Pleasant, but not exuberant nose of cedar, blackcurrant and a touch of tobacco.
In the mouth the sweet fruit comes first wrapped in cedar. Then awareness of the well integrated tannins. Refreshing acidity and then a really long finish, all sweet fruit again and tobacco, lasting the best part of a minute. Not marked out as an overly ripe vintage. Not the most impactful or fragrant 2009, but it brings a good slice of joy. Very enjoyable, ****+ no sign of tiring.
After some very good 09s recently, Iâm looking for some more, despite an attempt at a buying freeze (maybe Iâll start in January when I plan to be dry all month).
Whatâs good? Anyone had the 09 Calon Segur? I assume a vin garde producer in St Estephe did well in 09.
Opened the 2009 Grand Puy Lacoste and 2009 Beychevelle recently to see for myself, and these are just gorgeous wines. Maybe not full-on classics in style, but I donât care as they are so good, so generous while remaining undeniably Bordeaux
Still primary in many respects, but I love how open and giving these are. You undoubtedly can enjoy these 09s now but I imagine theyâll last for decades more. I am sure there are overripe, boozy 09s, but based on these two chateau I bet you are in good shape if you stick to classified growths in the Medoc.
I stocked up on halves of Cantemerle and Batailley 2010 and have played them off against each other every few months for a while now.
These are probably the best two yet. The Cantemerle is richer and fuller with tobacco, and blackcurrant. The Batailley comes across as more refined, cedar blackcurrant and some mineral/graphite notes. No favourite tonight, but simply enjoying the contrast.
Just had the 2010 Grand Puy Lacoste again and wow is it good. Pauillac was the âpurple patchâ in 2010 for my tastes, serious, deep, layered, long. The GPL drinks well with air now but this is a thoroughbred that wonât peak for another decade or so.
A good depth of garnet, no real fading to the rim.
Tobacco and blackcurrant nose with a touch of cedar and flowers.
A sweet fruit in the mouth, little tannin, a gentle lift of acidity.
I bought these bottles in two batches, a few for ÂŁ40 when they hit the shops, and a second batch months later when they had been on the shelves for a while at ÂŁ20. These are falling into two groups; 91 points and pleasant enough: and 93 points with more interest and promise. This was another 91 point bottle and I suspect I am paying the price for variable storage conditions.
A couple months at shop temps doesnât seem like they should lead to that big of a taste difference years later. It would make more sense if you had bought those a half decade later and they had been sitting on the shelf the whole time.
It was probably over 6 months, but Iâm not really sure. I canât think of another reason why the bottles would fall into two such clear groups. I have another 7 bottles and will be able to see over the rest of the decade.
Have you been able to correlate the 93âers with on-release purchase and the 91âers with been-on-shelves-for-awhile purchase? Or do you not actually know which bottles belong to which purchase?
No I didnât clearly identify the batches, I do know that I got 4 at full price and 6 at half price, so retrospectively the ratios would confirm or confound the theory.
The nose is tobacco and cherry, followed by touches of cedar and earth. No noticeable tannins; fruit, cherry but supported by blackcurrant, tobacco followed by cedar.
Big thumbs up from Mrs A. ****, if I wanted to be really picky I would say more Pessac than Pauillac, but I wonât be.
Iâve been chewing on a husky 2009 dâEscurac [Medoc] the last couple of nights and this solid - but well aged 14.5% abv - cru bourgeoise is starting to decline, which is not surprising nor negative for an older âmodest mouseâ wine. Iâve had a number of these in the last year, purchased near release, so the change is noticeable. Today - still some licorice/fennel/anise on the nose/palate, then grip in the mouth, and a quality 30+ second finishâŚyet there is a bit of coarseness when one really sloshes it around the mouth. I like the rhubarb flavor here, but it grows ponderous, and itâs time to finish it up. Itâs a B to maybe a B+ depending on your preferences for this vintage.
Damn - Iâve got one left! Thanks for the warning - it doesnât really sound like my sort of thing. I used to quite like Escurac, but looking at CT the vintages were the lighter ones, which probably explains it.
09 Issan was really dense. Dark, extracted and one of the more tannic Bordeaux I can remember. Interestingly, itâs not figgy or roasted/overripe, but pretty dark in profile. It reminded me of 86 in a way and I bet this can go 50 years easily.
As mentioned before the 2010 Chantegrive rouge [Graves] remains a fruity, yet structured Bordeaux with depth and interest. I will concede that it does not show classic aged red Graves / Pessac character like smoke/char/pipe and all that, but it still offers plenty of enjoyment. Itâs the product of a big vineyard - 96 hectares - and the bottling is half merlot, half cabernet sauvignon that clocks in at 14% abv; I sometimes compare it to Gloria in style (if not fruit inputs). This was consumed over three days, and as it hits sweet sixteen, I donât find any glaring/excessive oak â for a commercially oriented wine, it has aged well. My bottle was from MISA, Costcoâs agent, and one tends to see it there in the better vintages on a fairly consistent basis. (TW&M carries more of their lineup - Chantegrive has a number of bottlings - but demands a ten spot premium.) This 2010 is a solid B+ wine, and a great example of how the region keeps, in years where conditions cooperate.
Iâm not sure if they still still use Hubert de Bouard, but in this era he was their consulting oenologue. That might be a little bit of a surprise to tasters.
