Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

Tasting notes, varietals, grapes - anything related to wine
Message
Author
User avatar
Howard Cooper
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 16094
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 8:37 am
Location: Rockville, MD

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#51 Post by Howard Cooper » April 3rd, 2019, 2:31 pm

Jay Miller wrote:
April 3rd, 2019, 10:44 am
Howard Cooper wrote:
April 3rd, 2019, 10:34 am
Robert,

Our group usually does a different Burgundy village every month. Occasionally, we have other themes, like last month villages level wines - believe it or not, this is always one of the best tastings of the year. In the last couple of years, we have started doing tastings for the 10th anniversary of a vintage. So, last year we did 2008s and the year before 2007s. This year, I am debating whether it would be better to do 2009s or half 2009s and half 2010s to compare the vintages.
How did the 2008s show? I'd expect them to be pretty shut down at this point but I haven't experimented in a while.

And Maureen's group wants to do a vintage theme, there's nothing wrong with that. Both themed and unthemed dinners have their own distinct pleasures.
The 2008s for the most part showed better and more open than I would have expected.

Themed tastings are great but only when all or most of the participants have sufficiently deep cellars or want to buy wine.
Howard

"That's what I do. I drink and I know things." Tyrion Lannister

maureen nelson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2221
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 5:12 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#52 Post by maureen nelson » April 3rd, 2019, 8:36 pm

Well we drank 08s. Only the Bachelet Corbeaux was tight (so much for CT notes!). The Hudelot CV was typically lacy yet deep abd the Ch de Chorey Beaune Cras was very yummy and was the favorite of 3 of the 4 of us (only I preferred the HN but only slightly for its greater complexity; the beaune was quite yummy however.

maureen nelson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2221
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 5:12 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#53 Post by maureen nelson » April 3rd, 2019, 8:36 pm

maureen nelson wrote:
April 3rd, 2019, 8:36 pm
Well we drank 08s. Only the Bachelet Corbeaux was tight (so much for CT notes!). The Hudelot CV was typically lacy yet deep abd the Ch de Chorey Beaune Cras was very tasty and was the favorite of 3 of the 4 of us (only I preferred the HN but only slightly for its greater complexity; the beaune was quite yummy however.

Kevin Harvey
Posts: 2550
Joined: February 4th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#54 Post by Kevin Harvey » April 3rd, 2019, 9:09 pm

Odd Rydland wrote:
April 3rd, 2019, 1:25 pm
2001 without a doubt in my mind. Unfortunately my stocks are running seriously low, a Rousseau Clos de Beze to be opened on Friday being my last one I think (the previous 2001 was a superb Roumier Cras opened some time before Christmas). I may have a few Jadots left.
Yes, I would pick 2001 for sure. The wines are perfectly on point now.
Rhys Vineyards

User avatar
Michel Linden
Posts: 296
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 11:03 pm
Location: australia

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#55 Post by Michel Linden » April 4th, 2019, 4:58 pm

Kevin Harvey wrote:
April 3rd, 2019, 9:09 pm
Odd Rydland wrote:
April 3rd, 2019, 1:25 pm
2001 without a doubt in my mind. Unfortunately my stocks are running seriously low, a Rousseau Clos de Beze to be opened on Friday being my last one I think (the previous 2001 was a superb Roumier Cras opened some time before Christmas). I may have a few Jadots left.
Yes, I would pick 2001 for sure. The wines are perfectly on point now.
plus 1

maureen nelson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2221
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 5:12 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#56 Post by maureen nelson » April 4th, 2019, 5:12 pm

Kevin Harvey wrote:
April 3rd, 2019, 9:09 pm
Odd Rydland wrote:
April 3rd, 2019, 1:25 pm
2001 without a doubt in my mind. Unfortunately my stocks are running seriously low, a Rousseau Clos de Beze to be opened on Friday being my last one I think (the previous 2001 was a superb Roumier Cras opened some time before Christmas). I may have a few Jadots left.
Yes, I would pick 2001 for sure. The wines are perfectly on point now.
Well, me too, but others didn’t have any

john stimson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: January 24th, 2010, 8:11 pm
Location: seattle

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#57 Post by john stimson » April 5th, 2019, 9:20 pm

I'm surprised at how little love the 99's are getting. For me, I would far rather have a 99 than 2002 of almost anything, even if that 99 isn't quite "ready", although many now are. I still find the 2002's to be charmingly high toned, but ultimately lacking in depth and complexity. Very pleasant, but overshadowed by 99, 2001, 2005, 2008, 2010, and on.
I agree with 2001 being an in an excellent place now. and my experience with 2008 has been surprisingly good and enjoyable currently. And I bought a fair amount.

And, Robert, tomorrow I'm bringing an 08 Drouhin Amoureuses.

Gerhard P.
Posts: 4770
Joined: April 28th, 2010, 11:06 pm
Location: Graz/Austria

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#58 Post by Gerhard P. » April 6th, 2019, 12:59 am

john stimson wrote:
April 5th, 2019, 9:20 pm
.... I still find the 2002's to be charmingly high toned, but ultimately lacking in depth and complexity. Very pleasant, but overshadowed by
1999 (ok)
2001, (no)
2005, (ok)
2008, (no, never)
2010, (ok)
and on.
Red my addition, all imho, of course.
Gerhard Pr@esent
composer / AT

User avatar
Robert Grenley
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: November 23rd, 2009, 8:41 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#59 Post by Robert Grenley » April 6th, 2019, 1:04 am

john stimson wrote:
April 5th, 2019, 9:20 pm
I'm surprised at how little love the 99's are getting. For me, I would far rather have a 99 than 2002 of almost anything, even if that 99 isn't quite "ready", although many now are. I still find the 2002's to be charmingly high toned, but ultimately lacking in depth and complexity. Very pleasant, but overshadowed by 99, 2001, 2005, 2008, 2010, and on.
I agree with 2001 being an in an excellent place now. and my experience with 2008 has been surprisingly good and enjoyable currently. And I bought a fair amount.

And, Robert, tomorrow I'm bringing an 08 Drouhin Amoureuses.
OK, then, thanks for the warning...that sounds like a treat, and I think I’ll crack a 96 Mugnier Musigny and a 99 Bonnes Mares from someone, maybe Vougeraie.
I started out on Burgundy but soon hit the harder stuff.
-Bob Dylan

"...what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I've ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response was there anything that could even be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it."

M.Twelftree
Posts: 180
Joined: June 14th, 2009, 7:24 pm
Location: Barossa Valley, Australia

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#60 Post by M.Twelftree » April 6th, 2019, 1:36 am

I really love 2009 and 2010 right now,
2009 Grivot Boudot was really on song today and 2010 Chevillon Vaucrains was magic last weekend,
MT
Michael Twelftree
Two Hands Wine

A Songeur
Posts: 909
Joined: April 27th, 2010, 6:45 am

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#61 Post by A Songeur » April 6th, 2019, 2:39 am

Recently had 3 great wines
- J Drouhin Chambolle Feusselottes 2005 who was ready and will probably not improve
- Grivot NSG Roncieres 2006 very red fruited and delicious young but open
- Fourrier Morey clos Solon 2009 which was drinking great with a mix of maturity and the usual Fourrier fruit
Interesting about the Grivot 2009. I purchase all 6 Vosne 1er and Boudots 2009 (3 of each) but have not dared touch any (not to mention the GC). Maybe time to test them.
Antoine

User avatar
Josh Najjar
Posts: 152
Joined: May 2nd, 2010, 5:25 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#62 Post by Josh Najjar » April 8th, 2019, 3:11 pm

Robert Grenley wrote:
March 31st, 2019, 12:09 am
No one chose 1999?
Based on our tastings we have enjoyed the 2001’s, the 2002’s have been good but still primary in most cases and seem less complex than the 2001’s at this stage (I don’t know about you, but I bought fewer 01’s and had to go backfilling over the years), we are just starting to try some 2005’s and they are showing their quality but not a lot else right now, and I did not buy 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008. I have not really investigated the 2009’s and 2010’s in my cellar, I am not sure what they would show now, though I have a feeling the 2010’s will always drink well but not show much development yet.

But I must say that every 1999 we have opened has been a treat, and whether they are approaching maturity or still have a ways to go, every one has been enjoyable, and in tastings with other vintages have almost always been our favorites.

So, my choices, depending on what you have:
1999!
2001
2002
...for tasting ones that are at or a little closer to maturity, and otherwise:
2005...realizing that they still will be pretty primary and perhaps a bit massive.

Who is the photo in your avatar ?

Thanks !!!

User avatar
Robert Grenley
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: November 23rd, 2009, 8:41 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#63 Post by Robert Grenley » April 8th, 2019, 3:34 pm

Josh Najjar wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 3:11 pm
Robert Grenley wrote:
March 31st, 2019, 12:09 am
No one chose 1999?
Based on our tastings we have enjoyed the 2001’s, the 2002’s have been good but still primary in most cases and seem less complex than the 2001’s at this stage (I don’t know about you, but I bought fewer 01’s and had to go backfilling over the years), we are just starting to try some 2005’s and they are showing their quality but not a lot else right now, and I did not buy 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008. I have not really investigated the 2009’s and 2010’s in my cellar, I am not sure what they would show now, though I have a feeling the 2010’s will always drink well but not show much development yet.

But I must say that every 1999 we have opened has been a treat, and whether they are approaching maturity or still have a ways to go, every one has been enjoyable, and in tastings with other vintages have almost always been our favorites.

So, my choices, depending on what you have:
1999!
2001
2002
...for tasting ones that are at or a little closer to maturity, and otherwise:
2005...realizing that they still will be pretty primary and perhaps a bit massive.

Who is the photo in your avatar ?

Thanks !!!
That is Peter Green. He replaced Eric Clapton in John Mayall's Blues Breakers when Clapton left to form Cream. Then Green left and took the rhythm section with him, Mick Fleetwood and John Mcvie, and formed Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac. Peter left in '69-70 after some ill effects after too much LSD, and subsequent psychiatric problems. In any event, he was a great guitarist, absolutely beautifully lyrical, wrote Black Magic Woman (which became a hit for Santana, though the original Fleetwood Mac version is the best), and after Green left, of course, FM went from an English Blues band to a lucrative pop career. For a taste of Peter Green and FM of that period, I might recommend: (most of which can be found on Youtube) (Best single album is probably Then Play On, their last with Peter Green.)

A Fool No More (from The Original Fleetwood Mac)
I Loved Another Woman (from Peter Green’s Fleetwood Mac)
Without You (from English Rose)
Albatross (from English Rose)
Love That Burns (from English Rose)
Black Magic Woman (from English Rose…Peter Green wrote this, so this is the original)
Coming Your Way (from Then Play On)
Underway (from Then Play On)
Oh Well (from Then play On)
Although the Sun is Shining (from Then Play On)
Rattlesnake Shake (from Then Play On)
Before The Beginning (from Then Play On)
Got a Mind to Give Up Living (live from New Orleans)

Sorry for the long-winded response, but I obviously like me some Peter Green!
I started out on Burgundy but soon hit the harder stuff.
-Bob Dylan

"...what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I've ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response was there anything that could even be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it."

User avatar
Kent Comley
Posts: 2183
Joined: May 2nd, 2010, 6:43 pm
Location: South Oz

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#64 Post by Kent Comley » April 8th, 2019, 4:07 pm

My broad brush stroke thoughts, mainly at village and Premier level.
1999 - great vintage, starting to drink really well after sullen period.
2000 - delicious - a point
2001 - a bit leaner and finer, some blossoming, some yet to fully unfurl.
2002 - fleshy, sweet fruited, ageing nicely
2003 - surprising on the upside, very dense and ripe but in the right hands very tasty
2004 - not the greatest, cool, mirepoix notes
2005 - large scaled, dense, best to leave alone
2006 - a good not great vintage. Variable at this stage.
2007 - a less intense 2000 vintage. Pretty wines, with less stuffing. Drinking well now.
2008 - Still needs time for acidity to soften. Wines of good transparency.
2009 - large scaled. hold.
2010 - VG vintage but best to hold.

So I would suggest best to consume now - 1999, 2000, 2002, 2007 and some 2001s.
ITB

User avatar
alan weinberg
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 11476
Joined: April 25th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#65 Post by alan weinberg » April 8th, 2019, 6:29 pm

Kent Comley wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 4:07 pm
My broad brush stroke thoughts, mainly at village and Premier level.
1999 - great vintage, starting to drink really well after sullen period.
2000 - delicious - a point
2001 - a bit leaner and finer, some blossoming, some yet to fully unfurl.
2002 - fleshy, sweet fruited, ageing nicely
2003 - surprising on the upside, very dense and ripe but in the right hands very tasty
2004 - not the greatest, cool, mirepoix notes
2005 - large scaled, dense, best to leave alone
2006 - a good not great vintage. Variable at this stage.
2007 - a less intense 2000 vintage. Pretty wines, with less stuffing. Drinking well now.
2008 - Still needs time for acidity to soften. Wines of good transparency.
2009 - large scaled. hold.
2010 - VG vintage but best to hold.

So I would suggest best to consume now - 1999, 2000, 2002, 2007 and some 2001s.
a very nice summary—I’m in agreement.

User avatar
Kent Comley
Posts: 2183
Joined: May 2nd, 2010, 6:43 pm
Location: South Oz

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#66 Post by Kent Comley » April 8th, 2019, 7:05 pm

Thanks Alan, that's like receiving an A from Jack Nicklaus on the subject of golf!!
ITB

User avatar
alan weinberg
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 11476
Joined: April 25th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#67 Post by alan weinberg » April 8th, 2019, 8:13 pm

Kent Comley wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 7:05 pm
Thanks Alan, that's like receiving an A from Jack Nicklaus on the subject of golf!!
hahah, more like a high five from Mickey Mouse.

nicholas wilton
Posts: 32
Joined: September 4th, 2013, 1:39 am

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#68 Post by nicholas wilton » April 8th, 2019, 8:37 pm

IIRC, Mickey mouse only has three fingers and a thumb. So I guess that would be a high four.
Agree, Kent has penned that perfectly. 100% agree. (although I remain sceptical the 2005's will ever blossom into the greatness they hint at.)

User avatar
Matthew King
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1159
Joined: January 31st, 2015, 6:58 pm
Location: Santa Monica

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#69 Post by Matthew King » April 8th, 2019, 9:20 pm

I agree with kudos, but I do have one nit and/or question about description of 08.

Can acids really ever soften? Yes, the wine may “soften” but it’s probably something other than the acids. Right?
"Please don't dominate the rap Jack if you've got nothing new to say." -- Robert Hunter

User avatar
Kent Comley
Posts: 2183
Joined: May 2nd, 2010, 6:43 pm
Location: South Oz

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#70 Post by Kent Comley » April 8th, 2019, 11:18 pm

Quite right Matthew, but the perception (to me) is that they can soften, or become less pronounced. 1996 is the litmus test for this theorem.
ITB

Gerhard P.
Posts: 4770
Joined: April 28th, 2010, 11:06 pm
Location: Graz/Austria

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#71 Post by Gerhard P. » April 8th, 2019, 11:57 pm

Kent Comley wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 4:07 pm
My broad brush stroke thoughts, mainly at village and Premier level.
1999 - great vintage, starting to drink really well after sullen period.
2000 - delicious - a point
2001 - a bit leaner and finer, some blossoming, some yet to fully unfurl.
2002 - fleshy, sweet fruited, ageing nicely
2003 - surprising on the upside, very dense and ripe but in the right hands very tasty
2004 - not the greatest, cool, mirepoix notes
2005 - large scaled, dense, best to leave alone
2006 - a good not great vintage. Variable at this stage.
2007 - a less intense 2000 vintage. Pretty wines, with less stuffing. Drinking well now.
2008 - Still needs time for acidity to soften. Wines of good transparency.
2009 - large scaled. hold.
2010 - VG vintage but best to hold.

So I would suggest best to consume now - 1999, 2000, 2002, 2007 and some 2001s.
More or less I agree - and that means something! [thumbs-up.gif]
Gerhard Pr@esent
composer / AT

Gerhard P.
Posts: 4770
Joined: April 28th, 2010, 11:06 pm
Location: Graz/Austria

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#72 Post by Gerhard P. » April 8th, 2019, 11:59 pm

Matthew King wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 9:20 pm
I agree with kudos, but I do have one nit and/or question about description of 08.

Can acids really ever soften? Yes, the wine may “soften” but it’s probably something other than the acids. Right?
The tannins soften, the fruit unfolds ... and that makes acidity less noticable and better integrated ...
(... my take ...)
Gerhard Pr@esent
composer / AT

John Gilman
Posts: 551
Joined: June 30th, 2009, 10:46 am

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#73 Post by John Gilman » April 9th, 2019, 1:36 pm

Do the 2008 lineup Maureen- it will be lovely!

User avatar
Jay Miller
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 13617
Joined: June 19th, 2009, 5:18 pm
Location: Jersey City

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#74 Post by Jay Miller » April 9th, 2019, 1:44 pm

Looks like I might need to check in on some 2008s. I certainly own a bunch and I wouldn't be surprised if they shut down again somewhere along the way.
Ripe fruit isn't necessarily a flaw.

Charlie Carnes
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2141
Joined: April 30th, 2010, 2:13 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#75 Post by Charlie Carnes » April 9th, 2019, 3:55 pm

mike c wrote:
March 31st, 2019, 7:37 pm
01/06/07 for good premier / grand cru
+1 right on!
So shines a good deed in a weary world!

maureen nelson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2221
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 5:12 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#76 Post by maureen nelson » April 9th, 2019, 4:07 pm

John Gilman wrote:
April 9th, 2019, 1:36 pm
Do the 2008 lineup Maureen- it will be lovely!
We did - it was last week! The Beaune was the most delicious that night, the clos vougeot a little more serious, the Bachelet shut down.

john stimson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: January 24th, 2010, 8:11 pm
Location: seattle

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#77 Post by john stimson » April 9th, 2019, 5:35 pm

Gerhard P. wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 11:59 pm
Matthew King wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 9:20 pm
I agree with kudos, but I do have one nit and/or question about description of 08.

Can acids really ever soften? Yes, the wine may “soften” but it’s probably something other than the acids. Right?
The tannins soften, the fruit unfolds ... and that makes acidity less noticable and better integrated ...
(... my take ...)
Matthew has a legitimate question, but Gerhard's answer is correct. The acids don't diminish, but other things happen that makes things meld together with time.

For the record, I've never had a problem with the acids in 96, or 2008. this is a recurring fear that seems to pop up, much like the notes you see about folks wondering if the fruit of a given vintage will "fade", before the tannins soften, etc. We just did a chambolle tasting that I'll write up one of these days with 3 96's (including F Mugnier Musigny) and a 2008 (Drouhin Amoureuses)--nary an overly acidic wine to be seen. I would have been shocked if anyone could have picked the 96's as 96's blind.

User avatar
Howard Cooper
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 16094
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 8:37 am
Location: Rockville, MD

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#78 Post by Howard Cooper » April 10th, 2019, 5:17 am

john stimson wrote:
April 9th, 2019, 5:35 pm
Gerhard P. wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 11:59 pm
Matthew King wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 9:20 pm
I agree with kudos, but I do have one nit and/or question about description of 08.

Can acids really ever soften? Yes, the wine may “soften” but it’s probably something other than the acids. Right?
The tannins soften, the fruit unfolds ... and that makes acidity less noticable and better integrated ...
(... my take ...)
Matthew has a legitimate question, but Gerhard's answer is correct. The acids don't diminish, but other things happen that makes things meld together with time.

For the record, I've never had a problem with the acids in 96, or 2008. this is a recurring fear that seems to pop up, much like the notes you see about folks wondering if the fruit of a given vintage will "fade", before the tannins soften, etc. We just did a chambolle tasting that I'll write up one of these days with 3 96's (including F Mugnier Musigny) and a 2008 (Drouhin Amoureuses)--nary an overly acidic wine to be seen. I would have been shocked if anyone could have picked the 96's as 96's blind.
Wines with low acidity bother me much more than wines with higher acidity, given good ripeness, etc. They taste flabby (see, e.g., 2009 Bordeaux).
Howard

"That's what I do. I drink and I know things." Tyrion Lannister

User avatar
Nick Christie
Posts: 66
Joined: November 20th, 2016, 1:37 pm
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#79 Post by Nick Christie » April 10th, 2019, 9:42 am

Kent Comley wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 4:07 pm
My broad brush stroke thoughts, mainly at village and Premier level.
1999 - great vintage, starting to drink really well after sullen period.
2000 - delicious - a point
2001 - a bit leaner and finer, some blossoming, some yet to fully unfurl.
2002 - fleshy, sweet fruited, ageing nicely
2003 - surprising on the upside, very dense and ripe but in the right hands very tasty
2004 - not the greatest, cool, mirepoix notes
2005 - large scaled, dense, best to leave alone
2006 - a good not great vintage. Variable at this stage.
2007 - a less intense 2000 vintage. Pretty wines, with less stuffing. Drinking well now.
2008 - Still needs time for acidity to soften. Wines of good transparency.
2009 - large scaled. hold.
2010 - VG vintage but best to hold.

So I would suggest best to consume now - 1999, 2000, 2002, 2007 and some 2001s.
As others have already pointed out: Great short-hand summary, Kent. Could be a pinned post [cheers.gif]

Have been served too many '05s recently, and have had lovely experiences very much in keeping with the top of the list.

User avatar
Todd F r e n c h
Site Admin
<dfn>Site Admin</dfn>
Posts: 38429
Joined: January 27th, 2009, 8:46 am
Location: San Clemente, CA

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#80 Post by Todd F r e n c h » April 10th, 2019, 9:49 am

Nick Christie wrote:
April 10th, 2019, 9:42 am
Kent Comley wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 4:07 pm
My broad brush stroke thoughts, mainly at village and Premier level.
1999 - great vintage, starting to drink really well after sullen period.
2000 - delicious - a point
2001 - a bit leaner and finer, some blossoming, some yet to fully unfurl.
2002 - fleshy, sweet fruited, ageing nicely
2003 - surprising on the upside, very dense and ripe but in the right hands very tasty
2004 - not the greatest, cool, mirepoix notes
2005 - large scaled, dense, best to leave alone
2006 - a good not great vintage. Variable at this stage.
2007 - a less intense 2000 vintage. Pretty wines, with less stuffing. Drinking well now.
2008 - Still needs time for acidity to soften. Wines of good transparency.
2009 - large scaled. hold.
2010 - VG vintage but best to hold.

So I would suggest best to consume now - 1999, 2000, 2002, 2007 and some 2001s.
As others have already pointed out: Great short-hand summary, Kent. Could be a pinned post [cheers.gif]

Have been served too many '05s recently, and have had lovely experiences very much in keeping with the top of the list.
Let me pile on this with another attaboy - really good list, I need to keep it handy!
Apparently I'm lazy, have a narrow agenda, and offer little in the way of content and substance (RMP) (and have a "penchant for gossip" -KBI)

maureen nelson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2221
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 5:12 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#81 Post by maureen nelson » April 10th, 2019, 6:36 pm

Gerhard P. wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 11:57 pm
Kent Comley wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 4:07 pm
My broad brush stroke thoughts, mainly at village and Premier level.
1999 - great vintage, starting to drink really well after sullen period.
2000 - delicious - a point
2001 - a bit leaner and finer, some blossoming, some yet to fully unfurl.
2002 - fleshy, sweet fruited, ageing nicely
2003 - surprising on the upside, very dense and ripe but in the right hands very tasty
2004 - not the greatest, cool, mirepoix notes
2005 - large scaled, dense, best to leave alone
2006 - a good not great vintage. Variable at this stage.
2007 - a less intense 2000 vintage. Pretty wines, with less stuffing. Drinking well now.
2008 - Still needs time for acidity to soften. Wines of good transparency.
2009 - large scaled. hold.
2010 - VG vintage but best to hold.

So I would suggest best to consume now - 1999, 2000, 2002, 2007 and some 2001s.
More or less I agree - and that means something! [thumbs-up.gif]
My quibble - you have underrated 2010!

User avatar
Michel Linden
Posts: 296
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 11:03 pm
Location: australia

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#82 Post by Michel Linden » April 11th, 2019, 4:50 pm

Kent Comley wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 4:07 pm
My broad brush stroke thoughts, mainly at village and Premier level.
1999 - great vintage, starting to drink really well after sullen period.
2000 - delicious - a point
2001 - a bit leaner and finer, some blossoming, some yet to fully unfurl.
2002 - fleshy, sweet fruited, ageing nicely
2003 - surprising on the upside, very dense and ripe but in the right hands very tasty
2004 - not the greatest, cool, mirepoix notes
2005 - large scaled, dense, best to leave alone
2006 - a good not great vintage. Variable at this stage.
2007 - a less intense 2000 vintage. Pretty wines, with less stuffing. Drinking well now.
2008 - Still needs time for acidity to soften. Wines of good transparency.
2009 - large scaled. hold.
2010 - VG vintage but best to hold.

So I would suggest best to consume now - 1999, 2000, 2002, 2007 and some 2001s.

Gee Kent I sure hope 2008 comes good
the acid is still persistant
out of barrel they were thrilling
the 2008 Vogues are all still but babies........

User avatar
Kent Comley
Posts: 2183
Joined: May 2nd, 2010, 6:43 pm
Location: South Oz

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#83 Post by Kent Comley » April 11th, 2019, 5:36 pm

Michel, I am very upbeat about 2008s. They are right in my wheelhouse, but based on a few recent ones reckon they will greatly benefit from another 5 yrs or so. Interesting comment re Vogues as I recently picked up some Bonnes Mares.
ITB

User avatar
Howard Cooper
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 16094
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 8:37 am
Location: Rockville, MD

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#84 Post by Howard Cooper » April 11th, 2019, 5:54 pm

maureen nelson wrote:
April 10th, 2019, 6:36 pm
Gerhard P. wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 11:57 pm
Kent Comley wrote:
April 8th, 2019, 4:07 pm
My broad brush stroke thoughts, mainly at village and Premier level.
1999 - great vintage, starting to drink really well after sullen period.
2000 - delicious - a point
2001 - a bit leaner and finer, some blossoming, some yet to fully unfurl.
2002 - fleshy, sweet fruited, ageing nicely
2003 - surprising on the upside, very dense and ripe but in the right hands very tasty
2004 - not the greatest, cool, mirepoix notes
2005 - large scaled, dense, best to leave alone
2006 - a good not great vintage. Variable at this stage.
2007 - a less intense 2000 vintage. Pretty wines, with less stuffing. Drinking well now.
2008 - Still needs time for acidity to soften. Wines of good transparency.
2009 - large scaled. hold.
2010 - VG vintage but best to hold.

So I would suggest best to consume now - 1999, 2000, 2002, 2007 and some 2001s.
More or less I agree - and that means something! [thumbs-up.gif]
My quibble - you have underrated 2010!
I agree.
Howard

"That's what I do. I drink and I know things." Tyrion Lannister

User avatar
Michel Linden
Posts: 296
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 11:03 pm
Location: australia

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#85 Post by Michel Linden » April 11th, 2019, 7:18 pm

Kent Comley wrote:
April 11th, 2019, 5:36 pm
Michel, I am very upbeat about 2008s. They are right in my wheelhouse, but based on a few recent ones reckon they will greatly benefit from another 5 yrs or so. Interesting comment re Vogues as I recently picked up some Bonnes Mares.
it is still in nappies
dont touch
I opened the village 2008 last year and it is still not ready .......

maureen nelson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2221
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 5:12 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#86 Post by maureen nelson » April 12th, 2019, 6:59 am

If by ready you mean mature of course 2008 is not ready. If you mean currently accessible some are.

User avatar
Jim Anderson
BerserkerBusiness
BerserkerBusiness
Posts: 4949
Joined: October 20th, 2010, 1:18 pm
Location: Portland/Newberg, Oregon

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#87 Post by Jim Anderson » April 12th, 2019, 10:01 am

2008s were sort of the last vintage I went in/was able to go in on. After that prices went way, way up. Fortunately I like them. A little darker than the usual version (IMO) of whatever producer and/or cru you have in front of you but generally prettt nice wines.

Had an 03 M-G NSG Chaignots earlier this week that was good but not particularly terrific and certainly not in need of more time.
Co-owner, Patricia Green Cellars

User avatar
Kent Comley
Posts: 2183
Joined: May 2nd, 2010, 6:43 pm
Location: South Oz

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#88 Post by Kent Comley » April 14th, 2019, 3:10 pm

Data point on a 2008, drunk last night.
The 2008 Domaine Marc Roy Gevrey-Chambertin VV was quite reticent, showing pure and pretty red and pomegranate fruits, subtle earthiness and a firmish finish. Really needs another decade for my palate.
ITB

User avatar
paul hanna
Posts: 4901
Joined: April 28th, 2010, 10:14 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#89 Post by paul hanna » April 15th, 2019, 2:18 am

A 2008 Domaine Robert Arnoux RSV at a RSV dinner I did late last year was almost my wine of the night, drank absolutely beautifully on the night, not at all closed or acidic....

User avatar
alan weinberg
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 11476
Joined: April 25th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#90 Post by alan weinberg » April 15th, 2019, 12:35 pm

02 Bruno Clair Beze was gorgeous last night.

User avatar
Kent Comley
Posts: 2183
Joined: May 2nd, 2010, 6:43 pm
Location: South Oz

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#91 Post by Kent Comley » April 15th, 2019, 2:58 pm

paul hanna wrote:
April 15th, 2019, 2:18 am
A 2008 Domaine Robert Arnoux RSV at a RSV dinner I did late last year was almost my wine of the night, drank absolutely beautifully on the night, not at all closed or acidic....
Thanks Paul. Position, position, position.
ITB

User avatar
Kent Comley
Posts: 2183
Joined: May 2nd, 2010, 6:43 pm
Location: South Oz

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#92 Post by Kent Comley » April 15th, 2019, 3:02 pm

alan weinberg wrote:
April 15th, 2019, 12:35 pm
02 Bruno Clair Beze was gorgeous last night.
Thanks Alan. Those Clairs can be a bit tight, chiselled and backward.
ITB

Joshua Kates
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1128
Joined: October 30th, 2011, 6:31 am

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#93 Post by Joshua Kates » April 15th, 2019, 5:36 pm

Yes, I had a '96 of this about a month back. Quite promising, but seemed still very young.

User avatar
paul hanna
Posts: 4901
Joined: April 28th, 2010, 10:14 pm

Re: Which red burg vintage (1999-2010) showing well now?

#94 Post by paul hanna » April 15th, 2019, 7:48 pm

And we had the '15 Bruno Clair Beze a few months ago, was also singing on the day....maybe just caught it before closing down.

Post Reply

Return to “Wine Talk”