Burg vintages Post the great 2010?

[Brady_Daniels]

@Martin Steinley

@craig v

@alan weinberg

red or white? Different.

Sorry red. I’m pondering buying some 2011s from a top producer, even though, I’m leery of that vintage and could buy at 2012 instead at a significant premium.

My recommendation is to buy the 2011s. There is no reason to fear the 2011 bogeyman created by a few as there are lots of beautiful wines that will be ready long before the dense 2012s and which will always be more nuanced, transparent and interesting.

I agree with this. If you’ve got a good deal lined up, grab it. 11 might not be a great year, but is serviceable, and good domaines made good wine. As Martin alluded, this was reputed to be the second coming of the green meanies, but I’ve heard few people complain of that trait lately.

I have no idea if 11 will be approachable young, like 07 or 00, but I hope others are right about that. It struck me as more structured than those two vintages.

IMHO, many village 13’s are drinking beautifully right now. Certainly better than 10-12 at the moment. I await delivery on my 14’s, so I know nothing new since the January EP tastings.

[Howard_Davis]

Craig, I agree with Brady. Grab that '11 Gevrey you’ve been looking at. 2011 is no 2010 but it’s a good vintage that I suspect will be earlier drinking. Overall, Gevrey did quite well in '11.

I like red '13s, the better ones are crystalline and pure if often a little lighter bodied. I’ve (only) barrel tasted '14s, but more than 100 of them, last year. I was really impressed and might rate them better on average than the '13s.

I hope to taste some '15 reds in barrel soon but have heard it suggested that they are a cross between '03 and '09. If that’s right I’ll be stocking up on '13s and '14s because that’s more my palate (even ignoring the price hikes) …

Cheers, Howard

[Martin_Steinley]

@Gerhard P.

There are very good, even fine 2011s, but the vintage is variable, some wines have dry tannins and are lacking mid palate, sometimes with an astringent finish (from maybe too heavy extraction of hash tannins).

My assessment is quite different. The wines are not full-bodied and dense (hallelujah), but I have had few or none with the characteristics you describe. Rather, myriad medium-bodied, lower-alcohol, lithe, transparent wines which reflect their origin better than any vintage around it. Perhaps the trip across the Atlantic has helped my bottles.

@Gerhard P.

It also depends on when you wanna drink them. 2011s will usually be maturing earlier

This I agree with (hallelujah, again).

[jcoley3]

My take, and this may evolve -

I like 2013 in the right hands for brightness supported by a decent bit of intensity.

I like 2012 a little less, but would also be more willing to buy the vintage without tasting than I would 2013. It’s more consistently good to me across the board than 2013, though a touch more acidity would have done them wonders.

I own 11s from a couple of producers whose wines I tried and liked. I don’t think the good examples here are up to the best 13s and 12s, but I wouldn’t dismiss the vintage out of hand.

As always, this is based on what I have tasted, and I reserve the right to change my mind!

[Dennis_Kanagie]

Our favorite lighter style vintages are 2000 and 2007, so we bought a few 2013’s thinking they’re similar in quality with maybe just a little more acidity and body.

Tried a handful each of 2011 and 2012 from our usual suspects and weren’t impressed enough to go deep. None were bad; they just didn’t warrant a large outlay to stock up.