TN: 1982 Domaine de Chevalier (France, Bordeaux, Graves, Pessac-Léognan)

  • 1982 Domaine de Chevalier - France, Bordeaux, Graves, Pessac-Léognan (1/23/2010)
    Probabaly a few years past its best drinking state, ruby/brown with not much nose other than green herbs and loamy earth. Thin and light in the palate with almost no detectable tannins, tart, not much fruits, river rock and asian spices with a short finish. Put on a little weight with air but, generally, quaffable and not much else.

Posted from CellarTracker

Hi Clem,

The last bottle of Claret I owned (and, indeed, the last bottle I intend to own) was Domaine de Chevalier 1995. I popped it in in 2007 and, even given my generally low opinion of red Bordeaux, I was quite surprised by how actively unpleasant it was. A twelve year old Claret from a reasonably well thought of producer should not have tasted as old as this did; it had hardly any fruit and the palate was totally dried out and dusty. It was also quite dirty, not earthy in a nice sense, but getting perilously close to a well-manured compost heap in terms of aromatic profile. No thanks.

Cheers,
David.

Their white wines are something quite special and last for ages. They consistently outshine their reds.

I haven’t enjoyed this producer until the 05 that was a very nice red claret.
David we should introduce you to Jeff Leve. You might have the radioactive DNA that would be necessary to neutralize his program settings.
[stirthepothal.gif] pepsi

Hello Jack,

Radioactive DNA? That doesn’t sound like a good thing to me, should I be worried? If this Jeff Leve chap is a fellow who likes dull Claret I’d be only too happy to irradiate him. [tease.gif]

Cheers,
David.

David, I don’t care what your half life is. You are necessary to save our universe.
http://dat.erobertparker.com/bboard/showthread.php?t=137899&highlight=2009+Bordeaux" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In fairness, '82 was not a strong vintage for Chevalier - their '83 is much better, IMO. I still have several of their '78’s in the cellar, and side-by-side they consistently outperform the Latour from the same year, but as Wilfred said, these guys are probably better known for their whites.

Hello again Jack,

I read his first post and hated it. Not only is he pushing some excessively expensive Bordeaux as being worth buying but also recommending tedious filth. I don’t know all of the cheapie producers he recommends, but the ones I am aware of I despise. Calling Bordeaux a good source of inexpensive quality wine is disingenuous: at best the cheap stuff is dull, and far too frequently badly made, whereas flash Claret (and I will not deny some of them are damned good) it just excessively priced considering the large production of most estates.

If I run into this fellow I’ll give him a full dose of radiation.

David.

Exactly. I rather enjoyed the 80 more than the 82 [bleh.gif]

David,

No use…he is lead lined [berserker.gif]

Thanks anyway David, Bob is right, I don’t know what came over me.
[wink.gif]

There was rather extreme bottle variation in the 82 from the start. Some bottles were dilute and others were quite decent. I owned some of each. I never heard an explanation, but it was widely recognized and was reflected in the price beginning not long after the release. I paid $15 in 1986, which was well below other 82s of similar status at that stage.

The first couple of bottles I opened (in the late 80s or early 90s – I can’t recall) were seriously disappointing. I drank my last two bottles in 2003 and 2004, and they were better. Both were pleasant it not terribly exciting, and seemed to be at the end of their lives. I scored them 87 and 88.

If you can find it, the 2004 is very good and was cheap. I paid $33.50 for mine.

I opened a '79 on Friday night, gave it a few hours in the decanter and it as splendid for the $30 cost.

Never drinking a Claret ever again…interesting perspective I must say. Ever been to Napa Valley or Walla Walla for that matter? Or perhaps just a generalization towards French wine?