Unsung heroes are always the tricky part of finding good value. They don’t get tasted as often as the flashier labels with accompanying price tags which most already know about.
La Pointe 01 and 09 are ones that will surprise most who taste it.
Clos du Clocher 05 and 09 are both brilliant wines which will give pleasure for years to come.
Barde Haut always overperforms, as evidenced in 01, 05 and 09 to name a few.
Larcis Ducasse in 04 is brilliant as it is in 05 and 09
Grand Mayne in many a vintage… 00, 01, 04, 05, 08, 09
Off to a good start with the above. Again, thank you iPhone notebook!
Just a small data point from some younger tasters without the Bordeaux experience of many of you: my tasting group opened some '18 Left Bankers a couple months ago, along with a '14 La Mission. Even with the difference in age and perceived quality of the vintage taken into account, the LMHB was unanimously head and shoulders above everything else. Just in a class of its own. Not a blockbuster by any means (that honor went to the '18 Pichon Baron, which was absolutely impenetrable until it had been open for about eight hours), but just a gorgeous, lifted, elegant wine that, for around $200, seemed to be a great value given its class and breed.
Anyway, to bring it back to the topic at hand, I can only imagine how good that '14 Latour is going to be!
I too bit on the Flickinger’s offer for 2016 Les Forts and the 2014 Grand Vin. Nice to be able to triangulate around LBP’s and William’s notes on the wines in spending what I did on a few bottles.
I was glad to see I have the 2014 d’Yquem in the cellar as well based on Johan’s notes, and the 2012 L’eglise Clinet (not the '14) based on William’s thoughts.
Okay, 2016 Latour > 2014 Latour (but probably 50% more expensive when it shows up).
What do we think about 2016 Forts at 1/2 the price of 2014 Latour? Does it give enough of the Latour experience to justify the price? $250 is a lot for a second wine, and a lot for a non-first growth Bordeaux.
According to William’s tasting note, absolutely worth seeking out the 2016 Les Forts. Lisa’s note is available publicly (so no need for me to comment on it), but it is worth noting she gave it the same score as William.
Less than Palmer but more than Pichon-Baron, Les Forts seems more like a 2nd growth than a second wine. Whether it is worth the coin seems more a question of what style of wine you like and are willing to pay for.
If money is no object, then sure. On the few occasions I’ve had Forts, it’s been a lovely wine - especially a 1988 last year which was ethereal and beautiful - i wrote “The profile is Latour in outline, but without the power or density. Fits like a beautifully tailored suit on a lean model.” It was a completely different kind of experience of Pauillac.
But yeah, you can still pick up 2016 PLL or Montrose for that kind of coin, so…
I was thinking the exact same thing, and even price-checked it this morning. All day long I take Montrose, Lalande and Baron over Forts, prolly even Lynch Bages (depending on the year).
Or… La Conseillante, Canon, Rauzan-Segla, Figeac. To name just a few contenders with a shot at becoming perfect wines in 20 odd years. 2016 has massive depth when it comes to quality.
So, I purchased all of those except Conseillante, and I am very excited about starting to open them in another 8-10 years, but in defense of Forts, I think it’s a very different style of wine and delivers a very different experience. If Forts were $100, I would be a buyer of it as well, as variety is the spice of life, etc