Thanks for the note. Had this at the winery in 2014 and rather liked it, but have not opened any of my bottles yet.
1 Like
I think I am more positive overall on 2005s than a lot of people are and it has hit me as to why. I did not buy any 2005 St. Emilions and to the best of my memory have not tasted any. Not at all to say that they are all bad (again, I have not tasted any) but rereading this thread it seems like a lot of the problems are from there.
3 Likes
I think I have mentioned before my first tasting of 2005 Bordeaux. Height of Parkerism, and after I went to the Rive Droite tasting of most of the Right Bank tasting including some of the satellite appellations, and the wines were pretty horrible.
It seems that extraction was thought to be a substitute for quality and terroir, and it was never more apparent than in this vintage.
That being said, these were the exceptions, and 2005 was a benchmark for Bordeaux, and I expect in ten years they will begin to peak. My half bottles of VCC have finally began to show beautifully, and I have had some great bottles of Pichon Baron and Langoa, both slightly more advanced than my half bottle. If VCC is backward, Montrose is still in an angry adolescence.
1 Like
Agreed. I’m bullish on 2005 Left Bank. They’re just evolving at a glacial pace. It’s probably my favorite vintage in the 2001-2010 decade, although I haven’t tasted many ‘10’s in bottle.
A bottle of Grand Puy Lacoste last night was very encouraging, emerging into early stages of maturity with lovely structure and purity of fruit.
2 Likes
I fully expect the 05 GPL to be pretty spectacular in another 5 years.
Thanks for thecheck in.
1 Like
A few notes on 05 Bordeaux from the last year or so:
2005 Château Pichon-Longueville Baron
3/24/2026 rated 94 points: Decanted for 90 minutes. Perfect cork. Deep black red color, no sign of age. Soil and minerals on the nose, restrained black fruit and some mint. Tightly wound palate, very fresh and vibrant showing a saline infused texture with clenched black fruit and pepper on the moderately tannic finish. Great wine but a little stern and still so young like many 05s.
2005 Château Monbousquet
8/26/2025 rated 94 points: PNP. Ruby red. Nose is really compelling, I’m getting some espresso, vanilla, anise, kirsch and blackberry. Silky smooth palate, very lively and refreshing with lots of bright acidic lift and a mouth coating texture that is all about power without weight. Sweet fine grained and well integrated tannins on the finish. This is surprisingly good after several disappointing right bankers from 05 (Pavie, Larcis Ducasse).
2005 Château Angélus
1/10/2025 rated 94 points: PNP at dinner at Kona Village. This was impressive, showing black fruits, cedar and just the beginning of some secondary aromas. The palate is still quite primary with deep, perfectly ripe fruit and impressive structure for a right bank wine.
4 Likes
After musing about Lafon-Rochet yesterday, I tried this:
There’s a very apt expression in French: Seuls les idiots ne changent pas d’avis - Only idiots don’t change their minds
Well I’m an idiot but I did change my mind, hence the edit!
2005 Lafon Rochet St.Estèphe
1st night: Blackberry, dark cherry, some tobacco leaf and cigar box aromas, then a very silky, elegant mouthful of blackberry, plus some mildly spicy black cherry, before a wave of cool, restrained blackcurrant and a decent, if slightly austere finish. The tannins have finally receded, leaving a rather classy claret, very classic in style. I loved the silkiness and the freshness midpalate, but it does lack a little plumpness, the mouthfeel is a little narrow and pinched. Very enjoyable, but very good rather than excellent. 92 pts
Second night: much improved - nothing austere about the finish anymore and the mouthfeel is much plumper and better balanced. The fruit is much more pronounced too, but doesn’t affect the silky elegance at all. In fact there’s a Margalais feel to it, which is weird for a St.Estèphe. An excellent wine and a great example of Lafon-Rochet. 94 pts
Decanted for four hours, which felt about right on the first evening, but now I would say it needs a lot longer than that.
Bought at release for 33€, which was the same as the EP price. Not the best deal ever, but fine. Today it sells for 45 to 50€, which is not excessive.
To put it in perspective, I had tried a Clos Du Marquis 05 with it - the CdM was good, compared well the first night, not so well the second - the LR was just a lot more refined. Well, considering that the CdM sells for 63€, the LR is well worth looking at.
That being said, despite the second night improvement, given the choice, I’d rather have the 2016, 19 or 20, which I think have the potential to be even better the 2005…and concerning the latter two vintages…cheaper.
5 Likes
2005 Chateau Boyd-Cantenac
My first bottle from a six-pack. Decanted for half an hour.
Healthy dark ruby color, no bricking. Aromas have good intensity, with brambly black fruit (raspberry, currant) and a nice herbal touch. The palate is medium to full bodied, very well balanced, now with hints of red currant as well. There is very nice density of fine tannins, just beginning to resolve. The finish is moderately long. This is young and harmonious, just entering a good drinking window. Rated 92.5, 2 - 3 points of improvement likely over another decade.
1 Like
Over the past 8 months I’ve tasted three 2005s, all of which were fantastic.
Ch Pape Clément: magnificent. Tannins remain chewy and grippy, which likely means most knowledgeable tasters would think it too young; I thought they were the perfect counterpoint to the cedar, tar, black fruit and licorice that lingered for hours. Easily 97 points for me.
Ch Brane Cantenac: tasted vertically with the 2019 and 2020. Not only was it obviously the best of the three, it is at its peak IMO from the perspective of resolved tannins, beautiful violet and mint, black and red fruit and retained intensity and length. Also an easy 97.
Ch Haut Bailly: part of a recent horizontal of 2016 Bordeaux, in which the 2016 Haut Bailly was also included. The room overall preferred the excellent 2016, but I found the 2005 to be better balanced overall. I’d give it 95 as it didn’t give me the immediate and profound delight I experienced with the Pape Clément and the Brane Cantenac. Still very lovely.
It may be evident from my notes that I am generally one who prefers primary fruit to tertiary development, though that can vary with circumstance.
5 Likes