TN: 2004 Château Lascombes (France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Margaux)

WINE TALK
1
  • 2004 Château Lascombes - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Margaux (4/30/2011)
    Decanted for an hour and took 30 minutes for the oak to blow off and for floral fruit to emerge. Mid weight, silky tanins, currants, tobacco leaf, cherry,mineral and cassis. Decent length. All makes for a great value. I think CA would have a hard time matching this at 2-3 times the $44 price I paid for it. A smart buy. This is in it’s drinking window for me but I see no rush to consume these and will wait a few for btl 2/3. (92 pts.)

Posted from CellarTracker

2

I agree that this is a good wine and it was at a good price. Better than the 03 for me which kind of suffered from the heat of the vintage IMHO. The 05 is better but more expensive. I have not bought any since 05.

3

Craig,

Thanks for the notes! I had this 2 weeks ago and really enjoyed it. Recently I purchased a case of the '05.

4

Cool Luis! I organize monthly local byob tastings. If you ever want to join us send me and email to craigv@teammhc.com We have PNs coming up in May at Levain.

5

Craig,

I would love to attend your local BYOB tastings. I just sent you an email.

6

Thanks for the note, Craig. I have a couple of these sleeping in the cellar, alongside a few '05’s. The '05’s are exceptional, imo — need many years, but very very good.

7

Jack, I’ll tell you that the first bottle of 2003 I had was noxious and I was really ready to write them off. but about a year or so ago I had a second bottle which not only wasn’t putrid but was actually a pleasure to drink. If you haven’t had a 2003 recently it might be worth trying another

8

I don’t write notes any more so I don’t have anything for the recent bottles of Lascombes I’ve downed but, I dug up the last note I wrote for the '04 (I think this note is pretty consistent with the last few bottles I have had though):
12/22/09
Lascombes 2004:
Bright ruby color with blackish, purple rim. Aromas of black fruit, bittersweet chocolate, coffee grounds and game meats emerge as quickly as the cork is popped. Purple flowers and sweet cherries, along with mocha, lavender and smoke linger in the glass throughout the evening. This is one of the more concentrated wines I can remember from this vintage- no doubt why this wine has gained the reputation it has. Because of the concentration I think it is at its best with hour or more in glass. The finish is good, though overall the wine is a touch heavy and, if it matters to you, not really exemplary of Margaux. But, its pretty tasty.

9

I remember your note - I do have another bottle buried somewhere. Maybe drink sooner than later!

10

Had the 05 Thursday…with skis vice short ribs …pandp was pretty awesome for 57 restaurant price

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

11
  • 2004 Château Lascombes - France, Bordeaux, Médoc, Margaux (5/8/2011)
    After two hours in the decanter, the nose was essentially blackberry jam, red licorice and extreme oak. If smelling this blind, I would have pegged this as a Washington state cabernet. Palate isn’t very complex or enjoyable with too much oak, coffee liqueur, blackberry jam and red cherry. The oak treatment here is just too much and with the wine’s high level of fruit extraction it comes across flabby and unbalanced. (68 pts.)

Posted from CellarTracker

12

I’m with you (except for the score). This is closer to furniture than wine.

13

ha! i’m 8 points higher than you!

14

Ouch! [pwn.gif]

The fact that you scored 1992 Ernest & Julio Gallo White Zinfandel five points higher – in 2010~~ – must really say a lot about something!

15

that E&J wine had more character and charm than this Lascombes…and it had been stored in a garage in Las Vegas since release.

16

I too don’t find anything remotely Margaux about the 04 Lascombes, but there is a wide variety of tastes for people and so it doesn’t come as a shock to see a budding burg/nrhone/riesling-phile like Matt in utter disagreement with those that enjoy the profile.

F

17

Tried the EP2010 Lascombes on Friday next to other Margaux. Seriously night and day. It might be a good wine, but I’d never had ID’d it as a Margaux. Wouldn’t be a buyer, even if I was buying 2010, which I’m not.

18

I wonder if there was something flawed with Matt’s wine. I have had the 04 Lascombes twice and I would not describe it as flabby. I would agree that it had seen its fair share of oak and that it did not scream Margaux. If it is unbalanced, it would be the heavy use of oak, however, it is integrating and my last bottle was in much better shape than the first one I had back in late 08 or early 09.

If you don’t like heavy oak or modern/international styled bordeaux, I would skip this one. Otherwise, I’d give it a whirl.

G

19

Here’s the CT extended stats for users’ scores of this wine. It definitely shows a wide range of opinion.

*Average score (all users): 90.6 pts.
Average (I’m a fan): 88.3 pts.
Median score: 91 pts.
Std. deviation: 3.82

•95-100: 2.74% (4)
•90-94: 78.77% (115)
•85-89: 15.75% (23)
•80-84: 1.37% (2)
•< 80: 1.37% (2)
•Flawed: 0.62% (1)

Based on 161 notes and 146 scores from 135 users.
*

20

It seems pretty consistent to me - 119 out of 146 found the wine to be outstanding or better. Only 4 notes dropped below 85. I took a quick peak at the notes and the lower scores or more negative notes that were not scored tended to focus on the oak treatment. If you can’t/won’t tolerate a wine that sees a large amount of oak, then I would skip this wine. The second thing I gleaned is if you expect this wine to scream Margaux or to have the Margauxberry nose, then skip this wine.

G