2017 Bordeaux En Primeur

WINE TALK
61

Vincent, you really shouldn’t pretend that you know what you are talking about when you make such glaring errors as this. First Growths, which include three Pauillacs last time I counted, have traditionally not shown their wines at UGC tastings. And blind tastings are a relatively recent phenomenon, and the estates who stopped coming wanted to tell their story without being lumped into a large tasting. They also worried about sample degradation, as by the time we got to taste the wines, they were several days old.

I too am a little disturbed by your tone. By all means question the format, the results and what is being tasted, but you seem to have lumped a lot of very good people as untrustworthy, and wanting to game the system. if you had said that there are problems with en primeurs, I would not have had a problem with that, but you are injecting a note of venom, and making some really slanderous comments about the people who I know try very hard to give representative samples. If you have examples, pray share them with the rest of us, if not, I would suggest a polite retreat.

62

Vincent,
Jeff had the courtesy to respond to all of your questions. You have at least me as an audience for what you’re saying/alleging, but Jeff asked some very fair and good questions in Post #42; will you answer them? Your avoidance of his questions only weakens your argument, and tends to suggest you’re just spreading rumors/making stuff up. I’m genuinely interested to hear your answers to his questions (and I’d be willing to bet your audience is greater than only me). [cheers.gif]

63

I am sorry, but there is. You are simply quoting old websites as if they are gospel, and I am telling how it really is.

So maybe we agree that the wines tasted in March are not often close to the final product?

No. Please reread what I wrote. The Left Bank wines and Pessac Leognan have all been blended. In some cases, a minor amount of press wine might be added, but that is not going to change the wine. In the Right Bank, you are tasting a very good idea of the final blend, but the wines are not blended until later.

If you were really interested, you can find the blends for barrel tastings on my site for numerous Right Bank wines. That same info is on other sites as well. Have a look at those statistics and compare them with the blends for bottled wines from the same chateau. Those blends are often the wineries website. They are also included in numerous tasting notes on Cellartracker, from people tasting at the UGC and at the chateau or various dinners.

… You are never going to have a level playing field. For example let’s say you want to taste Pauillac. It is impossible to have all the wines from the appellation available to compare, as several estates do not provide samples for tasting outside their chateau…

It used to be the case, but then the high end chateaux decided they did not want to do it anymore in fear of being hurt by blind tasting.

No, that is completely wrong. Where are you reading this? Several estates have NEVER sent barrel samples for tastings. You can include all the First Growths, some Second Growths, Petrus, Le Pin, Lafleur, La Mission, Yquem, Cheval, Ausone, Tertre Roteboeuf, Leoville Las Cases and others.

…Some wines are always great in barrel, but they don’t develop the nuances as expected by the time the wine is bottled, or a few years later they lose their charm)…

So maybe we agree that the wines tasted in March are not often close to the final product?

No. Please read the entire paragraph. You need an understanding of how each wine ages, which is gained after years of tasting in barrel, and watching them over years. It has nothing to do with how the sample was prepared.

At the end, En primeur is an OK proxy of the final quality of the wine in general and it is a great marketing machine. It has turned into a marketing only machine for the high price bordeaux as they do not play the primeur game fair.

Again you wrong. En primeur is the greatest marketing machine in the history of wine. True. But it benefits consumers, the trade and the wineries.

Consumers because it would be impossible to have that much wine, from so many estates offered all over the world for what is truly a small markup. Plus stacks of journalists and members of the trade are on equal footing to taste the wines and report their opinions, offering a myriad of views.

The trade because they can taste 1,000 different wines over a few a few days and are more than able to rely on their palate for buying decisions.

The wineries, because those that are strong enough to sell as futures have access to cash flow. The system is not just for high priced wineries. Several hundred wines are offered as futures. Most are not expensive.

If you are curious and want a better understanding on how the system was formed and how it actually works, spend a few moments and read this article. Learn about Negociants, Courtiers, Buying Bordeaux En Primeur

Honest, I am trying to help you understand how it really works. It does not matter if you like the system or not, the wines or not, futures or not. But you should at least have a better idea of what really takes place.

64

Jeff if I am reading correctly, what you are saying about the blind tasting is not that you are upscoring a wine based on knowing it is a first growth specifically and that is why you dont like blind tasting, but it is that you can better predict how the next year plus of aging is going to go for a wine by knowing what it is, and that allows you to compare it to previous barrel tasting experiences which are now released in bottle and better predict what the consumer is going to get and try to score THAT wine, right?

in short, because wines have a lot of evolving left to do in the barrel, knowing the history of how this chateaus wine has evolved during that time in the past helps you predict where that barrel sample will go from here.

65

I never thought I’d live to see the day when a bunch of Wineberserkers rushed to the defense of Jeff Leve :stuck_out_tongue:

But well deserved, I think. I don’t always agree with Jeff’s taste, but more and more I find his website and dialog here some of the most useful info about Bordeaux.

66

En Primeur 2017…will the tortoise beat the tortoise?

67

Jeff, thank you for sharing your experiences and thoughts.

So would it be fair for me to summarize that barrel sample scores are heavily based on the taster’s previous experience with the Chateau, with the appellation, then with knowledge of the track record how a Chateau’s wine usually evolves, make a judgement call that is relative to the score of previous years’ barrel sample?

Or perhaps in a more blunt way, because there is no level playing field, because the wine is not FINAL final, because it’s too early, the EP score is essentially a comparison to previous year’s EP score, that it’s all relative and comparative in its very own scope?

The reason I’m asking my question this way is that, we all know the 100-point scale is really more of a 10 or 15-point scale (or for Suckling, 5-point scale). If EP score is mostly comparative, and as wine making technique improves every year, I can see Bordeaux to be the first victim that too many wines would just be in the 96-100 range that render the system meaningless.

Or am I digging the wrong hole here?

68

I read Jeff’s post as something along the lines of “previous experience helps inform what will come of this year’s bbl sample.”

Let’s say two different wines both present as big and bitter. Past experience has shown that one will sweeten and smooth-out with time, whereas the other will remain bitter throughout its life; that knowledge is helpful when predicting how the given EP samples will develop over time. If tasted blind, one wouldn’t necessarily know which outcome is more likely (expected).

… at least, that’s how I read it.

69

I very well could be digging the wrong hole.

…I haven’t had my wine tonight, after all.

70

… and I have had my wine tonight … so it’s a true toss-up as to who’s right! [cheers.gif]

71

I did taste barrel samples myself for some time and the main problem is not that the samples are doctored but that its often very early for the wines. Some Chateau itself and many critics would prefer to taste the wines in fall and not in spring. Due to more time in barrel the samples would be more similar to the final product than only ca. 6 months after the harvest. It has a reason why the wines rest in barrel for more or less 2 years and the wines are certainly not finished when tasted en primeur. The best way would be to stop this en Primeur circus entirely. Tasting bottled wine would be the most serious way of scoring the product. Then it would also be possible to compare blind tasting to non blind tasting results.

72

fixed that for you

73

Carter,

No, that is only a part of the equation. What’s in the glass is what matters. An understanding of the property and vintage gives the barrel sample context, so you have an idea about how the wine will develop. Tasting a barrel sample is not about how the wine is today, it is about how the wine will become as it develops.

Or perhaps in a more blunt way, because there is no level playing field, because the wine is not FINAL final, because it’s too early…

That’s out of context. Blind tastings for barrel samples are never on a level playing field, because you are not able to get all the players on the same field at the same time. Blind tasting data is flawed, because you did not have all the info needed for blind tastings.

The reason I’m asking my question this way is that, we all know the 100-point scale is really more of a 10 or 15-point scale (or for Suckling, 5-point scale)

That’s not really true. You cannot confuse what people write about, versus what they taste. James Suckling is a very good taster. His notes can leave a bit to be desired. But he comes out first, steps up and throws it out. Plus regardless of if he is 2 pts high, or low, you still get the idea regarding the overall quality of the wine. There is something to be said for that.

I cannot tell you how others work. But for me, for 2017, I tasted about 600 wines. I’ll have close to 500 notes published, tomorrow or the next day. I skipped about 100 because they scored low, and there is nothing to say about those wines.

Look at my notes on an appellation sometime for context. For wines with high scores, it is easy to ramble on. But for those wines that are simply dull, dried, flawed etc, there is nothing to say. Plus, those are not the wines you or others are interested in reading about. So, why put in the work? Frankly, it is much harder to write about 86 Pt wines than 96 Pt wines.

Something else, at least for me, with a few exceptions of new wines I have not seen before, 98% of the wines I taste each year are the same wines I taste every year. Those are wines from the best producers which usually have better terroirs. So those wines are naturally going to score higher. I do not see the 5 Euro bottles for example.

If EP score is mostly comparative, and as wine making technique improves every year, I can see Bordeaux to be the first victim that too many wines would just be in the 96-100 range that render the system meaningless.

That is not going to happen and it is not true. As an example, for 2017 Bordeaux, out of roughly 500 wines I scored, 25 wines, including dry white Bordeaux & Sauternes reached 96-100. Only 2 wines hit 98-100. Out of 7,500 wines produced, or even my universe of 500, that number is a small percentage.

Today, if a chateau is willing to take the hit and employ drastic selection and sorting, reducing yields to 10-20 hectoliters per hectare, it is possible to make very good in most vintages. However yields that low are for most growers, economically infeasible.

74

I know! I suppose I should not get used to it. neener

But well deserved, I think. I don’t always agree with Jeff’s taste, but more and more I find his website and dialog here some of the most useful info about Bordeaux.

Thanks for the nice words. Hopefully, for those that like Bordeaux, they take advantage of my site. Technologically it is adept and easy to use. If anyone ever sees things that can be improved, let me know. We will try to improve it.

It’s free, informed and offers info you will not see on other sites. The Rhone Valley coverage is good too. But it is not the same level of depth you find in Bordeaux.

Also it is not about agreeing with taste, regarding a wine. It does not matter we agree or not. But hopefully, from reading me, you have an understanding of the wine, winery ad vintage that lets you take it from there. He you could be like Alfret and employ the reverse Leve scale.

Run from the high scores and when wines are closer to 85-89 Pts, buy a bottle and try it! :smiley:

75

[quote="Jeff Leve
Today, if a chateau is willing to take the hit and employ drastic selection and sorting, reducing yields to 10-20 hectoliters per hectare, it is possible to make very good in most vintages. However yields that low are for most growers, economically infeasible.[/quote]

Up to this point I was nodding in agreement. But… nobody is cropping at 10hl/ha and I very much doubt anyone except under freak weather conditions is close to 20 hl/ha.

76

Mark I agree

I was saying that even the worst vintage, or moderate to lesser terrors, it’s possible today to make good wine by lowering yields.

It was only to illustrate possibilities

77

These two statements make no sense to me. You’re praising Suckling on the basis that you still get relative context from his “bracket” of point awards, yet you go on to omit some wines because the scores are so low.

That means that your own scoring windows are artificially narrowed and your readers cannot gain the full context of your scoring breadth. That is, you’re modifying the relatively which you just implied is useful.

Surely to understand what 92 points from one taster really means (or any other score for that matter), one needs to be aware of what an exceptional (or “perfect” if you like to use such metrics) wine and a poor wine would be scored?

For the record, I find your website incredibly useful and often rely on it for background information on BDX Chateaux.

78

Julian

I cannot tell you why James does what he does or go into detail on how low his scores go. I don’t subscribe. I only see it on Twitter or other sites I might peruse.

What he does or doesn’t do is his choice. The same for me and others.

For me, it’s not worth the effort to write about low scoring wines. There is little interest from readers and I’m only 1 person, with so much time open to spend on this. I think I explained why in my previous post.

If I was not clear and you need more info, ask away and I’ll try answering.

79

For those interested, there are now tasting notes up on the 2017 Bordeaux on Farr Vintners website. If prices come out on the low side (which may be a pipe dream), I might buy a six-pack or two. Otherwise, I still say look for remaining deals on the 2015s and 2016s. [soap.gif]

80

Great

Mean or weak wines, that are already mean and weak compared to Napa

Im going to California !! for the price of Palmer im getting HSS or top BTK wines and change