Underrated Burgundy Vintages

Tasting notes, varietals, grapes - anything related to wine
Message
Author
Mich@el Ch@ng
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5669
Joined: March 31st, 2017, 9:57 pm

Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#1 Post by Mich@el Ch@ng » September 17th, 2020, 5:55 am

What will we see as underrated in time?

For me: 07, 12, 14, 17

User avatar
Marcu$ Stanley
Posts: 1371
Joined: November 1st, 2010, 3:31 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#2 Post by Marcu$ Stanley » September 17th, 2020, 7:00 am

I think 2013, which people were almost talking about as being as bad as 2011 but IME has a lot more substance than some were claiming initially. 2012 and 2014, especially 2012, got some love on release even though they weren't seen as top vintages.

Interesting question whether either 2015 or 2016 will eventually be seen as either over or under rated as compared to 2009-2010 (which I think are pretty clearly established now as terrific vintages).

User avatar
Howard Cooper
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 19786
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 8:37 am
Location: Rockville, MD

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#3 Post by Howard Cooper » September 17th, 2020, 8:55 am

My feeling about recent vintages is this. 1999, 2005 (I hope) and 2010 are the great vintages. 2004 is a poor vintage and 2003 and 2011 are very uneven. Everything else since at least 1999 is at least pretty good, although they can be stylistically very different from each other. How to rank these vintages depends on what I have had lately. I probably have less confidence in what I have said above about where to fit in vintages 2015-2017 because they are so young (and none in 2018 or 2019 as I have not tasted any). Very young vintages tend to jump around a bit (for example, 2000 and 2007 turned out much better than I would have thought from the first time I tasted them; 2006 is probably less good than I thought it would be). I would have confidence that each of vintages 2015-2017 is at least pretty good, but where to rank them, I don't know yet.
Howard

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

User avatar
RyanC
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3852
Joined: June 2nd, 2009, 4:20 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#4 Post by RyanC » September 17th, 2020, 9:02 am

2012-14 for sure. All three are very good but somehow have gotten lost behind 09/10/15/16

2012 in particular. It's a legitimate great vintage that I feel has gotten lost in the shuffle.

2014 is up there as well, and 2013 is a sleeper that can still occasionally be found for reasonable pricing.

Also 2009 in light of initial concerns re overripeness. But it's not really underrated because opinion seems to have shifted and they've become rightly celebrated and are getting quite pricey (and harder to find).
C@ughey

maureen nelson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2654
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 5:12 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#5 Post by maureen nelson » September 17th, 2020, 9:49 am

1988

Mich@el Ch@ng
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5669
Joined: March 31st, 2017, 9:57 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#6 Post by Mich@el Ch@ng » September 17th, 2020, 10:19 am

Yeah I think 13 is going to end up being pretty good and hope so as I have quite a lot of it. I don’t think it’s underrated, though, as I think most ppl thought it’d be good but not great. 12 may end up being better than 09 or 15 for those who prefer leaner wines (compared to those two vintages)

User avatar
Marcu$ Stanley
Posts: 1371
Joined: November 1st, 2010, 3:31 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#7 Post by Marcu$ Stanley » September 17th, 2020, 10:30 am

Howard Cooper wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:55 am
My feeling about recent vintages is this. 1999, 2005 (I hope) and 2010 are the great vintages. 2004 is a poor vintage and 2003 and 2011 are very uneven. Everything else since at least 1999 is at least pretty good, although they can be stylistically very different from each other. How to rank these vintages depends on what I have had lately. I probably have less confidence in what I have said above about where to fit in vintages 2015-2017 because they are so young (and none in 2018 or 2019 as I have not tasted any). Very young vintages tend to jump around a bit (for example, 2000 and 2007 turned out much better than I would have thought from the first time I tasted them; 2006 is probably less good than I thought it would be). I would have confidence that each of vintages 2015-2017 is at least pretty good, but where to rank them, I don't know yet.
I am not as widely experienced as others on this thread I'm sure (have financial limitations to exploring the peaks of Burgundy), but in my limited experience 2009 belongs on the great vintages list too. As Ryan mentioned it has shed some of its puppy fat and revealed excellent structure under the fruit, while still retaining a vintage signature of great fruit.

User avatar
jason stein
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 412
Joined: November 17th, 2016, 11:15 am
Location: Boston

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#8 Post by jason stein » September 17th, 2020, 11:21 am

2014 in red is super classic and transparent to me. Good acidity, well structured, but not notably ripe or monolithic like the 15s/05s. Love the wines, and pricing tends to be favorable compared to other recent vintages.

The 17 reds are beautiful now, but I think will age well too. Great complexity of fruit, and like the 14s they are generally true to place
instagram: @jtswine

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1613
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#9 Post by Greg K » September 17th, 2020, 11:29 am

Marcu$ Stanley wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 10:30 am
Howard Cooper wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:55 am
My feeling about recent vintages is this. 1999, 2005 (I hope) and 2010 are the great vintages. 2004 is a poor vintage and 2003 and 2011 are very uneven. Everything else since at least 1999 is at least pretty good, although they can be stylistically very different from each other. How to rank these vintages depends on what I have had lately. I probably have less confidence in what I have said above about where to fit in vintages 2015-2017 because they are so young (and none in 2018 or 2019 as I have not tasted any). Very young vintages tend to jump around a bit (for example, 2000 and 2007 turned out much better than I would have thought from the first time I tasted them; 2006 is probably less good than I thought it would be). I would have confidence that each of vintages 2015-2017 is at least pretty good, but where to rank them, I don't know yet.
I am not as widely experienced as others on this thread I'm sure (have financial limitations to exploring the peaks of Burgundy), but in my limited experience 2009 belongs on the great vintages list too. As Ryan mentioned it has shed some of its puppy fat and revealed excellent structure under the fruit, while still retaining a vintage signature of great fruit.
I don't think 2009 is a great vintage; it's solid and currently pretty open, but the wines are definitely on the plusher side of the spectrum and even some really good producers made wines with a bit of heat on them.
Greg Kahn

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1613
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#10 Post by Greg K » September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am

Howard Cooper wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:55 am
My feeling about recent vintages is this. 1999, 2005 (I hope) and 2010 are the great vintages.
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
Greg Kahn

Tony C
Posts: 329
Joined: July 27th, 2015, 5:01 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#11 Post by Tony C » September 17th, 2020, 11:45 am

Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am
Howard Cooper wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:55 am
My feeling about recent vintages is this. 1999, 2005 (I hope) and 2010 are the great vintages.
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
What’s happening with the 96 vintage? I haven’t been buying Burgs for that long.
C @ r u c c !

User avatar
RyanC
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3852
Joined: June 2nd, 2009, 4:20 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#12 Post by RyanC » September 17th, 2020, 11:57 am

Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am
Howard Cooper wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:55 am
My feeling about recent vintages is this. 1999, 2005 (I hope) and 2010 are the great vintages.
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
I’m very, very bullish on ‘16. But there’s so little of it out there.
C@ughey

User avatar
Howard Cooper
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 19786
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 8:37 am
Location: Rockville, MD

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#13 Post by Howard Cooper » September 17th, 2020, 12:02 pm

Tony C wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:45 am
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am
Howard Cooper wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:55 am
My feeling about recent vintages is this. 1999, 2005 (I hope) and 2010 are the great vintages.
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
What’s happening with the 96 vintage? I haven’t been buying Burgs for that long.
A lot of them are tasting really good right about now but a lot of people drank them too young.
Howard

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

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1613
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#14 Post by Greg K » September 17th, 2020, 12:06 pm

Howard Cooper wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 12:02 pm
Tony C wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:45 am
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am


I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
What’s happening with the 96 vintage? I haven’t been buying Burgs for that long.
A lot of them are tasting really good right about now but a lot of people drank them too young.
I don't agree with that assessment at all. We had an accidental 96 horizontal a few weeks back with bottlers of Chevillon, d'Angerville and Roumier; some of those bottles had good noses, but all had impenetrable walls of acidity on the palate; none were even remotely close to being finished.
Greg Kahn

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1613
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#15 Post by Greg K » September 17th, 2020, 12:07 pm

RyanC wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:57 am
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am
Howard Cooper wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:55 am
My feeling about recent vintages is this. 1999, 2005 (I hope) and 2010 are the great vintages.
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
I’m very, very bullish on ‘16. But there’s so little of it out there.
Enough, I think, since the hype mostly went to 15, which I think is overrated.
Greg Kahn

Mich@el Ch@ng
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5669
Joined: March 31st, 2017, 9:57 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#16 Post by Mich@el Ch@ng » September 17th, 2020, 12:23 pm

Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am
Howard Cooper wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:55 am
My feeling about recent vintages is this. 1999, 2005 (I hope) and 2010 are the great vintages.
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
With that set of preferences you’d think you’d be all over 13.

Asger L a r s e n
Posts: 38
Joined: August 3rd, 2020, 1:16 am

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#17 Post by Asger L a r s e n » September 17th, 2020, 12:31 pm

Difficult, but I would always say buy producer before vintage.

In regards to weaker vintages. I have had very tasty 2011 and 2013 recently, e.g. Vosne Beau from JJ confuron and Clos de la Roche from moine.

I have had many disappointing top vintages burgundies, simply too young. I actually think I drink Grand Cru too early, and store too little volume village wine, as they can be amazing much earlier.

Rauno E (NZ)
Posts: 2240
Joined: March 13th, 2012, 12:32 am

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#18 Post by Rauno E (NZ) » September 17th, 2020, 12:39 pm

FWIW in relation to whites I reckon 2013s might be a real bolster. Very early days of course.
Rauno Engel

R. Frankel
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1931
Joined: January 24th, 2014, 11:07 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#19 Post by R. Frankel » September 17th, 2020, 1:24 pm

I’m not sure that the ratings are likely to be that for off for many of these vintages. Looking at professional reviewers, 2011 and 2013 are not considered horrible, just inconsistent, which may turn out to be right. 2007 is an oddity because many here have seen the wines give a lot of pleasure in the last decade, and yet it’s lower on the reviewers charts. I think this is explained by the age worthiness of these wines, or lack thereof. Critics tend to give structured vintages higher ratings. 2012 is fairly highly rated, justifiably in my experience. 2014 doesn’t get the highest rating, but it’s one that Meadows has continued to push over the years for its classicism.

2006 perhaps is underrated. Low scores from critics but I adore the bottles I’ve been opening (2006 Mugnier Clos de la Marechale recently, e.g.). The jury is out on 2017 but I found the wines at La Paulee this year to be excellent - deep, structured, with lots of life ahead of them.

For those worried about 2005, please dump your wines on me! Just did a tasting with a handful of 1ers and they were consistently worthy of praise. Youthful sure, and could be more open, but showing lots of yumminess now and depth for the future.
Rich Frankel

User avatar
Sean S y d n e y
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1155
Joined: March 1st, 2020, 3:20 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#20 Post by Sean S y d n e y » September 17th, 2020, 1:45 pm

I think 2017 is really lovely and will be achingly beautiful wines with time. We’ll miss years like 17 now that we have three straight years of hotter, riper wines to contend with afterwards.
Instagram: @seansydney

User avatar
Marcu$ Stanley
Posts: 1371
Joined: November 1st, 2010, 3:31 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#21 Post by Marcu$ Stanley » September 17th, 2020, 2:02 pm

Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am
Howard Cooper wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:55 am
My feeling about recent vintages is this. 1999, 2005 (I hope) and 2010 are the great vintages.
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
I have all kinds of confidence in 2005. Just tannic and needs age at the higher levels. But the balance is there for sure.

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1613
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#22 Post by Greg K » September 17th, 2020, 3:37 pm

Mich@el Ch@ng wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 12:23 pm
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am
Howard Cooper wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:55 am
My feeling about recent vintages is this. 1999, 2005 (I hope) and 2010 are the great vintages.
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
With that set of preferences you’d think you’d be all over 13.
Why?
Greg Kahn

JBrochu
Posts: 66
Joined: September 17th, 2020, 7:34 am

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#23 Post by JBrochu » September 17th, 2020, 4:04 pm

Anyone have thoughts on 2006 reds? I've never had any from that vintage, but just took a flyer on a few 2006 Domaine Raphet Clos Vougeot Vieilles Vignes.
J@hn

Danius Barzdukas
Posts: 289
Joined: September 25th, 2009, 7:49 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#24 Post by Danius Barzdukas » September 17th, 2020, 4:16 pm

Maybe 1991 is another one?

User avatar
Howard Cooper
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 19786
Joined: May 30th, 2009, 8:37 am
Location: Rockville, MD

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#25 Post by Howard Cooper » September 17th, 2020, 4:52 pm

If we are now going back in time, I am going with 1993.
Howard

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

User avatar
Jeremy Holmes
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 7151
Joined: April 28th, 2010, 3:50 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#26 Post by Jeremy Holmes » September 17th, 2020, 4:54 pm

In reds '91, '00 and '14. Some journo's seriously under-rated '99 on release, looking at yields and not the wines. This has turned out to be perhaps the greatest red Burg vintage of my lifetime.

In whites '00 and then some of the warmer years have been better than expected. '03 can be interesting and '09's and '12's drink well now. Not a warm vintage but '11's are really good, I tend to enjoy them better than '10.
ITB

M. Meer
Posts: 592
Joined: December 28th, 2010, 7:48 pm
Location: Glendale, CA

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#27 Post by M. Meer » September 17th, 2020, 5:13 pm

2013 > 2008 > 1996, but if one doesn't like the style, probably best to skip.

I agree with the idea that the duds have been few and far between, speaking strictly of vintages in recent memory.
Last edited by M. Meer on September 17th, 2020, 5:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mar.kus

User avatar
jason stein
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 412
Joined: November 17th, 2016, 11:15 am
Location: Boston

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#28 Post by jason stein » September 17th, 2020, 5:16 pm

Jeremy Holmes wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 4:54 pm
In reds '91, '00 and '14. Some journo's seriously under-rated '99 on release, looking at yields and not the wines. This has turned out to be perhaps the greatest red Burg vintage of my lifetime.

In whites '00 and then some of the warmer years have been better than expected. '03 can be interesting and '09's and '12's drink well now. Not a warm vintage but '11's are really good, I tend to enjoy them better than '10.
I really like 15 whites and they are drinking really well even in youth
instagram: @jtswine

User avatar
A. So
Posts: 3010
Joined: July 19th, 2011, 7:58 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#29 Post by A. So » September 17th, 2020, 5:23 pm

Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 12:06 pm
I don't agree with that assessment at all. We had an accidental 96 horizontal a few weeks back with bottlers of Chevillon, d'Angerville and Roumier; some of those bottles had good noses, but all had impenetrable walls of acidity on the palate; none were even remotely close to being finished.
That has generally been my experience with 1996 as well.
エaイdドrリiアaンn (93 pts.)

User avatar
Mattstolz
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2271
Joined: June 26th, 2017, 7:46 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#30 Post by Mattstolz » September 17th, 2020, 5:30 pm

maureen nelson wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 9:49 am
1988
birth year! ill take it!

now if I can just track down a few with good provenance...

Mich@el Ch@ng
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5669
Joined: March 31st, 2017, 9:57 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#31 Post by Mich@el Ch@ng » September 17th, 2020, 5:36 pm

Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 3:37 pm
Mich@el Ch@ng wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 12:23 pm
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am


I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
With that set of preferences you’d think you’d be all over 13.
Why?
Less ripe, complex, probably will age well, good acidity.

john stimson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3578
Joined: January 24th, 2010, 8:11 pm
Location: seattle

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#32 Post by john stimson » September 17th, 2020, 5:57 pm

A. So wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:23 pm
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 12:06 pm
I don't agree with that assessment at all. We had an accidental 96 horizontal a few weeks back with bottlers of Chevillon, d'Angerville and Roumier; some of those bottles had good noses, but all had impenetrable walls of acidity on the palate; none were even remotely close to being finished.
That has generally been my experience with 1996 as well.
I'm on Howard's side with regard to 96. Acid and structure don't scare me. You have to give the wines the wines a chance, though. Many have taken 20 or more years to come around, and you've got to give them at least a couple of hours of air to wake up. Recent Chevillon LSG and Bachelet Charmes have been stellar. (note CdB wines have been more spotty from 96, so it's a little harder to vouch for d'Angerville.)

User avatar
Keith Levenberg
Posts: 5592
Joined: June 6th, 2009, 3:11 pm
Location: Washington, D.C.

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#33 Post by Keith Levenberg » September 17th, 2020, 5:59 pm

M. Meer wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:13 pm
2013 > 2008 > 1996, but if one doesn't like the style, probably best to skip.
1996 tasted better young than 2008 or 2013, and 2008 tasted better young than 2013. If the hierarchy now is 13>08>96 that only reflects that the last two are aging badly (and the first might be the next to age badly!).

A couple years ago I would have had '08 on my underrated list, now I'm not sure what's happening to them. Hopefully they'll come out in a better spot than where they are now.

It's hard to think of underrated burgundy vintages because burgundy drinkers are too polite to malign vintages. Overrated vintages are much more common! However, one year I've had consistently appealing wines from that nobody talks about as especially good is '89.

john stimson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3578
Joined: January 24th, 2010, 8:11 pm
Location: seattle

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#34 Post by john stimson » September 17th, 2020, 6:08 pm

You know, my opinion is that every vintage goes thru phases. Great vintages, you hardly notice, because the wines are so good, but the less than great, but OK vintages, the phases are more noticeable. 2001 for quite a while would seem to go in and out of being "closed" then Open, then back to closed. 2008 may be doing the same thing. I wouldn't give up on any of them in terms of not aging the way you want them to.

User avatar
C. Mc Cart
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2038
Joined: December 22nd, 2009, 8:44 am
Location: Ontario

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#35 Post by C. Mc Cart » September 17th, 2020, 6:10 pm

Keith Levenberg wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:59 pm

It's hard to think of underrated burgundy vintages because burgundy drinkers are too polite to malign vintages. Overrated vintages are much more common!
Bingo.
Chris

User avatar
D@vid Bu3ker
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 37840
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:06 am
Location: Connecticut

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#36 Post by D@vid Bu3ker » September 17th, 2020, 6:26 pm

Rating a vintage implies that vintages can be assessed as a single entity. That makes zero sense.
David Bueker - Rieslingfan

maureen nelson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2654
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 5:12 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#37 Post by maureen nelson » September 17th, 2020, 6:28 pm

john stimson wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 6:08 pm
You know, my opinion is that every vintage goes thru phases. Great vintages, you hardly notice, because the wines are so good, but the less than great, but OK vintages, the phases are more noticeable. 2001 for quite a while would seem to go in and out of being "closed" then Open, then back to closed. 2008 may be doing the same thing. I wouldn't give up on any of them in terms of not aging the way you want them to.
Exactly. People are too impatient. A wine - or vintage - shuts down and people write it off. This is what happened with 1988s - beautiful and delicious when first in bottle and then the fruit went to sleep and people - most notably Parker, who never understood Burgundy (although has apparently now realized this) - revised their opinions of the vintage, downgrading them significantly. Even the 2005 vintage, which every wine critic that loves Burgundy raved up, is now out of favor (although many retain hope). The wines have shut down! True of 1988 until a very few years ago, true of 1993, very true of 1996 and to some degree 2008. Drink other vintages and be patient.

Jayson Cohen
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2565
Joined: July 9th, 2016, 4:29 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#38 Post by Jayson Cohen » September 17th, 2020, 6:30 pm

Keith Levenberg wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:59 pm
M. Meer wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:13 pm
2013 > 2008 > 1996, but if one doesn't like the style, probably best to skip.
1996 tasted better young than 2008 or 2013, and 2008 tasted better young than 2013. If the hierarchy now is 13>08>96 that only reflects that the last two are aging badly (and the first might be the next to age badly!).

A couple years ago I would have had '08 on my underrated list, now I'm not sure what's happening to them. Hopefully they'll come out in a better spot than where they are now.

It's hard to think of underrated burgundy vintages because burgundy drinkers are too polite to malign vintages. Overrated vintages are much more common! However, one year I've had consistently appealing wines from that nobody talks about as especially good is '89.
Keith, I think we have had this conversation before, or it’s deja vu, but 2000 strikes me as the most underrated vintage in red (also white) since ‘89. Whereas many lovers of traditional Burgs always knew that vintages like 1991, 1993, 2001, 2013, and 2014 had real potential, and even a vintage like 2007 was thought to be charming right away even if ageability was probably under-appreciated, nobody thought the 2000 reds would be really good, young or old. Until a few years in the cellar showed they were very good among many domaines. And they continue to be very good at age 20.

Jayson Cohen
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2565
Joined: July 9th, 2016, 4:29 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#39 Post by Jayson Cohen » September 17th, 2020, 6:35 pm

maureen nelson wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 6:28 pm
john stimson wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 6:08 pm
You know, my opinion is that every vintage goes thru phases. Great vintages, you hardly notice, because the wines are so good, but the less than great, but OK vintages, the phases are more noticeable. 2001 for quite a while would seem to go in and out of being "closed" then Open, then back to closed. 2008 may be doing the same thing. I wouldn't give up on any of them in terms of not aging the way you want them to.
Exactly. People are too impatient. A wine - or vintage - shuts down and people write it off. This is what happened with 1988s - beautiful and delicious when first in bottle and then the fruit went to sleep and people - most notably Parker, who never understood Burgundy (although has apparently now realized this) - revised their opinions of the vintage, downgrading them significantly. Even the 2005 vintage, which every wine critic that loves Burgundy raved up, is now out of favor (although many retain hope). The wines have shut down! True of 1988 until a very few years ago, true of 1993, very true of 1996 and to some degree 2008. Drink other vintages and be patient.
Patience is so key. It’s a long game.

Stephen Williams
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 302
Joined: June 13th, 2010, 9:27 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#40 Post by Stephen Williams » September 17th, 2020, 6:40 pm

Rauno E (NZ) wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 12:39 pm
FWIW in relation to whites I reckon 2013s might be a real bolster. Very early days of course.
I agree, certainly at the upper end. I had an extraordinarily good 2013 Bernard Moreau Grandes Ruchottes a few weeks ago, and Ramonet's '13s have always been super.
No, I'm not the guy from AWC !

User avatar
alan weinberg
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 13215
Joined: April 25th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#41 Post by alan weinberg » September 17th, 2020, 6:47 pm

maureen nelson wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 6:28 pm
john stimson wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 6:08 pm
You know, my opinion is that every vintage goes thru phases. Great vintages, you hardly notice, because the wines are so good, but the less than great, but OK vintages, the phases are more noticeable. 2001 for quite a while would seem to go in and out of being "closed" then Open, then back to closed. 2008 may be doing the same thing. I wouldn't give up on any of them in terms of not aging the way you want them to.
Exactly. People are too impatient. A wine - or vintage - shuts down and people write it off. This is what happened with 1988s - beautiful and delicious when first in bottle and then the fruit went to sleep and people - most notably Parker, who never understood Burgundy (although has apparently now realized this) - revised their opinions of the vintage, downgrading them significantly. Even the 2005 vintage, which every wine critic that loves Burgundy raved up, is now out of favor (although many retain hope). The wines have shut down! True of 1988 until a very few years ago, true of 1993, very true of 1996 and to some degree 2008. Drink other vintages and be patient.
true, true. Clive Coates and Tanzer correctly called the vintage; Parker missed it. And Parker’s call of 93 let the rest of us scoop up those babies at fire sale prices. Cote de Nuits was rated 73, Cote de Beaune 67, later upward-revised by Rovani, but still too little.

User avatar
Marshall Manning
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 624
Joined: January 31st, 2009, 1:16 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#42 Post by Marshall Manning » September 17th, 2020, 8:58 pm

Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
Greg, I'm not sure I get the comparison between the two vintages. 1996 was a less-ripe, high acid vintage that showed a lot of purity on release, where 2005 was riper, with more tannic structure but less acid. I'd say that 2005 is more like 1995, although with more ripeness, but I think they both had a lot of obvious structure when young.
Marshall

maureen nelson
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 2654
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 5:12 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#43 Post by maureen nelson » September 17th, 2020, 9:05 pm

Marshall Manning wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:58 pm
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
Greg, I'm not sure I get the comparison between the two vintages. 1996 was a less-ripe, high acid vintage that showed a lot of purity on release, where 2005 was riper, with more tannic structure but less acid. I'd say that 2005 is more like 1995, although with more ripeness, but I think they both had a lot of obvious structure when young.
And structure in burgundy (at least pinot noir) was something Parker couldn’t understand. But true Burgundy lovers know strucure is the key to beautiful burgundy. It is all about the shape.

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1613
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#44 Post by Greg K » September 17th, 2020, 10:25 pm

Mich@el Ch@ng wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:36 pm
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 3:37 pm
Mich@el Ch@ng wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 12:23 pm


With that set of preferences you’d think you’d be all over 13.
Why?
Less ripe, complex, probably will age well, good acidity.
I think 13 is the most variable vintage of the more recent good run; some are already aging somewhat questionably.
Greg Kahn

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1613
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#45 Post by Greg K » September 17th, 2020, 10:31 pm

Marshall Manning wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:58 pm
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
Greg, I'm not sure I get the comparison between the two vintages. 1996 was a less-ripe, high acid vintage that showed a lot of purity on release, where 2005 was riper, with more tannic structure but less acid. I'd say that 2005 is more like 1995, although with more ripeness, but I think they both had a lot of obvious structure when young.
The hope is that you're right, the fear is that you're wrong. 2005s have plenty of acidity.
Greg Kahn

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1613
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#46 Post by Greg K » September 17th, 2020, 10:33 pm

john stimson wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:57 pm
A. So wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:23 pm
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 12:06 pm
I don't agree with that assessment at all. We had an accidental 96 horizontal a few weeks back with bottlers of Chevillon, d'Angerville and Roumier; some of those bottles had good noses, but all had impenetrable walls of acidity on the palate; none were even remotely close to being finished.
That has generally been my experience with 1996 as well.
I'm on Howard's side with regard to 96. Acid and structure don't scare me. You have to give the wines the wines a chance, though. Many have taken 20 or more years to come around, and you've got to give them at least a couple of hours of air to wake up. Recent Chevillon LSG and Bachelet Charmes have been stellar. (note CdB wines have been more spotty from 96, so it's a little harder to vouch for d'Angerville.)
We just had two Chevillons and both weren't very good. The d'Angerville was the best of the bunch based on the nose.
Greg Kahn

M. Meer
Posts: 592
Joined: December 28th, 2010, 7:48 pm
Location: Glendale, CA

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#47 Post by M. Meer » September 18th, 2020, 10:13 am

Keith Levenberg wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:59 pm
M. Meer wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:13 pm
2013 > 2008 > 1996, but if one doesn't like the style, probably best to skip.
1996 tasted better young than 2008 or 2013, and 2008 tasted better young than 2013. If the hierarchy now is 13>08>96 that only reflects that the last two are aging badly (and the first might be the next to age badly!).
I see a common thread in the wines. I think winemakers and viticulturists, in general, are better equipped to accommodate vintage variation and adapt to challenges. '13s seem to have more tender acidities compared to '08s, which can be a bit harder. Will that make '08s better wines and longer lived 15 years from now? How much of that is mother nature vs human intervention? 🤷🏻‍♂️ I think '13s might be more friendly and enjoyable earlier in comparison, which isn't a bad thing for me.

I'm still pretty high on '08 & '13 and would backfill certain producers. I'd go '95 and '98 before '96, though I do hope what '96 I have in the cellar will ultimately be enjoyable.
Mar.kus

Greg K
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1613
Joined: December 21st, 2013, 3:16 pm
Location: New York

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#48 Post by Greg K » September 18th, 2020, 10:24 am

Mattstolz wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:30 pm
maureen nelson wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 9:49 am
1988
birth year! ill take it!

now if I can just track down a few with good provenance...
FYI, I had a bottle of 88 Lafarge Mitans a few months back that was pretty good.
Greg Kahn

Mich@el Ch@ng
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 5669
Joined: March 31st, 2017, 9:57 pm

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#49 Post by Mich@el Ch@ng » September 18th, 2020, 10:32 am

Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 10:25 pm
Mich@el Ch@ng wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 5:36 pm
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 3:37 pm


Why?
Less ripe, complex, probably will age well, good acidity.
I think 13 is the most variable vintage of the more recent good run; some are already aging somewhat questionably.
which are those? I've mostly found they just haven't been ready. I have had some nice ramonet reds from that vintage and kevin did just post a nice note on the 13 roumier cras. I have a bunch of barthod, rousseau, roumier, drc, etc from 13 so I hope they come around sooner than later but I guess we'll see.

User avatar
Keith Levenberg
Posts: 5592
Joined: June 6th, 2009, 3:11 pm
Location: Washington, D.C.

Re: Underrated Burgundy Vintages

#50 Post by Keith Levenberg » September 18th, 2020, 11:00 am

Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 10:31 pm
Marshall Manning wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 8:58 pm
Greg K wrote:
September 17th, 2020, 11:30 am
I'm less confident making that call on 2005, as I have some concerns that it might go the way of 96 (though I really hope I'm wrong). I also think 2016 is a great vintage, personally.
Greg, I'm not sure I get the comparison between the two vintages. 1996 was a less-ripe, high acid vintage that showed a lot of purity on release, where 2005 was riper, with more tannic structure but less acid. I'd say that 2005 is more like 1995, although with more ripeness, but I think they both had a lot of obvious structure when young.
The hope is that you're right, the fear is that you're wrong. 2005s have plenty of acidity.
2005s have everything. It's as close as you can get to a sure thing in wine. Comparing it to '95 just sounds craaaazy to me. '95 has had hard tannin forever and some of them lost their fruit before they even got on the boat. '05 is made of pure silk. It's also one of those vintages where the growers were in awe of the quality of the grapes as they were bringing them in, unlike those years that claw their way up the vintage charts with comments like, "Growers were pleasantly surprised by how much weight the wines put on in barrel..." I remember being in Burgundy during the '05 harvest and one of the estate managers remarked how excited he was looking forward to the season's cheese, because even the grass was perfect. You never have to worry about those years when everything goes right. Timetable is another issue. Definitely not a year for the Boomers.

Post Reply

Return to “Wine Talk”