2005 White Burgundy Vintage Assessment and Oxidation Check Dinner No 2 @ Valentino February 20, 2013

WINE TALK
21

Wow - this doesn’t paint a picture of a great outlook for the '05s, particularly the comments about no/little further benefits of age. I must admit that it seems at odds with my own limited view, based on a few villages and 1ers (Carillon, Sauzet, Pillot) - I generally don’t open 1ers and GCs until at least age 10 (don’t have enough to keep trying them early :slight_smile:). All of those have been too young for my tastes (perhaps except Pillot Chassagnes), and their fruit and palate weight have made me think they will continue to improve (for my tastes). It could be that I’m odd - and certainly, I don’t mind a bit of fruit richness and even sweetness now and then - but basically I’m finding the villages etc still too bolshy, in need of mellowing. How does that stack up against the prognosis for the GCs? Perhaps the sucrosite is more pronounced in the GCs given the “better quality” of raw materials? It would be ironic if 1ers and villages turn out to be more suited to taste preferences because of their inferior terroir :slight_smile:!

22

Rauno

As we all know the village wines generally struggle for ripeness while the particular terroir of the grand crus’ generally allows them to ripen more readily. In a vintage like 2005 that tendency to extra ripeness can be a disadvantage rather than an advantage. Think about the 1990 reds for example. That’s one of the best years of all time for village level reds and most premier crus . Yet many 1990 grand cru reds were overripe and disappointing (yes, there are some notable exceptions.) To me one illustrative example is that the 1990 Rousseau CSJ is clearly superior to the 1990 Chambertin and Beze.

23

Don,

Shame on the '05 Ramonet Batard, as I have seen this look very good before.

I hope you have the Ramonet Montrachet lined up for the next one, it is even better than the Chevalier!

Interesting to se how that shows and what you guys think of it…

1 Like
24

Paul:

Yes, I’m bringing the Ramonet Monty and the Coche Corton. Unfortunately, it is my only bottle of the Ramonet. At least now I know it’s likely to be at or near its peak…

25

From the bottle we had last year, I’d have said it is one of the few '05’s that still really has some decent upside…

The Coche (I’d imagine) , might well be another such wine.

26

Sounds like you are getting ready for La Paulee…Thanks for the notes Don.

27

Thanks Don, I was wondering whether I had it upside down and sideways :wink:. It does seem ridiculous, though maybe logical, that the wines to seek out are more in the 1ers and villages… On the other hand, I have generally adopted an approach of buying around the same amount of the GCs every year, but more of the lower levels in “ripe” years, so maybe that somewhat intuitive decision has provided me with a slice of luck. Determined now to try an '05 Carillon BBM soon and post my impression.

28

Thank you for taking one for the team, so to speak, on the issue of oxidation. I hade stopped buying white burgs for a number of years due to the premox issue but bought a few cases of 2005s because I liked them young. I have not had one for about a year. I think I had better find them in the cellar and tee them up. I was planning on serving one for guests this Friday. I guess I’ll have to have backups ready.

29

Don, thanks again for arranging the dinner and tasting. Like you, I believed 3 of the wines from night 2 were oxidized, and another was clearly advanced to the point of being undrinkable. But the other “advanced” bottles were in different stages of advancement, and I found many to be quite good. For example, the Jadot Demoiselles was #3 for me, and the Boillot Criots was my 6th favorite. Maturity at 7 years is certainly fast for these wines, but I didn’t mind from a drinking perspective. But as a collector, I’d be concerned.

30

These are again great notes for us , white Burgundy fans .
I believe 2005 is not a great vintage for white Burgundy, just a good one. Too advanced for my taste . ( this does not give you much hope for your tasting next year , Don , 2006 is even worse , I think ).
Very interesting results for Leflaive . A major culprit of premox in 2002 , 2003 , 2004 and 2006… I always wondered about 2005 . I guess that when you have a good bottle , it is indeed great ( I had that experience with 2002 Batard and Chevalier : 2 times premoxed bottles and when we tried for a third time , the wines finally rocked ).
We will try to repeat this interesting tasting here in Belgium . Thanks for the notes .

31

https://wineimport.discoursehosting.net/t/a-blind-tasting-of-20-white-burgundies-from-2005/68165/1

My friend told me we had organized a blind tasting of white Burgundies 2005 ( I had all forgotten about it ) . Anyway , we did not have your % of premox , but there are similar findings as well .

1 Like
32

Well, I’ve heard that one prominent biodynamic producer of white burgundy is convinced that UPC codes on the labels (mandatory in Norway) ruins the wines (it would be indiscreet of me to go into details). So I guess that may be the reason. EDIT: I needed a smiley here: [wow.gif]

33

Never seen a premoxed Leflaive from '03, '04, '05, '06, and only 1 bottle from '02 oxidised and one advanced bottle (that I can remember anyway).

I’ve probably had about a 100 bottles or so…

34

lucky you , Paul .

35

Thanks for the great info and notes Don!!!

36

Domaine Leflaive a “major culprit of premox in 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2006”? I drink lots of Leflaive, and encountered my first advanced bottle–an 02 Chevy–a few years ago, and I have subsequently been very much on the lookout for bad bottles. Haven’t managed to find them. I have to conclude that you’ve been a very unlucky man.

Thanks Don for the very helpful report on the 05s. I’m drinking an 05 Fevre Clos tonite; quite tasty, quite rich, little resemblence to 8 year old GC Chablis.

37

piling on, but I have also had a couple premoxed Leflaives. Anne-Claude is against those UPC codes, funny, huh?
alan

38

Also piling on. 40 odd bottles of leflaive in the last two years and no premox. Cross fingers!

39

Thanks for the intensive article. However, I am disappointed and puzzled by the Mikulski 2005 Genevrières consensus. As luck might have it, I visited Domaine François Mikulski this past Tuesday, just one day after the publication of your article, Don. We tasted through the 2011s and François generously opened a few older bottles, finishing with his 2005 Genevrières!

I am surprised to hear you had an advanced bottle as the one we enjoyed was, on the contrary, extraordinarily young, tight, almost in a straight jacket. Yes, there is power, relatively higher alcohol, and relatively lower acidity levels in this vintage, but isn’t that what we love about Burgundy…the unique expression of each place, grower, and vintage? I am worried that some may take the authentic expression of an atypical vintage as a flaw rather than an attribute.

François sent us home with the 2005 Genevrières bottle and out of pure curiosity I have just poured myself a glass (three days later after having been re-corked and stored in the refrigerator). It is still giving and the finish is now even more expressively mineral. Of course there are the added questions of transport and storage, but I have had many glorious experiences with cellared Mikulski wines (I absolutely adore the delicate 2001s), and so I just refuse to believe this experience is a common one.

40

Nice first post Danielle and welcome.

I used to buy the Mikulski wines occasionally but I had bad premox experience with the 96 wines and they fell off my radar screen.