DaleW wrote:
> Last night 8 good geeks gathered at Mortons to sample through some
> 1983 Bordeaux. This was originally supposed to be a Barton/Poyferre
> comparison,but a couple crucial people couldn't do this month, so we
> had a horizontal instead. A good group, with strong (sometimes
> divided) opinions, but all fun to be with. I quite enjoyed myself- the
> company was better than the wine, but the wine wasn't bad at all!
What a great lineup of wines, Dale! It speaks well for the company that
they were better.
> 1983 Ch. Gruaud Larose (St Julien)
> I get that Cordier funk right away. When I remark, someone says "what
> brett?" while Paul is pu****ng away his glass saying too much brett.
> Ah, the variabilities of brett sensitivity. This amount (and strain)
> of brett doesn't bother me at all. It's more cow pasture than bandaid,
> more animal than sewage. The fruit is rich and dark, the wine
> structured and virile. Cassis, tobacco, barnyard, and spice. A-
>
Count me among the Brett-tolerant (more or less essential for a lover of
Red Rhones), but I know what you mean about the strain, too.
Gruaud-Larose (and Meyney) has always had a meaty, animal element that I
know is probably Brett (no Mourvedre here!) but which I find quite
appealing.
> 1983 Ch. Palmer (Margaux)
> I liked most of the wines, but this was my WOTN without question. I've
> had some '83 Palmers that made me wonder what the fuss was, but the
> last 3 I've tried have been marvelous. Beautiful, full, lush, very
> young fruit but with lovely secondary aromas of cigarbox and leather.
> Some cocoa mixed in with that lush fruit, too. Iron fist in velvet
> glove, etc. A/A-
No surprise, given how successful Margaux was in '83. Too bad no one
brought the Ch. Margaux for a head-to-head. (It just happens also to be
the only '83 left in our cellar).
Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.cwdjr.net
|
