Author Archives: Ian Elton-Wall

Rippon Vineyards Pinot Noir

Burgundy is expensive – that is a fact. Prices so far for the 2015 Burgundy vintage look very strong indeed and the 2016 Burgundy vintage is a tiny one – this can only put more pressure on pricing. Where this really hurts is at village level: decent village Vosne or Gevrey can set you back £500 a case these days; premier cru wines even more.

This leaves the Pinot lover with a problem: what do you buy for decent drinking? We have an answer.

New Zealand Pinot Noir can be one of the easiest wines to pick out in a blind tasting. Why? Because so much of it simply tastes the same. It’s like there’s a formula, and a desire, to replicate the same flavour profiles again and again. And they can be a bit boring. The wines of Rippon Vineyards are a little different: these are wines with an inimitable character all of their own, and a very classy one at that. This isn’t lookalike red Burgundy, but the wines share a silkiness, a structure (and an alcohol level). These are wines for those that love the seductive elegance that only Pinot can achieve.

In style the wines are fresh, silky, and elegant with real energy, a distinct tannic structure and saline, mineral notes that set them apart from the rest of the field. The vines are grown (biodynamically) on schist-based soils. The mature vine Pinot Noir is the estate’s signature wine, and there are two single vineyard wines – “Emma’s Block” and “Tinkers Field” – with two quite distinct characters. “Emma’s Block” faces east, on clay-schist soils, and is the more feminine, floral wine. “Tinkers Field” comes from the estate’s oldest vines, planted on a north facing schist slope (n.b. southern hemisphere) and this is the more powerful and structured of the two – you could say Chambolle-Musigny vs Vosne-Romanee, but it is important to impress that these wines are very much products of their own quite unique terroir.

We can currently offer the following wines; please do contact us for more information.

2012 Rippon Vineyards Mature Vine Pinot Noir
GBP 325 per case (12×75) in bond

“Medium ruby-purple in color, the 2012 Pinot Noir has a very earthy nose over notions of blackcurrants, blackberries and red plums with accents of anise and pepper. Intensely flavored in the medium bodied mouth with tight-knit concentration and sturdy tannins, it finishes long and earthy. 92+” Wine Advocate

2012 Rippon Vineyards Emma’s Block Mature Vine Pinot Noir
GBP 455 per case (12×75) in bond

“Medium ruby-purple colored, the 2012 Emma’s Block Pinot Noir has lovely red cherry, crushed raspberry and red currant notes with underlying hints of rose hip tea and lilacs. Medium bodied, elegant and with great finesse on the palate, it offers lovely silly tannins supporting the fruit through the long finish. 94+.” The Wine Advocate

2012 Rippon Vineyards Tinkers Field Mature Vine Pinot Noir
GBP 530 per case (12×75) in bond

“Medium to deep ruby-purple colored, the 2012 Tinker’s Field Pinot Noir is bit closed at this youthful stage offering glimpses at the blackberry and black cherry aromas with touches of fertile loam and dried herbs. Medium bodied, the concentrated flavors are taut and muscular at this youthful stage with lots of background layers and a firm foundation of grainy tannins, finishing with great length. 94+.” The Wine Advocate

Please do get in touch if you would like to learn more about these lovely wines.

Mayacamas – Old Skool Californian

Leave a reply

Yesterday I was lucky enough to be invited to a vertical tasting of Mayacamas.

I jumped on the invitation: ‘Old Skool’ styled Californian wines are of considerable interest to me. For example I am a huge fan of the likes of Calera and Diamond Creek – whose classically styled wines command a fraction of the prices for which the newer generation of ‘cult classics’ (?) are traded. A tasting of wines from a name to conjure with in the history of Californian winemaking – not least in the context of “the Judgement of Paris” tasting – therefore struck me as an event I must attend.

Mayacamas, I learned, was bought from the long standing owner, Bob Travers, in 2013 by Charlie Banks a former/reformed venture capitalist, who also owns Screaming Eagle – ironically perhaps the ‘most cult’ of the ‘cult’ Californian ‘cult classics’. However Banks and his team – as I discovered at the tasting – are not setting out to make (cult ?) “Screaming Mayacamas” – indeed the winemaking looks set to remain comparatively ‘old fashioned’….

The tasting featured Chardonnays from the 00s and 10s, and Cabernets from the 80s, 90s and 00s. Many thanks to my gracious hosts for the invitation and to Jimmy Hayes, the Estate Director for sharing his expertise on these wines.

2008 Chardonnay, Mount Veeder, Mayacamas

Bottle one was a touch oxidised (Premox due to closure ?) – the second, which is considerably paler in colour (lemon/gold) shows savoury earthy notes, together with waxy, floral elements. On the palate it is muscular, briskly acidic, and concentrated. Judgement reserved – I didn’t have a big enough sample of the better bottle to get a proper feel for this wine.

2012 Chardonnay, Mount Veeder, Mayacamas

Paler lemon gold. Ok – so the earthy, floral aspect of what I did taste of the 08 appears to be characteristic – this also shows slightly mentholated notes along with the wax. Full bodied, chunky, firmly acidic, structured and (very) concentracted. One wouldn’t pick this as Californian Chardonnay. But the finish note is quite hard and peppery / bitter, perhaps reflective of the wine only having seen 20% malolactic fermentation.

2013 Chardonnay, Mount Veeder, Mayacamas

Pale colour. The most overt scent of the three Chardonnays, this has a touch of buttered popcorn – over the top of what I started to associate as being key notes from these Chardonnays: menthol, mint, violet, nut, apricot, wax, wet wool. My mind now takes me to some Cote de Nuits Blancs I’ve had. Once again, thick textured, concentrated, dense, firmly acidic. Like a (hypothetical) Cote de Nuits Blanc – made by Raveneau (?).

1986 Cabernet Sauvignon, Mount Veeder, Mayacamas

Bright garnet-mahogany hue; quite pale at the rim. In 1986 this apparently had the addition of some Rutherford fruit. Interesting scent – tarry, plummy and herbal with singed leaf notes steadily becoming more charred and smokey. Really good flavours and vibrancy on the attack; then very tannic and austere on the finish. This was widely liked around the room, other tasters enjoying the firm structure and significant acidity more than I did. Interestingly Jimmy likened the structure of Mayacamas to that of a Nebbiolo or Sangiovese which on tasting this wine I understood immediately. If only we’d had a steak to go with it.

1993 Cabernet Sauvignon, Mount Veeder, Mayacamas

Also contained some Rutherford fruit. Apparently from a considerably less successful vintage than 1986: 1993 was wet, apparently. However I preferred the 1993 precisely because of the relative absence of acid and tannin that others enjoyed in the 1986. Softer, liquoricey, savoury. Also has the singed leaf aspect, but has less austerity on the finish. More Cabernet Sauvignon ~ and less Barolo-like for me.

2003 Cabernet Sauvignon, Mount Veeder, Maycamas

Definitely has familial likeness to the 1986 and 1993 but this retains plusher mid-palate fruit. A happier point in it’s evolution than the older wines (from my perspective). Dark fruit, floral notes, some fennel and a hint of Coonawarra-esque mint / eucalyptus. Firm and masculine – but with a bit more richness to balance the structure.

2009 Cabernet Sauvignon, Mount Veeder, Maycamas

Very different at this stage, to the point that I don’t see the family resemblance, although Jimmy assures me that this will develop along the lines of the older wines. Has rather lovely chalky, clean, almost mineral cherry and wine gum fruit. {Pommegrante and red Cherry according to Jimmy}. The most attractive nose, and palate (for me) – the primary fruit is appealing and undeniably pure. A medium weight, crisp wine, but a concentrated one. Has élan. Just a touch austere ?

An extremely interesting tasting. I couldn’t help feeling that actually (despite apparent furore and angst that Mayacamas would be transformed beyond recognition by the ‘new guard’) – that perhaps the wines could do with just a bit more generosity and sweetness from better selected fruit; that vinification techniques might benefit from being a little cleaner (dare I say it, modern ?) and that just a smidgeon less tannin might make for a rather better glass of Vino – without sacrificing the character of Mount Veeder fruit ? Personally, I actively look forward to tasting Mayacamas made by the new generation.

Ian Elton-Wall

The Perfect Friday Lunch

Leave a reply

The perfect Friday lunch is an elusive thing. Clearly it cannot take place at one’s desk; but it’s better unadulterated by guilt, so getting a decent number of hours work under one’s belt before departing salves the conscience. I do like a late lunch, I confess. Thereafter, it comes down to venue selection. On which subject there has been a long standing debate between my colleague Gen and I as to whether London’s best steaks are to be found at Hawksmoor – or Goodmans. Unsurprisingly I believe I hold the high ground on this subject – her boyfriend has (previously) exhibited vegetarian tendencies – and to this day is uninclined toward the glories of the cow (except living peacefully in a field perhaps) – which surely must taint her credentials as judge and jury on matters of the flesh ?

But I digress – (as long as her beloved is not in attendance), I believe Gen and I could find agreement in the belief that the key ingredient of a perfect Friday lunch is steak. There are other components naturally: highly agreeable company is clearly a box that needs ticking – as is the skinny fry – why-oh-why do both Hawksmoor and Goodmans assume a fish and chip shop chip is more desirable than a beautifully slim stick of melting-crunchy perfection ? Yes: in this matter both Goodmans and Hawksmoor fall woefully short – and no, I don’t care about your triple cooking – or your truffled aromatics. To misquote la Moss, “Nothing tastes as good as skinny”. Bang on Kate. Only your chosen subject should have been the potato.

So – it was to one of these temples of beefy excellence to which I was fortunate to adjourn for a late lunch on Friday. And (after a somewhat long-winded preamble), the final feature of the perfect Friday lunch, obviously – is the perfect botte of red wine to go with the perfect steak. On Friday I had such a bottle, preceded by an excellent bottle of white – which provided the final flourish of perfection. Furthermore, gilding the lily, the perfect red was a wine that neither I nor my lunch companion had ever drunk before so the lunch had both steak and the frisson of lost virginity. It was my perfect Friday lunch. But for the chips.

Arthur (and later Anita) thanks for the highly agreeable company !

2010 Chablis 1er Cru Forets, Raveneau (93+/100)

Pale lemon coloured. Intensely aromatic scent – pristine Raveneau aromatics, rachetted up several notches, doubtless courtesy of the excellence of the 2010 vintage. Direct, punchy floral mineral aromatics with tinges of saffron, spice and wood smoke – and just that hint of wax. Intitially equally overt and vibrant from the glass, this tightened noticeably as we drank it, becoming more steely and saline. Very long and racy, with lovely weight and pristine fruit. This may just get better still, as lovely as it is right now.

2007 Domaine de la Grange des Peres (95/100 / Perfection with a Rib-eye).

A recommendation from Clay at Hedonism – I only wish I’d listened to him sooner as this wasn’t the first time he’d suggested it. Full dark ruby. Wild, intense perfume – with cassis and black cherry jam overlaid by lavender, incense, charcoal and garrigue. Full bodied, opulent and unctuous but with a rare freshness that it makes more vibrant than you could possibly expect from a wine of this weight and dimension. Dense, with rocky minerality, pure cherry and cassis fruit, finishing smokey and meaty. Liquorice, mint and violet on the finish. Chave Hermitage meets Sassicaia ?

Ian Elton-Wall

1999 Grands-Echezeaux, DRC. Overwhelmingly DRC

Leave a reply

I’ve had wines from the Domaine de la Romanee-Conti that have disappointed. The 1983s. The 1994s. The 1986s (yuk). Even you 1988s: ‘don’t get me wrong – yeah I think you’re all right – but you don’t keep me warm in the middle of the night’ (or any other part of the evening for that matter). These are wines that have aromatic interest, but which are all acid and structure – and little in the way of flesh or charm; which could, taken in isolation, could give some tiny measure of credence to criticisms of under-ripeness – as made by the likes of Helen Turley & John Wetlaufer

But I don’t think there have been too many of those in recent times. Everything I have drunk from the DRC from 1995 onward has been pretty special. ‘DRC’ genuinely is a by-word for bottles that are at the least, really, really, good. Drunk in isolation: delicious. And when tasted in a line-up of ‘top Domaine Burgundies”: top. Or thereabouts.

But amidst all these very good and very-very good bottles there are wines that are just, well, ‘beyond good’. And in one specific recent vintage ~ or at least ‘relatively recent’ vintage the DRC made wines that are particularly ‘beyond good’ ! I read somewhere that Aubert de Villaine described the 1999s as the ‘legacy and testament’ of his stewardship at the DRC. I don’t know whether he has changed his mind since; surely vintages like 2009 and 2010 have afforded the Domaine the opportunity to make great wines? But I do remember that when asked, at the Domaine in 2006, if he thought the infant 2005s might measure up to the 1999s – his answer was an almost dismissive shake of the head.

Of course, the 1999 DRCs, from Duvault-Blochet upward, are expensive. Very expensive. But (arguably) not excessively so given the price of other vintages in which the DRC made wines which are just very-very good. If you can afford them, you will not be disappointed.

I have a friend, a great collector and wine lover who I think is quite pleased with Renaissance Vintners’ efforts to sell some of the surplus of two decades of collecting for him. Obviously selling those wines on his behalf has been good business for us – but he also knows that some of the wines have been difficult to shift – in a not very easy market for those wines. So he very generously offered to share a bottle of 99 DRC over dinner last night. For fun (and why the hell not !) but also, I think, as an additional ‘thank you’ for our efforts. I’ve seldom been happier to have done a good job!

I didn’t try to compete with the centrepiece of the evening: how could I? So instead I bought a completely unrelated bottle from a grower that I suspected (correctly) he wouldn’t have tasted (Rhys). It was very good. We liked it. And the 99 DRC was….well….predictably ‘beyond good’.

2010 Rhys Alpine Vineyard Chardonnay (93/100)

Fullish buttercup yellow hue, just very slightly hazy. A hint of reduction lends freshness and interest to a lovely scent of lemon curd, tangerine and butter. A lovely bottle, which I guess to be at it’s apogee – it has a great balance of freshness and richness, of citrus and apricottey flesh. The only thing that prevents me from giving an even bigger score is that I don’t quite find the X-factor which so often is provided by minerality in great Burgundian Chardonnay. (Although a bottle of Rhys Horseshoe Chardonnay drunk recently also had that missing element – is that a fractionally better vineyard than Alpine ?) Notwithstanding that, this is very delicious.

1999 Grands Echezeaux, DRC (96/100)

Med ruby colour with very little in the way of bricking at the rim. Looks younger than it is, 17 years on. Immediately after decanting the scent was youthful and quintessentially DRC, with hawthorn, smoke and spice. A few moments later the wine was showing a new face: curry leaf and a riot of Asian spices. Then, momentarily, a murky clay and liquorice note, before it reached equilibrium and began to pump out richly spiced berry fruit. Likewise the palate evolved in the glass, the wine seeming to put on weight and dimension as we drank it. From medium plus bodied – to really very full. One curious note was that at one point we both simultaneously felt it tasted rather like great Bordeaux – ‘Margaux’ – but with more precision and verve. My score maybe a bit parsimonious – I think I am consciously marking this wine based on the assumption that the Romanee-Conti, La Tache, Richebourg and Romanee St Vivant are even better. A great bottle, and overwhelmingly, DRC.

RIP: La Tache 1991

Leave a reply

An evening to remember. An afternoon to forget. Conceived as a celebration of his new job, my friend, ‘Risky Business’ had declared his interest in drinking a special bottle. In fact what is widely considered to be one of THE special bottles – if you are a Burgundy nut at least: La Tache 1991. Having supplied said bottle and having read up on it, I volunteered to decant the Tache at the office (a few hours prior to dinner at The Square).

By the time I’d cut the capsule I was worried. By the time I had the corkscrew in the cork – which began to turn freely in the neck of the bottle – I knew that I, and the La Tache – was in trouble. I just about managed to withdraw a distinctly dry cork from the bottle in one piece. As I began to pour a Burgundian legend, the sensation of cold water running down my back increased. Completely brown with no hint of garnet, let alone ruby remaining. Madeira-like in aroma, but without any freshness or acidity, this bottle was completely ‘gone’. RIP La Tache 1991. (By all accounts this is not typical, clearly !)

Fortunately Risky Business is a man who knows how to prevent a crisis. One speculates that (professionally speaking) he sees the potential crises he averts as more serious than the incidence of an oxidised bottle of La Tâche; but from the wine merchant’s perspective, frankly – I doubt it. So, apparently unflustered, Risky Business took the matter in hand and, with the insouciance of a professional magician, produced another bottle to conjure with.

NB: to what extent Mme Bize-Leroy might approve of her wines being seen as “stand-ins” for the DRC is unclear……

2010 Meursault Perrieres, Roulot (96/100)

I was slightly surprised at the colour of this wine – which was a little more golden that I expected. So my suspicions were raised that we might be looking at oxidised wine number two of the evening….. Fortunately those concerns were rapidly assuaged, although without tasting a second bottle (any volunteers ?) I did initially wonder if this bottle was just fractionally more advanced than is typical. Anyway: rich, Lafon-like scent of lemon zest, candied peel, and lemon cheesecake. I wouldn’t have guessed this as Roulot I don’t think. Full bodied. Fleshy and opulent but with the freshness and acidity to balance the sheer volume of this wine. It really is very large scaled. Reminds me of the flavour of the lemon and honey cough mixture that my mother gave us as children. Which I loved: she had to hide the bottle ! Finishes stoney and bracing. Fantastic. As the evening progressed I became more and more convinced it is just a big, big Roulot Perrieres – the finish got more and more vivid and saline.

2002 Vosne Romanee 1er Cru Beaux Monts, Domaine Leroy (97/100)

Still a good bright ruby garnet colour. A huge relief and contrast to the lifeless tawny colour of the Tache 1991. Amazing fragrance. Really lifted and very, very intense. Aromas of hawthorn, briar, gravel, rose petal and peony. Turbo-charged freshness and vivacity. You’d swear this was a Grand Cru, and a great one at that, from the scent. Very, very long flavoured. Masculine, firm, savoury and dry with the lovely freshness of bright red fruit when first opened. Progressing beautifully in the glass and becoming darker and spicier. Hugely flavoursome. Later I picked up hints of tar and the proverbial ‘roasting tin’ meaty savoury aspect. A great wine and for my palate, bang on right now. No doubt it will last for ages, but why wait.

2010 Rhys Alpine Vineyard Pinot 92/100

Served after the big red and white Burgundies. Which worked for me – in fact it generally works for me – after mature flavours and aromatics I find myself craving lively fresh scents and juicy primary flavours. Bright, full ruby colour. Strawberry and cherry nose, just a touch jammy. Full bodied and flavoursome, with tons of red and black fruit. Also hints of tomato and fennel emerging as it sat in the glass. Finishes with velvety tannins and hints of slate or granite. Recognisably not Burgundy but recognisably Pinot albeit quite ripe. Really good but not absolutely top class – just slightly one dimensional. A very nice bottle nonetheless.

~ Very many thanks to Risky Businesss for his magnanimous attitude in case of vinous adversity

The 300 – (of mature Bordeaux)

Leave a reply

……Not – as you might expect (given that this is a wine blog) a reference to sword-wielding Spartan hoplites. Nor indeed to the eponymous – and gruelling – workout programme of said film. The 300 or, to be accurate, 298 points in question of course, being those ascribed by Robert Parker – and consequently highly unlikely to contribute to the sculpting of a six-pack….

Perhaps topically – given that it is currently en primeur time, and that apparently another great vintage is upon us with 2015 – the occasion arose to drink three highly rated mature Bordeaux (over dinner for four at L’Anima in the private room, amidst the racks of Italian wines…..!) On the face of it, drinking French classics in an Italian restaurant might be considered perverse, but it actually worked very well: unfussy food, as ever, providing the best possible canvas for the brushstrokes of vinous excellence.

And the wines. Well: 1986 Lafite-Rothschild, 1989 Montrose and 1989 Haut-Brion for the reds. So, clearly, none too shoddy as line-ups of mature Bordeaux go. But – naturally – incomplete without the judicious addition of ‘refreshment’ in the shape of 2012 Kongsgaard Chardonnay, a 2005 Criots-Batard-Montrachet from PYCM (Pierre-Yves Colin Morey) and 2002 Meursault Chevalieres, Coche-Dury. The wines were served in two flights: three whites, three reds and single blind.

Simple: or so you might think !

2012 Kongsgaard Chardonnay (94+?/100)

(Just to complicate things a little, this was the only wine served double blind) to three out of four diners. Honeyed, rich and peachy on the nose initially, with fruit completely overshadowing any notion of oak or minerality when first poured. Which led some of our group to be unsure of grape varietal ~ although there was a general agreement it hailed from pastures new (world). Full-bodied and fleshy on the palate, with a toffee / caramel finish. Delicious. Young. On the basis of the first hour in the glass one could be forgiven for assuming this to be somewhat monotone, somewhat simple – but later it tightened and became positively racy and saline. Which makes me think it actually needs time in the bottle, or at least the decanter. Very, very good with more to come.

2005 Criots-Batard-Montrachet, PYCM (97/100)

A wow wine, particularly if your taste is for minerality and freshness. This was (understandably) assumed to be Coche by two tasters because of the characteristic reductive, herbaceous spearmint and gunflint scent. Textured, creamy and yet extremely bright, with grapefruit and lavender flavours and aromas. Gravelly, and a bit savoury – oyster shell and smoked nuts. Excellent. Really five star stuff. Now, or in five+ years. No sign of any pre-mox whatsoever. Fullish bodied. Gorgeous.

2002 Meursault Chevalieres, J F Coche-Dury (92/100)

Hints of the ‘Coche’ scent I have tried to describe above. But in this case, low-key and slightly muted. I tracked this over the course of the evening, thinking it was eventually going to start pumping out more scent, flavour and volume. But it never did, really. At it’s best I picked up hints of oatmeal and bacon fat. Not showing any sign of waning, but didn’t really improve in the glass much either. Just very good. Nice, subtle: but no fireworks. Medium weight.

1989 Ch. Montrose (94?/100)

The second deepest-coloured red. Identifiably less fine than the other two aromatically with savoury, barnyard scents as well as ironey blood notes and a touch of orange peel. Forceful, masculine and savoury on the palate. This had been double decanted by it’s owner, ‘Legal Eagle’, for several hours. I felt it became progressively more astringent and less charming in the glass. On a stand-alone basis this might have delighted, in the company it kept, this was definitely the least attractive red. I also wonder if the extended decanting did not serve it well ?

1986 Ch. Lafite-Rothschild (96+???/100)

*Note to self: try tasting and analysing wines before you declare confidently what they are.

(Embarassingly, I took this to be the HB because it had the most exuberant scent, which I had pre-decided was going to belong to Haut-Brion).

The darkest colour of the three wines. Perfumed. Intense. Initially I caught a whiff of violet and tobacco and jumped to my (erroneous) conclusion. Later (especially after seeing the label!) its Pauillac origins became apparent – swirling scents of pencil lead, leather, mint and wax soared from the glass. Long and very flavourful. But this also remains quite acidic and also rather tannic. There was considerable speculation about the future of this wine. Certainly it remains intense and vivid, with primary currant fruit overlaid with hints of lanolin and eucalyptus. But the tannins remain fairly stern and the overall impression is one of classicism – and austerity. For me it isn’t a hundred points, now at least. And I am always sceptical as to whether the tannin and acid will resolve enough for it ever to be charming – as opposed to impressive – which it certainly is. Didn’t budge in the glass. It may well be that this is indeed still a very young old wine.

1989 Ch. Haut-Brion (99/100)

The palest colour of the three wines, although still a good deep garnet, showing considerable evolution. Less overt than the Lafite on the nose and my first impression was that there was a touch of acidity or volatility which also pushed me toward mis-identifying the two wines. As that blew away, a harmonious nose of violet, meat, spice and coffee emerged. By far the most appealing texture of the three wines. Silky smooth and layered. Seems to be fully mature and very seductive indeed with flavours of blueberry, spice, raisin, coffee and smokey embers. Gorgeous wine. It doesn’t – quite – match my memory of the last time I tasted the 1990 which seemed to have just a bit more energy ?

All in all this was a lovely evening which, holistically speaking, was worth immeasurably more than the 288+/300 (or indeed 572/600 for both colours of wine). My thanks to the Legal Eagle, Mr Andrew and Risky Business for their extremely generous contributions (both vinous and political).

If I were to draw conclusions…..it would be that (a) PYCM seems to make consistently excellent white Burgundies at all levels; that (b) Haut-Brion 1989 is lovely, truly lovely – and that (c) I think I maybe becoming marginally less excited by older wines than once was the case…..

2013 Diamond Creek releases

Leave a reply

Serious Napa Cabernet… Continue reading →

Renaissance Vintners – we want to sell your wine

Leave a reply

Do you have a collection to sell? Continue reading →

2006 Taittinger Comtes de Champagne Rosé

Leave a reply

All about pleasure.. Continue reading →

It never rains but it pours – Rayas.

Leave a reply

Curiously, until earlier this month I’d ever had Château Rayas. Curious because I have several good friends with substantial holdings of Rhône wines in their collections – and even one who (somewhat unusually) actually began his wine journey as a lover of everything Southern Rhône.

So – it came as a surprise when, out of the blue, I was offered two opportunities to drink what is reputed to be one of the world’s greatest red wines – in less than a fortnight. A happy twist of fate and one which turned out to be both extremely instructive and very, very delicious !

Rayas ‘Part One’ took place at 67 Pall Mall where they have the 2007 by the glass (amongst many other great, and reasonably priced offerings – I am now kicking myself pretty hard that I didn’t join at the onset). The very generous Pall Mall member who invited me had declared the 2007 to be great – and that he didn’t expect it to be surpassed this year either. Fighting talk I thought; given the nature of his collection and the opportunities to drink great wine he has over the course of a year….. I was duly sceptical: and duly confounded !

2007 Château Rayas (98+/100?)

Moderate ruby colour. No particular evolution at rim. Extraordinary scent that changed radically, over and over again in the glass. Initially I was reminded of the sweet malty-biscuit scent of Fuller’s brewery in full swing. Then the brewing/fermenting scent was swept away by intensely savoury Bovril and roasting liquor scents. A few minutes later; woodsmoke and charcoal swirling around the glass; a nose too almost too intense to be associated with wine. I remarked at this point “this is the best BBQ wine I’ve ever tasted” ~ which was true – but completely understates the dramatic impact of the scent of this wine. Then, a few more minutes on; civilisation was restored – plush red fruit overlaid with mocha and caramel was the key note.

On the palate, lush, voluptuous, layered – but not unbalanced or overtly alcoholic – pumping out creamy strawberry, cherry and rhubarb fruit, finishing hugely savoury with coffee, chocolate and a flavour I can only describe as “like the smell of charred embers from a bonfire……”

To my mind the most exciting Southern Rhône wine I’ve drunk; I’ve never tasted the 1990 but if it is indeed better than this, it must flirt with perfection…..

NB – Happily, my first Rayas experience was matched with 67 Pall Mall’s delicious lamb cooked two ways: cutlet grilled to perfection and slow cooked rump. I was very happy indeed.

Rayas ‘Part Deux’ was accompanied similarly carnivorously – with a fabulous char-grilled Rib-eye courtesy of Adam Handling at the Caxton Grill. The vintage (proferred by another exceptionally generous friend as ideally suited to a “light lunch for two” (?!)) on this occasion was the 1995…..

1995 Château Rayas (96/100)

Garnet colour, a touch of bricking at the rim.

A much more composed and harmonious nose than the kaleidoscopic 2007, but nonetheless exhibits some of the same elements; woodsmoke, roasting tin, red fruit and spice. Doesn’t have the sheer effusive power on the nose of the 2007 – is that a function of the vintage or just maturity? On both palate and nose, I am not at all sure I would have picked this blind as Southern Rhone – it has a purity and harmony that might well have encouraged me to assume it was Burgundy from a ripe, mature vintage ? I find none of the overt alcohol and farmyard notes I tend to associate with Châteauneuf-du-Pape. My lunch companion intimated that he had thought about bringing Rousseau Chambertin 1995 as a pairing (!) – it would have been interested to see just how Burgundian it might seem compared with the real-Pinot deal.

Is Rayas effectively the ‘first growth’ of the Southern Rhône ? Irrespective, this was another truly lovely bottle, perhaps fractionally overshadowed by the sheer exotic drama of the 2007.

So; Rayas – another genuine vinous landmark on my personal winescape. Happily (despite twenty plus years in the trade) my excitement at discovering a truly great wine is undiminished. And I think there are now more exciting wines out there than ever……

Gevrey-Chambertin: Domaine Fourrier

Leave a reply

Here’s a question: what is the best domaine in Gevrey-Chambertin after Rousseau?

The answer is of course at least partly subjective: there are always going to be fans of a grower’s style, or an emotional attachment to a particular estate. Denis Bachelet? Claude Dugat? Mmm. Or what about Domaine Fourrier?

Jean-Marie Fourrier is one of Burgundy’s most interesting and loquacious characters, and a man not short on opinion. He is also one of just a few growers in Burgundy who appear to have fully realised their potential. Burgundy is always full of talk of “the next superstar” or “a domaine to watch” but who, aside from Sylvain Cathiard and the Comte Liger-Belair in Vosne-Romanée, has actually made the jump?

When Jean-Marie took the domaine over from his father in the early 1990s, the estate was not at its best. His father had been working the estate since 1961, and the wines were underwhelming. Having completed internships with Henri Jayer and Domaine Drouhin in Oregon, Jean-Marie benefitted from both the deeply Burgundian genius of the former, with the new world dynamism of the latter. The quality of the wines was on the up almost immediately after he took full control in 1994.

If one were to look for just one descriptor for Fourrier’s wines, a good bet would be “pure”. As with all great winemakers, his work in the vineyard is assiduous – this is where it all starts – and he has an innate understanding of how his wines, and vineyards, work. In the winery the grapes are completely de-stemmed before a gentle fermentation with no pumping over. The wines are then aged in approximately 20% new wood then transferred to tank, then bottled without fining or filtering: the whole ethos of the work in the cellar is that it is non-intrusive: what happens in the cellar should not be tasted in the wine.

The wines are bottled with a fair amount of dissolved carbon dioxide: seasoned Fourrier drinkers will be adept at the “Fourrier shake”, which transforms what can sometimes be a rather fizzy Pinot Noir when a bottle is first opened. The retention of this CO2 is quite deliberate: it protects the wine and lessens the need for sulphur when bottling: a good thing in Jean-Marie’s opinion.

Once the shake, if necessary, has been executed, then comes the purity of fruit that is the domaine’s signature. These are quite beautiful wines, particularly if your palate craves the pure cool fruit of Pinot Noir.

Fourrier’s most famous vineyard is Clos St Jacques, and it is fair to say that his offering is the one that runs Mr Rousseau closest in terms of quality (the Rousseau and Fourrier plots lie next to each other though this may or may not have any bearing on this). He also holds a quarter of a hectare of Griottes-Chambertin and a selection of premiers crus including the rarely seen Goulots. In 2011 he added a small “micro-negociant” arm to the business: these wines are labelled “Jean-Marie Fourrier”.

Our full selection can be seen HERE. Please do get in touch if you would like to discuss them further.

2002 Romanée St Vivant, Cathiard

Leave a reply

We have a pretty exceptional list here at Renaissance Vintners. Of course we would say that, but who else has a list like ours, with wines all physically in the UK, stored professionally in Octavian, Vinothèque and London City Bond. Our relationships with some of the UK’s most important collectors has blessed us with access to some of the very best wines ever made.

So: here’s the question. What is the best wine on our list, or the rarest? It’s a tough one.

Some obvious candidates would be wines like 2000 Château Pétrus, Pomerol. It’s got the 100 points for a start. And it’s Pétrus, and it’s from the 2000 vintage, one of Bordeaux’s finest, and one that is just beginning to show its class. Late last year we had an experience with 1990 Pétrus which is best described as a theophany. Will the 2000 match it? Another ten years in bottle and we can find out. This is probably the case of wine I’d buy first if one of my silly multiples on the horses comes in.

But in terms of rarity, even 2000 Pétrus isn’t really at the top. 2,500 cases or so made and, whilst no one knows how many of those cases have been drunk, it’s fair to speculate that there is a fair bit left. It’s not difficult to find, just expensive.

We’ve also got a few bottles of 2007 Le Montrachet, Lafon - this is arguably a candidate for one of the finest dry white wines in the world, the other runners and riders being the same wine from DRC, Chevalier-Montrachet Leflaive, Corton-Charlemagne Coche-Dury (this one is probably the rarest) and some might argue that Haut-Brion Blanc should be in the running too.

Lafon’s Montrachet is also rare: the domain’s spot of Le Montrachet amounts to just 0.32 hectares. It is in one whole plot, at the bottom left-hand corner of the vineyard, just next to the plot owned by Romanée-Conti. The vines are old – 80% of the vineyard was planted in 1953, the remaining 20% in 1972, and yields are very low – enough for three or four barrels – depending on the year.

But the wine on our list that is arguably the most intriguing, and quite possibly the rarest, is Sylvain Cathiard’s 2002 Romanée St Vivant.

Domaine Cathiard have just 0.17 hectares of Romanée St Vivant, that they acquired in 1984. It lies just next to the edge of the village, between the plots of Dujac and Arnoux. Depending on the year it yields enough juice for two or three barrels.

Back in 2002, Sylvain Cathiard was just coming out from under the radar, and the domaine was on the road to superstar status. It wasn’t quite in the position it is in now, where the chances of getting a full case of RSV must be minimal.

We think we have the only full case of this wine available for sale in Europe and, quite possibly, the world. The bottles intrigue. Notes on the wine are rare. Allen meadows tasted it in 2008 and, whilst his score of 94 points is typically conservative, he does write “this is one of the best wines of the vintage and while it is rare and expensive, don’t hesitate if you find it.” Clive Coates rates the wine 19.5, just behind 2002 La Romanée.

Is this the best or rarest, or a combination of the two? It’s not quite a unicorn wine yet, but it’s just one of many wines on our list that intrigue on account of its undoubted quality, clear rarity and exceptional provenance. Any takers?

Wine Storage

Leave a reply

The correct and secure storage of fine wine is of paramount importance whether you are buying for future drinking, investment or both. With this in mind, Renaissance Vintners has partnered with Nexus Wine Collections to provide what we believe is one of the best wine storage propositions in the United Kingdom.

Nexus Wine Collections is the largest independent wine management service in the UK and have specialised in looking after the needs of serious collectors since their foundation in 2006. Nexus now administers portfolios with a combined value of over £60 million.

The Nexus approach is about service, security and peace of mind. Your wines are stored independently of any merchant stock and each case is clearly identified as being your property. You can view your portfolio online at any time. Transfers to and from your collection are hassle free, and Renaissance Vintners clients benefit from preferential rates for both storage and handling charges.

Wines are stored at either Octavian or London City Bond’s new facility at Dinton Woods. Conditions at both facilities are perfect for the long term storage of fine wine, and Renaissance Vintners recommends the former MOD bunkers of LCB Dinton: not only are conditions perfect, our experience of their service is very positive and charges, notably for delivery, are very reasonable.

The chambers were excavated 70 years ago for the Government. Free of vibration and UV light, their massively thick concrete walls provide the perfect environment for fine wine storage. Thick steel doors and sophisticated alarm systems provide the security for these perfect conditions.

Fine wine has become an expensive commodity, and peace of mind is key for the customer. Whether your collection is for drinking, for investment, or for the sheer pleasure of collecting, we believe that our partnership with Nexus Wine Collections provides the perfect solution.

- Perfect, secure conditions

- Online management

- Peace of mind: all wines are clearly identified as being your property.

- All wines are fully insured at replacement value

If you would like further information then please do contact us.

enquiries@renaissancevintners.com

020 8560 3200

2002 Krug – the wait is almost over

Leave a reply

2002 Krug. After a plethora of Champagne releases over the past year or two, the big one is now on the table, or at least on its way. The Daddy of the champagne houses and, whilst I really do rate 2004s, the Daddy of this century’s vintages.

No one does marketing quite like the Champenois and when I was lucky enough to be invited to the UK’s first look at this potential icon, I was looking forward to it immediately.

As with most Krug launches, more than one wine is on show, and this opportunity is what it is all about. Last night we tasted the current release of Krug Grande Cuvée – edition 163, 2003 vintage Krug, 2002 Krug and Grande Cuvée edition 158, which is the Grande Cuvée based on the 2002 vintage.

The current release of Grande Cuvée is fresh, lively and inimitably Krug, which is the whole idea. In addition to the Krug id system, Grand Cuvée now has each “edition” on the label. Edition 163 is based on the 2007 vintage and is quite delightful. As with all Grande Cuvée, it will age, and age very well, though it was just perfect on the evening as our aperitif, getting us into gear for the big show.

Then 2003 Krug. I’ve liked this wine from the start. Controversial might be too strong, but when Krug released their 2003, there was some surprise. But the best 2003s – DP is an example – are excellent and this bottle of 2003 Krug was just that. There is a silky fattiness to the wine that makes you (or certainly me) want to drink more and more of it.

Then came the headline act: 2002 Krug. My note:

“Clearly brighter than the 2003. This even looks steely. Am I being seduced already? This is 13 years old, and whilst it doesn’t look like a puppy, it doesn’t look much older. Very, very, Krug in style on the nose: biscuits, cream and that inimitable Krug muscle. It gets better in the mouth. Meaty. Taut. Poised. And, whilst we’ll all talk about its potential for the cellar, this is ready to go now – there is a touch of maturity to this, and that voluptuous side that to me is all about 2002: that chunky seduction. This may well be sold as a young wine but to me it is already on the way up: it’s not a baby, not a boy, it’s an adolescent, and a punchy one at that. And – this is the real mark – there is a depth to this that matches grand cru white Burgundy (either the steeliness of Corton-Charlemagne from a cool plot, or maybe just Chevalier-Montrachet). Seriously good, and has to be touching 97 or more if I’m going to score it.”

This is clearly a salesy note, and maybe I was a little seduced by the surroundings (not always easy in Shoreditch) but I think it’s fair to say that 2002 Krug will be worth the wait. It is exceptional wine, one that I’d happily drink now, and no doubt one that will get better and better with time in the cellar.

The wine will be released in February and allocations will be very, very tight. If you do have interest in 2002 Krug then please do let us know and we will do our best.

In the meantime, thank you to the chaps at Krug for the kind invite.

2004 Dom Ruinart Blanc de Blancs

Leave a reply

2002 may be the vintage that is talked about but taste 2004s and read what the critics have to say and it is clear that, not only does 2004 run it close, it beats it in many cases. And, stylistically, if you like an edgier, more mineral style, then 2004 is the one to go for. And the wines will keep and keep.

Dom Ruinart is both a prime example of 2004 brilliance, it is also one of the “cuvée prestige” wines that flies under the radar.

Galloni is a fan, calling it both “seriously beautiful” and “viscerally thrilling”. We agree.

At GBP 470 per six in bond this is a seriously good sparkler for the cellar. Something to take the edge off 2016 – it is lovely now – or something to cellar to 2026 if you have the patience.

We can offer

2004 Dom Ruinart, Blanc de Blancs
GBP 470 per case in bond (6x75cl)

“The 2004 Dom Ruinart is just as brilliant and viscerally thrilling as it has always been. If anything, the 2004 has shut down considerably over the last six months. Tightly coiled and exceptionally beautiful, the 2004 boasts fabulous intensity, class and pedigree. The flavors are vibrant, chiseled and crystalline in their precision. Time in bottle is doing wonders for the 2004. This is a tremendous showing. Disgorged June 2013. 97 points.” Antonio Galloni

“Creamy mousse. Very pale. A touch of green. Very gentle bubbles. Very citrussy on the nose followed by a touch of biscuit. Very inviting, and there is both depth and precision here. Disgorged a year ago; there is a second batch disgorged more recently. Creamy in mouth, where the mousse initially explodes then settles down into something more delicate. Very racy and very lacey. The detail is fine. Silk petticoats. And as tight as a drum. Steely. And long. This is wound up very tight… … coming back to it there is much more here. A touch of smoke – not quite struck match. Lots of restrained, smoky fruit. Very elegant, very classy. And a touch of salty spice at the end. Real mouthfeel. 96+ or 97.” Joss Fowler

Please do contact us if you would like to discuss this further or would like to take a case or two.

Chambolle Les Amoureuses

Leave a reply

Or, translated, the lovers.

Along with the Clos St Jacques in Gevrey-Chambertin, Les Amoureuses is the greatest premier cru vineyard in the Côte de Nuits and one that is a candidate for promotion to grand cru. This is widely accepted, and the prices of the wines reflect that.

The vineyard covers 5.42 hectares, just east and downslope from Le Musigny. Robert Groffier has the largest holding of the vineyard, with Mugnier, de Vogue and Roumier making some of the most sought after examples.

As Clive Coates writes in “The Wines of Burgundy”, the vineyard is “really a sort of younger brother to Musigny itself: perfumed, silky smooth, intense and soft rather than brutal and muscular, and with real finesse.” This sums it up well though, as with much of Burgundy, the clue is in the name.

Les Amoureuses is a seductive, sensual wine, one that dances in the mouth. It is the epitome of Chambolle, in a more playful, more youthful, way than Le Musigny itself.

As with nearly all fine Burgundy there is not much of it. Our current listings of Chambolle Les Amoureuses can be seen by clicking HERE.

Meeting Saint Peter – 1990 Pétrus

Leave a reply

Unlike Ian, who drinks much better than I do, my Pétrus experiences have been limited to tasting rather than drinking. 2003 from the barrel in 2004 and again from bottle in 2012. A corked bottle of 1964 at around the same time (which was served anyway). A glass of the 1975 sometime in the late 2000s, courtesy of a generous friend at a neighbouring table at the now (sadly) gone Ransome’s Dock. The 2007, 2010 and 2011 at blind tastings over the past few years, and that’s it. Which may sound like a fair bit of Pétrus but, until last night, I’d never really had the opportunity to properly drink Pétrus, to get stuck in. No notebook (though I’ve mentally scored it), no tasting-sized sample. Just a magnum of the 100 point 1990, accompanied by some quite outstanding Ibérico Pork Ribs at the brilliant Ember Yard.

Straight out of the bottle (well, magnum, double-decanted an hour or so previously), you have to work a little to see the class. The incredible length gives it away but, that aside, you might fear an underwhelming evening. Opening bottles like this is a little like meeting your heroes – it can occasionally go wrong. This didn’t, but the initial introduction was a little frosty.

Pomerol is all about clay. Every proprietor in the region will claim that his or her property sits on a button of clay but the Pétrus button of clay is the real one, and it is this that initially dominates or, rather, this is the first part of the character to show. And then it just gets better, and better, and better.

There are few better ways of enjoying a bottle of something special than opening a large format. In the case of something like 1990 Pétrus, the sheer decadence is a pleasure though it isn’t necessarily gluttony. Drinking the contents of something that, when unopened, is worth a few thousand pounds can be looked at as obscene, or it can be seen as exactly the opposite: the monetary value of the juice is mere accountancy, it’s all about the juice. And this was the case. This was all about the juice.

After a few minutes in the glass, the genie started to emerge from the lamp. The clay was still there, indeed it stays throughout, but is slowly joined by caramel, spice, toffee, vanilla – to be honest the nose, and the mouth, becomes so kaleidoscopically complex that it is hard to nail anything down. To steal someone else’s note (on 1945 Latour), the flavours are like “tastes coming at you like Luke Skywalker being attacked with hundreds of bursting light bullets”.

I’ve been thinking about the wine ever since, and that Merlot quote from Paul Pontallier at Margaux: “you can’t make great wine from merlot”. 1990 Pétrus is easily the best wine I’ve drunk this year, and there has been some pretty stiff opposition. What keeps me thinking is that, not only is it Bordeaux, which to my mind is secondary in sensuality to Burgundy, it’s Merlot – a pretty crappy grape variety. And it’s a Merlot from Bordeaux that puts Burgundy in the shade. With the exception of 1961 Palmer, I can’t recall such a sensual claret and struggle to think of a wine that so seduced me, one that I could drink more and more and more of. There was almost something physically seductive about it.

The score? An easy 100 points if only because the experience couldn’t have been better.

1999 Chambertin Rousseau

Leave a reply

1999 Chambertin, Rousseau: this has to be one of the finest wines on our list. Domaine Rousseau hold just over two hectares of Le Chambertin, producing 750 or so cases per year. This is rare wine. The domaine itself is one of only a handful, if that, that can hold a candle to Domaine de la Romanée-Conti in terms of quality and prestige, and Chambertin Rousseau is one of a handful of wines that can stand up to Romanée-Conti itself.

Secondary market prices for Domaine Rousseau have risen dramatically over the past few years, though this is largely on account of the sheer quality of the wines, and subsequent demand from drinkers, than any speculative angle. Rousseau buyers tend to buy the wines in order to drink them.

We are very, very lucky to have a single case of 1999 Le Chambertin, Domaine Rousseau available for sale It is in pristine condition and just looking at the picture brings on some Pavlovian salivating. At the time of writing this is the only full case in its original packaging available in Europe. It is currently lying in Octavian.

1 case (12 x 75cl) 1999 Chambertin, Rousseau - SOLD OUT

“Fullish, vigorous colour. Fat, rich, succulent nose. Very lovely fruit. Full body. Vigorous. Meaty. Very, very rich. Excellent tannns. Fine grip. This is very, very lovely. Multi-dimensional and very long on the palate. A great wine. From 2015.” Clive Coates

“A fantastically complex nose that offers up impressively dense and concentrated fruit blended with an incredible array of spices that precede big, rich, intense and mouth coating flavors that have really beautiful depth, power and length. This is not a particularly structured wine but the sheer complexity and class combine to create a simply knock out Chambertin, worthy of every accolade reserved for the very best in Burgundy. Really lovely stuff in a forward style though this will be capable of aging for years. I have upgraded my rating (as well as extended my estimated initial drinking window) as it’s more than clear it deserves it. Tasted on multiple occasions with consistent notes. 96 points. Try from 2019+” Allen Meadows

This case has now sold. Please do contact us if we can be of service.

Richebourg

Leave a reply

After Romanée St Vivant, Richebourg is the largest of the Vosne-Romanée grand crus at just over eight hectares. It probably comes in just after La Tâche in terms of greatness, though is at least relatively affordable after La Tâche, La Romanée and La Romanée-Conti.

Domaine de La Romanée-Conti own almost half of the vineyard; their holding is split into five parcels, the largest of which is at the southern end of the vineyard, contiguous to La Romanée and La Romanée-Conti. Along with Domaine Leroy, this is the Daddy of all Richebourgs. And “Daddy” is apt: Richebourg is all about opulence, richesse and weight.

The Gros family hold the next largest share: between Domaines Gros Frère & Soeur, Anne Gros & AF Gros they hold just under two hectares, located at the northern end of the vineyard that borders Vosne Les Brulées. Thibault Liger-Belair has just over half a hectare, Domaines Méo-Camuzet, Jean Grivot, Mongeard Mugneret and Hudelot-Noellat all have around or just under a third of a hectare, and Bichot have just 0.07 of a hectare in the north-east corner of the vineyard between Cros Parentoux and Les Brulées.

In terms of style, Richebourg is probably Pinot Noir at its most muscular and opulent. La Romanée and La Romanée-Conti are probably finer; La Tâche more intense. Le Musigny is softer, Chambertin more strict.

As with all grand cru Burgundy, there isn’t much of it. The biggest producer – DRC – makes around 1,000 cases per year. Bichot’s Domaine du Clos Frantin, with just 0.07 of a hectare, make less than 100. This is rare wine.

Our current availability from this brilliant vineyard can be seen HERE. Please do get in touch if you would like to discuss the wines, the vineyards, the domaines – or anything else Richebourg related – further.

The 100 point Wine (?)

Leave a reply

I’ve always thought that awarding a wine 100 points…..or 20/20 if you prefer the traditionally British scoring system – to be rather egotistical. When declaring something to be perfect, it seems to me that you are also indicating that you believe you have absolute knowledge about that item. That you know, absolutely, categorically that it could not be improved upon.

And I don’t claim to know that. So I don’t give 100 point scores.

Not even privately, in my head.

Yesterday I attended a dinner with two friends at which we were lucky enough to drink extraordinary wines. Three Burgundies and one Bordeaux. It was one of those dinners that makes you laugh out loud at the absurdity of your good fortune. “How on earth did I end up here, doing this, today ? ? ?”

My heartfelt thanks to those friends that made this evening possible.

As regards the wines themselves, one might argue we did everything wrong: the red wines were served simultaneously, inviting invidious comparisons between three special red wines – which certainly all merited being considered alone. The wines were as follows:

1999 Puligny Montrachet, Les Enseignieres, Coche Dury (94/100)

Medium yellow gold. Bright and lively, yet full coloured. Having had this wine before I should have had the courage of my convictions and asked the excellent sommelier (at The Square) to decant it a couple of hours in advance: it seemed slightly jaded initially but tightened and freshened and revealed more and more fruit in the glass. Really lovely; but not typically ‘Coche’ for me – this is broad, orangey ripe, creamy. But after some time in the glass not a bit jaded. Bang on.

1989 Château Pétrus, Pomerol (98/100)

Hugely fragrant with that Pétrus scent that I’d (try to) describe as Asian spice, smokey nuts and clove. I kept on picking up different nuances over the course of the evening – one minute I picked up fennel seed, then cumin or curry leaf, the next liquorice, tar, toffee. Sometimes fruity; sometimes waxy, leathery and just a bit feral ! Very concentrated, very deep and very powerful on the palate. Almost too much of a good thing: huge opulence; flavours of blueberry, spice, plum pudding, caramel, aniseed, and saffron. Finishes very powerfully with savoury toffee. Colossal. I love it, but I couldn’t drink a bottle by myself.

2005 Chambertin, Domaine Armand Rousseau (96++?/100)

….At this moment in time, this is by far the tightest and most restrained of the three reds which we drank. Which doubtless did it a disservice. As the evening went on, this was developing beautifully in the glass. Indeed – if we’d opened it 24 hours in advance (or given it 20 years in cellar, much more appropriately !) this could well have been the standout wine, but today it was all in reserve. But lovely, nonetheless. Reticent initially, then mineral, with hints of cinnamon, raspberry and leaf. Later on I picked up notes of stem, smoke and rose petal. Very long and palate saturating, with almost citric purity. Crisp red berries, maybe. Long, bitingly concentrated finish. But not especially giving or generous today, you sense that this needs time: a lot of it !

2005 La Tâche, Domaine de la Romanée-Conti (100/100 (!) (?))

I had my first mouthful of this after finishing a glass of Pétrus and was rendered speechless.

Almost unbelievably, not only does it rival or exceed Pétrus 89 for sheer power and intensity (!), – it has a rapier like delineation and focus, that makes it seem…..just….more. Irrespective of region; irrespective of age. I just can’t imagine there being a more perfect young wine. There couldn’t be, could there ? The intense scent of 2005 La Tache was in perpetual flux over the course of the evening. Initially I picked up herbaceous elements of hawthorn, briar, and even mint or menthol. Later it seemed to have acquired all sorts of notes of spice, gravel and smoke. On the palate this is combines enormous scale, silky texture, painful intensity and total precision. Totally, totally fresh, vibrant, rich, and even now, at what you might expect to be an awkwardly early point in its evolution, it is breathtakingly brilliant.