An alarm went of when we opened a delicious but fully ready 2002 Batard Montrachet ( golden color ) next to an oxidized 2002 Chevalier Montrachet from Domaine Leflaive . This was at restaurant Chez Guy in Gevrey Chambertin .
Back home , I opened my first Puligny Pucelles 2002 from my case of 12 wines ( bought on release , cellared in a good temperature controlled cellar ).Oxidised with notes of Sherry and biscuit . I have opened 6 other bottles from that case and all of them had signs of premature oxidation . Not alway enough to put it in the sink but clearly not right . The 2 Combettes I had so far were better but also fully ready , they will not last 3 more years .
My nephew Michiel opened a Pucelles 2002 from Henri Boillot and from Leflaive last saturday . The Boillot was fresh , chalky and still young and vibrant , the Leflaive ( from his cellar ) was completely oxidized .
I remember being in the cellar at Leflaive and asking about premox in general . Erik Remy , the new regisseur , told me he had things under control but he also mentioned he " was not sure about their 2002’s ".This was in 2007 or so when the wines did not show the signs they have now…
I wonder what happened .
Please update your entries to DC’s wikipage, that info is very important, considering your discussion with Remy and noted provenance; considering DC hasn’t updated some of his statements on the wikipage regarding Leflaive being one of those who you could count on for not being premox’d:
http://oxidised-burgs.wikispaces.com/Domaine+Leflaive
http://oxidised-burgs.wikispaces.com/Which+Producers+are+Most+and+Least+Affected%3F
Category V: The fifth and final group of producers are those who have very little premature oxidation as a percentage of bottles opened and indeed > seem to have no higher incidence of premature oxidation since 1994 than they did before> , i.e., Coche-Dury, DRC, > Leflaive> , Leroy/D’Auvenay and Raveneau
…time to move Leflaive to category IV I should think.
One of the contentions is that the winemaking did not change at these producers/domaines so that unlike the others who sought to make more forward wines, these few made the wines the same way they always had, not ready to drink young, built to age. Except that negates the fact that Lafon with their alleged premox problem, made very forward, indeed outstanding, white Burgs in 1989 with no apparent published premox problem with those?
not good to hear.
alan
Color me wildly unsurprised and thanks for dredging up the memories of all the yellow capsuled bottles in my cellar that are likely to be afflicted.
I wonder what it was about 2002 that caused this. I’ve opened in the past 2-3 months a range of Leflaives from 1999-2007 and they’ve all been drinking wonderfully. In fact the 99 pucelles was too young!
I’d love to hear from anyone with inside info on what happened with 02. Maybe the sulfur injector didn’t fire properly while bottling? shrug
As posted a few months ago we opened some Leflaive from 2002 ( Clavoillon, Combettes,Folatieres & Pucelles ) last autumn without any signs of pmox, and as a regular buyer of Boillot we tasted Pucelles from both wineries at the end of 2010 without any worrying
signs. Even the Bourgogne 02 lately was tasting fresh. I think most of my 2002 stash will vanish in control tastings
Not at all good; I have precious few bottles of Leflaive as it is.
I bought cases of '02 Leflaives on release (including at least a case of Chevy), and have been drinking a ton of them, many recently, and am probably over half way through.
Only one oxidized bottle (a Folatieres from memory) out of maybe 25 bottles.
Noooo!
Looks as if the white burg premox wiki supports your samples Paul!
When someone has an oxidized White Burg, I’d like to know if it was a gray market purchase or thru normal US supplier channels.
Even more so, I’d like to finally know what causes this and put it behind us, as it basically means at my age cellaring White Burgs is a game of financial Russian roulette.
A couple more years and I’ll be out of white burgs for good…
Charlie,
This seems to have generally been true with Leflaives so far…
However, I would also say that I think the '02 Leflaives should perhaps be drunk sooner rather than later…
Based on my having read this thread, I thought I would try one of my 2002 Leflaives. I have not yet encountered a premox’d bottle of Leflaive from any vintage so far, and I have considered Leflaive and Coche-Dury relatively immune from the plague.
So, opened a 2002 Folatieres and, lo and behold, it was badly premox’d, as my dinner guest and wine tasting colleague confirmed. Then went to the cellar and pulled out a 2002 Clavoillons and it also was premox’d, though to a lesser degree. We could not drink even a glass of the Folatieres, we sipped at the Clavoillon until it became increasingly clear that it might serve better as a poaching liquid for some pears.
OK, I guess Leflaive is not immune. It sure would be interesting to find out what made Erik Remy comment that he was worried about the 2002 vintage back in 2007, if I am remembering that correctly.
We drank a 2001 Leflaive Folatieres last month, it was fine.
Since I have taken such a love to the various 07 and 08 Sauzets in the past 6-9 months, what would be the opinion on these standing up to the pox threat? I probably have 8-10 bottles of this producer now laying down, wondering what I might find in 5-7 years with them?
Sauzet is susceptible, or was. I’ve had 1999 1er crus badly premoxed and a gorgeous Le Montrachet from them, also from 99. I’d not trust Sauzet to age past 5-6 years from vintage. Or rather, I’d feel like I was rolling the dice. I LOVE the wines when on. But this thread is yet another in a VERY long line of examples of why I don’t buy white Burg. You either get a ruined wine with no recourse or you drink a wine that’s too young and would have aged beautifully. There’s no way to tell.