Fabulous old-school Bordeaux. Chocolate, dark fruits, leather, balance and velvet. No fruit bomb, no alcohol bomb and no oak bomb. Pre-Parker era. Its not a jump-in-the-face wine, rather an unexcitedly wine which impresses by balance/harmony and elegance. Clearly a wine from another era.
I drank ´83 around 10 years ago and it was mind-blowing.
Fair to say that Ch. Figeac has a lot of bottle variations according to the TNs I read from cellartracker etc. On the table was a danish wine merchant he also praised the wine and Figeac in general, clearly a Figeac lover. He said that he was in a restaurant and a Figeac blown away a Ch. Petrus from the table. I forgot the vintage.
OR maybe the Figeac-style could be easily overlooked?! Its not a jump-in-the-face wine, rather an unexcitedly wine which impresses by balance/harmony and elegance.
Martin, I recall scoring the 1982 off the list at Alta in nyc (great tapas; great and reasonable wine list) maybe ten years ago for a song. I’ve been hooked ever since.
I’ve had recent good experiences from old Figeac, notably 1978 and 1985, but echoing what Martin said, both faded within 60-90m following a double decant
When I first started with wine, I did an incredible course in Bordeaux. Among the tastings was a 1979 horizontal, and Figeac was definitely the outlier with an strong asparagus nose.
Tasted it three times since, last in 2006, and the asparagus aromas were always front and center; wonder if they have dissipated with age.
I looked at cellatracker regarding 1983 and it is interesting to see the huge gap regarding scoring. You have people with 87-88/100 and people with 92-94/100.
“In short, Chateau Figeac is a (still) rather misunderstood wine that is perhaps – as Kevin Shin suggested – a most Burgundian style of Bordeaux!”
Not in this universe. If Kevin had said the most Medocian Right Banker, where it would show its large percentage of Cabernet, I would be saying “Attaboy” and waving a few flags. But having tasted Figeac extensively as well as a lot of Burgundy, I cannot see any resemblance whatsoever.
Well I may understand where Martin is coming from in comparing it with Figeac now, though I trust your experience and knowledge, Mark, which is far greater than mine. My only point is that my bottle was not in good enough shape to judge from. I love Burgundy; that was not the issue.
Sorry that was a little direct (rude).
I have only ever really thought Beychevelle could be confused for a Burgundy. And the 1959 may be the best Richebourg ever made in Bordeaux.
The old Figeacs can be some of the most profound wines I have ever tasted. For a number of dinners for journalists dinner at Vinexpo, the management used to pull out wines from the 1940s and 1950s. I do remember the 1950, a beauty.
In general, the high proportion of Cabernet ripens a little after the Merlot, so there is always a danger the wines will not be totally ripe. The risk/reward can be tough, but if you want to taste great Figeac, perfectly ripe, look for the 1998.
If my memories are correct also the Figeac-expert Panos Kakaviatos made this Burgundy comparison in Berlin with attendance of son-in-law Eric d`Aramon. I hope my memories are valid?!
La Conseillante, notably from 1981-90, occasionally has Burgundian overtones. I agree that Figeac does not, but that view could be communicated more tactfully.