Patrick the ones from your list I like and which are drinking really well albeit still being on the young side are Batailley, Belair, Betychevelle, Duhart and Gruaud Larose.
Have heard very good recent reports on Montrose too.
1 Like
Cheers, Ian. This reminded me I tried an 05 Batailley a few years ago to help decide if I should sell the rest as part of a cellar purge, and I quite enjoyed the bottle (which cost the princely sum of $32.50 back in the day), so I happily hung on to the remainder (5 bottles). Maybe I’ll add one to the queue.
1 Like
Interesting about Batailley. It used to be slow to mature, while Haut-Baitailley was approachable young.
1 Like
Bill I think the ‘05 Batailley is as good as, on least in a par with, the legendary ‘89. I know you are not generally a fan of this estate - I remember you once quipping that ‘if you really gave to drink Batailley’ drink one which is fully mature - but the wines have improved in last decade or two.
I had a La Vielle Cure 2 nights ago. it had a very roasted over oaked, too ripe profile to it. not nearly as bad as the 04 Pavie, which was a drain poor, the first in many years! It had a stewed, simmered dark fruit and roasted meat profile to it that was not very appealing. when young, it was a nice bottle. But it feels like the fruit is fading, its not very balanced.
john
There were many Right Bank wines that were problematic in ‘05. My first impression of the vintage was from a Right Bank tasting of satellites and a few lesser Saint Emilions and Pomerols.
The wines were kind of nasty. This was the era, where the thought process was that if you wanted a high Parker score, it did not matter what the underlying terroir was, extract the hell out of what you had, and you would get the score. Many of the wines were both raisiny and slightly bitter, and I left the tasting shaking my head.
Of course, the better wines from the Right Bank were much better than this, but this like 2000, Right Bank especially is heterogeneous, and one should buy carefully.
It’s better than it’s been, but still doesn’t compare to the wines they made in the '80s and decades prior. “Light touch” might be the culprit - none of the legendary oldies would be described that way!
2 Likes
I guess so but I find “light touch” a blessing in the modern era of Bordeaux. And they don’t lack substance either.
Has anyone had a 2005 Figeac? They were usually resistant to that kind of thing. I have a few but haven’t tasted them yet – they’re getting very mixed to negative CT reviews.
I had a '05 Pontet-Canet tonight. Respectfully, I didn’t appreciate any Napa similarities - there is nowhere near the fruit forwardness nor the ripe tannin finish of so many Napa Cabs. Having said that I don’t think it is anywhere near ready. It probably will morph into something better but I prefer the maligned '03 P-C at the present time. A little riper profile which I think is still very Bordeaux like if “modern.”
3 Likes
I don’t think you’d be disappointed in any of these, all of which are drinking well, though d’Issan and Giscours are likely to improve further.
1 Like
Big generalization here, but my loose sense is 2005 gave traditional wine makers a lot to work with.
1 Like
I love 03 P-C. Its ripe, but not overripe.
1 Like
Agree on 03 PC. I am drinking the second half of the '05 tonight - merits a better score tonight - very nice full bodied lingering finish and still packed with great fruit. I am more convinced than ever to leave most of the '05s alone - certainly the PC for now.
1 Like
Enjoying the last glass of a 2005 La Croix de Gay and it’s flat out gorgeous. Took a while for the fruit to come around but after an hour in the decanter it was singing. A very elegant and balanced wine, it has a bit of forest floor, truffles, and tart dark cherries on the nose. The fruit on the palate has increased with each glass and gotten darker. The finish is silky but fine grained tannins linger on the back of the palate. For a wine in this price point, it really delivers. Glad I have more.
2 Likes
I’ve always liked this property but in my region it has become inconsistent in availability.
I’m not too familiar with it, but seems like it has a lot of history. According to Leve, it’s only about 4h in size.
1 Like
Had one of these in Magnum last night - decanted and good to go. Surprisingly ready to drink - very linear with nice dark fruits and a polished finish. I was afraid this was going to be backward but the table enjoyed it - none left in anyone’s glass among the table of eight!
2 Likes
Just opened a 2005 Malescot from OWC, it is fantastic. Obviously a new-school Bordeaux, but the fruit and the tannin have been tamed to a good degree and it’s just a delicious drink right now. Not much tertiary yet, for that you’ll need 5-10 more years.
I had this the other night, thought it was a really nice wine that is approaching or at full maturity. The aromas are lovely and secondary, the palate is solid, medium-bodied, balanced. I enjoyed it thoroughly, but it didn’t show the subtlety and class of a great wine. I would drink now and over the next few years, as it may start to lose grip. Rated 90.
Had six bottles of the Tour St Bonnet, drank them too young.
to Pat Martin: These are probably excellent today and great cellar defenders for a vintage where the top wines will probably come around, but not tomorrow.
1 Like