1989 Pichon-Lalande

Here`s another fabulous wine that was shared at our dinner table at the Olde Port Inn [Avila Beach] for the birthday celebration for Archie McLaren, the founder of the Central Coast Wine Classic:

1989 CHATEAU PICHON-LALANDE PAUILLAC- the nose was redolent of leather, tobacco, cedar and earth; with some black currant in the background, but it was the major hit of leather that dominated initially; it became more fruity on the palate with plum, black cherry and blackberry blending in with some tar accents; it was full bodied, had fine structure with subtle tannins and promises to hold on for another decade or 3.

Ive loved the comparison of the 89 to the 90 over many years. In this case, we only had the 89, but it was showing nicely with vibrant youthfulness and a pleasant taste profile; it can still stand up to the 90` IMHO.

Cheers,
Blake

Please excuse typos and unintended auto-corrects

Agree, the ´89 PL is really fine … (glad I´ve still 9 bts)…
but I had only disapointing results for the ´90 … from app. 1992 until last year …

I wonder if there are different bottlings - but what I´ve tasted is not amusing (and in accordance with several TN printed and online …) - the 1990 PL lacks fruit, charm, depth, length … tastes like a 25 € Bordeaux … (and none were my bottles … I passed fortunately …)

89 PLL has been really good the past few years… and all the years before that!

Love the '89. I’ve never had a bottle of '90 that didn’t fade within the first 30 minutes of being opened.

I agree that 1989 is a marvelous wine, and very, very consistent. Archetypal Lalande, if you don’t like this, you don’t like Lalande.

Like others, I have yet to have great or even a good 1990, and I have tasted it three times, and it is a little variable, the best bottle still underwhelming.

Apparently, the chateau was very disappointed by the quality, and fired the winemaker.

Mark, I agree with your Chateau comment re the 89. That vintage and the 82 are standouts IMHO.

OTOH, Im surprised at the feedback re the 90. Ive had many, many bottles and most have been very good or better. Yes, Ive had a stinker or 2, but that has been the exception and I figured the rule was in favour of the positive.

And, Im a fan of the 95 although it is still a pup and has so much further to go and has the stuff to do it.

I have had good experience with the 90 as well. And a few years ago I noted that I preferred the 90 over the 89. I am curious to try them again (I have a few more of each still in the cellar, bought on release). Thanks for spurring this conversation.

Actually, I loved the 90 so much, I initially liked it over the 89, but not of late= last 10 years.
As with you, Im thinking of doing both in the fall [when I return from a few weeks abroad]. Lets both post our results Ron.

Every bottle I’ve had of '90 has made me gag and want to part ways with my previous meal. Either the most polarizing wine in history or a serious variability exists and, in my case, is paired with horrendous luck.

Maybe I should start a new thread with a poll vote for the 2 vintages. Right now, the 89` wins hands down.

I sold the '90, even though it was a birth year wine for my daughter. I had it a few times and thought it was wrong. Still have a few '89.

Yeah, I’ve never had a '90 that I thought even got close to being a 90 point wine, so at least IMO, clearly a disappointment given the chateau and the vintage. According to CT, I still have a couple in the cellar, so I guess there still remains some hope for a miraculous transformation.

IMO, the '89 blows it away. To my palate, the '89 is only slightly behind the '82.

Happy to do that – want to choose a date so we do it at the same time (if our schedules permit)?

I think '82 has gotten better and better over the years. Last couple times we did an '82 dinner, it came out in the top 3. It wasn’t so in earlier years.

I am a big fan of the 83 PLL. It is fading a bit in recent years, but the 83 is probably my favorite vintage of this Chateau after the 82. That said, this chateau had such a stellar run from 1978 (or earlier) through 1989. Even the 80 PLL is fantastic.

PS. The one time I had the 90, it was clearly a weird wine. Not undrinkabe but quite disappointing given the context.

I have tried the 1989 four times in the last few years and it has been variable, at its best magnificent, sometimes surly and out of sorts and always viscous and full-bodied. It is a strong candidate for the second best wine in that 1978-89 golden era for the estate. But I have more love for the 1978, 1979 and 1981. The 1996 is the second best PLL in the modern era after the 1982, but the 2016 will challenge that and could set a new benchmark for this estate.

I had an 83 and an 89 PLL at the same dinner a few years ago. Both were stellar. But in that night I had a clear preference for the 83 which was more complex.

I’ve been following this thread closely. I’ve been looking for well priced bottles of the 89. It’s interesting hearing the continued negative feedback on the 1990 too. Recently I decided to take a flyer on a bottle since most recent CellarTracker reviews have been positive. Looking forward to to trying the black sheep comtesse of 1990!

I’ll pile on with the '89 praise. I’ve gone through 3 or 4 over the past few years and they have ranged from good to exceptional. Having recently had the '82, they are different beasts, but I’ll admit I enjoyed the '82 more. I’d much rather have 4 more bottles of '89 than 1 '82 however, given current pricing.
Only had '90 once and it was in the setting of the HDH '90 horizontal. I enjoyed it, but wasn’t blown away.