Following a disappointing tasting of some of the top Right Bank Bordeaux from 1998 (the vaunted 1998 Trotanoy showing not like an adolescent, but like a young adult refusing to leave the house and not ready to do so for another 10 years, 1998 La Fleur Petrus almost as backward), I was relieved to have the chance to taste some 2000 Bordeaux that were surprisingly perhaps more accessible.
The 2000 Trotanoy was the star of a Pomerol lineup, with floral, almost exuberant exotic perfume on the Oriental spice nose, and a multilayered finish on the palate. Initially, the 2000 La Fleur Petrus showed as exceedingly backward, not really giving much up at all, but with about 4 hours of air starting to strut its stuff. Our host told me that the next day it may well have been out-performing the Trotanoy, and given the depth on the wine (we are talking Marianas Trench here), I could see it. Incredible length on the finish, this one easily ran to a full minute. Less impressive was the 2000 Vieux Chateau Certan (and also, in 1998), a step down from these two, with a softer aspect and shorter finish. The 2000 Le Gay was the worst performing wine, sweet, soft, and shallow, with a 2000 Pride Vintner Select Merlot easily outshowing it.
A couple of nights later at Wood Tavern, we had the 2000 Pontet Canet, which I might have guessed as a Right Banker blind. Soft, fully resolved tannins and a fragrant leafy green nose that on the rich palate show a distinctly spicy character, this one really is an adolescent, but on track to show even more I think in 5 years. A day or so before, the 2000 Sociando Mallet, which showed the most overt “bell pepper” character I can recall with this wine–I had read comments to this effect for some time, but this time the comparison was inescapable.
Yes, I think the 2000 (great growth or equivalent) Bordeaux will be ready a lot sooner than is commonly thought.
Already, I am going through my mid-range stuff, and these have been invariably fully ready.
Of course, when it comes to Bordeaux, there will always be people who say you need to keep the wine five, ten, or more years…
That’s because many wine lovers prefer the tertiary notes in great Bordeaux to the fruit.
As for myself, if forced to choose one camp, it would have to be the latter.
I concur, 2000 is a mid-term vintage, ready to go now at a almost 14 years except for the deepest and most tannic wines. Early drinkers are already past peak in many instances (thought they can still be very good).
1998 is much more of vin garde vintage, perhaps even more so than 1996!
I like at least the secondary notes on Bordeaux, so I would wait on another bottle of 2000 Pontet Canet another 4-5 years probably–all depending, of course, on how many I have (I think 5 now). The Sociando is not in a good stage–whether it ever will be, I do not know, but some more time n the bottle there is likely to help as well, hopefully turning the aggressive bell pepper into something more floral??
I agree about the Pipeau, just coming into its own, but despite Parker repeatedly calling it a fruit bomb, I don’t consider this an “early drinker”.
But there’s a long list (off the top of my head, maybe 25+ wines) that I’ve had repeatedly from 2000 that are past peak. Fombrauge is one example. Still drinkable, but better 5 years ago.
I’m glad to read these notes, Carl, about both vintages. Thankfully, perhaps, I don’t have my Right-Bank 98s up to bat for about 8 or 9 more years, so hopefully that will be enough time.
A bit concerned to see the note on the Sociando-Mallet. I don’t mind bell pepper, but not when it’s super-overt. Did you decant yours for any length of time, or re-taste the next day? Again, thanks for the data points.
2000 Bordeaux are still babies at the top end. We recently had Ducru, Lynch, Cos, Palmer, Ch Margaux, and Haut Brion and they were still totally primary.
Pat, interested in your list of 25 wines past peak from 2000 if you can provide detail. Just started going through some minor wines and seconds, with d’Armailhac being a disappointment, Moulin Saint-Georges maybe just ok but no hurry to drink, Lanessan holding up quite nicely albeit nothing overly complex, Les Pagodes de Cos showing pretty well for what it is and likes a little air to come around, Sarget de Gruaud-Larose being on par with the Pagodes.
In general, I think that 2000 is a slowly evolving vintage, although not as bad as the 1998 Right Bankers, which are looking like they will need 25 years perhaps.
+1
Certainly Montrose is taking its usual time… I recall at Vinexpo 2013, tasting the 2008 and 2000 Montrose side by side. The 2000 was painfully young.
Well said - I concur with the theory, and agree with your preference. I’ve discovered that, across the board, tertiary is not for me, and certainly with Bordeaux. I need to tackle more of my 2000’s…
As wiser folks have pointed out, 2000 was a huge crop in Bordeaux, and so unlike in some vintages (like 1996 on the Left Bank) when concentration and depth come readily to all, 2000 was a year when vineyard work and deselection in the cellar were key to preventing dilution, etc. Or so I’m told.
I haven’t encountered many dilute wines in 2000 Bordeaux, but a bunch of them have been soft compared to almost any other so-declared great vintage that I know well (almost any 80’s vintage, 1990, 1995, 1996, 1998, 2005). This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but I think waiting too long on the 2000s (based on the aging curve from other great years as a guide) is a mistake. The great estates and overachievers (of which their are plenty) are still young, but the likes of d’Armailhac, Cantemerle, Louviere, Charvin, Charmail, Bernadotte, Fombrauge, Haut Bergey, Tour St Bonnet, Lanessan, etc. are either ready to go or were better a few years ago.
A few years back, I did a pretty big 2000 horizontal of moderately priced chateau ($20-$40 as futures, some of which are double that in price today) at age 10, and every wine was wide open and ready to go with air. Maybe not filled with tertiary complexity, but ready. The 2005s, in comparison, are still mostly unyielding at age 9, even for cheap wines like Chateau Fonbel.
I did the HDH Bdx tasting of 90 vs 00 last year. These were all classified growths, including all the firsts, cheval blanc, conseilante, etc. It was rare to have an expressive '00 as most were quite closed including: la mission, LLC, calon segur and montrose. All firsts were tight.
The more open examples included: LP, GPL, Ducru, clinet, PB, Cos and Palmer.
This is all relative of course. Big tasting/moving fast, take with a grain of salt.
I’ll pop a Gloria this weekend as folks have commented that the “lesser” wines are ready or past their peak. The notes on CT, however, suggest this wine isn’t quite ready.
This bottle is young, on opening fairly unruly and disjointed for the first 1.5 hours. The dense opaque color speaks well to what to expect. Loads of dense primary fruit, some secondary character. The tannin is present and evident but not out of balance. After 2 hours it all came together, a very nice claret that has a muscular nose and palate and easily another 5+ years or more would serve it well.
I had a recent bottle of the 2000 Cantemerle that was much better than the others bottles I’ve had over the last few years… but it still seemed quite mature. For example, next to the 1996 and 1989 Cantemerles, it came across as the most in need of consumption (though all 3 are ready to go to be sure).
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
