I picked 2000, but it could have easily gone to 2014. The benefit of age and having more killer experiences with 2000 is the only thing that swayed the results. 2014 may very well get there.
2010 for me, but I’ve had more of those than ‘14, which are still mostly snoozing away in the cellar. Looking back through my notes it seems like the real glory of these top vintages is the Bourgogne Blancs. Note to self to overbuy ‘19.
At La Paulee vertical tastings the last few years, 2010 white Burgs have stood out to a stunning degree. But nobody has been pouring their ‘14s.
I may go so far as to say that 2014 White Burg may be the most consistently strong vintage of any wine I can think of (at least in terms of how they drink young) – anywhere, for any type of grape. It’s not just that it reaches great heights – it does – but it’s also so darn consistent up and down the range. I can think of a few others that could contend, but nothing jumps out at me as better.
Yes Howard, keep the naysayers in line! If they dare question, attack their credibility, this is the way!
Funnily, I’m not a naysayer, I’m just suggesting that if you asked non-Berserkers, there might be less consensus.
I am not an apostate Howard, please don’t excommunicate me from the Church of Proper Burgundy Appreciation.
Again, how many 2014 white Burgs have you tasted? Then you can rant and rave and act like a crazy person.
I think it’s a worthy point about bias that you raise. It’s why I thought hard on my answer before choosing 2014. In the CdB we have had a plethora of strong vintages this century that “but for” premox would have us all gleeful.
Sorry Grand Inquisitor, my point doesn’t require a minimum number of bottles consumed. I decline your demand.
Howard, you often react so strongly to folks who disagree with you. I’m just generally not the target of your aggression, so this is quite fun. I hope you know I’m just gently teasing you.
You haven’t disagreed with me or anyone. There were people on this thread you have views of top vintages other than 2014, state their reasons for the posts, and I very much respect that. You just came here and criticized our answers based purely on the fact that you wanted to trash people who like white Burgundy. Now, after writing nasty post after nasty post, you are just kidding and somehow I am the one who is at fault. Don’t worry. I won’t hurt your tender snowflake feelings anymore.
In fairness, I think the group-think here is justified. It’s not like this board is shy of cantankerous people disagreeing about wine. Even this thread. 
You are so funny, Howard. Reread the thread. I have insulted nobody’s views, because I’d be insulting my own too. I drink white burgundy. I like white burgundy. Just today, I even picked up four bottles of Chablis which I love, even if they are out-of-favor 2015’s. Actually, I think 2014 is terrific, and it’s my second choice after 2010, for most of the same reasons. Somehow, you made the assumption I didn’t like white burgundy because I refused to engage your antics? That’s on you.
I remarked about the overwhelming consensus, and wonder if there might be some groupthink, which oddly made you claim I am crazy and nasty and that I trash people who like white burgundy. Groupthink is real, and good people are subject to it, smart people too. Wondering if it’s a factor, isn’t an attack, Howard.
Please notice that others have been able to engage with my groupthink question without taking personal affront.
I picked 2014 , and I think 2008 is a close second . I am surprised that Jeremy chooses 2000 , I should try more of them but I am afraid I drank most of them fearing a short life span .
I was tempted to pick one of the earlier years - I can make arguments for several, e.g. the 2001s I have and had have all been fantastic - but I voted 2014. I reckon it will turn out much more consistent, and many producers have improved significantly since the early 2000s. There are also a number producers who have shifted to Diam by 2014, leading to higher reliability. Overall, I would wager there will be more great wines from 2014 than there were from any of the other choices.
I seem to remember that when the vintages first came out that 2002 was rated higher than 2000 or 2001. It is interesting that today there seems to be about the same support for all three and that in comments people mention 2000 and 2001 but not 2002. I also am interested in the support for 2010. I would have thought 2007 and 2008 would have gotten more votes than 2010. Interesting.
I wonder whether over the years support will increase or decrease for 2014. Certainly, it is the best vintage I have ever tasted young or even now in middle age or whatever it is in the age of premox. It will be interesting to see whether these wines with age prove to be superior to say 2016 or 2017.
Just as a casual observer of tasting notes, one thing I have noticed about 2014 is that the greatness is not as evident in Cellartracker notes where people evaluate the wines. Usually for red wines there are very sharp differences in the scores you see for the greatest vintages compared to the surrounding ones. Less so for whites. For 2014 in particular scores often seem to be good but not great compared to surrounding vintages. A fair share of 2014 tasting notes mention wines being shut down, highly acidic, or needing more aging – quite unusual to see that for white Burgundy where people are now tending to drink them early. Realize I’m just conveying Cellartracker impressions here, perhaps the lowest form of wine commentary, but that’s what I’ve observed.
1 Like
I had this experience recently—drank Hubert Lamy’s ‘14 bourgogne blanc a few months ago and it was highly acidic. It didn’t seem like there was much else behind the acid that would bring it together with more age.
I posted TNs on some 2014s and 2007s just the other day. Three of the former were “shut down” so I’m not surprised by cellartracker notes not being effusive across the board. We take such periods in our strides as normal with reds, so I’m fine with it with whites too; indeed it can be a good indicator of quality. I’m not surprised that there aren’t tonnes of 2007 votes. Many great Chablis, but frankly a few CdB wines are under-fruited to be great.
Deleted.
The thing is that reds have an extremely reliable record of re-emerging from a shut down period with time. Whites not so much. It’s already six years from vintage date so if you are going to say they are “great but shut down” now you are talking about the greatness emerging like a decade from vintage date. How common is that for whites?
I’m just saying that if people are going to claim 2014s are overwhelmingly and obviously the greatest white Burgundy vintage of the century and possibly the greatest vintage anywhere of any wine (shades of 2007 Chateauneuf…) the evidence should be obvious in the bottle.
I had a bottle of Lamy’s 2014 Chez Derriere Haut Densite in November and it was spectacular, so his 2014s definitely have plenty behind the acid.
Having consumed 56 bottles of 2014 white burgundy from my cellar, plus probably trying at least that many during tastings, I do feel that the evidence supports my vote for best vintage. Consistently the 14s show very well, tons of dry extract and acid, but many times balanced with perfectly ripe fruit. Yes some have been closed, but the vast majority have been singing.
Both Chablis and CdB, up and down the hierarchy, from Saint Aubin to a glorious PYCM Batard drank last September (although I admit this one has lots of upside). My experience, YMMV.
1 Like