Yes, and I thought someone might point that out. But that’s an issue separate from inadequate acidity.
Luckily, still-bonkers pricing largely kept me away from 2009 and 2010, so these vintages will never be of great concern to me (the only '09 holding I have is two mags of Lanessan, an excellent year for them, imo; and the only '10’s I have is a small handful of GPL, Rauzan-Segla, Les Carmes HB). About a year ago I had a 375mL of the 2010 GPL – it showed poorly, imo; mildly concerned.
The 2016 is for Bordeaux lovers. 
Because the vintage conditions were quite different. Have you tasted either, or even better, both 2009 and 2016 COS?
I have tasted both.
I am happy to say I agree with Jeff, the 2016 is a better than the 2009, although the ‘16 is not one of the better wines from the vintage and pales considerably besides wines like Pichon, both Lalande and Baron, and its near neighbor Montrose etc.
I have expressed my view on the 2009. I think it’s bombastic, over extracted with zero terroir, and have had this wine now three times with consistent notes. I do apologize to the gentleman who liked it so much.
Three things you can bank on: death, taxes, and Jeff thinking the most recent (ripe) Bordeaux vintage is its best ever!
Just adding my voice on the Lanessan 2019. It is fantastic. Go try go buy!
Slight thread drift here. Thank you, Keith! This is good to know, because I recently backfilled some 2009 Brane Cantenac.
I had a bottle of the 2010 Cantemerle a month ago, and I thought it a bit stodgy and foursquare. Possibly it needs more time to come out of its shell, but it’s one of the few left banks that I clearly prefer in 2009 over 2010.
Sounds like me! No wonder I like it!
The 2016 Cantermerle is rather good. Long loved wines; I had the ‘49 for Thanksgiving, and it showed beautifully.
Thanks Howard! I think that’s the one I was referring to. I’ll scroll through that one again.
So if I understand correctly Robert they had a momentary lapse of reason somewhere halfway the 10s but have reawaken now? I saw 19 offered for 17 euros… I might bite that one.
I proudly decimated many bottles of 2009 GCC close to release. IMO 2009 was the greatest early-drinking BDX vintage ever. Rarely have I ever experienced such velvet seduction from BDX in such a short window. 2010, not so much. Many 2010s sit in storage waiting for the day.
Coincidence or not? I just today missed out on an Amsterdam auction case of Lanessan 09 which I discovered while googling Lanessan on this thread this morning… If I had not been such a cheap skate… 
Not a big gun, but given that the 2010 Lamothe-Bergeron [Haut Medoc] is now a Hubert du Bouard project, I figured it would count as a ‘modern’ Bordeaux for this topic. This is now a cru bourgeoise superieur and leads off with currant, then licorice/fennel/mulberry. I thought it was a dilute in the flavor intensity, but over three days it did show a dusty cedary complexity. This is from an old estate in between St Julien and Margaux; personally I have liked the lower level 2010’s that were more Northern. It’s 60% merlot, 40% cab sauvignon and comes across medium bodied and classic, at only 13.5% abv. It was a Costco / MISA direct import, and was a good value upon release, but I don’t think I’d repurchase for home cellaring. K&L has also been bringing this in directly on the West Coast in many recent vintages, for a few dollars more.
Professionals were more enthused about this, maybe I should have it sooner, but I’d give it a strong B. It doesn’t seem to have much flair and I would not wait further.
The few 2009s and 2010s I have tasted in the last few years generally were all in need of a good bit more time to develop. Among major wines this would include- in either or both vintages- Magdelaine, Figeac, Leoville Barton, Pape Clement, Cos d’Estournel, Clarence de Haut-Brion and Mouton. In particular I would note 2009 Mouton is incredibly good. I think it is the closest vintage to the 1982 in terms of style and volume (and need for cellar age) you will find.
One thing I have found with time is that in bigger vintages the more modern wines seem to be evolving more successfully than I would have expected. It is still too soon to say whether they will eventually have the complexity of a less heavy handed approach- but I tend to agree with Mark Golodetz in being pessimistic on that front. Even so, 2010 Cos d’Estournel is a wine not much to my liking- but which I must admit is well balanced and seems to be evolving quite well- at least enough to be very good in time, if perhaps not with the degree of nuance in their lovely 80s and early 90s vintages.
If you want to look at Bordeaux from a 50,000 foot level and that point where gradual change/evolution in style took a dramatic step- I think 1995 and 1996 are where one should be most concerned. A great many 1995s, even at the top levels, show beautifully on the nose and front of the palate only to finish out very abruptly with little length. It is a very strange almost schizophrenic phenomenon I have not seen in a Bordeaux vintage since 1975- which was similarly odd, though in different ways, until the wines finally began to mature [caveat- I am 50 years old, so I did not see the 1975s in youth, though I certainly experienced a number of them before they began to settle down and fully open]. With 1996, excessive oak and a bit of a heavy hand when it comes to concentration can be problematic. Margaux is a great example- now at fully maturity the 1996 Margaux is in many respects a glorious wine- but I find the experience mildly affected by the traces of excessive oak.
1997 and 1999 have their own peculiarities as well- leaving 1998 as the only late 90s vintage which I have found to generally be surprising to the upside in a big way in recent tastings.
Since 2014, I think things are much better again in general. Many chateaux have dialed it back a bit, plus many that have remained fairly modern- notably Mouton and Palmer- have found a really good balance where they are making wines that are sexier and more approachable in youth, but also wonderfully complex and showing early signs of the savory delights one expects from the Golden Decade of the 1980s (which to my palate remains unmatched to this day.)
Final note and caveat- this is all talking at a very high level, and in my case dealing mainly with the Big Eight plus the more acclaimed classified growths and reputable Pomerol/St. Emilion wines.
I’ve really loved nearly every 2009 or 2010 that I’ve had in the past year, with one exception. Here are my notes from the past year-ish:
2010 Chateau Anthonic Les Aigles d’Anthonic: maybe a little light on structure, the tannins soft but not quite velvety, really very good. No score recorded
2009 Chateau Lanessan: another solid bottle from a case I bought way back when. No score recorded
2009 Chteau Maison Blance: probably just past prime as the tannins were great but the fruit was starting to go a little bit. No score recorded
2010 Chateau Meyney: this is the one exception. It’s not bad but just crushingly dry without any real fruit happening. Charmless, I’ve called it. Every bottle out of my case has been the same, so I won’t repeat entries but I’ve had 5-6 in the past year. Maybe an 6/20
2009 Chateau Lestruelle: a little past prime with the fruit just hanging on but probably should have had a few years earlier, but still enjoyable to the last drop. 8/20
2009 Chateau de Chantegrive: really liked it a lot, probably right at its peak. Nice secondary flavors going on. 17/20
2009 Chateau Vieux Maillet: I’d call this mature with just a hint of charming “dustiness”. Wish I had more. 17/20
2009 Chateau de Chantegrive (second bottle): this one seemed more advanced and probably just past prime, fruit fading, but still really liked it. 15/20
2010 Chateau Haut Bailly, Le Parde de Haut Bailly: opened up really nice after a little time, I’m guessing its at or near its peak. Lots of leather and a real savory quality that I liked a lot. 17/20
2009 Chteau Franc Lartigue: my wife found it too simple but I really loved it. Probably a touch past prime but still in the best window, I would imagine. Tannins fully resolved with a sort of brick dust quality that I liked. 16/20
2010 Chateau La Fleur (St. Emilion): Really very good. Fruit on the decline but lots of secondary flavors. My wife took a sip of mine and then got her own glass. 16/20
2009 Chateau Franc Lartigue (second bottle): really very solid. Lots of “aged flavors” like dusty dark fruit and that sort of brick dust thing again. Wish I had a bunch of these. 16/20
I looked around and I don’t have a single 09/10 Bordeaux, but a decent amount of 00/05/08 from the years 2000-2010. Took a break til 2016 and 2019, dabbling a bit with 2014.
When I tasted many as the wholesaler back then they were very fruit driven with many having a distinct coffee or compote note to them. 2010 was better balanced IMO than 2009 for my tastes, but I wasn’t willing to gamble 2010 would be a modern day 1989 and 2009 a modern day 1990 in 30 years time.
To me the two vintages have always been quite different – the 09s more forward and lush, the 10s more tannic and “traditional.”
I haven’t opened a large number of either but the 09 Domaine de Chevalier I had last weekend was gorgeous and in keeping with the vintage character. It has a long, long life ahead of it. The 10s I have had in the last 6 months remain stubborn. I think they have bright futures, but they are much more like the 95s; you’ll be waiting a while
Agreed on Meyney and Lanessan. The Meyney is a block of wood, and as you note, dry and astringent. The Lanessan is fantastic, a surprisingly red-fruited gem. Does not drink like a typical 09. It’s one of the very few 09s that I loaded up.
