainly the most approachable of the three 1998s, not one that holds as much, let alone hides much upwards potential à la Ausone. To me, what is so great about this wine is that its roundness and silkiness does not come at a price – it is just a perfectly natural-tasting, uncomplicated, pure and typical Pomerol (there is nothing artificial or overly polished about this). There may be no mystery about this, but seriously, if anyone told me they do not like it, I would have a hard time believing they are not trying to pull my leg. The one aspect that is deceptive here is that such a wine will seem less “structured” to some than a so-called “toughie” (that in reality is no more concentrated and tannic, merely less balanced, exposing its acid backbone more) – and one might wonder if it is a typical VCC. Probably not (certainly Christian and Remo could not think of another vintage they like half as well). Rating: 96(+?)
Château Pavie St. Emilion 1998
Thanks to Remo. Almost opaque ruby-black with a fading purple hue. Oaky, with a top note of tobacco ash to sweet cherry and marzipan, graphite, minerals and chalk. Minor Cabernet Franc leafiness? Some green and aged tobacco. People could not agree on which is more concentrated (Oliver thought it both more concentrated and lighter...), this or the VCC, but the Pavie is certainly much less plush and harmonious, instead tighter and a bit more austere at this stage. Not quite as complex, nor as long. Nicely minerally on the finish and aftertaste, though. “More easily forgettable”, Christian said. I agree, although I do not agree that any one of these three wines per se has lesser terroir. 12 hours later grown through with oak yet in balance with its fruit, terroir notes and tannin. Certainly has youthful intensity and grip. My gut instinct suggests the 1998 will surpass the 1999 in the long run, but I had expected it to be more open and approachable already. Oliver, Patrick and Remo (who thought this the wine of the evening along with the Bonneau, and proclaimed himself to be a Pavie fan, and yet, he said he prefers the Pavie Macquin from the same vintage – I do, too) did not stop raving about this. Rating: 93+/94(+?)
Château Ausone St. Emilion 1998
Thanks to Christian. Full ruby-black almost to the rim, fading purple hue. The oakiest only because it is (by far!) the most closed to the three 1998s tonight. So oaky at first that Oliver wondered for a while if this was corked. The most concentrated and tight and tannic of the three 1998s. Leafier, most minerally, firm and tight fruit, softly grey-peppery tobacco, some herbs and grassy notes. Already very long on the finish. Wholly convincing 12 hours later: yes, this is one of the greatest terroirs on the planet! The complexity, stony minerality, graphite and tobacco notes, firm fruit, and noble tannin remind me of Foucault’s Le Bourg in a top vintage (ironically, I now see I wrote the same thing about the 1982 Ausone). Oak integration now seemed perfect for a wine of this age/youth (less oaky on balance than the Pavie). The 1998 Ausone shows all the positive characteristics of my favourite Ausone vintages from another era, e.g. the 1976 and especially 1982 (the 1998 seems to me not bigger, but as good, potentially perhaps better), and seemingly none of their drawbacks. The 2001 (the most recent Ausone I have had) comes across as a semi-modern sissy in comparison (and yet, is the best 2001 Bordeaux I have so far had – merely proves what a great wine Ausone is, can or could be...). Potentially the wine of the night along with Giacosa’s 1996 Falletto Riserva – in the long run! Rating: 95++/96(+?)
Henri Bonneau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Réserve des Célestins 2001
Thanks to Patrick. Lot L. 11.07 Medium-plus ruby-red with a faint orange hue and medium black reflections. Perplexing Célestins insofar as it closed down on us with airing instead of opening up (to the disappointment of Patrick, who found it “the greatest wine” he had ever had the way it showed initially). Also perplexing insofar as it looks and at least superficially smells evolved, a bit like the 2000 in this respect, but upon closer inspection (structurally) is more reminiscent of a virtual blend of the 1988 and 1985 (accounting for the difference in years, of course). The complexity and finesse here is such that one wonders what aroma and flavour one cannot find in this wine! The sweet sweat, leather, black pudding, American hazelnut coffee and mace top notes are backed by deep, multi-dimensional fruit and substantial if gingery-fresh, black tea like tannin. Oliver noted, quite rightly, the similarity to an oxidative/traditional style Piedmontese Nebbiolo. Not the Amarone-like density and upwards potential of the 1998, but highly concentrated. Very long on the finish. Although not on the level of the 1989, 1990 and 1998, I would still rank this in the top half dozen or so vintages of Célestins I have had – no wonder my friends thought it the wine of the night. Curious to know to what extent the other lot numbers (L. 04.08 and L. 05/08 are ones I know of – the latter thus bottled half a year later than this) differ; traditionally, Bonneau’s later bottlings used to be even better (or are there exceptions to that rule?). Rating: 96+/97
Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________
„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
