Last night had two wines that really showed the pleasure and enjoyment of wines from so called lesser vintages. Both were a joy to drink and gave a lot of satisfaction.
1987 J L Chave Hermitage Rouge: Pale red colour, nose starts off with a bit of barnyard stink and then a very burgundian palate of red fruits, silky resolved tannins and a nice balanced finish. A delicate and light bodied wine. After about two hours it opened and changed; the nose developed a nice smoky meat and dried wild thyme character and the palate developed a bit more richness and depth. Continued to develop and evolve positively during the evening. Initially this gave the impression of being an older burgundy but the Rhone syrah character emerged later. Everything in harmony and balance. A wine of beauty, grace and subtle character. I loved it as did our guests.
2003 Donhoff Oberhauser Brucke Auslese: Very Pale yellow colour, showing only the faintest signs of secondary development. Very pure and clean nose of green apples and citrus. Amazing intense deep palate of ripe apply fruits with great extraction and depth of flavor but all done with truly incredible balance which is topped with a bravado endless finish singing with the wonderful bracing acidity. I was expecting a soft wine with 2003 over ripeness and low acidity. Nothing could be further from the truth. A truly great wine made by a master. This was a 2004 auction wine and man it is drinking fantastically now but probably has at least another 10 years of positive development ahead of it. This is an outstanding Riesling auslese and near perfect in my book.
My conclusion is kind of obvious: Master wine makers demonstrating their skill set in vintages that contained significant challenges. Really glad to have had these wines and for me another piece of evidence showing the risks of following vintage ratings too much.
And the thing is also to define “lesser” vintage. If a wine is good out of the chute and writers rhapsodize over it and call it a great vintage, that doesn’t mean the wine will hold up and improve 10 or 20 years later. Plenty of “lesser” vintages have surpassed the “better” vintages in places all over. 1997 Napa Cabs come to mind.
Also, say the vintage is considered “lesser” because they had hail just before harvest in an otherwise good year. The producer that does a severe selection may end up producing good wine anyway, just less of it than normal. German 2003s are interesting - it’s the vintage that for me demonstrated the silliness of DOC regulations.
Agree.
I had it in La Beaugraviere with several friends - next table sat Laurence Feraud with friends … and I served a glass (blind) to her … together with a 1986 Cuvee Reservee Pegau … we all prefered the Pegau, but only slightly … (no, she didn´t recognize it) - and both were very enjoyable, the Chave showed more mature …
However that was 7-8 years ago … and both wines are long gone from the wine list.
I had been thinking of the vintage thru the perspective of Kabinett and Spatlese pradikat levels as these are where most of my German Riesling drinking lies. I have not really considered the vintage in terms of the higher pradikats. Thanks for the clarification.
I guess I really was trying to say I had moderate to low expectations for the 2003 and it was fabulous. So much for preconceptions.
