Comte Armand 2005 Pommard “ Grand Epenotes “

Opened the first bottle of a half case of this and was frankly disappointed. Beautiful color; fairly restrained, but nice enough nose; and a muddle, overripe taste. Reminded me of some of the lr]esser wines of 2003 and 1990. Raisiny, almost port like flavors, without the purity of port. Had I not known how it had been stored the las 13 years or so, I might has suspected a very mild storage or heat issue. It wasn’t bad, but it certainly wasn’t us to 1er Cru burg standards. I guess i’ds ire I an 87 or so. Plenty of density, but no gracefulness.

The Chevillon 2002 Burgougne Rouge opened (much) later in the evening — kind of a last bottle of the night/let’s clear this one out of the cabinet afterthought — was much better. Quite good, for what it was in fact. But after four folks who tasted bath preferred the Chevillon. I’ll be quit interested to open my next bottle of the Grand Epenotes and see if this bottle was a aberration or par for the course.

My exact experience with this a couple years back. May have even posted a note on it here. Definitely a Port-like quality to the flavors.

Interesting, this was my experience with the 1996…it was a bigger, more full-bodied Pinot Noir than I’d ever experienced. Not my cup of tea.

Not a great period for this domaine, in retrospect, though the critical consensus at the time was the opposite and makes for interesting reading. I had the Clos des Epeneaux a few years ago and thought it more reminiscent of a ripe, figgy but austere, oaky Saint-Estephe than Port, per se. The 2007, tasted a few weeks ago, was, if anything, even worse—or, perhaps it would be better to say, equally bad but in a different way.

It sounds like the greatest sin of this wine is the tannic quality, both from extraction and from oak. Even the early, more positive reviews spoke of the massive amounts of tannin. The winemaker, Benjamin Leroux, more or less admits he overextracted the grapes. Neal Martin’s review from this year reads: “The aromas are bold and in your face, but simply lack Pinoté, while the palate is tannic and ferociously backward with dense tannins. Even after 16 years, it is a rather charmless Pommard and one that I cannot see improving with extended bottle age.” Tannic and ferociously backward with dense tannins…so, Neal, was it tannic? William’s “austere, oaky Saint-Estephe” sounds consistent.

I have a 05 Montille version- should I expect something much different. Seems like Montille wines need like forever to be ready to drink.

I think the barrel choice was a bit off, too: the impression is that they were quite heavily toasted, which plays with the very ripe fruit to give the wine has a very roasted profile lacking fresh fruit aromas and flavors.

Anyone had the 09 or 10 for comparison recently?

Sorry for the thread drift. Since we are talking about 2005 red…much appreciate to hear from anyone had the recent experience with the 2005 Corton - Les Renardes by Michel Mallard. I have not open any bottle yet.

When did this problematic period begin for the domaine, and when did they pull things back together?
I haven’t tasted any of their Clos des Epeneaux from my cellar after the 1999 vintage.

Personally, I wouldn’t touch anything before 2015 or so (unless going back pre-Marchand), but to each their own.

Should be drinking well. The wines being made today are a lot better and are worth a serious look.

Did you really mean pre-Marchand, i.e., before 1985?

Thanks William [cheers.gif] .

I am a fan of Michel Mallard for many years and loved his 2002 Les Renardes - despite it needed lots of bottle-age.

I became a bigger fun since he started his role as the wine-maker for Domaine D’Eugine as I got the feeling that he has since softenup his style for sure since vintage 2010. I also just learned recently that he is releasing his red 2 years later than usual.

Much appreciated your confirmation and comments. [thankyou.gif]


I opened one of my bottles of the 2005, and indeed it sucked.
Could not finish the glass, and poured the rest of the bottle out.

I have a few bottles of 2010, so I see notes about this on the Cellartracker front page whenever someone posts one. Since 2020, just about every note there (10 so far, another glowing review today) has a 94 or 95 point score. Is it mass hysteria and group-think by a cabal of Bordeaux lovers? Given the rather contradictory comments here, I’m almost afraid to try one!

The 2010 is an utterly gorgeous wine, the best which Ben Leroux made in his tenure at Comte Armand. He made many good to great wines there in my opinion, though not the 2005 which was over-extracted. Don’t be afraid to try the 2010 Clos des Epeneaux (I presume the wine meant in the OP) now, though it will keep. In fact I had the domaine’s Auxey-Duresses 1er Cru 2010 last night, and that too was lovely.

Immediately pre Pascal Marchand the domaine was very poor, but prior to that there were some great vintages, notably 1962. I have also had very good bottles of 1996, 1999, 2009 and recent vintages


Anyone with experience with the 2001?

Thanks for chiming in. I have a decent array of CA CdE and have always enjoyed it but the 2005 was a massive let down. Once didn’t go to a Miami Heat game (during the 1st year of LBJ, Wade and Bosh no less) just to eat at a restaurant that had the 1999 on the list for $165.

1 Like