BAMA vertical... or when everything goes wrong

[Robert.A.Jr]

Sigh……

It was a snobby joke, boys.

The GenPop thing.

[Craig_G]

Joke explainers

[Mark_Golodetz]

@Phil_T_r_o_t_t_e_r

@Robert.A.Jr

So what Maggies are you popping?

2002, 04, 05, 08, 10 and 11.

If you need other vintages, please pm me.

[Brian_G_r_a_f_s_t_r_o_m]

My aforementioned limited experience with BAMA has shown me that they get worse, not better, with more than a few hours of air; perhaps my experience is colored somewhat by opening bottles 20+ yrs out from vintage.(?)

ETA: upon further review, I now realize your post to which I was responding was about Magdelaine, and not BAMA. Soooo, nevermind.

[Mark_Golodetz]

It doesn’t matter what wine begins the discussion, all roads lead to Magdelaine.

[Phil_T_r_o_t_t_e_r]

@Brian_G_r_a_f_s_t_r_o_m

ETA: upon further review, I now realize your post to which I was responding was about Magdelaine, and not BAMA. Soooo, nevermind.

The post was about BAMA (started from an experience Brian had with an 86). Sooooo, do mind

[Howard_Cooper]

@Robert.A.Jr

@Julian_Marshall

Bel Air Marquis d’Aligre is the polar opposite of the sleek, precise wines made with state-of-the-art technology, consultants and fifteen different types of oak barrel toasted in five different ways that most CCs have on their production lines. It’s made by an old fellow who is now, I believe, in his early nineties, on his own using the same equipment he probably had in the 70s, and using the same techniques. Much of the charm of Bel Air Marquis d’Aligre stems from the fact that it tastes like wines did before the Parker revolution.

Now, say what you like about His Bobness, but it’s undeniable that his period of hegemony either inspired or at least coincided with massive improvements in production techniques that have rendered wines from most châteaux a lot more reliable than in the past.

So yes, Bel Air Marquis d’Aligre is less reliable than most “normal” wines. Unfortunately, it’s the price those who enjoy it have to pay, but the thing is…when it’s good, it’s absolutely amazing, one of the finest wines I’ve ever had the pleasure of drinking, the epitome of what a fine Margaux should taste like. But, yes, when it’s bad, it’s really awful.

A wonderful tribute, You know I concur 100%.

Where I deviate is your last point. I’ve had some so-called off-bottles but never an awful bottle.

So, then the real price of BAMA is 50% more or double the price you pay taking into account the “off-bottles”?

I understand this concept as I recently bought a couple of bottles of 1979 Ridge Shenandoah Zinfandel. Sometimes uncertainly is part of the price one pays for the shot at something unique.

[David_Glasser]

A Schrödinger type of wine?

I’ve drunk 7 bottles of the 2000 BAMA and have been delighted with every one. Lucky I guess.

Sitting on a small stash of the 2010, waiting to hear that it’s ready to go.

[Marcus_Goodfellow]

I do wonder at how much the missing “weight” in the palates of these wines might be magnified by the fact that the vast majority of modern wines are produced to be so much denser and more intense than wines were in the past (with so, so many adjuncts available now to push the wines to thickness). Our palates are constantly nudged towards accepting wines that are richly dense as normal (see 2018-2020 red Burgundy) and at what point do we begin to be accustomed to a higher level of palate weight/texture/density as normal than would have been the case by someone drinking wines 40 years ago would have?

This is just a hypothetical musing I have had somewhat frequently over the past 10 years, and not related in any way to Phil’s specific experience. BAMA is not a wine I am familiar with but based on this thread, and your post specifically, I think that I will seek some out.

[Marcus_Goodfellow]

100% in agreement.

Most long time Pinot Noir/Burgundy lovers know this is the choice they are making most of the time.

[Robert.A.Jr]

Howard my rate of so-called “off-bottles” has been very low.

[Brian_G_r_a_f_s_t_r_o_m]

If the shipping economics of the situation weren’t so bad, I’d happily trade you my one remaining bottle for a bottle of your Pinot or Chard.! Perhaps someone in your area would be willing to do the same …?

[Russell_Faulkner]

Agree - I think this is more preference variation than bottle variation - on the whole.

[Marcus_Goodfellow]

I’ll be in your area sometime after harvest this year to catch a Kings game. Perhaps then?

[Phil_T_r_o_t_t_e_r]

@Marcus_Goodfellow

I do wonder at how much the missing “weight” in the palates of these wines might be magnified by the fact that the vast majority of modern wines are produced to be so much denser and more intense than wines were in the past (with so, so many adjuncts available now to push the wines to thickness).

That would hold true if I was drinking these for the first time. But I’m comparing against same wines from same vintages, sometimes from the same purchase! Before this abysmal 0 for 6, my hit rate on Bama was like 26 out of 28! 93% success rate on old school Bordeaux feels pretty good too me.

Add the 6 fails and the 2 good ones that followed (I had another 2010 today) and that’s a 78% hit rate. Not critical.

[Phil_T_r_o_t_t_e_r]

And Another!

@Phil_T_r_o_t_t_e_r

Bel-Air Marquis d’Aligre 2010
The sole remainder of my last BAMA tasting. A friend who was there for the BAMA road crash was also present. He never guessed this was the same wine. Not my best BAMA 2010 as it still felt a little on edge (not sure it could age more) but still, lots of joy in drinking this. Nose full of strawberries, damp earth, leather and dried herbs. Full on red berries and bright acidity on the palate with a good finish on earthy tones and tobacco. Everyone loved this. Guesses were Lussac with some age or 2017 Pessac-Léognan. Cool reveal.

[Brian_G_r_a_f_s_t_r_o_m]

That would be great. And, bonus for you: it’s a bottle of the 2000, which, imo, was the best of the four vintages I’ve tried. Nonetheless, I’d much rather have one of your wines. Plus, my office is downtown, less than a mile from where your game will be; it should be easy to meet-up.

[Julian_Marshall]

Luckily my hit rate has been high enough that I don’t really calculate what the few bad ones mean in terms of cost and the good ones more than make up for them !

[Julian_Marshall]

Those are excellent points - it’s true that old geezers like me enjoy them precisely because they remind us of how those old wines tasted. In my case it was, of all bottles, a Malescot 74! Anyway if you feel like trying one I would start with something like a 2000, which is a lovely wine and so far, at least, I have never had a bad one.
So grab Brian’s!

[Howard_Cooper]

@Marcus_Goodfellow

I do wonder at how much the missing “weight” in the palates of these wines might be magnified by the fact that the vast majority of modern wines are produced to be so much denser and more intense than wines were in the past (with so, so many adjuncts available now to push the wines to thickness). Our palates are constantly nudged towards accepting wines that are richly dense as normal (see 2018-2020 red Burgundy) and at what point do we begin to be accustomed to a higher level of palate weight/texture/density as normal than would have been the case by someone drinking wines 40 years ago would have?

I must admit that my favorite wines are wines that have intense flavors and noses but that are relatively weightless. I wish there were more wineries that would go against modern normes and make more old-fashioned wines. I want to scream when someone complains about a wonderfully complex Burgundy with lots of intensity and a very long finish because “the wine does not have the weight of a grand cru.” I have to admit that when I read a post saying this my first thought is that the so-called Burgundy expert does not really get Burgundy.

But, for any type of wine - Bordeaux, really old California Zins, etc. - I just love wines with lots of flavor but that are almost weightless.