Gilman Says '85 Margaux is "Lifeless" and Gives it 70

WINE TALK
1

One of the most absurd things I’ve read recently.

In my last encounter with the wine it was poured in a blind flight containing every 1985 First Growth…and Margaux was my favorite by quite a lot.

On Cellartracker, the tastings of this wine from the last year reveal many, many stunning bottles of this wine…most rated above 95 points, and many tasted alongside other great wines with '85 Margaux coming out at the top of the heap.

Gilman justifies this score by saying the bottle he tried had wonderful provenance. So what? This review is so clearly out of whack with what other educated palates are experiencing that it is ridiculous to publish something like this.

Is there anyone else out there who has had this wine recently and agrees it is a 70 pointer?

Cheers,
Blair

2

That Dusty Gilman has a horrible palate :wink:

3

LOL…I was referring to John Gilman, but his palate must have been dusty that day… [scratch.gif]

Cheers,
Blair

4

Bad bottles happen.

5

And it seems that Gilman is basing a judgment on an entire vintage of a wine based on what is, in all likelihood, a bad bottle. Poor form, IMO (not that it matters).

6

Not that John needs my help, but the lengthy article is titled, “1985 Claret, The Finest Bordeaux Vintage of the 1980s”

I like the vintage quite a bit, but agree with Gilman that Margaux underperformed in 1985, given the quality of the vintage and how well Margaux performed during the decade. YMMV.

The controversial statement in the article is not that '85 Margaux underperformed, but that '85 as a vintage is the best of the 1980s.

7

Mr. Gilman appears to be taking absurd stances in order to garner traffic. This is not the first example of an indefensibly low score. I’d recommend ignoring such hyperbole.

8

Or would that be lowperbole?

9

Meiosis

P Hickner

10

we had Margaux and Palmer 3 weeks ago side by side and both were very, very good. The Palmer right from the beginning starting to fade slightly after 90 minutes while the Margaux was considerably better at that time and evolved further more til the decanter was empty ( both bottles decanted 30 mminutes prior to serving ). Would rate Palmer 95 & Margaux 96 pts. Both from cases bought en primeur. Gilman must have had a faulty or not properly stored bottle or a blackout.

11

I had several wonderful bottles of 1985 Ch.Margaux, the first in app 1991, the last 5 months ago which was highly impressive first (from colour and intensity) but proved to be slightly corked [head-bang.gif]

Well bad luck, but “lifeless” is [bullshit.gif]

IMO Ch.M. is one of the best 1985 Bx, left bank together with Las Cases plus several right bankers (like L´Evangile, L´Eglise Clinet, Conseillante, Lafleur et al).

Underperformers in 1985 are IMHO Lafite, Latour, Pichon Lalande …

12

I like Gilman and love to read his writings. Weather I agree with him or not and is another matter… [cheers.gif]

13

Sounds like he had a corked bottle under his ability to detect. It can happen even if one is sensitive. I didn’t read the review. did he open a second bottle? Of course, that can be expensive when talking first growths.

Gilman can be provocative, but he usually is very consistent.

14

+1

15

I am dumping my two cases right now.

16

Opened a bottle of '83 Margaux and it wasn’t any good. Just lifeless tasting old red wine. Now mind you the fill level was a smidgen lower than it should have been, and the capsule showed some oxidation, so it’s hard to say what the culprit was.

17

I suppose 85 Margaux could have died since I last tasted it 2013. But I doubt it. I’ve always found the wine charming, even though you find a hint of rusticity in the tannins. Learn all about Chateau Margaux in The Complete Guide

I just do not see how any reasonable taster could give that wine 70 Pts. If Gilman really made the comment that 1985 is the best vintage of the 80’s, and he might have, it’s his responsibility to call it as he sees it. But it’s hard to see how anyone can come to that conclusion. There are some very good 1985 Bordeaux wines. But there are no great 1985 Bordeaux wines like you find in 1982 & 1989. All three years are equal in all banks, so I am not sure where he is coming from.

**** AlexO… It’s all about personal taste. But my guess is, your bottle was not sound. 1983 Margaux has for me, always been a very good wine. Tasted this year, and at least once a year for more than a decade, it is still vibrant.

18

If his comment was based on multiple bottles, then his opinion is what it is. If his comment was based on a single data point, then shame on him; he should know better.

You’re talking about a wine that is nearly 30 years old. As time progresses, you would normally expect a greater amount of bottle variation–the spread between the best bottles and the worst bottles. All of us with any experience have had an older, vastly underperforming bottle. But most of us know better than to generalize all bottles based on one data point.

Bruce

19

This is confusing. I can see why somebody loves 1985 Bordeaux because I love the vintage too. But on the other hand: 1985 Margaux is a wonderful wine. It is textbook Margaux – very elegant but complex and with a long aftertaste. It is probably as good as any other 1985 Bordeaux.

20

Alex, that’s a shame. I had a couple of good bottles of that wine last year. Hopefully you have a chance to give it another shot!