Had a Barolo from 2010 that was lovely last night- licorice, roses, dark red fruit and fairly restrained tannins- next to a youthful 1996 Scavino Bric, and the next day, after Cork in half the bottle in the fridge, the 2010 was dead and already oxidized beyond pleasantness. I’ve had lots of beautiful young wines that have blossomed after a day of oxygen explosive in the fridge, but have never compared that to how well they’ve aged.
Lots of anecdotal thought on how well or how badly a day of air compares to a decade of bottle storage.
Anyone have good stories, bad or good? No blanket statements please. Give me concrete examples. Especially if you have had this experience with higher end bottles…
Recognizing that the plural of “anecdote” is not “data”, I’m still curious as to our collective experience
Unfortunately (with the vagaries of cork seals) the act of opening the bottle makes it impossible to know if that bottle would have fallen over after a couple of years, or gone on to reach 50 alive and well. With screwcapped wines we may be able to be bolder in our comments, because of the greater consistency between bottles.
So (as phrased) I really can’t give you a concrete example of a wine that I’ve opened & then revisited, that I know would have been pretty much the same as a bottle I opened decades later. My oldest Screwcap bottles are (IIRC) around the 2000 vintage.
It gives you a good idea of a wine’s stability. Also, if there’s good stuff that emerges on day 2, that’s a good indication it might improve with age. There are no absolutes, of course. If it doesn’t show well day 2, one should keep in mind why. Oxidized is clearly not good, but if it shut down it may be entirely stable.
There’s an old school winemaking stability test for ye olde days when Tom Hill was but a lad. Back before sending samples off to a lab was a cheap, convenient thing to do. You put samples in glasses and cover with cheese cloth or something, allowing oxygen exposure, but preventing introduction of things like acetobacter that wouldn’t make it through a cork. Then you analyze the aroma and wine surface every day. That gives you an idea of both stability and what sort of problems you may have.
Not sure who could get many concrete examples, other than from veteran winemakers, who’ve had a lot of experience with open bottles sitting around sampling those same wines years down the road, and specifically remembering.
High pH wines created to pop-and-pour can fall apart in the time it takes for two (responsible, nonguzzling) diners to get to the last glass.
My wines (Franc/Merlot blends) are all (save the 2012) built to age. After years of tasting the same wines over and over --my 2007, 2008 and 2010–there is no question in my mind that a wine gaining weight and depth and richness, plushing out and rounding up and developing deeper complex flavors with 02 exposure all correlates to ageability. At release (in late 2010), I used to sell my 07 with stern instruction: 3 hours in decanter, 3 days open on the counter or at least 3 more years in the cellar. Today, seven years later, it’s vibrant and rich and still needs a good 20+ minutes to express itself in the glass, and most bottles are still great even better the second day, especially if gassed and kept in fridge as you did.
A last thought, my 2010 Virage one of our members described as like a burgundy you want to age, and indeed its acidity is what put him in that metaphor. My experience with that wine: at 4 days on the counter 4 years ago the wine achieved a terrific texture and became dark and chocolately but lost some of the big plummy/blackcherry fruit character. Today, after decanting an hour I get those dark chocolatey coffee notes, mineral richmess and sublime texture–all with plenty fruit. So the point: cellar time develops all the nonfruit goodness at a faster rate than fruit fades. Of course, acid protects fruit. The inverse conclusion: accelerated aging–a fully open bottle–will lose fruit faster, before the best of texture and tertiary flavor potential develops.
I believe this is one of the biggest myths talked about on here and an absolutely awful indicator of anything except that people are insensitive to oxidative flavors in wine. I have yet to have more than a couple dozen wines out of 10,000 that I wouldn’t feel embarrassed pouring after 24 hours, unless the bottle was recorked after opening with 100% of its contents inside (not even a taste poured). This includes first growths, superseconds, crazy burgs, top end Rhone from both ends, gnarly cali cults, old school, new school etc. Yquem and ancient Rivesaltes seems to be the most consistent ones to fight it off, and Quintarelli reciotto… but still, there is a vivacity and freshness that leaves the mid palate after seeing extended air. Young wines with extended aeration do not improve after being decanted more than 2 hours for the volitiles to blow off and reach a pleasure equilibrium, rather most tannin firm up and become rustically textured, and people think it’s good and probably their disdain for cognitive dissonance makes their preference match their choice to air it out too long (sounds critical, but I don’t believe this is right or wrong, just a preference). Honestly, I believe if anything, red wines from Bordeaux that are not over extracted that have great promise are the worst offenders, unless the acidity is excruciatingly high with too little alcohol (read weak vintage or technologically inferior vinification equipment). Ok this is turning into a rant…but my eyes literally glaze over anytime I see a day two tasting because I can’t stop thinking, ‘why do I want to read a note from a now damaged wine?’
It tells you nothing except whether or not it’s a good candidate for a weak liver that needs multiple days to man up
I feel the same about decanting in the glass… such a waste when compared to the 3/4 bottle that’s been open an hour or 2, or a 1.5-2 hr hour decanted wine.
Shocking, in its absolutes. Shows how incredibly different palates can be. You just posted on a series of wines, Pavie and Bellevue Mondotte, with gushing scores, that would take 2 of those with my scoring to achieve your 100s. Bellevue is perhaps the worst, non-spoiled Bordeaux that I have ever had. I drink many wines over the course of 2 days. Have been doing this my whole life. Lighter, fruity wines like Beaujolais, generally do not fare as well, whereas young Bordeaux or Rhones can actually taste better sometimes, on day two. Of course, I prefer higher acid, lower alcohol wines, you know, the kind that can only come from weak vintages and technologically-inferior vinification equipment.
I’m on board with Anton. Day 2 for me (if and when it ever occurs ) always tends to show more tannins - sometimes much more! I guess if tannins are what drives your taste buds, then Day2 is for you! Indication of the future…I’m not so sure!
I’m generalizing to a certain degree, and there’s many exceptions to the rule, but I’m hyper sensitive to oxidization. And those scores with the Perse wines, I called them as I saw them as objectively as possible, but they are not what I would want to guzzle down at this stage (big exceptions Pavie 00 and 11 blanc monbousquet). But Bdx and Rhones more than most others I hate on day two, unless they have been bottled within the last year or so.
I know, you like Cantemerle!! It pains me to see what happens in that vineyard and mechanical harvest machines!! Just glad Figeac has joined the 21st century muahahaha!
But I’m speaking to MY palate (and being opinionated), and I like Uber ripe, low acid yet not overextracted (but will give scores regardless of extraction)… and typically won’t buy any 70s minus 78 lafite/Le pin, 80,81,83,84,87,88,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,02,04,07,11,13 Bordeaux. Well not just typically… I wouldn’t ever…rather lose my pinky… unless that 83 is Palmer or Margaux. Can’t wait to try Bellevue mondotte 10 in 15 years though, come to Dallas I’ll open you an old figeac if you try one with me!
Putting oven mitts on as I enter this thread, as there are some super hot takes.
To the OP’s request for concrete examples:
While it was several years ago, I very fondly recall a 2000 Palmer which was opened very young, under 10 years of age, and which 3 days later, was absolutely delicious. And yes, you’d expect 2000 Palmer to have incredible aging potential, so while the 3 days were hardly needed to gain that knowledge, that was a tremendous half bottle of wine that I’d saved for 3 days.
More recently, this weekend, I shared a 2002 Boillot Meursault Les Charmes with my good friend, Humberto. We had this over a the course of an evening, but I also saved some for lunch the following day. I happened to really enjoy it the next day. The oak profile was entirely absent, the front palate as a whole very muted; the back end, however, was really subtly something special. A very delightful expression of grassy flavors. I would most certainly not be embarrassed to have served that wine 18 hours later.
Now, trying to guess exactly how that wine is going to age for the next 10+ years is tricky, as it’s a bit of an educated guess, but the fact that it was really intriguing in a softer state the following day would be very encouraging if you had a bottle and wanted to try a 25-year experiment.
Anyway, like all things with wine/food: experimenting for yourself and with the people whose palates you trust or share is part of the joy of figuring out flavors.
![[snort.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/b/bdc3944606213c4dca6c1169cf0a166c8bc4f8c9.gif "snort.gif"){kind=small}
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
) always tends to show more tannins - sometimes much more! I guess if tannins are what drives your taste buds, then Day2 is for you! Indication of the future…I’m not so sure!
