I drank a really cheap Chateauneuf yesterday: a 2003 Fortia cuvee Baron.
Sure it was roasted an somehow a little jammy, but the nose was seductive in its own right and after 24 hours it was actually a very enjoyable bottle.
Many producers did quite well in 2003. Is there still hope for the rest down the road?
For the good producers I don´t see any problem, except the fact: who doesn´t like warm vintages should stick to 2004, 2006 …
Many 2003s are still youthful reg. aromatic developement … with further age they will reveal more structure and complexity. Chateauneuf is not a wine that ages on its acidity …
Thanks Gerhard. Very fine reply
Chateauneuf is not a wine that ages on its acidity …
That’s for sure. I agree w Gerhard - IMO the 2004 and 2006 vintages are overlooked. And I even prefer those young. But having had a 2010 wine from Lirac last night, I think my advice would be to get a wine that wasn’t made by Cambie. That Lirac was and it was also terrible. You give him vintages like 2003 and 2007 and you drink at your own risk.
I will not buy another bottle of '03 CdP.
Me neither, but still have some bottles in the cellar. The Fortia kind of was a pleasant surprise as my expectation were low. (It is a 25$ bottle)
Few days ago a Brunel Les Cailloux hat strong volatile acid. Is that normal?
Will need to open and 03 Pegau with fellow Berserkers and report back…
All my bottles of the 03 Pegau have been varying levels of awesome.
Not when I can get 2007s. En magnum. To take to sushi.
[someone had to say it]
I bought a decent number of 2003s; at that early stage of my exploring French wine, it seemed like a good introductory category and vintage. The results I get in recent years tend to range from what Claus describes, down to worse. I try to drink these when I have an occasion that doesn’t really call for a good wine (e.g. feel like having another glass or two at the end of the evening on the weekend), mostly just to get them out of my cabinet and to make room for something more deserving.
The Rhone has kind of lost me overall, though there are of course certain wines, producers and vintages that I still admire (though few of the ones I do still move me to buy them, particularly given the pricing). If I want Rhone style wines, I’d rather buy Tercero. I have a decent amount of Beaucastel and Vieux Donjon from good vintages in storage; I’ll probably open a bottle here and there in the coming decade or so to the extent I want CdP.
One of the many things that eroded my interest in the Rhone is my continuing inability to know when to open anything. Not only do I seem usually to get the wrong age, but I can’t even usually tell if I got it too early or too late. I have no idea whether my remaining 2003s are going to get better or worse if I wait longer.
I will be opening a mag of '03 Pegau in a week or two, will post if this thread is still active even though I’m the importer. It’s a favorite vintage of mine for Pegau; my results with other Chateauneufs has been very mixed.
Dan Kravitz
I’m in a similar boat, Chris. CdP was the first “real/popular/big boy” wine region my wife and I (read: I) focused on in our quest to build a cellar. Luckily, we (I) got into the game with the '04 and '05 vintages; so any '03’s I have were back-fills. Unfortunately, many '03s got high scores from WS, and I was largely using WS as my buying guide back then. I’ve had a couple '03 CdPs that I thought were really good (Vieux Donjon comes to mind), and many that were rather messy. Like you, my tastes have gravitated away from the S. Rhone — a large part of that is the role wine plays in my life; it used to be more of an on-its-own beverage for me and my wife, but that gradually changed over time to a dinner accompaniment beverage for us. We don’t frequently eat food that calls for a big red, and most of our CdPs still require more age, so I rarely find myself opening one.
I still keep my eyes on a few producers I’m particularly keen on (Pegau; Boislauzon; Charvin; Vieux Donjon; Clos des Papes, Beaucastel), but I nonetheless don’t find myself buying very often. I’ll still buy when I see good deals, but I’m pretty much of the mind that I have enough CdP in our cellar to keep us happy for a long time.
As for when to open them: my rule is right away, and then wait 10+ years, with appropriate adjustments as certain vintages and wines require. For example, it generally pains me to see folks popping corks on their '05 CdPs right now — that vintage is so incredibly structured, right now might literally be the worst time to be opening these bottles. I think CdP lasts a lot longer than most folks give it credit for, so I’d advise “no hurry” on opening most of them. That said, the '03 vintage kind of flys in the face of a lot of what I just said. 
The 2003 Henry Bonneau Marie Beurrier was light and delicious after 5 hours decanting. But you really need the decant to taste it – otherwise it’s pretty flat.
I agree the 2004s are overlooked; I have a few Bonneau Celestins, and they have been delightful, slightly better than the 2005s and much more to my taste than the more highly regarded 2007s.
Did Bonneau make a 2003 Celestins, I have never seen one?
Only a Marie Beurrier and Les Rouliers i think
Disagree if you mean that the 2004 Bonneaus are “better” than his 2005s. The latter vintage - however - will need a lot of time in the bottle. But the 2004s are also good.
If you don´t like the 2007 Bonneaus you also won´t like the 1989 Celestins … ![[wow.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/7/7d450e9830889c8943b674446a21b7254cad657e.gif "wow"){kind=small}
No, Bonneau did not produce a 2003 Celestins - only a Marie Beurrier and a regular CdP.
I stand by note that the 2004 is better than 2005; I have had them side by side three times, and each time preferred the 2004. Much more aromatic complexity, and a little more freshness versus the density and mass of the 2005. Different animals entirely, and comes down to taste.
Although I have not tasted the 1989 and 2007 together, I have loved the 1989 Celestins, which has aged beautifully and is certainly more red fruited than the rather plummy 2007. I would compare the 1990 Celestins with the 2007, very similar in style.
I haven’t had much luck with the 03 VD. I thought I’d drunk them all up. But found yet one more a while ago, and stuck it in the racks for some casual quaffing. It’s probably the most disappointing vintage of theirs I’ve tasted, and time seems to have made things worse. On this one, I disagree with all the pro reviews…
That´s it !
I haven’t had much luck with the 03 VD. I thought I’d drunk them all up. But found yet one more a while ago, and stuck it in the racks for some casual quaffing. It’s probably the most disappointing vintage of theirs I’ve tasted, and time seems to have made things worse. On this one, I disagree with all the pro reviews…
Upon further reflection (added later) when we did a VD vertical some years ago, maybe the 94 or 97 were worse, being watery, rather than roasted. But I never bought those. So I guess this is the most disappointing I’ve cellared. [/quote]