Ok I get the connection. Kevin’s tasting preferences in Bordeaux varieties, in your mind, hurt his credibility in evaluating whether a red Burgundy vintage is not only less than great, which is fair, and I drink and love a lot of less than great Burgundy, but actually tainted, which if inaccurate is unfair to the producers. Where I disagree with you is that he possibly recognizes the chocolate accurately. He just likes it. That doesn’t by itself make him untrustworthy in evaluating wine. It just means his preferences are toward wines that might not reflect traditional terroir. If he told me hey George this Bordeaux is just like chocolate covered cherries, you’d love it, he’d be at least half right. It does and I wouldn’t.
I’d pay triple for a 2011 than for a 2004 though. But I’d pay half for a 2011 than for a 2010 or 2012. Not because of taint.
I wonder if there is any parallel to the wine maturing and your love of it. While not a long span of years, your scores are trending down as this wine matures. I recall reading your 2015 shortly after I had popped another 2000 Cheval Blanc, and our notes were like two different wines. Your more current note is starting to pick up more of the earth, red spectrum and acid that I really liked in this wine. I think my score was in the 97-98 range. A phenomenal wine. Out of my price range generally, however. A rare occasion wine for me, was able to enjoy two nice glasses on that one evening.
I’ve only tasted one '11 red burg
…Champy Pommard village…undrinkable upon opening…gorgeous the next day…lean, pretty, tart, mouth watering fruit, racy acidity>(would never guess pommard) Never!
in a tasting like this (right-bank bordeaux) 70% of the wines taste about the same, the real talent and challenge is coming up with the unique descriptors to make them sound different.
I rated Tertre-Roteboeuf 2000 92/100 in April 2015.
Very ripe of course, and my guests unsurprisingly proposed a super toscan or a californian Bordeaux blend (the wine served beside was Cheval-Blanc 1998, very ripe as well).
On the basis of the bottle tasted during the Pavie dinner a few years ago, I would not rate Pavie 2000 as high (my rating was 91/100, for a quite “heavy” offer, lacking complexity and elegance).
Same rating than you, Panos, on Angélus 2000 (Angélus verticale in april 2007) and on Figeac 2000 (Figeac verticale in january 2010).
Robert,
I absolutely have no preference for young/youthful wine. FWIW, my true passion is drinking truly mature wines, e.g. the 59s and 61s at the moment. Also, I doubt there would have been much evolution since Dec, 2015.
Whenever I organize and post a blind tasting event, I am keenly aware that I make myself very vulnerable. Clearly I either didn’t get the 00 Cheval Blanc or the wine didn’t show well.
In regards to our opinions regarding the 00 Cheval Blanc, I am very much comfortable with my assessment as I am sure you are with yours. We can at least agree that it is a monumental wine with a long life ahead.
Yes there were two ripe wines but as I recall, they are from the small properties. I was making a general overview of the vintage and the top wines. The 00 is a very ripe vintage and at the moment, a lot of Merlot based wines showed the ripeness that I describe as “chocolate” I am simply reporting what I observed in a relatively short time.
FWIW, my cellar consist of 91.2% French (33% Burgundy, 22.4% Champagne, 18% Rhone, 14.5% Bordeaux). Other than the 09 Beausejour that I bought a lot, I have less than a few cases of St Emilion. I seldom drink Bordaux at home and if I do, they are mostly all fully mature Bordeauxs.
Initially it was just me and Bill Nanson who pointed out the issue. I was making an assessment of the vintage. How can I not generalize? You should read the 11 thread and see how much we got ridiculed. The reaction was very similar to yours here, i.e. I am reporting the 00 blind tasting and you dragging the 11 Burgundy which is not really relevant.
Which is more “reckless”, giving high scores to the top 11 wines or point out the caveat emptor?
I always expect someone like you to chime in which is a lot worse than getting a couple pasts on the back.
This is a great example when I said I am not making friends. I am reporting my perception of the 00 St Emilion and you want to criticize me for my take on the 11 Burgundy.
Kevin is a great taster: always careful and with a very perceptive nose. Of course he has stylistic preferences and we disagree sometimes on these. There is and always should be room - thank goodness - for such disagreement.
As for Rochebelle, I’m scratching my head just a bit, but not too much. The small 2+ hectare estate has nice terroir - just near Troplong Mondot - and was promoted (justifiably) in the last revisit to the classification to grand cru classé. Winemaking is not modern styled, and favors freshness.
Sorry I meant to reply to the above reposting by Laurent. My point about Pavie is that I was half expecting an oak ridden, über concentrated libation but it wasn’t so… I wonder how it will be in another 10 years.
Martin Steinley wrote> :
In the end, I really couldn’t care less what Kevin writes about 2000 St. Emilion, but when he casts aspersions on an entire wine region’s entire vintage after tasting a handful of the wines (and with what I now know is a high tolerance for overripeness and an affinity for chocolate in his wines), I will call him on it every time.
Did you buy a lot of 2011 Red Burgundy for your business or personal cellar that you now have a valuation issue with? If Kevin and others are wrong about 2011 why do you care? Why not just disagree and move on down the road? If you disagree about Kevin’s tasting notes and palate why not put together your own tasting, invite people to join you, and post your notes and results? I respect your right to disagree but your multiple posts and tone just feels to me like something else (other than disagreement) is at play with you.
I was waiting for someone to play this card (it is just too easy, much like playing the “sour grapes” card when retailers posted warnings in the Premier Cru thread), and the answer is “no.” If you had read my posts, you shouldn’t have to ask the questions you did. Kevin, after tasting relatively few 2011 red Burgundies upon release, declared repeatedly that the vintage is “tainted.” That, IMO, is reckless behavior, particularly for the amateur that he is. His OP in this thread confirms why he reached that conclusion (he likes excess ripeness and torrefaction, primarily chocolate, to blot out any sense of plant matter and earth), but it does not justify his irresponsible behavior. In 20 years, when those who purchased 2011 red Burgundies are enjoying the aromas and flavors of the sun, the earth and the rain, Kevin can enjoy his 2000 St. Emilion milkshakes.
Martin Steinley wrote:
I was waiting for someone to play this card (it is just too easy, much like playing the “sour grapes” card when retailers posted warnings in the Premier Cru thread), and the answer is “no.” If you had read my posts, you shouldn’t have to ask the questions you did. Kevin, after tasting relatively few 2011 red Burgundies upon release, declared repeatedly that the vintage is “tainted.” That, IMO, is reckless behavior, particularly for the amateur that he is. His OP in this thread confirms why he reached that conclusion (he likes excess ripeness and torrefaction, primarily chocolate, to blot out any sense of plant matter and earth), but it does not justify his irresponsible behavior. In 20 years, when those who purchased 2011 red Burgundies are enjoying the aromas and flavors of the sun, the earth and the rain, Kevin can enjoy his 2000 St. Emilion milkshakes.
Martin,
You are completing ignoring my response to you earlier. My reckless behavior seems to come to a fruition if you are sensitive to the 04 like taint. I have been pointing out from early on that the taint is not as severe as the 04s. However I still stand by that the 11 reds should be avoided. Since the 80, the only two red Burgundy vintages that I don’t care for are the 04 and 11. Other than Antonio, almost all critics seem to like the 11s initially.
As I posted before, I have a very little St Emilion in my cellar other than the 09 Beausejour. My biggest position on the right bank wine is VCC. I drink mostly Burgundy at home. Based on Pano’s suggestion, I thought it would be interesting to organize the 00 retrospective. The 00 is a very ripe vintage and the merlot based wines commonly exhibit the chocolate flavor. It is what it is.
BTW, Your definition of decorum is quite different than mine. If you ever wish to test how amateur my palate is, I will give you 5 to 1 odd. I will meet you at a mutually convenient location.
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}