is he still using his white dot on the bottle to evaluate whether the bottle got hot? I once baked an empty bottle at 350 degrees and the temp dot didn’t change.
Well, I have 3 of the 99, which sounds more consistent, 3 of the 05 which hopefully is all that they thought it would be but I will wait a good long time, and the bottle of 01 I will crack open and see what gives.
And since I only have 1 of the 10, again I will wait on it.
So, are the old barrels and no SO2 and maybe some other “musty” techniques the reasons for the crapshoot in some vintages…at least in the 90’s and after?
Great threads- enjoying the commentary very much.
For my part, I was laughing when I saw the title. Not at you OP- but at the notion of “Ponsot” and “in general” in the same phrase. As others have attested, the eventual variability here goes far beyond that of any other famed wine producer I could name- though I would say that Leroy comes in second place for me, if a distant second.
My experience with Ponsot is fairly limited, but generally in line with what many report here. When the wines are on, they are incredible. A great mature Ponsot wine is a rare combination of youthful freshness, tantalizing tertiary detail and a velvety smoothness all effortlessly restrained in a classic structure so well embedded that you do not even notice it at first for all the emotional sensations hitting you.
The 1985 and 1991 Clos de la Roche VV are among the greatest burgundies I have ever tasted. And the Mont Luisants has an amazing life span much of the time. Even the 1981 was showing nicely- if on the edge- at nearly 30 years of age.
At the next level you have wines like the 1990 Chapelle which has aged beautifully but comes off a bit simply for lacking the nuanced detail expected, even if excelling on other points.
And then you have the ocean of wines- or in many cases I should say specific bottles- that are flawed or seem to be flawed in some manner.
For my part, now that I have had the chance to revel in superb bottles of two of the generally accorded greatest examples during Laurent’s tenure (the two CDLR noted above), I have thrown in the towel and moved on. At current prices there is just too much risk involved.
As for Alan’s comment on the white dot- the last time I attempted to order Ponsot about a decade ago, the six packs arrived with the white dots intact but with very noticeable fresh seepage- trails of it running down the backs of the bottles and settling in puddles inside the cases- about the worst I have ever seen. So I too have found little reason to put any faith in that bit of technology.
Steep and planted across the slope and very old vines, all in all hard to plough - so they have used herbicides. As I say, they want to change that, but it’s not so easy.
I don’t know about recent wines but bottles from ‘off’ vintages in the 1980s-80, 81, 82, 86, 87- have in recent years been just heartbreakingly wonderful, in narrative terms really as good as burgundy gets. Perhaps they just need time, though I suppose things have changed there in the meantime just as much as anywhere else.
A friend from my wine group opened a 1985 Clos de la Roche two weeks ago. Auction buy. Showed mild funk . acceptable to me. Nice wine. But I would not call it spectacular and would not tempt me to buy another one especially at the prices asked.
I have a few bottles of 2006 CdlR. Don’t know whether to open and drink them or auction them.
That is interesting. It seems to me, as I browse through Burghound Database “personal tasting notes” on older vintages (as opposed to tasting notes appearing in BH issues), his comments on finding Brett (from mild to “undrinkable” levels) are increasing dramatically. Since I bought some of these wines based upon laudatory reviews upon release, it is a bit concerning.
Not that I have a ton of ponsot experience (but the 1988 CSD inhad about 15; years ago was incredibly delicious) but i note that these wines tend to bounce around the US secondary market. As a result I expect poor storage of some could encourage brett bloom.
it used to be spectacular. And $100.
I love the idea of a wine that ages well, but posts like this make me cringe. Buying wine for +10 years only to find out two decades later it’s downright bad or just muted in taste…terrible.
I know nothing about Brett. Is it a product of contamination during elevage, and can poor storage make it worse?
Robert, certainly don’t take my thoughts for facts! I am no expert at all - just curious to see that the fact that professional tasters seem to encounter more brett these days coincides with the idea that “the less new oak, the better”. See Brett in Burgundy - the red wine premox? - WINE TALK - WineBerserkers
Has anyone had the 2010 CDLR VV lately? Is it a plastic cork wine?
joz€f p1nxten, thanks for the link. I had not see that thread previously.
And I will go check out the Burghound article on Brett mentioned in the thread, and try the search for brett in tasting notes on BH’s database as I believe it was Tom Reddick who had suggested it.
OR, instead, I could ignore the whole thing so it doesn’t stress me out!
(I already obsess over premox, to the extent that I stopped aging white burgs, and I don’t need something else to worry about.)
Just thought of another question though:
If a tasting of a bottle reveals brett, and the producer has bottled the wine direct from barrel, barrel by barrel, then I can see that only some bottles might be affected and others not.
If, as I assume is more commonly the practice, the wines from barrel are assembled in a tank and bottled, to avoid bottle-to-bottle variability, and a tasting from bottle reveals brett, can one assume that the entire production of that wine is “infected” by brett to some degree, and some bottles may show more than others depending on growth over time in the bottle?
Cuvee William or VV?
They made two wines that year, and the VV is worlds apart.
The answer to both questions is yes. Brett can exist in a wine in small amounts and be, for most, unidentifiable and might actually add to the complexity of the wine. At warmer temperatures the existing brett will multiply (bloom) in the bottle creating a brett bomb. I’ve found the demarcation point to be a temperature somewhere around 70 degrees, though I suspect that is probably pH sensitive (higher pH = lower temp).
Can’t help you Robert - I am not too worried at this stage, as I don’t seem too sensitive to. As noted, it can add complexity, and I have never come across a bottle that was undrinkable because of brett (as opposed to premox of TCA).
Best,
Jozef