TNs: Krug 165eme, 04 and 21eme Rosé

Got to whip through these tonight. All lovely stuff.

165eme - Definitely an interesting foil to the rightly ballyhooed 164eme. Like most 09 vs 08 debates, this is showing more cards now, but it is nowhere near maturity or peaking. Oldest wine in the mix dates back to 1990, and the mature wines blended in are giving the layering, richness and a mellow complexity without anything notably oxidative. Lovely golden fruit and an intense finish. Yeast/autolysis is very subtle. Excellent potential, and may come closer to the 164eme than expected.

04 vintage - More overt and intense liveliness here. Relatively Chardonnay heavy for Krug, and it shows in the acidity and cut and fresh citrus fruit. Very youthful for a 14-year-old wine. Not quite at the level of the 02, but easily one of the best 04s I have tasted, and one of the least evolved. The 165eme is more alluring today, but a revisit in 10 years between these two would be fascinating.

21eme Rosé - On the subtle side of rosé. Light red berries, watermelon and apricot. Good density and length, but not quite up to the complexity of the 165eme or 04. Hard to say if this is just reserved or not quite up to the level of the previous two wines.

I wonder how much 08 there is in the 165 as compared to the 164?

Thanks for the notes. I prefer 165 over 164. 165 has a wonderful creamy texture and beautifully balanced acidity and flavors and none of the harshness of the stern and very acidic 164.


I agree, right now, and for the foreseeable future. I do think the 164eme will surpass the 165eme with time, but as discussed elsewhere (I think) the gap is not as wide as one might suspect. And having tasted a fair number of 09 vintage wines over the past two years, I have been very surprised by how much I have enjoyed them young, but also expect them to have a long life. While relatively ripe, the wines in general are refined and not at all clumsy. has pointed out that 164 isn’t particularly Krugy. No such issue with the 165. 165 has plenty of structure and I agree will probably last nearly as long as 164. Have you tried the 02? That will be magnificent in the long haul.

I have! And I thought it was already spectacular, though it will certainly be long-lived. I thought I had a note from a dinner earlier this year, but I was helping prep other wines while it was being consumed, so didn’t get to jot down specific thoughts.

Jim, we’ll miss you this weekend in Coal Creek Canyon! Interesting on the Krug. So far I’ve been in the minority on the 02, most of the bottles I’ve had didn’t move me. Like the 04, and love the 00. That’s what makes a market.

Brad, I will be sad to miss it, and can only look forward to reading about both wines and company vicariously. I hope you all can outdo Mitch’s last big get together.

Somehow I have missed the 00 Krug thus far, but the 04 is definitely a worthy vintage chez Krug. I’m not too surprised though, as I think 00 is a relatively underrated vintage, generally.

Very nice Jim. Some interesting comparisons and predictions. It will be fun to track these.