82 Grand Puy Lacoste is rockin'!

82 Grand Puy Lacoste bought in the mid 90’s, for the then princely sum of $40. Ahh, those were the days. Paired with 40 day, dry aged, Flannery strips and pan roasted potatoes. Decanted about 10 minutes before tasting.

82 Grand Puy Lacoste is ruby in color, with cassis, tobacco, truffle, chocolate mint, spice, cedar and earth make up the perfume. Full bodied, concentrated and mouth filling. Your palate is drenched in rich cassis flavors in this traditionally styled Bordeaux. The finish is filled with chocolate covered cherries and cassis along with a minor hint of green and slight bitter cherry in the long finish. But those minor faults do not detract from the immense pleasure this wine offers. Based on this perfectly stored bottle, it might even improve, but it’s showing so great today, why wait? The wine improved in the glass for 90 minutes. I hope 90, 00 & 05 turn out this good. 96 Pts

GPL can be great. I love the 90. Glad your 82 showed well.

'00 GPL was a tannic beast when I had it last summer.

Eric… I am with you on the 90. It’s a great little wine.

Bill… 10 years of age is still young for a strong vintage of GPL. For 2000, the wine is packed and stacked with ample fruit, that the wine can be tasted today. But as you noted, it’s still tannic. Another 5-10 years will add a lot of complexity to the wine.

I really enjoyed the 82 GPL 3 months back–I agree it offers great drinking right now in a nice traditional style.

1982 Château Grand-Puy-Lacoste Pauillac. This wine is fairly dark in aromatic tone, with aromas redolent of fine earth, smoke, gravel, black currants, cassis, sliced green pepper, tobacco and dark leather that are complex and serious and show absolutely no signs of let-up. In the mouth, it is richly enveloping and nicely layered in both flavor and texture. It exhibits a lot of stuffing, but doesn’t show any jagged edges. It opens with dark red fruit, turns a bit drier and blacker-fruited in the middle and then finishes long with smoky overtones. It is a dark beauty with lovely depth that tastes great now but will have no trouble holding for a while. It was my runner-up wine of the night and was the group’s WOTN.

The 2000 hit me perfectly about 2 years back, but a few people I know who popped a bottle in the months following my note were hit much harder by the tannins than I was.

2000 Château Grand Puy Lacoste Pauillac. This wine is right in my sweet spot. The nose offers up lovely notes of sweet tobacco, leather, spiced fruit cake, clean fur and soft red berries. In the mouth, it has great balance first and foremost. There is also solid drive, a seamless texture, plenty of lifted acidity and very classy tannins. The flavors are also lovely, leading with red currants and mixed red berry fruits. It has medium body and no rough edges or overdone notes. For all that, it is clear that this can go for quite a while—hopefully drinking at this nice plateau or even getting better over the next 5 years. This was my wine of the day, as it just reached out and grabbed my pleasure sensors while also stimulating the mind.

Maybe I just like the GPL style? Heck, I thought the 1998 was doing just fine a few years back, too!


Nice to see you posting notes!
Had a bottle of the 82 GPL over the summer, not a bad bottle, probably an 89-90. Perhaps was less than stellar storage conditions. Really paled in comparison to an 89 Tertre Roteboeuf and 88 Haut Brion (which if you haven’t had lately, is stunning).

OTH, a mag of 89 GPL early last year was absolutely stunning. Then someone brought a 99 Chave to the table. [welldone.gif]

Jeff, have you had the 2003? Do you think this might ever get to the level of the 82 or 90?

I love the 82 GPL. It is a great example of Pauillac in this vintage. The last time I had it, it was quite vibrant and youthful.

Jeff (and Michael),
Thanks for the TNs! EDIT: Forgot to mention this sent me into a midday web frenzy searching for GPL…

I had this wine once about two years ago, and it was outstanding. Thanks for posting your note.

Time to open another one of these…the last one seemed just a bit young. I prefer the 90 but the 82 GPL is great stuff.

Had it last night and I definitely agree that it is very good, though I also personally prefer the '90. Actually, i read the original tasting note above, referred to my written notes, and we surely drank the same wine.

Thanks for posting. Sounds awesome. Don’t have any 82 Bord in my cellar but they seem to always be a treat to taste.

So do you miss have a few rough edges? Sometimes those are fun.



I’m not Jeff, but no, I don’t think so. However I think the 2005 will. The 1998 and 2001 are also worth looking at, as is the 1996.

Had this wine in a 1.5 L format Saturday night. It was on a short list of WOTN. It showed VERY well.

Thanks Tom.

Eric… I’ve tasted 03 GPL a few times. It’s a very light wine and not in the same class as any of the top vintages from the Chateau.

Phillip… Thanks, I’m dropping in a few more notes today as well. I might even pop a couple of pics in the food section. I’ve been playing with a few new ideas in the kitchen.

Ed… I cannot blame you a bit if you prefer the 90. Some days, I think it’s better as well!

Jason… It’s worth finding a bottle.

Bob sucker punched me with his first review when he drew comparison to the 1990.

By Robert Parker
Wine Advocate #152 (Apr 2004)
Reminiscent of the 1990, this blend of 70% Cabernet Sauvignon, 26% Merlot, and 4% Cabernet Franc possesses low acidity, good ripeness (but not over-ripe), and Grand-Puy-Lacoste’s classic creme de cassis character well-displayed. Medium to full-bodied with noticeable tannin in the finish, it is a heady, rich, beautifully made Pauillac that should be drinkable within 3-4 years. Anticipated maturity: 2007-2018.

He subsequently downgraded it. Fail.

Eric… GPL is an interesting wine. It is not consistent. Their terroir is not as good as Lynch Bages or Pontet Canet. That coupled with high yields might have something to do with their lack of consistency. In great years, they produce outstanding, age worthy wines of character for fair prices. But at least to me, in less than great years, the wine can be light and take on rustic qualities that I do not care for.

In a vertical from 2000, tasted at the Chateau in 08, except for the 07, 2003 was my least favorite wine. FWIW, 00 & 05 were both outstanding wines.

2003… An atypically superficial effort… is very good… does not stand up to … Medoc offerings… deep ruby… moderately intense bouquet… tails off in the finish… lighter-styled example of this generally high-class performer.

How surprising!