I thought 1990 was fully mature some years ago, and 1995 as well.
LOL Faryan! That was a fun evening. Well, it was not Eric d’Aramon’s choice, bringing in Rolland. There was a bit of a family feud as prices had shot up for the wine, but sans the corresponding Parker scores. So bring on Rolland. Only now, Parker is gone… Anyway. Frederic Faye remains as director and as Jeff Leve wrote above, Rolland is doing blending mainly. Faye goes out of his way to insist that he is the director. As in 2014, 2015 is splitting some opinions. I think the any excesses of the “Rolland style” are not prominent as to change things too much. I was tasting with Adam Lechmere who noticed a glossier aspect to the wine, giving it away as “Rolland”, he said, but I liked Figeac in 2015, as I had enjoyed it in 2014. I am putting notes together now, but I do recall that more Cabernet Sauvignon was blended in as is typical, about 43%, which makes sense for 2015. Tasted just after the Moueix wines, I detected a more friendly juiciness to the mid palate in Figeac as compared to several from Moueix, as I had tasted them just before. So there is freshness and elegance, in spite of the early summer dry heat, as Frederic explained. About 14% alcohol which, compared to many Right Bank wines in 2015, was not too high. “We harvested on the freshness, to avoid sunny effect,” Faye said. I have a video interview with him about 2015, which I will be posting in the near future and by the way, the second wine is also quite charming and delicious, too. Anyway, I still recall being more excited about, say, 2005 Figeac, back in April 2006 from barrel, but 2015 resembles that vintage to some extent, albeit with a touch more “sheen” 
You didn’t really answer the question, though. Do you observe a stylistic or directional change at Figeac since Rolland became involved? I figure you’d be a great one to comment on that. I don’t mean to imply that a change has to be a bad one, necessarily.
Panos,
Excellent information, thank you!
Hope all is well,
Asked Jean-Valmy Nicolas at Conseillante. He confirmed the advice was in blending because of changes they want to make in planting locations of merlot vs CF and the independent initiatives they are making in heat control during fermentation
I still think my favorite innovation for heat control during fermentation was Lopez de Heredia’s contribution: they open their cellar windows.
Panos… Glad you liked the 15 as well, but I doubt that Adam, or others could find Rolland wines in a blind tasting. IMO, there are no giveaways to any wines.
The last statement is probably some half-serious hyperbole on your part, but it seems to me that there is plenty of evidence that barrel sampling is meaningful. How many times have we seen a vintage hailed as great based on barrel sample, turn out to be terrible in the long run, or a vintage panned as terrible turn out to be great in the long run? It seems like the association between vintage first impressions and vintage long-run quality is far from random.
Chris… I do not think there is such a thing as a style by anyone. Wines, due to their terroir, blends and vintage conditions are unique. At least that is how I see it. Also, as I said, Michel Rolland is brought in most of the time for blending. He may or maynot be more involved with an estate, and that chateau is free to take as much of his advice as they wish. I know for a fact that some estates, with strong, involved owners pay very little attention to his suggestions.
As for a change in style, the wines are riper, with a better mouth feel, along with more depth and concentration, is that a style change?
This is not directed at you in the least But I find far too many people base their opinion on ideas, pre conceived notions and news stories, and not on actually from tasting the wine.
Will rolland survive to RP’s retirement ?
Otherwise i prefer la conseillante than figeac.
They do the same at Bartolo in Barolo
It is going to be fascinating to see how both these chateaux and the new Rolland roles play out. I can’t help feeling as others have noted that they have missed the boat, and without Parker, extreme Rolland will probably not interest anybody.
As Panos noted, it was a family feud that forced out Eric d’Aramon, probably resulting from the new Saint Emilion classification, when Figeac stayed as it was, but Pavie and Angelus were promoted. The correlation between Parker points and the classification was almost exact, and Rolland was brought in to get higher scores and to help get that promotion. Alas, best laid plans and all that…
I have only tasted one wine made under the new regime, the Figeac 2013, and it was quite pleasant in that undistinguished vintage. Nothing forced, but it is a hard year to determine how much influence Rolland has, particular since he was not really that involved apart from the blending. I will be going to Bordeaux later this year and look forward to tasting at Figeac.
That sheen is one of my least favorite Rolland signatures. That and the oak. I love a rustic structure-- which can take decades to smooth out-- combined with a ripe year, but I almost never get that rustic, organic structure in a Rolland wine (which is admittedly a moving target). Instead, there is most often a polish to the texture and structure that strips the soul from Bordeaux, for my mileage. But then, I think the 1980’s was the golden era in Bordeaux, while others think that wine making just gets better and better there, year after year (rather than admitting that things aren’t “better”, just different).
I would add that tasting Bon Pasteur from the 80’s may not tell us much about Rolland’s approach in recent years-- he presumably has changed, just as Parker’s palate evolved through the decades. And “modern” from thirty years ago probably seems traditional today.
I think you guys are really underestimating the number of people who like the wines Parker likes. I see that on here all the time where posters like Jeff Leve and Kevin Shin have very similar palates in Bordeaux to Parker and know there are many, many others who do also. I am sure Mr. Rolland will do fine.
Back to the original question, Rollo stripped the dang green outta the Figeac, scandalous!
The 2015 Figeac is a blend of 29% Merlot, 28% Cabernet Franc and 43% Cabernet Sauvignon that was picked from 21 September with the Merlot until 15 October with the Cabernet Sauvignon at 41 hectoliters per hectare. The Cabernet comes through strongly on the nose - classic Figeac in many ways - black fruit, a touch of cassis, pencil and a touch of rose petal. The palate is drop-dead gorgeous, its foundation a lattice of filigree tannin and perfectly judged acidity. It is very fresh from its vivacious start to its pencil-lead finish imbued with effortless grace. > It is almost comical that naysayers decried that Michel Rolland would turn Figeac into some kind of fruit bomb. Head winemaker Frédéric Faye has overseen a tip-top classic Figeac > without any of the greenness that occasionally affected older vintages> , now boasting a level of precision up there with the very best in the Right Bank. It was difficult to find fault with this quite astonishing Saint Emilion and who knows what could transpire once it is in bottle.
97-99 points, eRobertParker.com (Issue # 224 - Apr 2016)
Booooo
The decision to follow the consulting advice or not will always rest with the property itself…the consultant cannot force an action onto a property…
From the property’s perspective, I think this is a fantastic idea.
Because sometimes the property thinks the advice isn’t great or that they know better. It seems dumb but happens fairly often. Often they take some but not all of the advice.
Because there is a lot of complaining about certain qualities and they want broader appeal. Plus their riper siblings have an ‘a’ now. This is still a business and there are things to consider even beyond its style (as I do not feel it is completely deviating from).
Just grabbed some 2005.
Has anyone had the 2001 recently?