TN: 2008 White Burgundy Vintage Assessment Dinner No 2 @ Valentino February 25, 2016

As many of you already know, each year in February and March I host a series of white burgundy vintage appraisal and oxidation check dinners in Los Angeles. We taste the vintage which is then 7.5 years from the date of harvest, and we usually taste 60 to 75 of the top wines from the vintage over the course of three nights. This was our eleventh consecutive year of holding these dinners and this year the vintage was 2008.

Fourteen of us met in the Gold Room at Valentino Restaurant in Santa Monica on Thursday February 25, 2016 to taste twenty-eight of the top 2008 hyphenated grand crus from Puligny and Chassagne Montrachet. Just in case anyone didn’t think we had enough wine to drink, Walker Strangis brought along a bonus bottle from the 1984 vintage of one of the same wines we were going to taste from the 2008 vintage. Valentino’s wine director, Paul Sherman, again handled the huge number of glasses and wines flawlessly.

Valentino did a great job with the food once again. They delighted everyone by bringing out “seconds” on the incredible Prawns and Maine Lobster Risotto served as the third course with the first flight of Chevalier Montrachet. The Risotto in its various permutations seems to be everyone’s favorite food pairing for the white wines at our dinnners. You know the food is really good when a bunch of winos get served two courses of Chevalier Montrachets and they just put down their glasses and pick up a fork and go at the food before returning to the wines. My thanks once again to Pierro Selvaggio, the owner of Valentino, and Giuseppe Mollica, Valentino’s director of special events, for putting together a great menu to go with the wines.

The wines and food courses are set forth below. All of the wines were served blind and none of the attendees knew the identity of our three ringers on night two. All of the voting was completely blind with the attendees ranking their top five wines identified by the number on the glass.

My thanks as usual to Andrew (“Andy”) Gavin for all of the great photos.

Andy Gavin’s Fish Eye View of the Group Hard at Work During the Fourth Flight

Appetizer Course
Oysters, Ahi Tuna Tartare, Burrata Caprese
Bruschetta With Wild Arugula, Prosciutto And Grana Padano “Schegge”

Ahi Tuna Tartare

1998 Philipponat Clos De Goisses (two 750 ml)
Medium gold color; citrus and toast aromas – rather like Krug; a champagne with fairly intense citrus flavors, good acidity and yet a sense of roundness in the mid-palate; nice citrus and minerals finish. Excellent. 94

Flight One – Bienvenues-Batard-Montrachet and Criots-Batard-Montrahcet

Dover Sole Involtini With Wild Mushroom Sauce

#1 [2008 Ramonet Bienvenues Batard Montrachet]
Light yellow-gold color aromas of white flowers and green apple; on the palate, bright sappy green apple flavors with a little smokiness on the back; a big minerally finish. I liked this a lot. My rank: 6th. Group Rank: Tied for 3rd, 20 points (2/1/1/0/3) 94

#2 [2008 Jacques Carillon Bienvenues Batard Montrachet]
The color is between light and medium gold; the aromas are light green apple with a fairly remote floral note; concentrated meyer lemon flavors – almost lemon drop candy; good acidity gets more noticeable on the back end and this finishes a bit short. Somewhat odd. The group consensus (8 of 14 tasters) was that this was slightly advanced. I’m not sure whether I agree, but I’m bothered by the short finish. Group Rank: Tied for 19th (last), 0 points (0/0/0/0/0) 91 – Advanced?

#3 [2008 Colin-Morey Bienvenues Batard Montrachet]
Medium gold color; definite TCA – even detectable by me , so it has to be pretty strong.; on the palate, this had some sour/bitter lemon and a quinine character; lemon rind. Group Rank: Tied for 19th (last), 0 points (0/0/0/0/0) DQ-corked

#4 [2008 Leflaive Bienvenues Batard Montrachet]
Just short of medium gold color; aromas of lemon curd; on the palate, this has bright green apple flavors and a simple slightly buttery finish. Group Rank: Tied for 19th (last), 0 points (0/0/0/0/0) 92

#5 [2008 Pernot Bienvenues Batard Montrachet ]
Again just short of medium gold color; finally, honeysuckle aromas – the first classic BBM nose in this flight; on the palate this had light, bright green apple and pear flavors with a nice minerally finish. Group Rank: 10th, 6 points (0/1/0/0/2) 93

#6 [2008 Fontaine-Gagnard Criots Batard Montrachet]
Medium plus gold color; aromas of lemon crème pie; very little fruit on the palate but a good deal of viscosity; buttery finish with just a touch of citrus fruit. The group consensus was that this was advanced. Group Rank: Tied for 19th (last), 0 points (0/0/0/0/0) 90 - Advanced

#7 [2008 Henri Boillot Criots Batard Montrachet]
Between light and medium gold color; a very bright lemon crème aroma; on the palate the lemon crème pie continues – very rich and still has a sense of lightness; soft acidity impression on the back of the palate; nice finish. Group Rank: Tied for 8th place, 7 points (0/1/0/1/1) 93

#8 [2008 Hubert Lamy Criots Batard Montrachet]
Light plus gold color; light white flowers and green apple aromas; green apple and lemon pastry flavors; modest minerals on the light citrus fruit finish. Group Rank: 6th place, 11 points (1/0/0/3/0) 93

Flight Two – Batard Montrachet

Pan Seared Scallops “In Porchetta” Wrapped In Pancetta, White Wine Sauce

#9 [2008 Leflaive Batard Montrachet]
Medium gold color; aromas of pears and white flowers; light, brilliant, highly structured wine – a bit of ying and yang at first because of a lot of acidity in the finish. Seemed to settle down nicely on the second pass. Very nice. My rank: 7th. Group Rank: Tied for 13th, 3 points (0/0/1/0/0) 94

#10 [Ringer No. 2 – 2008 Ramey Hyde Vineyard Chardonnay]
Color between light and medium gold; sweet botrytis–like apricot notes in the aromas with a smoky/almost burnt oak top note; sweet pears and a viscous finish. Definitely at least advanced, if not more. Four of the 14 of us, myself included, thought this was advanced. Group Rank: 7th place, 9 points (1/1/0/0/0) 88-Advanced

#11 [2008 Sauzet Batard Montrachet ]
Almost medium gold color; light white flowers and pear aromas; a clean, but minimalist impression on the palate; nice bright citrus and minerals finish which is by far the best feature. Group Rank: Tied for 15th place, 2 points (0/0/0/1/0) 92

#12 [2008 Henri Boillot Batard Montrachet]
Fairly light gold color; beautiful lemon-lime citrus aromas; lemony citrus and pear flavors, bright almost distinct layers; a little disjointed, not quite there yet. Another year or so should help. Group Rank: Tied for 15th place, 2 points (0/0/0/1/0) 91+

#13 [2008 Ramonet Batard Montrachet]
Between light and medium gold color; some green apple aromas but marred by a really odd chemical aroma; the aroma just keeps getting worse – this really ruined the wine for me. A couple of people labeled this advanced but the rest of us agreed that this wine was chemically “off” or “flawed” in a really unacceptable way. Group Rank: Tied for 19th (last), 0 points (0/0/0/0/0) DQ – Very Off

#14 [2008 Jean-Marc Boillot Batard Montrachet]
Almost medium gold color; very botrytised, candied peach aromas; very sweet botrytised chardonnay with prickly pear acidity; a bit disjointed.
Group Rank: Tied for 19th (last), 0 points (0/0/0/0/0) 86

#15 [2008 Pernot Batard Montrachet ]
Between light and medium gold color; sweet tropical fruit aromas; some light citrus and tropical fruit flavors with very good acidity and a bright citrus and minerals finish. Some prospect for improvement here. A few people commented this might be the ringer. Group Rank: Tied for 19th (last), 0 points (0/0/0/0/0) 92+

#16 [2008 Vincent Girardin Batard Montrachet]
Between light and medium gold color; green apple aromas but marred by a high degree of oak toast – reminds me of one of the old-style excessively oaky Girardins; on the palate, this bright citrus fruit but with bitter lemon rind element. A couple of people thought the aromas were from reduction, but I don’t. It’s high toast oak and it really ruins the wine for me. Others said that they thought that excessively toasted./singed oak aroma was a chemical rather than wood. The group consensus on this wine was that it was chemically off and/or excessively oaky. Group Rank: Tied for 19th (last), 0 points (0/0/0/0/0) 85 – OFF

Flight Three: Chevalier Montrachet I

Risotto With Prawns And Maine Lobster

#17 [2008 Sauzet Chevalier Montrachet ]
Color between light and medium gold; aromas of lime and tropical fruit; nice citrus fruit but a bit bitter on the finish. I suspect this could improve, but I’m not sure. Group Rank: 12th place, 4 points (0/1/0/0/0) 92+?

#18 [2008 Jacques Preiur Chevalier Montrachet]
Medium gold plus color; ripe botrytised fruit aromas – peach/apricot; bright citrus and botrytised fruit flavors; no mistaking this has high acidity. Like a mix of almost underripe and heavily botrytised fruit. Not my style at all for Chevy. Group Rank: 13th place, 3 points (0/0/1/0/0) 88?

#19 [2008 Bouchard Chevalier Montrachet Cabotte]
Between light and medium gold color; very sweet lemon-lime aromas which I thought may have a bit of botrytis; very sweet tropical fruit flavors and buttery texture. Far more like Batard than Chevy. Group Rank: 18th place, 1 point (0/0/0/0/1) 92

#20 [2008 Niellon Chevalier Montrachet]
Medium gold color; light lemon, almost lemon butter aromas; tart, lemony fruit with some texture and a nice, lightly minerally finish. Group Rank: Tied for 15th place, 2 points (0/0/0/1/0) 93

#21 [2008 Girardin Chevalier Montrachet]
Between light and medium gold color; light green apple and sweet lime citrus aromas; concentrated green apple/key lime flavors with a milk fat/lactic component; intense lemon-lime citrus flavors on the finish are long and really elegant. Impressive. My No. 3 wine of the night. Group Rank: Tied for 8th place, 7 points (0/0/2/0/1) 95

Flight Four – Chevalier Montrachet II

Grilled Veal Chop With Sage And Parmigiano Fonduta
Served With Rosemary Roasted Potatoes, Haricots Verts, Carrots

#22 [Ringer #3-2008 Bouard-Bonnefoy Chassagne Montrachet “En Remilly” 1er]
Deep gold color – obviously advanced; apricot aromas; lemon and apple cider flavors. Notably advanced wine. The group consensus was that this wine was advanced. Group Rank: Tied for 19th (last), 0 points (0/0/0/0/0) 87-Advanced
[Note: Two nights before the dinner I had another bottle of this which was exceptional. The color was medium gold; the aromas were green apple and lemon citrus; the flavors were concentrated lemon crème and minerals with a long citrus and minerals finish. It had grand cru weight and density. I was really impressed and gave it 94 points. Given the $45 price tag, the next day I called the importer, North Berkeley Imports, and tried to acquire more, only to find out that there isn’t any to be had. I was looking forward to an eye-opening showing for this unknown tiny Chassagne producer, but it didn’t happen. This comes from a 12 acre plot which literally abuts the northwest border of Chevalier Montrachet as the hill sweeps through tiny Chassagne “En Remilly” a premier cru, before continuing into St. Aubin “En Remilly.”]

#23 [Ringer #4-2008 Colin-Deleger Chassagne Montrachet “En Remilly” 1er]
Color between light and medium gold; some simple light lime citrus aromas and flavors which broaden into a more viscous almost citrus-oil flavor; no real finish.
Three tasters thought this was a little advanced. Group Rank: Tied for 19th (last), 0 points (0/0/0/0/0) 89

Educated ringers: Chassagne Montrachet “En Remilly” a 1er at the northwest edge of Chevalier Montrachet

#24 [2008 Leflaive Chevalier Montrachet]
Deep burnished gold color; very obvious, over the top sherry-like and cornflakes aromas. Absolutely oxidized. There was unanimous agreement that this was oxidized. Group Rank: Tied for 19th (last), 0 points (0/0/0/0/0) DQ-Oxidized

#25 [2008 Ramonet Chevalier Montrachet]
Light gold color; aromas of key lime and minerals; concentrated and bright lemon and key lime flavors with ample minerality – a wow wine to be sure; extremely long impressive mineral finish. My No. 2 wine of the night. Group Rank: 1st place, 48 points (3/6/2/1/1) 96

#26 [2008 Jean-Marc Pillot Chevalier Montrachet]
Light to medium gold color; aroma of citrus flowers; brilliant lemon/lime flavors with good minerality and a rising sense of acidity on the back of the palate; lemony finish with good minerality and an almost chalkly/lemon rind element. By the end of the night this was a bit more shut down or clamped on the finish, which I think is a sign this one will age well. My rank: 5th. Group Rank: 5th place, 13 points (0/1/2/1/1) 95|94+

#27 [2008 Bouchard Chevalier Montrachet]
Between light and medium gold color; lemon/lime and light white flowers aromas; lemony fruit with good density and minerality; an impression of great power without weight; bright, sweet lemon-lime finish with nice minerality. My No. 3 wine of the night. Group Rank: Tied for 3rd, 20 points (1/0/2/3/3) 95

#28 [2008 Colin-Morey Chevalier Montrachet]
Light gold color; lemon and white flowers aromas – pretty elegant; bright lemon citrus flavors with some layers and minerality which gave it obvious but subtle structuring; there is fabulous texture on the palate and the finish is incredibly good and quite long. Even some upside here. Wow. My No. 1 wine of the night. Group Rank: 2nd place, 47 points (5/2/3/2/1) 96+

#29 [1984 Fontaine-Gagnard Criots Batard Montrachet]
A bonus wine brought by Walker Strangis just to show us what Fontaine-Gagnard used to produce. Medium full gold color; a rich white nectarine and melon aroma; this had a very viscous mid palate but not much else. Not a memorable vintage, but despite 24 years older than the 2008 version in flight one, this bottle was surprisingly not oxidized! 89

Dessert Course

Sicilian Cannoli With Pistachio And Prickly Pear Sorbet

1976 Schloss Eltz Auslese
Amber color with aromas of honey and waffles; if you can imagine, this tasted like maple syrup with light lemony acidity. 92

Postscript statistics and comments:

Corked - 1/28 - 3.6%
Other Defects - 2/28 - 7.1%
Oxidation - 1/28 - 3.6%
Advanced - 3/28 - 10.7% (4 of 28 (14.3%) by my count)
Oxidized or advanced - 4/28 - 14.3% (or 5/28 (17.9%) by my count)
Technically Defective in some manner 7/28 25%

Cumulative Group Box Score for Nights one and Two:

Corked -1 of 57 - 1.8%
Other Defects -2 of 57 - 3.5%
Advanced: 8 of 57 14.0% (9 of 57 (15.8%) by my count)
Oxidized - 1 of 57 - 1.8%
Either advanced or oxidized - 9 of 57 - 15.8% (10 of 57 (17.5%) by my count)
Technically defective in some manner - 12 of 57 - 21.1%

From Left to Right: Ron Greene, David Ramey (Ramey Wine Cellars) and Kirk Calhoun in serious reflection

At the beginning of the dinner, David showed everyone the new DIAM corks which a series of burgundy producers began using with the 2009 vintage and which Ramey began using with their 2013 vintage [corrected, per David Ramey]. David also showed us a block of production cork and six corks cut out of the block. The DIAM 10 corks we looked at were amazingly dense and, unlike conventional cork, are quite difficult to compress much by hand. David said that the DIAM corks have significantly better performance than conventional corks both in terms of measured oxygen transmission rates and from the actual perspective of tasting sample batches of wines sealed with DIAM. Next year we’ll see our first group of DIAM corks in this dinner as the 2009 vintage reaches 7.5 years of age.

Cheers and Jeers

Cheers go to:

Colin-Morey – We’ve had six wines in the two dinners so far. Five hit it out of the park and one was corked. Colin-Morey is the clear sweepstakes winner for 2008 before the third dinner is even held.

Henri Boillot – Improvement on the premox front in 2008. Five wines in two dinners and none were advanced or oxidized, though one was a bit too oaky for my palate.

Ramonet – Mixed performance. Two super wines finished in the top three, but a very badly flawed Batard left me wondering what went wrong and if other bottles are similarly affected.

Jeers go to:

Leflaive – the flagship Chevalier Montrachet was grossly oxidized for the second year in a row. There have been large numbers of reports of oxidized Leflaives from this year’s attendees and many friends – even more reports than there were for the 2007s. After three absolutely disastrous vintages in a row, it’s time for me to join many of my friends who have abandoned ship on buying Leflaive. Given the extremely high prices from the Domaine for these wines, and the absurdly high prices demanded by Wilson-Daniels for the US import versions, Leflaive is in trouble. I think Leflaive urgently needs to hire a new winemaker or to bring back Pierre Morey to teach someone how to make wines in the same way that Domaine Leflaive wines were produced from 1993 through 2001.

Fontaine-Gagnard – This domaine demonstrated yet again why it holds the title, along with Jadot, as the “poster child” of premature oxidation. It literally takes a miracle to find a 7+ year old bottle of Fontaine-Gagnard that’s not advanced or oxidized. Buying Fontaine-Gagnard is like burning $100 bills – a completely pointless exercise. I really don’t understand why anyone continues to sell these wines.

Sauzet – For the second consecutive year a lackluster performance by Sauzet. The big price increases for the Sauzet grand crus in the last two years just don’t make any sense from a performance context.

Paul Sherman readying the hundreds of stems before the dinner

Next Event: Night Three – “Mostly Montrachet” at Melisse Restaurant on March 8, 2016

it was a lovely night perfectly orchestrated by Don. I’d have been happy just to have had 4 courses of the risotto–and Colin-Morey wines. Chapeau!

Thanks, Don, for the great night and wonderful notes.

The last flight with the Ramonet, JP, PYCM, Bouchard was a revelation. I think everyone was surprised to hit that many really incredible wines in a row.

Don, thanks again for organizing a wonderful and educational event with the DIAM discussion.

PYCM Chevalier Montrachet was also my favorite. The acidity and structure was lovely. The PYCM signature was very pronounced.

It’s really interesting to see how prominent the botrytis and ripesness shows in some of these 2008s. We opened 08 vs 12 Coche Dury Enseigneres the other night and once again the 08 ripeness showed. It also lacked the matchstick nose, did not seem “classic Coche”, and also a bit flat. I did not detect any hints of oxidation though. In comparison, the 12 was just brilliant.

I’m actually looking forward to the 2009 tasting. I suspect it might surprise on the upside.

Another tremendous report–much of the best appeared to be saved for last. It is fun to still live vicariously through a night like this.

I have a question stimulated by curiosity. With about 8 wines per flight, how did you approach the logistics or process of tasting them with each food dish—and did you save some from one flight to match up with food in another.

Thanks again for the fascinating read.

Mike

None of the glasses were taken away. So you could consume when you wanted

Charlie:

I wasn’t really surprised by the last four bottles of the fourth flight as those were four of my five favorite Chevaliers, but so many other wines underperformed in flights two and three that I was beginning to despair.

As you know, we normally have two flights of Chevalier and we usually have 12-14 wines from Chevalier Montrachet. But this year we struggled to get 10 bottles for the tasting. I didn’t want to have two flights of 8 followed by two flights of 5. So I came up with the idea of supplementing the Chevaliers with ringers. I looked for the immediate 1er neighbors – Puligny Demoiselles, Puligny Caillerets and Chassagne En Remilly. The Remillys were the only ones I could find with what purported to be good provenance.

I knew that the Remilly vineyard straddles the 300 meter level – which matches the top of Chevalier. I knew the Remilly wines, if showing at their best (ours sadly didn’t) should be lean/racy styled wines. So I decided to divide the Chevaliers by style – putting those with the most fat, or most Batard or Montrachet-like style, into the third flight. I picked the five wines I thought have the leanest/raciest/most minerally style wine into the fourth flight and combined them with the two ringers from En Remilly. Well, it sounded great on paper at least …

Flight four mostly worked out well, but flight three didn’t. The first three wines of flight three underwhelmed me (and I think everyone else). The Niellon was very nice, but not exceptional. Finally, when we got to the Girardin Chevalier, we got to a wine that I really liked. Then the fifth flight opened with a very advanced wine, followed by a pretty uninteresting wine, followed by an an oxidized Leflaive Chevalier. I was almost ready to hit the panic button. Then the last four wines in flight four performed exactly the way I would have expected them to.

Don
Thanks for the update especially regarding the Chassagne-Montrachet Remily. Not sure if you use the application BurgMaps but it shows this is at 280-300 meters and right next to one of Bouchard’s plots in Chavalier-Montrachet.

Great and informative report, thanks Don. What a shame that out of the large “who’s who” set of WBs it appears there were only a handful showing a worthwhile GC experience. Yes, I’m sure some wines and their qualities just get a bit overlooked in a format like this, but it seems there were more BAD wines than GREAT wines…

Rob:

Thanks for the heads up. I have seen the application but haven’t really used it to any degree. One of my favorite sources of information about the locations of the vineyard plots within the more notable vineyards is Steen Ohman’s website Winehog.com. Steen is a great researcher. He’s very patient and he has all of the cadastre maps and old historic texts and he really digs into this stuff.

For example, Steen published a map showing exactly where all of the Leflaive Chevalier vines are planted. See http://winehog.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/img_2215-1.jpg That same map shows Chassagne En Remilly in detail and the six distinct plots that make up that vineyard. See that triangular plot of Chassagne En Remilly literally sandwiched into the borders of Chevalier Montrachet? My understanding, based on two different descriptions of their vines’ location, is that must be the plot owned by Bouard-Bonnefoy. The Bouard-Bonnefoy vines currently in En Remilly were planted in 1983. The family has owned 1er vineyards in Chassagne for four generations but until the 2006 vintage sold all of their grapes to negociants. While they don’t own any grand cru vineyards, the family owns vines in five other well known Chassagne 1ers and two St. Aubin 1ers. I read some reviews of their wines on the French website Le Passion du Vin and the posters there particularly liked the En Remilly. So I was sufficiently fascinated that I tried to find some bottles of this wine. Luckily, HDH had two bottles of the 2008 En Remilly and knew the precise provenance on the wine. So I bought them both along with the Colin-Deleger that came from the same cellar.

The first bottle we opened at home on February 23 put a big smile on my face because I would have sworn I was drinking very good Chevalier Montrachet for $45 a bottle. That bottle was basically mature or nearly so, but of super high quality. The bottle we opened at the dinner on February 25, however, was clearly advanced. That was my second bottle ever, so I don’t really have a feel for how well this producer’s wines will hold up. But their En Remilly vineyard clearly produces very high quality juice.

The Colin-Deleger version of the same vineyard, while not advanced or oxidized, just didn’t excite me. It was clean wine but quite simple and aside from good acidity, had no resemblance to grand cru Chevalier.

Rauno

Almost. On night two we had 7 of 28 wines (or 25%) which had some sort of wine making defect and I had 7 of 28 wines which I rated at 94 or above. But on night one, we had only 5 of 29 wines (17.2%) with some type of defect and I had 13 of the 29 wines scored at 94 or above (44.8%).

I think the results on night two are a reflection of the variability of quality in the 2008 vintage. On night two I scored 11 of the 28 wines at 93 points or better. In contrast, on night one, I scored 19 of the 29 wines at 93 points or better. So, yes, the wines of Chablis, Meursault and Corton showed better overall on night one than did the Puligny and Chassagne hyphenated grand crus on night two. Over two nights, 30 of the 57 (53%) wines I rated at 93 or better. There were definitely some exceptional wines made in 2008, but in my opinion 2008 is definitely NOT an exceptional vintage precisely because of the high degree of variability and the number of botrytis-affected wines.

Let me digress for a moment about botrytis. Some producers try to exclude all botrytised grapes from their whites as a matter of practice. Some others include a small percentage of botrytised grapes as a deliberate style choice. For example, I recently read that Paul Pernot typically aims for 15% botrytised grapes in their wines, but in some vintages there just aren’t many/any botrytised grapes to include. Some producers will permit botrytised grapes into their crusher because they consider it an economic necessity or reality – especially if the percentage of botrytised grapes in the vintage is pretty high. In 2008 botrytis definitely happened, despite the failure of some to mention it. Steve Tanzer, to his credit, did warn about many wines being botrytis affected in his description of the vintage. I was told in private by one of my burgundy producer friends at the time of the vintage that some producers had as much 30% botrytised grapes. So if they didn’t exclude those grapes, or limit the amount of botrytised grapes (the pinkish color usually makes it obvious), then you can understand why there are some really odd ducks in the 2008 vintage.

When I was putting this tasting together I contacted Wilf Jaeger, who owns vines in St. Aubin En Remilly, which are made into wine by Pierre-Yves Colin-Morey. I wanted to use one of Wilf’s Colin-Morey St. Aubin En Remilly as a ringer with the Chevalier flight. Wilf told me that he had sold every bottle he owned very early on because the wines had some botrytis and he cannot tolerate the taste of botrytis in white burgundy and that, for that reason, he generally does not like the 2008 vintage. I am not great fan of botrytis in chardonnay myself, but I can tolerate it if the percentage is small, where it tends to add a more tropical fruit quality to the aromas and flavors. But when the wines smell and taste like dessert wines, I’m running for the exits myself. The closest parallel I can come up with for 2008 is 1986, another botrytis-affected vintage. There were some really fine wines produced in 1986, but it is not what I would consider to be an outstanding vintage.

The burgundians and the wine trade have become very good at hyping vintages and putting the best “spin” on things as they are selling each vintage. As one burgundy producer friend told me with a smile, “your vintages are like your children, and though they are different, you love them all.” Both Steve Tanzer and Allen Meadows do go into some detailed discussion at the beginning of their reviews each year describing the growing season, the problems encountered and the harvest conditions. There is a great deal of useful information in there that really tells you a lot about what you can realistically expect out of the vintage. But if people fail to read this information and buy the wines strictly based on the numerical ratings and individual wine descriptions, substantial disappointments are likely to occur. I certainly made that mistake in the 2005 and 2006 vintages and to some extent in the 2008 white burgundy vintage. I didn’t wise up until the 2009 vintage was released, which I expect will be a slightly better version of 2005. (But let’s be honest here. It’s hard to convince yourself not to buy some wine you normally buy in most years when you read that the vintage is generally considered quite ripe and low in acidity and then you see the wine you normally buy with a 93-96 barrel score or a 94 or 95 point in-bottle score.)

The reality is that because the critics are reliant on their “relationships” with the domaines for access to taste the wines and because sharply critical commentary is likely to result in the critic being “uninvited” to visit the Domaine (e.g. Ponsot in the case of Tanzer and Ramonet in the case of Meadows), the critics tend to gloss over certain defects or to use softer “code words” like “exotic” to describe problems like botrytis. Worse yet, producers who have huge premox problems like Fontaine-Gagnard, Blain-Gagnard, Matrot, Jadot, and Bonneau du Martray are never called out for it in the critical reviews. Their wines still get very high and totally unrealistic ratings in barrel or on release and there’s no warning that these producers have a very high incidence of premature oxidation so buyer beware.

Don
Thanks for the write up and for clarifying the botrytis issue. I do not have any 2008s currently in the cellar but when I reflect on my experience regarding some of those wines it now makes sense.

Funny.
Andre Noblet once told me you needed a tad of noble rot in order to.make great white Burgundy…a la their 68
Montrachet.

Andre or Bernard? Daddy was a long time ago–are you that old?

Don,

I hope your good run with '08 Boillots continues with the final dinner.

I have had a horrendous run of oxidized and advance wines with their GC '08’s (including 3 dud Monty’s in a row), and hence have gotten rid of my remaining bottles.

Also had an '08 PYCM Chevalier a few weeks ago that really failed to impress. Not sure if that was not a representative bottle or what, as I do remember it earlier and on release as superb.

Looking forward to part 3…

Considering the cost of these wines, the significant number of wines that were advanced, oxidized, flawed, or just disappointing is maddening.

Maybe we’ve just been very lucky Paul.

Boillot is very frustrating, because he clearly knows how to make excellent whites. I’m convinced he skimps on the SO2 because invariably some of his grand crus start going advanced or premoxed beginning at about 6.5 to 7 years of age. He’s not in the category of Fontaine-Gagnard, Jadot or Matrot where the wines are almost guaranteed to be oxidized at age 7.5, but I’ve seen problems in virtually every vintage, so I’ve cut back on what I buy and I’ve resolved to drink my Puligny Clos de Moucheres and Meursault Perrieres about one to two years ahead of my normal schedule.

The one vintage where Boillot made glorious long-lived wines was 2004 – because of all of the sulfur used in the vineyards as oidium treatment, some of which managed to get trapped between the grapes and wasn’t washed away and ended up going into the crusher with the fruit. I don’t think I’ve encountered a single oxidized or advanced bottle and I owned three cases worth of five different grand crus. I still have a bottle or two of the 2004 Chevalier. It will be a fun bottle to compare with the last good Leflaive Chevalier from 2004.