1973 is truly a piss poor year. 1973 Bordeaux Wine Vintage Report and Buying Guide
Yes, 1974 is even worse, but not by much. Great for California Cabs though!
Overall, I agree with Jeff. I think it’s also true, though, that the OP may simply not like secondary and tertiary characteristics of aged cabernet as much as youthful characteristics if at all. What Jeff said about early '70’s in Bordeaux definitely does not hold true for CA cab in 1974, which boasts many, many outstanding examples. It’s my husband’s birth year, so I’ve had dozens and he’s probably had closer to 100. '77 and '78 can also be quite fine in California. So unless Alan’s “undrinkable” CA cabs have all been from poor producers or poorly stored, I think it’s likely he just doesn’t care for them. That’s fine. I think Scarecrow is undrinkable.
I agree with you on 1972, 1973 and 1974. I would not even think of buying any, but I might be curious to buy a few.
However, I keep tasting 1970s that I really like. Over the past few years, I have 1970s from Latour, Haut Brion, Leoville Poyferre, Cheval Blanc, Montrose and just a couple of weeks ago Lynch Bages that were quite good or better. The Lynch Bages, in the view of the four people at the table including me, was better than the 1982 Lynch Bages we had with it.
Not sure of your definition of “a few wines.” Certainly, back in 1970, there were a lot fewer wineries in Bordeaux making good wines and even a bunch of big name producers like Lafite and Margaux did not make good wines. But, my sense is that where with classified wines the wineries were making quality wine at the time, the wines are still tasting really good now. Where there is a problem, it is much more an issue of low standards at the time than of the ability of wines from the vintage to age.
In the last year I have had very good Bordeaux from 1971 and 1973 (not to mention even better wines from 1970 and 1978). I have also had dead wines from 1971 and 1973.
Wines do not care what the vintage chart says. They follow their own path.
Sarah, this surprises me. Where the wineries made good wines at the time, I really like California Cabernets from the 70s. I am amazed that there were 100 or even dozens of wineries making wine there at the time that would age this long. Certainly, as I said earlier, I love the good wines from that era and, in fact, I look for younger California Cabernet that are still made in the style of the wines of that era but I am surprised there were a 100 of them. I doubt that today (even with how many more wineries there are today than there were then) I could find anywhere near 100 that are making wines that will age (rather than hold) for 40+ years. Certainly, wines like Ridge, Montelena, Mayacamas, some wines from Heitz, Dunn, Dominus and a handful of others, but I start running out of names without getting to that many more.
I am not disagreeing with you, I am just surprised.
Acid is a preservative and wines tasted at vintage are analyzed on a comparative basis with other recent vintages. As a result, wines with higher acid were likely seen as less intriguing wines at the time, but have been preserved better than some of their counterparts. Opened now, they retain a perceived “freshness” that carries a lighter fruit profile, and some often mistake the retained “green” aromas as some complexity that would have been perceived as a sign of a lesser wine when young. A less acidic wine may show a more decayed fruit profile and less verve. An elite vintage will carry both fruit and acid. That is likely why you can find a wine from the mid-70s of a relatively written off vintage and still find some pleasure. The vintages you referenced are both cold weather vintages high in acid and low in pleasure when young.
Also if you like really bright fruit and verve then yes…you will probably never like ultra-aged wines. The fruit inevitably fades from bright and sweet to something different as the wine ages and develops secondary and tertiary flavors and aromas.
We buy types of wine to meet our preferences. The age of wines we drink is no different. If you keep doing the same thing and expect different results you’ve…um…got a problem not worth telling the world about. To your other point, if you’ve had a bunch of 1974 Napa cabs that have been stored well and find them grossly inferior to Bdx of that same general period, you’re probably a lost cause. They’re fading, but they’re high acid more red-fruit profiled wines. Storage and preservation are critical. Find an old Eisele, Mondavi Reserve, or Heitz from that period.
At a recent wine dinner in Santa Barbara, the youngest California cab was from 1973, and showed decently, but not nearly as well as the Martin Ray from 1946 or almost all of the BV Georges de Latours from the '50s and '60s (hope I got all my apostrophes in the right place!). I guess it was just too young.
Re: 1973 Bordeaux, I was of the opinion that they were likely terrible until we opened a bottle of '73 Beychevelle a few years ago. I even warned the sommelier that she might not want to even present the wine to us after she decanted it! She came from her decanting station and said, “I think you’re going to want to drink this.” It was really terrific. Not even that old-seeming, and very yummy.
Who knows about old wines – certainly, many don’t live up to expectations, even low expectations, but others do great. Just check out Tom Hill’s notes on wines that he abandoned (not on purpose) in his garage, stored upright, for over a decade. Subject to summertime temperatures in the 90s. Quite a few are toast (or vinegar), but others are in great shape. How is that possible, defying every rule of wine storage.
Old wines have more to offer than we know, even those of us who have tasted lots of old ones.
I should have been more clear, Howard. I did not mean a hundred different wineries. I meant I have had dozens of bottles from the 1974 vintage alone, and Jonathan has had a lot more.
I have had much better luck with 1974 Bordeaux than Sarah. Pomerol had some decent wines, particularly the Trotanoy and Petrus, and a La Mission Haut Brion both from bottle and magnum were light but pretty wines, but just about at the end of their lives.
I am not sure that Jeff speaks for all of us with his condemnation of all the Bordeaux from the 1970s, particularly when I remember drinking with him at Du Tertre a lovely magnum of Giscours 1970, which I liked and he panned. As he said, we will just have to leave it at “we just do not agree.”
Lots of great California wines from the 1970s, and some unexpected treasures, such as Jordan and Burgess.
Vintage charts had some utility in the days before smart phones, fishing for a wine off a list with no further help. Nowadays, I can’t really think of what I might use one for
And as already noted, even in “weak” vintages, there are successes (just as there are disasters even in great vintages). The former provide particularly good shopping opportunities.
I definitely support the comments that:
- Vintage generalisations are generally blunt tools, as they don’t allow for when the grapes were picked, and what state those grapes were in, were they sorted? (rigorously?) and what winemaking approach was used, including what blend was chosen.
- Most vintage charts are horribly over-cautious in when to ‘drink up’. Even more so than already cautious drinking windows that the critics apply to individual wines.
It’s amusing when you see an ‘Australia’ vintage chart, with just a single rating for each year.
I know
often with wines regions miles apart rated under the same rating …
Or vintage charts that just list “Italy.”
Got it, thanks. I know there were wineries like Mt. Veeder and Burgess making ageworthy wines at that time that I am not sure are around at all anymore and am not sure of the extent of such wineries. I did not think there were 100 of them but thought you might well know more than me on the subject.
Had the 1976-1980 Jordan’s, but a long time ago. How have they aged?
Even for regions. What number do you give 98 Bordeaux? No subregions, just one number.
Not so well. I had one recently. Too little acid and tannin, I think.
The dog, which sleeps all day, is less predictable than your posting. We get it, you hate old wines.
Keep in mind that Mouton is a first growth, a very high quality and pedigreed wine with generally a great track record of aging. It wouldn’t be surprising if you had a vintage where most of the wines would be poor today but a First Growth would be doing well.
Bottles of Bordeaux are unable to read the vintage charts, and therefore do not know how they are supposed to behave. If they aren’t following the vintage charts, it’s because you have not been training them properly. This also explains bottle variation.
I offer my services as Wine Whisperer to those who are concerned about the proper training of their Bordeaux. For a modest fee (and travel expenses), I will come to your cellar and train your bottles, sampling them on occasion to insure that they remain on track.
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
David Glasser, WW