Pichon Lalande 1961-2000

Some quick notes and a few beauty shots from our annual wine dinner featuring this year fourteen vintages Pichon Lalande. For once we were lucky, with every one of them firing on all cylinders, and almost without exception, showing the tell tale floral and herbal notes of the chateau. An excellent meal catered by the Artist’s Palate, a hidden gem of a chef out of Dutchess County,

We were able to raise a significant amount of money for two really deserving charities, Midnight Run and Sloan Kettering rare cancer research. Heritage auctions kindly partnered and helped underwrite the tasting.

To get things going, a Figeac 1986 served blind. No prizes, the high percentage of Cabernet fooled everybody. It turned out to be much better than the 1986 Pichon. 93.

2000
Beautiful young tannic dark fruit herbal brilliant. A good decade away from apogee, will stay there for some time to come. Even though it is not ready, it is still enjoyable. 95

1996 Solid herbal edgy without the fullness in the mid palate of the 2000. Again very young, it is extremely tannic, and I am still hoping that the tannins will soften before the fruit dies. See 1975. 91-94?

1989 I have always enjoyed the 1989, and bought a ton of it before prices went up. Even now, it is something of a bargain. An archetypal glorious nose menthol, Turkish delight, mocha. And of course that herbal undertow. Fully realized, and Brilliant 97

1990 sexy opening up quite nicely; better than expected, but of course suffered next to the 1989. I believe Parker scored this less than 80 points. If so, can’t see why. 90

1988 This was probably the surprise of the tasting, not a great fan of the vintage which I generally find is dusty and charmless. This was neither; a fully mature, aromatic wine that was very Pichon. Medium finish, but still excellent. 93

1986 very square tannic little complexity. Tannic, massive, at thirty three still backward. May finally resolve, but again the tannins will probably win again at the expense of the fruit. 87?

1985 is so pretty. It should have been dwarfed by the 1982, yet it almost held its own. Rich, but with a core of fresh red fruits and lovely rose petals. And the beginnings of earth, and leaf meal. Not easy to find, according to a merchant who flew in for the tasting. A certain Chinese tycoon loves the wine and is buying it in bulk. 96

1982 vied with the 1961 for wine of the night; I really could not decide, so gave them both perfect scores. It is all Pichon, but also has that incredible sensual character that is a hallmark of the best wines of the vintage. Rich, opulent but with unbelievable precision highlighting the complexity of this wine. Cedar, tobacco, lavender, crunchy fruit, and a huge layered finish. Magnificent. 100 points.

1981 How do you follow 1982 Pichon Lalande. Sadly not with the 1981 or 1978.:and yet both of them are lovely examples of perfectly mature Pichon. Tannins soft and pliant. Very pretty lovely if slightly muted flavors. Great-in its own right, but slightly overlooked in this company. 92

1978 Fairly similar to the 1981, again the tannins resolved, but there was some edgy acidity, which worked well with the fat of the duck. 89


1975 For me, the weakest wine of this brilliant tasting. A good reputation among 1975 Medocs, it showed plenty of unresolved tannin and a slightly disturbing volatile acidity. Not that nice. There is some fruit, but one is left with an impression of sharp tannins and acidity. 83?

1970 I love this wine, and it showed beautifully yesterday. For me it was tied with the lovely 1985, archetypal mature Pichon Lalande. Beautifully balanced, and still only at the early stages of maturity. The wine is complex yet light. Plenty of dark fruit, leather, flowers and cedar. And of course just a bit of herb. Long easy finish. 96

1962 was served blind, with half thinking it was claret and half a Rhône. I thoroughly enjoyed it noting the tobacco and cedar, and less herb and Turkish delight. Excellent. As Yogi would have said, “everybody knows 1962 is an underrated vintage”. 95

1961 And finally to the second potentially perfect wine from this tasting. The initial reaction to this wine was stunned silence. How could a wine be this fresh and still be nearly 60 years old? Every flavor complexity we had seen in other Pichon was here, totally realized, fresh and mature. Spice, cedar, herb, lavender, rosemary forest floor. Just a brilliant wonderful wine. 100 points


1900 Quinta do Sibio colheita Port. From a house that had a sterling reputation at the beginning of the twentieth century. We should have waited. It was hand carried from England, and rested in my cellar for a couple of weeks. Still cloudy. Interesting walnut and almond flavors, and some fruit. ?

Awesome notes! I was fortunate enough to have the 1982 last night and your score and notes are spot on! For me, it was a perfect wine.

Kudos, Mark. Your passion and kindness of spirit really show through. I love when our love for wine combines with a commitment to the greater good. Your wine karma bank overfloweth, sir.

Jonathan

Nice! I’ve had the 89 and 96 recently and very much agree on both. 2001 also recently really exceeded my expectations. Duck is the perfect way to do Pichon. Cheers, K

The 1982 Pichon Lalande is truly magical. That was an extraordinary tasting. Thank you for your great notes on all those vintages.

Nice line up and notes!

Factoring in price, PLL is my favorite claret.

Great bottles and all that, but I had a bottle of the 86 last year that was otherworldly good.

1978-1989 was such a magical run for this chateau.

I’ve yet to drink a '90 PLL that I thought was in the neighborhood of 90 points. I still have a couple bottles from the case I bought on release, so there is always hope, but I don’t think there is any argument that the chateau underperformed in what is in retrospect a great Bordeaux vintage.

I must admit I have had the 1982 a few times and while it is quite good, for me it is not a 100 point wine. My guess is that eventually the 2016 will be a better wine than the 1982.

I have enjoyed the 1975 and 1986 more than you guys did. I have very much enjoyed both of these wines. Another Pichon Lalande I have enjoyed is the 1979, which you guys did not taste.

This is probably the sixth time I have had the 1982. Only once have I had a bottle this perfect. For John Gilman, it was also the best he has ever had.

Interesting comment from someone with such an old world palate. I’m listening. What was your take on the 2014? For me, it’s a wine of the vintage, outside of some First Growths and maybe VCC.

Good notes.

I had the 1996 and 2000 in recent years. Both excellent.

The only time I have had the 2014 was at a large tasting of Pichon Lalande in DC. TN: Pichon Lalande dinner with Nicolas Glumineau - WINE TALK - WineBerserkers I do not have a real strong recollection of the wine, although I know I liked it. If I remember correctly, I was thinking it could age to be like the 1979.

I tend to come to Bordeaux with more of a Burgundy, German wine palate. I tend to like Bordeauxs with good acidity and, for example, have not had that many 2009s that I really like. I also tend to find Bordeaux pretty hard to evaluate until it is about 10 years old - that was not as true many years ago but today so much young Bordeaux is smothered in new oak and I really do not have that much confidence in my predictions until the oak starts to recede some and we can see what the structure of the wine looks like.

That all said, at that tasting, I was surprised how much I liked the 2016, which I don’t think had been released as of that time. I liked it a lot more than the 2014 and 2015 that I tasted in the same flight.

Mark,


Thank you for reporting this prestigious panel …

My last Lalande, in june 2018 :
Pauillac Pichon Comtesse de Lalande 1996 : 17/20
Superbe fumet aquitain, corsé. Matière intermédiaire, cohérente.

I did not find these harsh tannins you describe.

An excellent/great Lalande 1986 for Christmas 2004 :
7. Pauillac - Pichon-Longueville Comtesse de Lalande 1986 :
PP17,5 – LG18
Arômes caractéristiques typés, à peine tertiaires et précieux de cassis, d’herbes aromatiques, de graphite, de santal, de viande rôtie, de suie, de réglisse, de havane, parfaitement en place.
Bouche solide, qui possède la race minérale d’un grand Pauillac (millésime oblige), ferme et impériale, mais qui ne sacrifie nullement la gourmandise sur l’autel de l’austérité.

I had Pichon Lalande 1982 in 2003, still very young and very promising (wish I could taste a perfect bottle, 16 years after) :
11. Pauillac château Pichon Comtesse de Lalande 1982 :
Notes : PP17,5 – DS18,5 - PC18,5 - LG17 - VM18/18,5 - RT18,5
Robe intense, relativement jeune.
Nez caractérisé par des senteurs de bourgeon de cassis soutenues. Notes complémentaires de viande, de cuir. On distingue un fruit intense et très mûr. L’évolution (eu égard au millésime) est toute relative.
Bouche racée, équilibrée, persistante, dotée d’un grain subtil. On sent ici aussi la grande maturité du millésime, mais le vin, ainsi rendu quelque peu atypique, conserve une trame fraîche, correctement vertébrée. La vigueur tannique (très classique, très “Pauillac”) de ce grand vin de garde semble elle aussi compensée par la générosité du millésime.

Mark,
great notes. It’s wonderful that it sounds like the wines showed so well. And thanks for your charitable energy.
We opened a 375ml of '85 Pichon Lalande to toast you last night.

Wow sounds like a great event. Kudos.

I have only had it once- a couple of years after release- and while I thought 79 was a little harsh, it was definitely a very light wine for a 1990. It performed more like the 1992s that had just been released at the time. Along with Mouton, it was a real standout miss- though Mouton did eventually get interesting and very good, if not great.

That said, the Pichon was at least an attractive wine- so if it put on weight with age I can see where 79 might seem really unkind today.

Thanks for the notes, Mark. Sounds like - at best - the jury is out on the '96. I thought it might turn into a great wine, but your note suggests otherwise. I had the 1990 not that long ago and it was lovely, yes, a green note but not in any harsh way but rather providing complexity on the nose. A score of “90” seems about right to me now that it’s mature. Certainly no 79!

Thank you Mark for the notes

I’ve had very different experiences with the 1996, most recently at a big dinner where it was WOTN for me vs. stiff competition from Mouton, Ducru, Haut Bailly, etc. It didn’t taste particularly tannic or edgy to me, and in fact my notes say “giving and friendly.” Bottle variation perhaps? Or maybe my palate had become saturated with tannin from tasting 20-30+ wines beforehand

(Paging George Chadwick to the thread)

I’m in agreement with you. I’ve gone through 4 96’s out of a case, and every one has been excellent. Lovely balance of fruit and structure for my palate. Still on it’s ascent.