Despite my continued hankerings Burgundy remains a niche interest on Winedoctor. I think it is a region you have to know really well in order to make any informed comment of interest to knowledgeable Burgundy drinkers. For that reason (it’s not just that I’m short of time – although that’s true as well) it is a region I touch upon when the opportunity presents itself, rather than me chasing the experience.

These two wines are one such opportunity. The domaine is one I am reasonably familiar with (my way of saying I have a few bottles in the cellar). Now in the hands of Comte and Comtesse Aymard-Claude de Nicolay, the domaine is I think a good source of wines away from the top tier appellations, with a portfolio that is centred on and around Corton, including Savigny and Pernand-Vergelesses.

These two wines are barrel samples from the 2010 vintage. I have thus marked with ranged scores. I have also included prices for cases, in bond, from stockist Bancroft Wines.

Chandon de Briailles Savigny-les-Beaune Premier Cru Les Lavières 2010: A good depth of colour here. And a characterful nose, with a good intensity to the fruit, vibrant but rich, with the depth of dark cherry but with the brightness of loganberry, and a twist of grey smoke. It has a rather granular depth to it, and overall it seems to have promise. This comes across as a confident character on the palate, with full fruit but also a crunchy definition, and the grip of good structure. A very convincing palate, broad and with appealing flesh. Overall, very good. 15-16/20 (May 2012) (£235 per case, in bond)

Chandon de Briailles Pernand-Vergelesses Premier Cru Île des Vergelesses 2010: Dark cherry fruit here, showing a good intensity of aroma with savoury elements to it redolent of mushroom and truffle, but there is an appealing freshness and vibrancy to it as well. Less granular than the Savigny tasted alongside, a more integrated, admittedly chocolate-tinged polish here. Full, rich, but with a more silky tone to the structure and overall composition which I like. This is certainly no delicate lightweight though, as there is substance and potential here beneath the flavour and definition. Good potential here. 15.5-16.5/20 (May 2012) (£265 per case, in bond)

Filed under: Burgundy
Posted by Chris Kissack on May 4, 2012 at 3:31 pm
7 Comments »

I couldn’t resist making the trip down from Scotland to London today for the annual Bordeaux Cru Classé Tasting, in which a group of châteaux – including some top names such as Pontet-Canet, Canon, Guiraud, Canon-la-Gaffelière and so on – show their four most recent vintages. So this year that was 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008, the first two vintages from barrel, the latter two from bottle (in most cases – I noticed Pontet-Canet’s 2009 was labelled up indicating it was also from barrel – Pontet-Canet Gran Reserva, anyone?). What could be more fascinating than a chance to look at two great vintages sandwiched between two weaker ones, to compare and contrast, especially when so many are drawing parallels between 2011 and 2008?

The tasting was indeed fascinating, on many levels. So many, in fact, I can’t really go into them all in the detail I would like to here (sitting in St Pancras Station) and now (with my train due in a few minutes) so I will just touch upon three themes.

2011: Just one month on from tasting these in Bordeaux, those wines I have tasted before (it was my first taste of some wines, in particular Mondotte, Canon, and a few others) showed consistently. Naturally in a month they have moved on, but looking back at my primeurs scores I’m ranking them the same today, e.g. Aiguilhe 2011 gets 16-17/20 again, Pontet-Canet 17-18/20 again, Branaire-Ducru 15-16 again. Gazin I’ve scored a half-point lower, otherwise there are no differences. To cut it short, the past month in barrel certainly hasn’t changed my impression of the vintage.

2009: The remarkable aspect of this vintage is just how it was tightening up. When I tasted the wines at the UGC in October 2011 I was struck by the rich, velvety drapes of fruit which hid the tannins and acidity so well I wondered if the fruit was all there was at times. But they have really tightened up since then, there is still plenty of fruit, and one or two still show that gloriously velvety weight, almost like a mouthful of double cream, but many now allow the structure to show itself more readily. I like that. I have been warming to the 2010s recently, preferring their structure, but the 2009s have it as well. It is going to be fascinating to watch these two vintages mature.

2011 vs. 2008 It was very notable how weak both these vintages were against the 2009 and 2010 vintages (both are better in Pomerol, but only Gazin represented that commune, and none of the wines there – from any of the vintages – were stellar). In terms of absolute quality, there is not much between these two vintages at present. Bear that in mind as the 2011 prices continue to roll out. Oh, and one last thing. Am I imagining it, or were there indeed a few critics or wine forum posters who proclaimed 2008 to be a great vintage at various points in time in the first year or two after the harvest? I am sure that was the case. Would anyone who once described 2008 as ‘great’ care to speak up in support of the vintage now? There was certainly nothing “great” about it today!

Filed under: Bordeaux
Posted by Chris Kissack on May 3, 2012 at 4:30 pm
12 Comments »

They say it ain’t over until the fat lady sings. Well, when it comes to Bordeaux 2011, I think the fat lady sang last week. Or rather, an ex-lawyer from Baltimore sang. And although it didn’t exactly bring the house down, it certainly brought the tragic opera of Bordeaux 2011 to a close…..before the campaign ever really began.

There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that 2011 is not a great vintage. Nevertheless, I think many thought that of 2008, and then Parker came out with some very positive scores, with 167 wines out of 416 wines rated (40.1%) achieving a score range starting at 90 points. And there were some high scoring wines; Lafite, Petrus, Ausone and Trotanoy all had scores indicating a potential 100 points.

Those that released early got burnt; prices rose, and the châteaux missed out on potential profit. They saw the vintage differently to Parker, and they paid the price. In a time where en primeur prices are being pushed upwards to keep the profit with the châteaux and not the traders and speculators, that really hurt.

Back on March 30th, when all the talk was of an early and quick campaign, I tweeted: “RP has made positive comments. They [the Bordelais] will wait for his scores. Remember ’08?“. To me it seemed inevitable that would be the case; although Parker had made some very negative comments about 2011 before tasting, on his return he backtracked, commenting on his site that the vintage was “better than expected“. There was hope for the Bordelais after all. A few came out early of course; Lafite, despite being extraordinarily expensive, judged the market right (all they had to do was make it the cheapest Lafite on the market for the speculators to bite, of course). Others failed. Cos d’Estournel was too expensive, even with a large percentage reduction. But most waited. After all, once Parker published his scores, the market would rally – just as it did in 2008, right?

Wrong.

Parker’s scores were pretty dismal. OK, so he opened his report with a conciliatory comment on the vintage, that it “could turn out to be close in overall quality to years such as the underrated 2001 and 2008“, but the scores were way down. In 2011, of 365 wines rated, 115 were given 90+ point ranges (31.5%). That’s only three-quarters of the 90+ scores dished out for 2008, not really comparable (unless that is an admission the 2008 vintage was initially over-rated, of course). Ausone received a surprise nod with 96-100, but otherwise few scores touched a potential 95 or 96. And there are more scores in the mid-80s than I have seen for a long time. Lafite was a surprise low, at 90-93 (is there another story hidden in this score?). You can spin it whatever way you want (and the merchants have – remarkable how positive the emails dropping into my in-box are!) but Parker has destroyed any hope of selling this vintage the Bordelais might have had.

Looking back to another of my pre-campaign tweets, on March 29th I wrote “There is a potential for a massive stall if the prices are too high“. In the face of such low scores this seems inevitable. So, with Parker’s scores in their mitts, what will the Bordelais do now? We are due a rush of releases today (Wednesday May 2nd), after two days of holiday in France (a Tuesday public holiday, and what the French call a pont, a bridge, where everybody takes Monday off as well).

It seems to me there are two options:

(a) release now at a reduced price. I think it would be applauded by potential buyers, and it might generate some interest, but from the Bordelais point of view, how will your neighbours view it? Does this admit ‘defeat’ in some way? What effect will it have on the prices of other vintages? How will it look when the fabulous 2012s (you never know…) are released at an increased price again? And, with low levels of enthusiasm and low Parker scores, will the wines sell at any price?

(b) release now at a comparable or even increased price. We can call this hubris (“my wine is superb every year“) but maybe it makes commercial sense for the Bordelais. Write the vintage off. Buyers will look at the comparable prices of 2009 and 2010 and back-fill with the better vintages for the same money. When the superb 2012s (see above….) are released, the comparable price for the better vintage will seem generous (amazing how short our memories can be). And in time, as the prices continue to rise, the 2011s will eventually look good value. There’s a lot to be gained. Why hurt long-term growth, and the brand image, with a price reduction just to sell a few bottles now?

I know which I think is more likely. Stand ready for some releases, at comparable prices or – at best – some token price reductions. What do you think? If you were one of the Bordelais, what would you do?

Postscript, Wednesday afternoon: I just got off the phone with a UK merchant who confirmed that he is seeing increased sales of Bordeaux 2010 during the 2011 campaign. The Bordelais can take that as a positive effect of the campaign, and fits with plan (b) above.

Filed under: Bordeaux
Posted by Chris Kissack on May 2, 2012 at 9:27 am
10 Comments »

Following on from this week’s Wine of the Week, the Pierre Gaillard Asiaticus 2010, here are notes on four more wines from Pierre Gaillard, all from the 2010 vintage.

I liked these wines; they show rather primary varietal characteristics at present, but they also show good harmony on the palate on the whole, with ripe and integrated structures, freshness and style. The Asiaticus was undoubtedly the most striking, but I woudn’t shy away from any of these, especially the Clos Cuminaille which looks like good value to me.

Although only two were marked tiré sur fût looking at the Pierre Gaillard website all his Northern Rhône cuvées spend at least 18 months in barrel so I have assumed all are barrel samples, hence the ranged scores. I have also included prices for cases, in bond, from stockist Bancroft Wines.

Pierre Gaillard St Joseph 2010: A moderate concentration of varietal Syrah fruit on the nose here, showing good character and suggestive of some concentration, but also rather blunted and difficult to define around the edges. A nicely rich substance on the palate though, with a light grip underneath the fruit, showing some biting structure in the midpalate and end. A nice weight to it, with firm and rather punchy acid and a light tannic backbone. Attractive if rather soft and low key at times. 14.5-15.5/20 (April 2012) (£125 per case, in bond)

Pierre Gaillard Saint Joseph Clos Cuminaille 2010: Dark, rich and spicy fruit on the nose here, very classically varietal in some of its tones, especially the blackberry fruit with that typical Syrah vein of sweetness, presented in a soft and slightly diffuse fashion, but certainly identifiable. There is a slightly woody, bracken-like quality to it as well. The palate is soft, gently polished, not especially deeply fruited or rich, the fruit a touch hollow at present, muted by the oak somewhat I think. Where the wine shows its mettle is in the finish, which has better definition than through the midpalate, showing a little grippy tannin and refreshing acidity. Very primary at present, but very harmonious and certainly showing some potential. 16-17/20 (April 2012) (£165 per case, in bond)

Pierre Gaillard Cornas 2010: A darkly coloured wine, concentrated but not opaque, and red-black in terms of hue. The nose is very muted at first but with time it reveals rich fruit aromas reminiscent of blackberry, with such a creamy, sweet intensity that it suggests blackberry purée swirled with vanilla ice cream. And yet alongside this there is a sooty, savoury note which steers the wine away from mere sweetness and simplicity. The palate is full, opening out over an hour or so, with firmly structured fruit and moderately grippy tannins through the middle of the wine, and gentle fresh acidity to the core. The fruit character isn’t quite as well defined as on the nose, but there is some frame to it, and there is certainly some substance to the finish. A wine with some good potential here. 16-17/20 (April 2012) (£260 per case, in bond)

Pierre Gaillard Côte-Rôtie 2010: Great primary fruit character on the nose here, all blackberry with the very typical sweet, buttery, crumble and vanilla ice cream character that comes with young Syrah, and underneath that there is a dark and savoury seam of aromatic, smoky, roasted meats. A good substance in the palate, similarly primary as the nose is, but with a good definition and flesh. Rich, full, more savoury than the aromatics suggested, with a dry and biting finish. Later, this settles down into a really savoury and harmonious balance. A very good style here, with really super potential. 16.5-17.5/20 (April 2012) (£310 per case, in bond)

Filed under: Rhone
Posted by Chris Kissack on April 26, 2012 at 2:09 pm
No Comments »

My third day of judging on the Loire panel at the 2012 Decanter World Wine Awards has drawn to a close; it has been another long day of tasting. Keeping me company today were panel chair Jim Budd, and two figures already seen this week, Nigel Wilkinson (who judged with us yesterday) and Ken MacKay (who judged with us on Monday). Despite this being the third day our room (shown below, one of many) was as busy as ever, full of tasters looking at everything from Bordeaux and Regional France, to Port, Maderia and the wines of the Middle East and Far East.

We kicked off this morning with yet more Sauvignon Blanc. I guess that is hardly surprising; from a commercial point of view, Sauvignon Blanc – wearing a myriad of different appellation labels from the grand to the obscure – is of great importance to the Loire. Regular readers will know it is not these wines that draw me to the Loire, but the less commercial – and yet infinitely more interesting – wines of the Loire heartlands, Touraine and Anjou, and in more recent years Muscadet too. Nevertheless I’m certainly up for judging these wines, dishing out criticisms or medals as appropriate. Apart from a flight of wines from Cheverny (all Sauvignon and Chardonnay blends) and a single Cour-Cheverny (an appellation purely for Romorantin) this morning was entirely devoted to 2011 Sancerre.

We finished up with several flights of reds (just a small selection shown above), all Cabernet Franc or Cabernet Sauvignon, from the famous Touraine appellations (Chinon, Bourgueil, St Nicolas de Bourgueil) as well as Anjou (straight Anjou and Anjou-Villages). These were (like the Sancerres) rather variable in quality, although here there were a number of different vintages involved, including 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011.

That’s it for this year as far as I am concerned, although I know Jim, Nigel and two as yet unnamed Loire experts will be exploring the delights of the Loire’s sparkling wines, pink wines, older white Sancerres, red Sancerre, Gamay and probably other obscure oddities tomorrow. Naturally I will be thinking of them. With a sense of envy, obviously.

Filed under: Loire
Posted by Chris Kissack on April 25, 2012 at 5:04 pm
No Comments »