Last night, a group of Houston-area Berserkers met up for the first time to have dinner and some excellent wines with out-of-town celebrity guest @Dav3_Dyr0ff. Kudos to @Myles_Lup for hosting us in the lounge at Art of Cellaring, which was fantastic as always (kudos also to Myles for truly OTT generosity with something like 5 wines contributed). After a couple prior attempts via the Offline Planner forum that fizzled out for one reason or another, it was an absolute pleasure to put faces to the names with Dave, Myles, @Corey.H, @MICHAEL_C_R_O_M_W_E_L_L, @R.Condron, and Luis (whose last name I did not catch)! @RyanC was much-missed.
After swapping some emails, the group landed on a Leoville-Barton vertical, and between generous brings from the group and a couple bottles that Brandon Kerne MS graciously tossed in from the AOC cellar, we had a whopping ten vintages represented (as well as two champagnes, a white burgundy, and two sauternes). If that was not enough, on the same night AOC had a ticketed La Conseillante tasting with winemaker Marielle Cazaux, and after that event wrapped up Brandon and Marielle kindly brought the leftovers over and so we stacked a five-vintage Conseillante vertical on top of the rest. That was fantastic in and of itself, but even more special was the opportunity to chat with Marielle for a while before the jet lag caught up with her and she had to go back to her hotel to crash. She was absolutely charming (and first perplexed and then very amused at the notion that we had never met each other save for online!)
This was by far the largest sweep of exposure to Leoville-Barton that Iâve had, and reflecting generally on the vertical my main takeaway was the chateauâs strong performance in relatively unheralded vintages. (Not breaking any new ground with this one, as it is one of the main talking points you see re: L-B, but I can now confirm it firsthand.) To be sure, the wine was more or less intense, concentrated, generous etc. in some years than others, but year over year was identifiably and pleasantly itself, and save for the towering, monumental â96 the gaps between âgoodâ and âmediocreâ vintages were not enormous (and some, like the â04, were usefully open and developed for current drinking).
Without further ado, the wines â as usual my notes arenât very good to start with and only get worse as the night goes on 
We started with two champagnes and a white burgundy.
Emmanuel Brochet 1er Cru Le Mont (Corey, pls correct me if Iâve got the name of the cuvee wrong!)
Classic almond, white flowers, pear, chalky minerality, good density and length.
2002 Francoise Bedel LâAme de la Terre
19 years sur lie! Initially I thought this was a tiny bit suspect with a touch of mustiness on the nose but that appeared to recede with air. This vinous champagne showed developed golden fruit, apple, nuts, toasty maillard, and lively acidity.
2019 Jadot Puligny 1er Clos de La Garenne (Dom. Duc de Magenta)
Not to be confused with the Jadot 1er La Garenne (Dom. Louis Jadot). One might think that Clos de La Garenne is a clos within La Garenne, but this is Burgundy (you dummy, you moron) and so they are actually totally separate vineyards with Truffieres and perhaps a couple others between them. Jadot blancs are not âgood valueâ in any ordinary sense but within Burgundy Bizarro-World they certainly qualify. Consistently satisfying and this was no exception. This was a touch larger scaled and shows the warm year, maybe one could argue it was more of a classically Meursault profile than Puligny, but who cares: I thought this was delicious, with spiced citrus, golden orchard fruit, and tastefully toasty framing oak. Balanced acidity, generous and open, texturally satisfying, long. (My bring, grain of salt, blah blah blah.)
Then onto the La Conseillante vertical, 2015 mysteriously absent from this lineup photo but pictured separately:
In the haphazard order I tasted them:
2015 La Conseillante
More burly and extracted than the 16, riper and more intense, darker and chocolatey. Last year of Rolland. [EDIT: I think I misinterpreted this as it looks like he is still involved; more accurately âlast year that Rollandâs input was taken as a primary determinant of the winemakingâ or similar.] Like the last time I tasted it (at AOCâs â2015 at 10 yearsâ event a few months ago) this is not my cup of tea but unlike many 15 right bankers it is not Actively Bad.
2016 La Conseillante
Outstanding - ripe but balanced, plush, toasted garlic, licorice, chocolate, mix of dark and red fruits (certainly redder fruited than I initially expected), medium plus body, quite elegant. This was the first year that Marielle jettisoned Rolland and went fully her own way [EDIT: Same as above, see discussion below in thread, I think the truth here is she simply felt more empowered to make her own calls and override Rollandâs input].
2014 La Conseillante
More red fruited and brighter toned than the 15, with a sterner initial presentation and tannin appropriate to the vintage. Lots of licorice and florals. This is still quite ripe and showy for the vintage but is very nice for a Rolland wine.
2019 La Conseillante
This is darker than 16, still pretty oaky and wound up. Lots of potential. Great depth and power, this is a massive wine that needs time to unwind.
2011 La Conseillante
This was closest to being ready, it has some tertiary and leafy character coming in that is really nice. Really pretty, red fruited and generally just delicious. I see why classical-palate types love this right bank vintage, down the middle stuff.
And then onto the main event: 10 vintages of Leoville-Barton.
1973 Leoville-Barton
Alive! Some volatility that, as with old Musar, gave the wine some lift and verve. Cedar closet, tobacco, bit of barnyard, red fruit. Interesting to drink, wouldnât turn it down. For a vintage that I think it is fair to say was âpretty poorâ I think this is a very creditable wine.
1981 Leoville-Barton
Alas: corked! Truly a shame as the color was astoundingly deep and dark, I can only imagine this would have been a stonking wine had the damned closure not interfered.
1988 Leoville-Barton
My bring. Initially some questionably basementy aromas but I ultimately did not think this was corked after some time open (and no one else mentioned it, but if anyone else had suspicions sing out). Cedar, incense. Cool and leafy. Jasmine florals, as Myles aptly pointed out. Just very classical. Savory and showing a bit of Brett. Very proper and stern. Still some tannic structure to this. Not a wine that shone in a larger vertical like this but one I would be very very happy to have at the table with dinner.
1996 Leoville-Barton
WOTN for me, this was monumental and towering. Spicebox, curry, sandalwood and floral incense. Amazingly open and balanced dark fruit and tobacco core. Tannins in good shape, mostly resolved and silky with some residual fine-textured grip. In a pretty perfect transitional state with lots of good fruit left vs the older vintages, but very present tertiary character. This was deep, complex, long. Outstanding.
2000 Leoville-Barton
Excellent and opening. Not quite ready to the extent that the 96 is, hasnât had the turn to really showing off the tertiary notes quite yet but they are starting to make themselves visible. Tannins still to be resolved though this is on the verge of its early drinking window. Lots, lots of power and intensity here that will carry this wine for another couple decades no problem. Not a crime to drink nowâI would say the window is just barely cracked openâbut profitable to leave it be if youâve got the patience.
2002 Leoville-Barton (somehow missed getting a photo of this)
Startlingly close to the 2000, despite the less heralded vintage. To be clear there is less depth and concentration and a shorter finish but it really isnât a huge fall off. Crunchy leaves, healthy dirt. Grippy tannins, lots of time left in the tank there. Certainly a touch slimmed down compared to the 00 or the monumental 96 but this is a wonderful classical Bordeaux.
2004 Leoville-Barton
Much more ready than 2002 and 2000. More open and a bit plumper than the more classical 2002. Has a meaty character to it (likely some Brett) plus lovely autumnal 2004 leafy tones and excellent loamy dirt. More tertiary character than pretty much anything back to 88. Darker fruit tones than the 02 and 00. If youâre drinking any of the post 96 wines, this is the most ready and willing.
2009 Leoville-Barton
This was really good. Yes, it is a big old 2009 but it is nonetheless clearly identifiable as Bordeaux not Napa, and is obviously quite young but it is drinking quite nicely now. I have not tasted a ton of 2009s but the ones I have tasted have been pretty Napa-ish, this was not. Surprisingly charming, suspect this will continue to improve for a long while and be a very nice albeit more âpowerful and intenseâ than âelegantâ wine in its maturity.
2016 Leoville-Barton (courtesy of AOC)
Young, but lots here despite being pretty wound up. Elegant, concentrated, bright fruit, cocoa powder. Future star.
2017 Leoville-Barton (courtesy of AOC)
A bit plusher and more chocolatey than the 16, maybe more Merlot in the cepage? (Looked it up: NOPE.) Good and surprising for the vintage. Open and quite drinkable.
Finally, two Sauternes (that I missed getting a picture of):
2009 Guiraud was massive and opulent, with oozing golden apricot and peach, orange marmalade flavors, a luscious texture, and a persistent finish. A touch of volatility on this which I often get with Sauternes, but it did not detract.
1988 Guiraud was a sharp contrast, much leaner with higher acidity, less impression of sweetness, and with a more medium-bodied profile. Obviously many more years of development, this had some pleasant burnt sugar and botrytis tertiary tones.
Not a bad nightâs work!
