TN: 2000 Potensac, Medoc. Decent, but I find this wine presents too soft for its own good and lacking real character. Soft on the palate, to a fault. All characteristics I sometimes sometimes find in Clos du Marquis, though that wine is usually a step up in its complexity. All that said, its drinking well enough now, with plenty of cassis, and is quite pleasant. Blind, I would have said a lower level St. Estephe. Why/how is this wine made in so “soft” a style? $17. A solid 85 points.
This had earth, tar, tobacco, tannins and acidity but no fruit. Like a liquid ashtray dropped in the forest that was very nicely made. The problem is I don’t want a wine that is nicely made that has no fruit. I need a little fruit. Not overwhelming gobs. But some fruit.
My bottle did have an ashtray characteristic too, and did lack fruit - the softness of it was what left me scratching my head. Must be something to do with its vinification. Anyone have an idea?
I really don’t know. But remember the '86 Potensac we shared at Wilfred’s house with Josh Raynolds and how good and still youthful it was. The 2000 was good in its youth but did not last. I think it has to do with the RO machines they got right around then. I think '85 or '86 was the last good LLC vintage and I assume they started fucking with all the wines after that, including Potensac.
Interesting. I do recall that very tasty 86 Potensac Josh brought (and the stellar 85 LLC we had the same night - which just tied for WOTN for me with that 78 Phelps Eisle you brought, in fact).
