TN: Lanessan 1981

Level well into the neck; the color deep red with slight brown edging. Fully mature, fruit is being overtaken by the tertiary aromas of mushroom, forest floor and truffle. Still lovely but drink up. 90

Thank You.
If I find some, then I’ll drink them immediately. Just cruel to cellar them further, it sounds.
36 years, for a not great vintage, -that’s a well made wine !

-Søren

We had a few bottles last summer. Our hotel had it on the list for 40 € and we finished the remaining 5 bottles. Each a gracefully aged mature Bordeaux. Yesterday a bottle of the 2000, lacking the tertiary aronas of the 1981 but a delight to drink too. Will hold for years to come but a great food companion already.

Nice to hear this is alive and kicking!

I’ve had an 82 and 83 recently, the 82 was excellent.

A soupcon of Tertiary coming through on the 2000’s. A bottle had a couple of weeks ago was a delight. Paired well with lamb steaks.

2000 is drinking great today.

Thanks for the note on the 1981.

Deleted.

I think the 90 point score reflected that this was as good as a Cru Bourgeois is likely to be in a second tier vintage. A really pleasant wine but never could it be mistaken for a '82 Latour or even the '82 Branaire I had last week.

I think I paid $15 for the bottle, so extremely happy with it.

Singing my song… I don’t think I ever had this vintage, but I have an '82 lined up for this winter, will post. The 2000 is really beginning to sing, I have most of my case left but don’t plan to open more than one a year.

Maybe not the best of all Crus Bourgeois (Chasse-Spleen, Haut Marbuzet…), but best value trophy retired.

Dan Kravitz

I’ll be the contrarian here, but I’ve had the 2000 a few times in 2010, 2013, and one tonight, and it’s a nicely balanced wine with bordeaux character, nothing more. The fruit is fading compared to my last bottle in 2013, and not much complexity is replacing it, though I would be happy if I was wrong here (I have two more bottles).

Not to say that I’m unsatisfied with the wine… I bought it for $15 and it more than lives up to that as a value wine, but I’ll just throw in my opinion that I’ve never really gotten the over-the-top notes that I sometimes read here on Lanessan.

I love the 2000, have had three over the past six months. I’d gladly take them off your hands.

All too often the case. I firmly believe wine enthusiasts overplay the appeal of the lauded vintages, with them often being 2-3 times the price of a perfectly decent / interesting vintage and even more times the price of a more challenging vintage where there can still be some good / interesting wines for the enthusiast to sniff out.

I’ve had several bottles of the 1995 in the last year (bought for $30@ at retail last year). They are nice, balanced old clarets. A little drying, and not really having developed much complexity, but perfectly correct no-frills Bordeaux. Good as a complement to your meal, fine but not offering much interest as a stand-alone beverage.

The 1996 was a very good wine, but I doubt it will have the longevity of the 1981.

Also I should mention, this wine came from a really cool, humid passive cellar, the label was hanging by a thread, but the level was at the neck. High humidity can make for fantastic wine, but aesthetically, there are some drawbacks.

You know what is a really strong vintage of lanessan? The 2003, which I got for $13/bottle from PJs back in the day. Still needs time, but delicious today in a fruit-forward, primary way. I like lanessan in 96, 00, and 01 but I often think it would better with a bit more fruit. The 03 has that without any of the pitfalls of that vintage.

I agree with Pat, the 03 is very good.

In my modest experience and for my palate, the riper vintages like 03 and 09 are good for this producer, and it’s less something to seek out from cool vintages like 02.

Kind of the flipside of why I prefer producers like Monbousquet, SHL and Lanessan in cooler vintages like 04.

Funny enough, 2009 Lanessan did not really drink like a ripe year like many Bordeaux. It’s actually bright red with high acid, and was quite refreshing in its youth. I have quite a bit of it but have not had one in a couple of years. It may have been the most approachable young Lanessan that I have ever had, and the complete opposite of the 2010.

That’s sort of my point, their austere house style combines with the ripe vintage to result in a harmonious balance of things.

As a long time member of the Lanessan fan club, I can see the logic in a more beefy version.
Chris’ post make sense.
A fruiter Lanessan to enjoy without food… That actually sounds nice, and new to Me! (Only tasted 2000 and back.)
-This is next on My wish list.

Søren.

I also was very impressed by the 09 Lanessan on release, enough that I went out and grabbed a case. Robert’s comments capture its style well. I haven’t checked in on the 09 since, might be fun to take one for a spin soon