2000 Domaine du Pégau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Réservée- France, Rhône, Southern Rhône, Châteauneuf-du-Pape (10/13/2018)
Served with some mild Indian food, this was drinking very well, with earthy, leathery tones, alongside dusty red fruit. The texture was silky, and the finish echoed the leathery side of the wine, along with the red fruit and herbs. It was very easy to drink, and I think I will open my remaining bottles sooner, rather than later. Might as well drink it while it’s in such a good place.
2004 Domaine du Pégau Châteauneuf-du-Pape Cuvée Réservée- France, Rhône, Southern Rhône, Châteauneuf-du-Pape (10/13/2018)
Served alongside the 2000, along with some mild Indian food, this was quite spectacular. Fruitier than the 2000, it was also richer in texture, but also mostly resolved, and so drinking very well. There was plenty in reserve, but as I said about the 2000, why not drink it now while it is so delicious.
Two thoughts. First, I said usually. Second – if you think that CdP is generally better at age 23 or 28 than age 10 – I’m not going to argue. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
Also – I always thought the 1995 Pegau sucked. The 1994 was much better. And, the thought that the fruit lasted longer than its early harsh tannins, frankly, amazes me.
I tasted the same bottles Craig did, and enjoyed the 95 and 90 very much (my 2nd and 3rd in a flight of 6, group’s # 1 and 2). The 95’s fine structure actually help hold the wine together. 98 would have been excellent, had it not been overwhelmed by brett (my biggest complaint against Pegau). 99 was also quite nice, still showing fairly youthful. Outside the 98, I actually ranked the youngest wines (06 and 07) at the bottom.
I suspect that the belief in younger vs. older wines being “better” is to some extent a self-fulfilling prophecy, in that older wines were better to begin with, and many newer wines have have gone through the Parker phase, and producers are only recently deciding what they really want to make based on how those wines have aged.
My opinion is that there are a set of CdP that reliably age well, including Pegau, Beaucastel, Vieux Telegraphe, Bonneau, and Rayas. I’m sure are others but outside of my experience. Outside of that group my experience has been pretty mixed. I used to try aging some others that I liked young like Bosquets des Papes, Fortia, Guigal and others, but they haven’t reliably shown better than they did young and there have been some pretty poor results.
In the young vs old debate it is my opinion that personal taste preferences play a huge part. I know I prefer older wines but know many others that have a clear preference for younger wines.
Fwiw - Last Friday I attended a tasting a friend of mine made in Vienna, and I added a few bottles:
older Rhone wines - 1985 and earlier … (- 1949)
out of 20 wines there was maybe one bottle (or two) when one could say “past its best” …
1985 Pegau was fabulous, but it was not the best wine …
don´t underestimate Rhone, and CdP in particular …
Is this the Pegau thread? I had a couple of bottles recently as well.
2001 Pegau – fantastic! Subtle and precise to the point of being Burgundian, while still retaining that CNDP oomph. Good underlying fruit depth but expressing a lot of earth and mineral right now. Really well balanced, layered, and structured, one of the most elegant grenache-based wines I’ve ever had.
2012 Pegau – feels a little young and surly, chunky tannins and not very expressive. A very brooding wine right now. Plenty of fruit clearly, has some of that deep raspberry/strawberry jam quality that young Pegau has, but lacks the exuberance and flamboyant expression you get in the best Pegau vintages (e.g. 2009). Not sure where this one is going, it’s not bad at all right now but it’s just not real expressive. How will it age?