Savennieres POX

The place for all things wine, focused on serious wine discussions.

Moderators: Jenise, David M. Bueker, Robin Garr

Savennieres POX

Postby David M. Bueker » Sun Feb 17, 2013 8:49 pm

Or at least OX. The 2002 Baumard regular was brutally oxidized this evening. Thankfully the '95 Schmitt Wagner Auslese was on form!
There behind the glass lies a real blade of grass. Be careful as you pass. Move along. Move along.
User avatar
David M. Bueker
Riesling Guru
 
Posts: 21980
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: Connecticut

Re: Savennieres POX

Postby Dale Williams » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:04 pm

Seem to be issues with both Baumard and Closel in '02,
User avatar
Dale Williams
Compassionate Connoisseur
 
Posts: 7851
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: Dobbs Ferry, NY (NYC metro)

Re: Savennieres POX

Postby Tim York » Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:24 am

Dale Williams wrote:Seem to be issues with both Baumard and Closel in '02,


My last bottle of Closel Clos du Papillon 02 showed deep colour but was otherwise in fine health about a year ago, but I have heard that others have had problems.

A degree of OX used to be considered a normal part of the ageing profile with traditional Savennières producers and I once posted a thread on the lines of "is it supposed to taste like that?". The majority of bottles from a three dozen purchase at Château d'Epiré in the mid 90s turned out like that from about the 7 year mark but perhaps I didn't serve them correctly. Recently I have twice put bottles of 95 rejected for OX into the fridge for cooking purposes, only to find them better balanced with the OX much less dominant two or three days later.

A few years ago I raised the problem of my Epiré stash with Éric Morgat who was very dismissive about Epiré's methods but I don't remember in which respect. Have the young Turks like him and Laureau established a sufficiently long track record to prove that their wines are not subject to OX? Or, for example, the Savennières from the less young Claude Papin (Pierre-Bise)?

And I don't think that Baumard would want to be considered a traditional producer.
Tim York
Tim York
Wine guru
 
Posts: 3862
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 3:48 pm
Location: near Lisieux, France

Re: Savennieres POX

Postby Dale Williams » Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:35 am

CT shows me as still having one bottle of 02 Closel Papillon, but I think that's consumption entry error, pretty sure all gone. Drank a couple close after release. Of other 4, all had some oxidative notes, but 2 seemed lively and in balance, 1 was totally shot, and 1 was advanced but I thought still good- others that night were divided (John Gilman was convinced PremOx, this is his note:
Domaine du Closel is one of my absolute favorite producers in Savennières, so I was very dismayed to cross paths with this very obviously premoxed bottle of the 2002 Clos du Papillon. The nose offers up an advancing mélange of apple, quince, a bit of lanolin, chalky soil tones and orange peel. On the palate the wine is less fresh than on the nose, with a bit of overtly oxidative fruit tones on the attack, good mid-palate depth and still a fair bit of snappy acids on the very mature tasting finish. This was tasted back in the tail end of April of 2010 and I wonder if some bottles are not already in significantly more serious decline than this bottle was eight months ago. The disjointed combination of youthful acidity (sound bottles of this wine should of course still be too young to drink) and mature flavors threatening oxidation made it rather an unpleasant wine to drink. (Drink between 2010-2012)

So the different bottles being all over the place reminds me of problem era white Burgs. Sometimes someone will say "no problem with 2002 Fevre, I had a Clos the other day and it was fine" when in fact the problem seems random even within the same case.
User avatar
Dale Williams
Compassionate Connoisseur
 
Posts: 7851
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: Dobbs Ferry, NY (NYC metro)

Re: Savennieres POX

Postby Bruce K » Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:48 am

Has the 2002 Baumard Papillon last week -- no POX and unbelievably good, though seemed like a bit of infanticide even at 10+ years. I had the 2002 Baumard regular about 18 months ago and it was really good, too. But I have had other Baumards that were badly POXed, particularly the '96 regular and '97 Papillon. So I guess it's the luck of the draw...
User avatar
Bruce K
Wine guru
 
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:06 pm

Re: Savennieres POX

Postby David M. Bueker » Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:51 am

Bruce K wrote:So I guess it's the luck of the draw...


And there lies the definition of the POX.
There behind the glass lies a real blade of grass. Be careful as you pass. Move along. Move along.
User avatar
David M. Bueker
Riesling Guru
 
Posts: 21980
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: Connecticut

Re: Savennieres POX

Postby Patrick Martin » Wed Feb 20, 2013 12:41 am

Can someone tell me how sweet these wines are?;
Baumard Cuvee Le Paon
Baumard Clos de Sainte Catherine
Baumard Cote d'Or

This thread made me think about how I don't know... I guess I've tried a bottle of the Cote d'Or before that seemed quite sweet.
Patrick Martin
Ultra geek
 
Posts: 151
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 3:28 am

Re: Savennieres POX

Postby Rahsaan » Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:08 am

Patrick Martin wrote:Can someone tell me how sweet these wines are?;
Baumard Cuvee Le Paon
Baumard Clos de Sainte Catherine
Baumard Cote d'Or

This thread made me think about how I don't know... I guess I've tried a bottle of the Cote d'Or before that seemed quite sweet.


They are all Coteaux du Layon wines so they all have a fair amount of residual sugar. The Carte d'Or is the 'entry level' Layon and is probably the least sweet. Not sure about differences in sweetness between Sainte Catherine and Paon, but the latter is the high-level 'prestige' wine from the special old vines.
Rahsaan
Wild and Crazy Guy
 
Posts: 6917
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:20 pm
Location: Chapel Hill, NC


Return to The Wine Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 14 guests