Vcc seems to be awesome from both vintages.
Certainly, I understand. At my age and wine cellar, I probably should not buy any more wines, esp. reds. But, I will.
I only mentioned the Rolland wines because, given what I thought are your preferences, how Rolland, etc., wines from 2009 and 2010 are doing seem irrelevant to this discussion of what and whether you should buy from the two vintages.
Robert,
I know that you love the 2014 vintage and I know they are very good and right in your stylistic wheelhouse. My question is how much is your view of the vintage colored by what you paid for the wines?
To me there are two types of ways to compare vintages. Same winery to same winery - say for 2014 and 2016 VCC to each other, Pichon Lalande to each other, Cantemerle to each other, etc.
Then, there is dollar for dollar. 2014s were great buys while 2016s were more expensive. Without figuring out specific wines, just say VCC in 2014 is the same price as a Pomerol you donāt like as much in 2016. Looking at the wines that could be bought for specific dollar amounts, 2015 could be a stronger vintage than 2016.
Would you rank 2014 with or ahead of 2016 on both measures or would you rank 2016 higher on the wine for wine measure and 2014 higher on the dollar for dollar measure. Just curious.
Certainly, I really like 1982 Bordeauxs based on how they taste, but on a dollar for dollar measure, no vintage I have ever bought of Bordeaux comes even close to 1982 Bordeaux based on what I paid for wines on futures.
Those are very good questions, Howard. While I have not had as many 2016 vintage wines as I have of the 2014 vintage, I can generally say I think 2016 is a qualitatively better vintage than 2014. The 2014 vintage hit really high marks for me because it was more classic, restrained, and of course, very affordable. It also came on the heals of a lot of vintages in which I did not partake, or which I was only very limited in purchases. I do think some 2014 wines are actually better, and some on par, and then others like vieux chĆ¢teau certain, begs the question whether you really want to pay 2x+the price for two wines that are substantially similar in quality.
2 Likes
I think 2009 is a legendary vintage that is aging great and will continue to do so for decades to come. I love the wines, finding them to be simply stunning in every sense of the word, in every appellation, and at all price ranges.
This is based on tasting hundreds of wines, again and again.
I like 2010, and while some wines are better than in 2009, if I had to pick one vintage, 2009 is a much better year. However, both are aging well, and will continue to do so.
5 Likes
Iāve loved the 2010s Iāve opened, more right bank than left, and have been sorely tempted to reload on some. The 2009s have mostly been more pretty faces with less depth than I prefer. Edit: Iād add to the OP question, the 2010s seem to have the stuffing, style and balance to age quite well and I havenāt thought the same about the 2009s.
So, Jeff, you think 2009 is a better vintage than 2005 and 2016?
2009 is much better than 2005. 2016 is better than 2009.
So, all this Bordeaux talk pushed me to grab a bottle from the cellar.
One thing I neglected to mention earlier was that I am blessed with a big cellar filled with wines that are either too young, or worth too much to drink!
Not true of course, but sort of. So with no time to decant, and no bottles standing up, save some 99 first growths that ZI didnāt buy enough of when they were closed out, I decided to grab an old faithful
ā
Ch Poujeaux, 2000 to be specific.
This is the wine I am looking for. 12.5% alcohol, complex, savory as well as fruity, but still so very young and fresh from my cellar. This is the sort of wine I want to be able to grab out from the cellar in 10 years, stylistically. though I will not object if that wine will be qualitatively better.
The more I think about it the less 2009 in particular, but also 2010 seem to be what I am looking for, with exceptions.
I had to move a few bottles out of the way to get to the Poujeaux, one of the bottles was 2014 Leoville Barton with a post it on it which said Good Bordeaux! Buy more! So I think that is part of my solution!
I really did like the 2010 Haut Bailly last time I tried it, so I might throw a few bottles of that in the cellar as well but I think I will still be on the hunt for something well priced, like this Poujeaux from 2000 to help fill that tiny gap in my Bordeaux.
Sadly, upon cursory review of available wines it seems like wines like Poujeaux are in the $70+ range in the 2010 vintage, so It might be back to square one for me on that front!
1 Like
I used to love love Poujeaux, a total classic and QPR. Sadly, they brought in Stephane Derenoncort for the 2009, and its showed. Bye bye! I have not bought again.
1 Like
My first case purchase of Bordeaux was 1982 Poujeaux. I bought it regularly through the 2000 vintage. Tasted some of those post 2010 vintages, not the same wine.
Along with Meyney, Patache dāAux, and Potensac, Poujeaux made up much of my early cheap Bordeaux happiness through the 1980s.
4 Likes
If youāre backfilling on 2009 and 2010 you should get some Brane Cantenac. Most of the bottles at retail are recent library releases from the chateau so none of the usual backfilling worries. And the winemaking never strayed from the classic.
2 Likes
2009 Cos dāEstournel is the best red wine Iāve ever had. I have some 2016 in the cellar, you think it will become even better?
Interesting topic guys, a lot to learn here!
My experience on these these vintages is limited as I was just 26/7/8ish yrs of age back then. But I looked back in my notes and noted and hereās my 2 cents on Senejac 09 and Cantenac Brown Brio 09. I did not like them 5 years after harvest (too ripe and modernistic) but they cooled down >10 years and became really to my liking. Tertiary notes and complexity appeared and brought it back to camp classic.
Lanessan 09 was a blast from the get go and developed accordingly. Love this wine and have a single bottle left unfortunately. Did not drink any other vintage but I Remember Robert.A.Jr. (?) posted extensively about this chateau that they go rogue somewhere during the past decade?
Clos Puy Arnaud 09 was quite warm and fruit forward. A correct and enjoyable wine but definitely in modern style.
Maybe its time for a big update on the Bordeaux: modern vs classic topic 
1 Like
Quite agree about Poujeaux 2000, a typically classic wine from an old favourite. I havenāt tried any recent ones.
Inspired by this thread, I took a look at a 2009 last night:
ChĆ¢teau Batailley - Pauillac - 2009
Quite a fruity nose of blackcurrants and dark raspberries, but with some cigar box and graphite, then a full-bodied mouthful of blackberry and violet at first, followed by oodles of cooling blackcurrant and a long, if not especially complex finish. This was recommended by Jane Anson and I can see why - itās a really enjoyable Pauillac, well-rounded and satisfying, not overripe in the least, no more so than any 2000. Itāll be better in another three or four years but itās already fun with a decant and well worth seeking out. JA gave this 96 points, which I think is a little generous, but itās certainly worth 93 for me.
2 Likes
I have had few of the major wines, but like Julian I have had a good number of cru bourgeois. Most have been excellent, but in general I have preferred the 10s to the 09s. The few bottles that I have not enjoyed were 09s that I found over ripe, with raisened or pruney characteristics to the fruit. The most recent example I recall is the Serihlan from St Estephe.
2 Likes
That 2009 Lanessan is excellent, and quite the surprise from this ripe vintage! I was not a fan of the 2015, which is when they brought in one of those ubiquitous modernist consultants, so stopped buying. I have seen some recent notes on 2016 from palates that I respect, so have been thinking of circling back to try a few, especially 2019.
1 Like
Both are great. But in time, the 2016 will probably be a better wine, though they will be quite different in style.
Why quite different in style?
2 Likes