Agree with Chris- in general it will happen on no particular schedule for any given wine- so no predictability.
My best example was 85 Lynch Bages- totally delicious till 91,shut down hard for 10-15 yrs( my general storage was at 52 degrees ) and finally came out in the mid 2000’s. It was undrinkable for me in between, hard,no fruit - nasty.Opened multiple bottles and cases and gave up. Drank through 20+ cases.best example I have of a dumb phase with multiple example/cases. Rest of mine are more anecdotal - wine shut down hard- no specific flaws,but not enjoyable.
Yeah, but that’s not unpredictable – it’s totally predictable, the classic Bordeaux pattern that I outlined in the post above in this very thread. Open for drinking from bottle release through 5-6 years after vintage date, then shuts down hard through about 15-20 years after vintage date, then opens back up again. I have observed this pattern over and over again with classed growth Bordeaux so I think it’s the opposite of unpredictable. Contrary to “no particular schedule” it appears to have a quite reliable schedule. In fact it’s so predictable I’m curious as to why we don’t have a clear scientific explanation for it.
Generally predictable, yes. But not specific enough to confidently predict when a particular bottle has opened back up and is ready to rock. For that, I need additional input from someone who’s had it recently or at least knowledge of the specific wine and vintage. Your “15-20 years after the vintage date” won’t tell me which if any of my 2005s or 2000s are ready to go.
I tend to agree with you that the evolution of Bordeaux wines is predictable in a way, at least for experienced Bordeaux drinkers, but, from my experience over decades, it mainly depends on the vintage. While, for example, the wines from 1985, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1997, 2001, 2002, 2004, or 2007 rarely showed any ‘dump phase’ worth mentioning, the wines from 1986, 1988, 1995, 1996, 2000, or 2005 seem to be textbook examples for wines that have to go through a relatively long ‘closed’ period, especially the 1995s. -Other people may have other experiences!
With other words, the time frame for a ‘dump phase’ can last from “not worth mentioning” up to several decades. It all depends on the experience and the preferences of the individual drinker.
As for science, Marcus, I think that it is not only impossible, but also undesirable to find a clear scientific explanation. If actually there were an explanation -biochemical or whatever-, then the door would be wide open for further manipulations that I don’t think would be desirable.
The science is there. You can buy the text books. That doesn’t make it easy to manipulate a wine in this regard without major negative trade-offs. How do you change a component essential for longevity without effecting longevity? Why would you do that? The incentive is to manipulate wines to make them accessible early and not “need” age.