In reading the Galloni thread, I kept running across the 2018 Palmer release as a textbook example of reviews running up prices. So I went to the K and L website, as they kindly reproduce all the major critics take on this wine…
With a 3.83 Ph, and alcohol in excess of 14%…listed as 14.3…how is this wine so different or unique that a typical cult like Cali Cabernet blend that Parker has loved for years? Gobs of fruit, blueberry pie, blackberry jam descriptors, etc. I could be drinking Carter, or Schrader, or a number of other Napa Valley floor producers with similar numbers. Is there something unique in this bottle that we have not all seen before? Or is it just that Bordeaux has finally reached the apogee with climate change that they can now produce California lookalikes consistently.
And the Palmer pricing seems to have reached Cali cab levels of roughly $500.00 per bottle. Are we just getting fooled again?
I cant answer your question, but this comment from Vinous (!) might assist:
Martin noted that while it could easily be argued that Bordeaux estates are more risk averse these days as they become more corporate, the 2018 Palmer is in his view as “boundary pushing” as the 1947 Cheval Blanc was in its time.
“Long after I’m gone, the cognoscenti will be talking about the 2018 Palmer in exactly those terms,” he predicted.
“There will never be another Palmer like it,” he said in his tasting note. “It was a massive risk. But by throwing caution to the wind, something extraordinary was born”.
I don’t know why Parker is getting dragged into this, but here’s his early in-bottle tasting note on the 1989 Palmer:
“Palmer’s 1989 is one of the vintage’s great successes. The wine exhibits a dark ruby/purple color, a sweet, jammy nose of black fruits, intermingled with floral scents, licorice, and a touch of truffles. Full-bodied and supple, with low acidity, copious quantities of ripe fruit and glycerin, and a medium to full-bodied, concentrated, harmonious, seamless texture, this is a gorgeous Palmer. It may turn out similar to this estate’s brilliant 1962 and 1953. Although approachable, it will improve for another decade, and last for 20-25 years.”
I’m not sure what is new.
Yes, Palmer is expensive and has been for a while, although $500 is clearly related to the scores and scarcity of the 2018. It’s actually making me a bit fearful I won’t get delivery of my futures.
The special part here is that due to mildew, the biggest part of the potential crop was destroyed very early on. The rest of the crop got a perfect growing season afterwards. So the remaining bunches got all the power of the vines and the terroir. It’s like doing a green harvest and removing 85% of the potential bunches.
The result is a wine which can’t be reporduced at this estate and which has more of everything (that’s why most critics, especially Neal who isn’t usually a fan of these kinds of bold and over-the-top wines, scored it much lower from barrel as it could have turned out wrong, a caricature of a Bordeaux; but that obviously didn’t happen). There are other example where such extraordinary conditions turned out exceptional wines, another one is the 1961 Palmer: as Jeff Leve noted, Palmer had the same exceptionally low yield of 11hl/h in 2018 as in 1961, and well all know the more than legendary 1961 Palmer.
It will for sure not taste like your usual Napa, it’s still Bordeaux, Margaux and Palmer. But it will be a different Palmer with a lot of everything. That doesn’t mean, however, that everybody will like it. I know a few people which never really liked the often cited Cheval 1947. I guess you have to taste it to find out if you like it or not. I’m not sure I will like it, but I’m curious as hell to try it.
On another point: And 14.3% is much lower when compared to so many Napas these days. I’ve just tasted the last few vintages of Sloan and every vintage showed heat from the glass (with alcohol levels around 15.5%).
I buy Palmer most years, usually in magnum form. I have never had any Palmer that tasted remotely like a California wine, and although I suspect with that low a yield, this might be a little different, but not enough to surrender its Palmer character.
Palmer is the Medoc wine I would promote to First Growth.
This description is Neal blowing a gasket for this wine.
“The 2018 Palmer is a legend in the making. I had an inkling out of barrel, but such was its intensity that I wanted to assess it in bottle before I felt confident in saying so, because this could have gone either way. It storms from the glass with black fruit and floral scents, crushed violet and incense that knock your senses sideways while retaining brilliant delineation and focus. The palate is not quite as bold and brassy as when I tasted it from barrel, though I can vouchsafe that among over 20 vintages of Palmer that I have tasted at this stage, this is easily the most extroverted and powerful, displaying a kind of millefeuille of intense black fruit counterpoised by a razor-sharp line of acidity. This audacious Palmer was still revving its engines 48 hours after opening. There will never be another Palmer like this, sui generis. It was a massive risk. But by throwing caution to the wind, something extraordinary was born.
Thanks for the replies! So it sounds like the ultra low yields this year are the secret sauce explanation for the character of the wine. This didn’t happen all over Bordeaux, so what happened at Palmer? Did they run out of chemical spray to suppress mildew? Devotion to biodynamic principals? It appears they had a near disaster but pulled out a triumph in the end…
In my somewhat limited experience, even when Bordeaux are riper than normal and at higher alcohol levels, they still don’t smell or taste at all like California wines. They just don’t. The fruit has a different profile, there are different secondary notes, etc.
Heavy rains produced mildew and killed off a lot of the crop. They didn’t make a 2nd wine in 2018 either. Not sure what Palmer would use to suppress mildew but they are very biodynamic, so certainly wouldn’t have been a chemical spray.
Agreed, Ive had several Palmers with the most recent being a 2000 and definitely wouldn’t mistake it for Cali cab. Even more spoofed wines like Leoville Poyferre I don’t think I’d ever mistake for a Cab - though blind tasting can be humbling…
Parker always wrote like that, it was how he achieved “Parkerization” of the wine world – claiming that low acidity and jamminess were positive qualities. It doesn’t at all mean that the 1989 Palmer was “jammy” by today’s standards. The key thing to look at is alcohol levels. I’d be astounded if the 89 Palmer was 14.3% alcohol or otherwise similar to the 2018. The 1999 Palmer was very heady, plush, and opulent but I believe had 13% alcohol or less.
I have zero interest in a modern left bank Bordeaux described as super-jammy, concentrated, and alcoholic. Especially if it’s $400!
I had the 2009 Palmer at a Zachys tasting and while it didn’t taste like a California wine, it DID taste like a Chateauneuf / southern Rhone wine! Very good in that style but not very left bank.