I have been tasting through a good number of 2016s recently to see how they are looking at the outset here, and I have to say, I’m very impressed. I think they will be the real deal.
For reference I have found most, though not all, 2005s 2009s, and 2010s over extracted and monolithic. So many of those wines show a lot of alcohol in a way that makes them unenjoyable. And they just lack complexity and the feeling that the future will bring improvement.
2016s, on the other hand, strike me as having the freshness to offer more potential for future development. More depth and complexity. I have been particularly struck by the pomerols. Conseillante , trot, and vcc have been delicious. Ducru and cos on the left bank have been lovely too. The only real surprising miss was Angelus, which tasted more akin to 2010 or 2009.
Some of the big ones I have not yet tasted include Lafleur and le pin, cheval, and hb. I will report back once I have an opinion on those.
But overall I am very pleased. The balance of the 2016s makes me hopeful that the winemakers will do well harnessing the warm years of 18 thru 20. My advice to them would be to take your foot off the gas. Don’t overdo the wines.
While my palate would not necessarily agree with yours regarding 2005, 2009 and 2010, I would wholeheartedly agree with you about 2016. I think it is a phenomenal vintage. Below is a link to my UGC experience:
Yep. Few if any duds, and many “best ever” candidates even for chateaux that have many greats to their name. But I don’t think I’ve opened any in a year or so. Are they still good for early drinking?
I have not had that many 2016s, but from what I have had (esp. Pichon Lalande) I completely agree with you - also agree about 2009 (esp. 2009 where a lot of wines seem to me to be pruny and not that fresh) and 2010. I think a lot of 2005s will be really good eventually.
Patrick Stella wrote:
I have been tasting through a good number of 2016s recently to see how they are looking at the outset here, and I have to say, I’m very impressed. I think they will be the real deal.
For reference I have found most, though not all, 2005s 2009s, and 2010s over extracted and monolithic. So many of those wines show a lot of alcohol in a way that makes them unenjoyable. And they just lack complexity and the feeling that the future will bring improvement.
2016s, on the other hand, strike me as having the freshness to offer more potential for future development. More depth and complexity. I have been particularly struck by the pomerols. Conseillante , trot, and vcc have been delicious. Ducru and cos on the left bank have been lovely too. The only real surprising miss was Angelus, which tasted more akin to 2010 or 2009.
Patrick, agree with you on the 2016’s. I went to the UGC tastings for all of these vintages, and the 2016 was my favorite, followed by the 2010 and the 2005. 2009 did not appeal to me nearly as much as the other vintages, although most people there were raving about them.
Colin Haggerty wrote:
Hi Patrick:
While my palate would not necessarily agree with yours regarding 2005, 2009 and 2010, I would wholeheartedly agree with you about 2016. I think it is a phenomenal vintage. Below is a link to my UGC experience:
Leglise Clinet I think is a very good wine, but more structured than vcc or conseillante. This is more closed down and more tannic. Put it away.
beausejour duffau lagarrosse is a little too modern for me. Interesting this wine has about as big a spread between scores from different critics as I can recall seeing. Neal Martin liked it, then really liked it, then didn’t. Galloni loved it. Some others thought it pretty unremarkable. Opinions are all over the map. Personally I thought it wasn’t really going anywhere. Not enough depth or complexity. Some fruit, but monolithic. Not exciting to me.
Chateau L’If is pretty good but not great. Nice sour cherry fruit profile. A little tart. Just doesn’t quite have enough delineation to get me really excited. A little bit jumbled. I’m sure it will be a nice wine in time, but it doesn’t spark excitement.
Another bottle of Cos, on the other hand, does. So seductive already on the nose, and then the palate is so well coordinated–the fruit and acid and tannin just moving through the taste in great unison. Like parallel lines moving forward. Not crossing and getting all mixed together. Staying in their lane and complementing each other. The taste remains clear from start to finish, and you can feel each part so distinctly. To me that is balance. Such a nice wine.
I don’t know how I missed this! I live in Summerlin and a Grand Reserve Member at Total Wine, lol! It looked amazing, so thank you for posting! I did somehow find a similar UGC tasting for the 2017’s through K&L in SF January 2020…little did I know it would be my last event like this for a while
We have been buying, and enjoying the 2016 Gros Caillou. A great value at $22, IMO. Neal Martin’s review is spot-on. This wine nicely straddles the line between Old and New World. I am sure they can be cellared for a few years, but they are so good right now and they will probably not shut down. I know the OP is about the top wines of the vintage, but there are also values to be found in this vintage.
There’s a number of threads out there with great recommendations if you use the search function a bit. It all depends on what style of wines you like and what your ceiling limit is for price in your QPR. But regardless, there are a TON of great values in BDX in a year like 2016 (but maybe even moreso in 2014 which has not appreciated like 2016) under $50… Certainly you can get far better value than in Napa.
Of the budget BDX that I’ve had so far, the ones <$30 that have really impressed include: Capbern, Lilian Ladouys, Lanessan, Marquis de Calon and Cantemerle. If you extend to <$50, I’d include Sociando Mallet, Meyney, Gloria, and Dame de Montrose. And there’s surely dozens of others, especially if you like riper Napa-style wines.
Mark Golodetz wrote:
Usually people don’t mention the 2014s, but I prefer it as a vintage to 2009 and 2015.
I went to the UGC tasting for the 2014 vintage in 2017 and thought very highly of the wines, and bought a lot of them. I thought the qualitative peaks of 2015 were higher than 2014, especially in Margaux and Pessac on the Left Bank. Happy to own some bottles of both vintages. IMO, both vintages take a back seat to the 2016 vintage.
I think it is a question of style. Found a few ‘15s to love, but I find the majority of 2014s have a raciness that I love. Absolutely agree that 2016 is more profound.
Lots of good discussion on the topic via the search function here. And you can also look on the Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts board for other threads on the same topic.
If you are able to get wines shipped from either K&L or Winex, both of them carry good selections of everyday drinking Bdx, beyond the cru classe that are everywhere.
But a thread leading off with Le Pin, Lafleur, l’If etc. may not a be a great launching point for QPR discussion…
A suggestion would be to figure out what style you prefer as many here have wide ranging preferences so a good QPR from one of us might not be your style and a poor QPR for you (if that makes sense). Is there style of wines you like we might be able to help guide you from/with?
Tour St Christophe is hard to beat at ~$28 but it is of course style dependent but usually a good one at that price point to try. An idea would be to try 375s of various suggestions for you to get a gauge on style preference; look for tastings in your area; buy with friends allowing to split bottles or buy more bottles to taste, etc etc
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
![[oops.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/1/1f129ddad071ffe5db6c99817c3cab666035a70a.gif "oops"){kind=small}