I suspect this is a stylistic disagreement. I did a big Fourrier vertical a few years back (Griotte vs Clos St. Jacques for 2006-2018) and while I think 2006 is at peak, 2007, 2009 and 2011 are hapy to be opened and are particularly good vintages for Griotte.
I know Griotte and have tasted it through a lot of vintages.
If one likes Burg on the young side, no problem, but I’d prefer a mature vintage at half the price over a primary one with more “prestige” … most 2009s are not “singing” now
It’s not about prestige; I’d just much rather drink a considerably better wine that’s slightly younger. 2009 is a warm vintage, it’s not closed; if you don’t find it’s ready for your palate, that’s fine. This hasn’t been my experience with Fourrier.
I don’t know why everyone is so concerned about how the Fourrier might drinking now when there was no mention in the OP about these wines being for immediate consumption.
Cellartracker shows 1650 remaining bottles of the Lambrays vs. 300 of the Fourrier, with an auction value approximately double the Lambrays. If I’m getting a free bottle of Burgundy, and without any other information, I’d take rare and expensive and something I’ve never tried previously .
If it were my choice - and assuming all wines were purchased upon release and properly stored since AND not flipped - I would go with the Lambrays. Now, I happen to really like Fourrier and if his 09 GC is any indication, he did really well in 2009. But I have had the 02 Lambrays a couple of times and really enjoyed it and, like Nick, I really like the 2002 vintage for red burgundy. I like to drink it and I like to open it for others as well-made and properly stored 2002s from the producers I like are drinking really well right now (actually, they have always shown well, but now they are showing an excellent blend of maturity and youth). And I would be comfortable opening one of the Lambrays at any time, whereas I’d be much more cautious about the 2009 Griotte.
If it’s free (though I guess that wasn’t stated explicitly) and not something I normally cellar, there’s a higher chance I’d open a bottle 16 years old like this simply out of curiosity / for educational purposes.
It has been a few years since I had the 2002 Lambrays but it was drinking well then. I had the 2001 about a month ago and also was fully mature. In my experience, the 2001 is the better wine.
PaulN recently started another thread that seemed to indicate to me that he is pretty new to Burgundy. Two-part Burgundy question - WINE TALK - WineBerserkers I would hope in such case he should be trying to learn about Burgundy the old fashioned way (by drinking it) rather than just by reading reviews.
I don’t really care whether he gets the 2002 or the 2009, but, if he is planning to drink it soon, he may not know what to expect from the wine. I thought he should know that if he gets the Lambrays he is getting a fully mature wine, but that if he is drinking the Fourrier he will be drinking a wine that is much less mature. I was not at all telling him what to buy, but rather trying to tell him what he will get from the wines and let him decide which experience he wants.
Is a 02 Lambrays really going to teach you more about Burgundy than an 09 Fourrier Griotte? I’m not so sure. Fourrier drinks better young than most producers, and Griotte drinks better young than a lot of Grand Crus, so I don’t really think it’s fair to call a 16 year old Fourrier Griotte “too young.” If anything it’s in its early drinking window, but with upside from here. I’ll admit that I have a lot of bias though because Fourrier is one of my favorite red burg producers, and the older bottles of Lambrays I’ve had probably would have scared me away from Red Burgundy if they had been my introduction to the region.
The difference here is not between a very young wine and a mature wine, but rather between a 23 year old wine and a 16 year old wine. They are along different stages of maturity, but not so far apart as to call the Fourrier “much less mature”. There’s no reason to fetishize aging over quality.
Thanks everyone, lots of information here. Seems like maybe I’m leaning toward the Fourrier and holding it for a handful of years, maybe will be getting more ready closer to 2030?
Thanks again for all the generous information and guidance!
Yeah–I’d take the Lambrays for the reasons above–1) it’s a 2002, 2) 2 bottles vs one cuts your bad bottle disappointment risk. Lambrays is sort of a special case for me–it often gets left in the dust in tastings because it’s sort of a stealth late bloomer, not really coming on until it’s been open for 3 or more hours. It tends to lag behind initially in tastings, then comes on late. By that time, the power tasters have cruised thru the wines, written their notes, packed up their glasses, and called their Ubers.
I don’t think it matters that the Lambrays is an 2002. Sure, 2002 is known for being a great vintage, but just like great winemakers often make great wine in off vintages, lesser wines don’t automatically become great due to a great vintage. The Lambrays, while good for Lambrays from that period, simply isn’t a very good wine, let alone a good 2002.
Not knowing anything about the style of wine you like, or what level of maturity, or even if it will be consumed now or later, I’d just go with the better wine.
And btw, I own and have drunk both. If anyone who has been advocating for Lambrays wants to trade an 09 Fourrier for 2 of my Lambrays, I will gladly take that action.
Right? I’m actually happy to drink my 02 Lambrays, which I bought ages ago for cheap. But I would never choose it over a good vintage of Fourrier Griotte.