2000 Bordeaux are now 21 years old, finally reaching drinking age

Sociando Mallet 2000

At last! A good bottle of SM 2000! I hoped that such a thing existed but after countless disappointments I opened this one with no expectations.
The nose was entirely different compared to previous bottles - bright dark cherry and blackcurrant, before leather and cigar box, the attack was bright and fruity, blackberry and blackcurrant with real concentration and zest, then a middle section of plums and dark cherry, freshened by that trademark minty touch, and a long, quite deep finish.
Not quite as good as the Cuvée Jean Gautreau but very close. It’s a pity all bottles of SM 00 are not like this.

This was sadly my last bottle and I thoroughly enjoyed it, but after 13 bad bottles previously, I will not be looking for more.

DDC: Mark – I have a different view. We had a vertical of the wine with the owner about 10 years ago. Everybody present thought the wines got better with the 1998 vintage. We had no very old vintages but the 80th and early 90th were not a good period. With the 1998 the wines were more intense without being overdone. And the owner, Monsieur Bernard, hates wines too modern and too manipulated in the cellar. He made this very clear and I thought the wines show it.

I never liked the 2000, and found it a bit angular, disjointed, and unwieldy.

Bumping this to note that the bottle of 2000 Lagrange I just opened is singing with no air/decant.

1 Like

Drinking one (2000 Lagrange) right now, pop and pour, and my experience has been quite similar…it’s singing!

My last remaining Bordeaux are mostly 2000s - Palmer, Ducru, Cos, Figeac, Canon la Gaff … probably time to jump in.

I popped a 2000 Lagrange on Friday… it was a bad bottle (or had been stored poorly, I just picked it up recently), burnt flavors. Down the drain. Maybe I will look for another to see if can have a good one.

They were pretty damn delicious upon release in 2003.

I had a Pape Clement 2000 magnum last Sunday , drinking very very well .

1 Like

I was operating under the impression that Derenoncourt arrived at DDC in 2002, but maybe it was earlier? The 1996 is a wonderful classic old school claret, and I liked the 1998 too, but the style had evolved by then. I have not tried the 2000, which Julian did not like, but this estate has imo become more homogenised and anaesthetized in the 21st century, so it is an easy pass every year, given that the competition, both in Pessac and more widely in Bordeaux, is so much more interesting.

My impression of the 2000 vintage is that it is a good vintage to own and the majority of classed growths are entering their drinking windows but there are notable laggards among the FGs and super seconds. A notable recent standout has been Pontet-Canet.

1 Like

Agree on the Ducru but I found it needed a long decant and was even better on day 2

We enjoyed a 2000 Smith Haut Lafitte last night, and it was superb. The nose just screams Pessac, full of smoky, cedar and earthy aromas. More red fruits than black on the palate, with enough tannins to suggest that this wine is not at its peak yet. A great match with chateaubriand from the backyard grill. The only downside is that this was our last bottle, but it sure was enjoyable.


This 2000 La Lagune [Haut Medoc] was purchased EP and shows a cool, taut iron/iodine nose on day one. Bricking at the edges, but still good depth of garnet color. There is a little funk on the palate - forest, barn, fall leaves. Medium bodied, 13% abv, and seems to gain more flesh on the second day. Sometimes this property - and Cantemerle - are mentally grouped in with the Margaux AOC given their proximity/similarity, but I liked the 2000 Rauzan Segla we had recently more. A couple notable aspects of this year - 2000 was the first year to use a sorting table (which seems surprising for a cru classe) and 30% of the blend was cabernet franc and petit verdot. Overall, I quite like this, slotting it into the A- zone on my scorecard (more based on the day two development)…but I still feel like it could/should have been better based on how near peers have done over the years e.g. 2000 Rauzan Gassies and others of that ilk.

I’d call that a garnet core, with bricking, but perhaps The Hanes can opine.


I tasted the 2000 and 2005 side by side a year or so ago. Nothing wrong with the 2000 but nothing great either. The 2005 though was utterly insipid, and any resemblance to the great wines of the past was on the label rather than in the contents of the bottle. So bland that most of it went into the next day’s sauce.

Dererencourt is a very nice man, but I have never tasted a wine of his that I would serve to friends.

1 Like

No surprise, but I’m in full agreement about the wines at DDC completely losing the thread post-02.*

I did thoroughly enjoy a 2000 DDC rouge though a few months ago. It wasn’t a rival for their epic wines from the 60’s and 70’s (and I don’t really know their 80’s wines), but it was sufficiently old school and typical to check that box, enough so that I’ve grabbed 5-6 bottles at auction of the 98s and 96s to enjoy.

*I was impressed by both the 19 and 20 recently.

I have quite enjoyed the couple of 2000 La Lagune that I have drunk. Classic luncheon Claret style, and no worse for it. Was actually pretty tasty at 10 yrs of age, with its supple tannin profile.

Dinner with visiting family from out-of-town at a local Argentine restaurant on Monday 10/30/23 and I decided to lug along 2000/2002/2003 Leoville Barton for the mostly non wine-geek attendees.

As I’ve noted with prior bottles from the same at-release purchase lot, 2003 continue to drink well and please those looking for a happy compromise between very ripe and still classic Bordeaux characteristics. Uncorked at the restaurant.

The 2002, double decanted at about 2 hours before the 1st pour, had sufficiently impressed me with prior, mostly singular bottles to taste its evolution over the years, this en-primeur bottle was fine but not up to par with either of the 2003 or 2000. Definitely in the classic mode, but this slightly bulky-clunky wine revealed plenty of angular roughness when tasted side-by-side.

The 2000 Leoville Barton was double-decanted at about 2 hours before the first pour, another at-release bottle, and was simply head-and-shoulder above the other 2. Silky-smooth texture that effortlessly glides in the mouth. Fruit and just-right extraction, with incredible length, that made me reach out to sip more often than I did with the other wines. Plenty of great stuff in this wine that will please for many, many years.


A 1991 Napa versus a 2000 Paulliac.

1 Like

Probably the lighting but one looks rich in suspended sediment!

Did you decant in advance? I’ve seen milk with better clarity LOL