I’ve recently started adjusting CT drinking windows after I taste a wine or based on a note I see from a trusted taster. In general, I find the drinking windows too aggressive and push the start date back by 3-5 years and the end date back by about 10 years. In general, I rarely feel like I caught a bottle too late.
I’m curious what others are doing here.
Generally my tastes are towards later drinking than CT averages. I suspect your adjustments aren’t too dissimilar to mine.
That said, I treat any drinking window (including my own) as a very vague indication, mostly used when sorting down my list of wines to find something mature that might appeal that evening. I never have any fear about letting a wine slide past the drink by date, and happily open bottles before the start drinking date.
I agree and have wondered if my cellar temp over the lifetime of each bottle is that much lower than average, or if my preference is that much different, or what.
I see drinking windows as an extremely general guide - useful, but not something to follow rigidly. Crowd-sourced info combined with professional reviews helps give a rough idea of when a wine might be in a good spot, but there’s no such thing as the “perfect time” to open a bottle. As I get older, I find myself caring less about hitting that elusive peak moment and more about simply enjoying a good bottle with good company. I’d rather drink the wine than risk it outlasting me.
That said, there are always exceptions - some bottles are meant to age, and I’m holding onto a few for specific occasions. But in general, I’m less worried about squeezing out every last ounce of potential and more focused on just enjoying the experience.
I trust the winemaker more than either the CT reviews or even the professional reviews, e.g., Jim on his PGC wines, Marcus on his Goodfellow wines, and Don or Johanna on iOTA wines. An added layer of confidence as to drinking windows provided by those here who have been drinking and enjoying those wines for years, if not decades. 
On the plus side they often have more opportunity to taste back vintages, and probably taste a wine more often than anyone else. However they also have their own palate preferences, and that may be different to our own. e.g. I recall Aldo Vacca of PdB saying he sees their riserva Barbaresco wines as typically ‘at best’ between 12-15 years. That’s a very different expectation to plenty of other folk on this forum
I am often amazed at some of the early drinking windows and notes from people saying that a 2016 Barolo or something is “ready to drink” or “at its peak.” I just think there are a large percentage of users who either don’t like secondary flavors in wine or who don’t really have the experience to know what a truly mature wine is like.
We just did a tasting of 6 vintages of Mas Daumas Gassac earlier this month including 1984. 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1993. The 1984 was the only wine that was really at maturity, but CT has many notes on the other vintages being “ready” or “tired” from 5 years ago or more.
Great example, Ian. I don’t think the 2001s from Vacca are ready!
I like ‘em older than CT drinking windows would suggest.
Another metric, possibly more useful, is to look at the Community Holdings section to see what % have been consumed. When that number hits around 30-35%, I find most wines have started to drink well. Not necessarily fully mature in the case of Bordeaux or Barolo for example, but enough so that I rarely feel like I’ve erred in opening the bottle too soon.
Even better, short of tasting the wine myself, is a recent note from a palate I know and trust.
I think the “drinking windows” on CT are useless (as are the drinking windows provided by professional wine writers when tasting young wines), and I don’t pay any attention to them. When I am wondering which of my wines to open for an upcoming meal, I look at recent CT tasting notes on the wines I am considering. If the note was entered by someone I drink with or by someone whose notes I’ve read before and generally agreed with, then I look to see if the comments are something like “shut down” or “open for viewing” - if the latter, then I put that wine in the “possible” list. That is what I use CT notes for and I just ignore the drinking windows given.
Drinking windows are all subjective. There’s a reason why we try to buy multiple bottles of something so we can taste it as it enters our preferred drinking windows.
I would say most drinking windows are conservative and that’s because if from the winery they don’t want their customer to drink something that is on the downside.
Trial and error definitely tells me most bottles can age longer than the stated drinking windows. We just have to find OUR window and that is the hardest thing.
I also wonder about provenance in cases like these - I’ve had some older bottles from a 55ºF cellar, purchased on release, where the last 3 or 4 tasting notes on CT call the wine over the hill, urging quick consumption, only to find the wine to be in a perfectly mature drinking window, maintaining its integrity over the course of an entire evening. CT’s always a rough guide at best, of course, but I always appreciate notes that describe bottle provenance as well as the wine in the glass. It obviously really matters.
Yes, it’s definitely important to consider provenance. But unless someone makes a note about the bottle being in poor shape I’m assuming it’s a solid bottle. I just think a lot of people don’t understand how slowly many quality wines age.
And red Burgundy is the one that baffles me the most…lots of '95s, '96s, '99s and '02s I’ve tried over the past few years aren’t even close to being mature. They are drinkable, and not painful, but haven’t hit that magic spot where they are very complex, have bottle sweetness, a supple, aged texture and just a hint of tannin and acid to keep them vibrant. I think a lot of good Burgundy really needs 30+ years to really be mature.
Drank a lovely ‘95 Monday night that fits this description - Bonnefond (Roumier) Ruchottes Chambertin. Maybe Keith or Noah or Nick will comment on it.
But generally I agree. 2002s are constantly yummy, however.
I make a point of setting my personal drinking windows for wines I own and have tasted. Or have enough experience with other vintages to make a reasonable window for myself. Your personal window will override the community value for your view.
I think most newbs out there are not informed that the CT drinking windows do not come from authority or some sort of objective judgement on each particular wine. They are a cross section of user inputted windows, John Gilman notes(and maybe select other critics I am unaware of) and a general placeholder window now set by CT that didn’t used to be there. So a young wine with no user input yet may only have the CT generic stub window in there. A wine with lots of owners from a great vintage 20 years back will a have a lot of user inputted windows averaged.
I’ve started setting my own drinking windows as well. As others mentioned the default in CT isn’t reliable and user notes are variable. It’s a useful feature that we can set it ourselves and I’d encourage others to try it out.
I set my own drinking windows, and I periodically update them as I read notes from others, or having begun drinking my own.
I look at them but don’t always take too much credence in them. David G’s comment regarding percentage consumed is a helpful metric. The other thing is individual preference. I think most of us agree that most wines benefit from some degree of aging in the bottle with a few notable exceptions. There are many who feel only aged wines that show tertiary characteristics are worthy of drinking (thinking more of Bordeaux and Burgundy). For those an extended drinking window makes sense - maybe their window starts at 20 years or so. For others, maybe ten years of aging is enough. Sometimes it seems like a tricky balance between getting some interesting tertiary notes but still keeping some of the primary fruit. I certainly know people whose palate is much more aligned with primary fruit than tertiary notes.