Although on this assessment the wines of the Médoc gave me a little less excitement than those from Pessac in this vintage, there is no shortage of pleasure here. And rightly so; after all, the tasting spans the full range of potential quality, from a trio of first growth estates at the top (Mouton, Lafite and Margaux; Latour is a persistent absentee at this event) right through to the lesser known estates of Moulis, Listrac and the Haut-Médoc. There has to be a good bottle in there somewhere! Starting with my ever-brief assessment of St Estèphe a half-dozen wines (not a bad turnout from this commune) put on a good show, helped along by the presence of a very fine Cos d'Estournel which possessed both a beautifully expressive nose and a finely defined aromatic profile; an attractive wine which I would be very pleased to find in my cellar.

There is more to say with Pauillac, however, where there is fairly broad success, with some real high-points of pleasure. Of course, one of those highs comes from Mouton. Looking back to my previous assessments of this vintage, my only primeurs opportunity to taste the 2006 vintage was at the Bibendum tasting in London, and I wasn't fortunate enough to visit Bordeaux nor to taste Mouton-Rothschild. Nevertheless, the prevailing opinion coming from the mouths and pens of both merchants and critics was that in 2006 Mouton had played a blinder, pulling out all the stops to fashion what many people were already declaring - based at that time on an embryonic barrel sample - to be the wine of the vintage.

Bordeaux 2006 We are now nearly four years on from that primeurs circus and here I encounter Mouton for the first time (although a member they do not participate in the annual UGC tasting). And being positioned close to the first growth table - where Mouton, Lafite, Margaux, Haut-Brion and Cheval-Blanc were being poured (not usually into the same glass I must stress) I can't avoid taking in the many opinions I hear expressed, and Mouton was going down very well it seemed. Not even the Lucien Freud label, a bizarrely child-like drawing of a pot plant and a giraffe, as far removed from (a) a mouton or vinous theme, not that such a theme is mandatory, and (b) Freud's usual style, which I usually find quite endearing, can prevent the thirsty tasters from confirming to themselves, and to anyone else within earshot, that Mouton seems to have scored a bullseye with their 2006. It is, it seems, wine of the vintage for many if not most tasters.

The "people's choice" for wine of the vintage, Mouton-Rothschild, is an exceptional wine, one with a very classic Mouton-Pauillac spice, an aroma that is very easy to spot when you know it, but very difficult to depict in everyday language; I think of it as a mix of iron, rust, pickling spices and violets, but I'm not sure that even comes close to communicating what I sense in the wine. I think it will make fabulous drinking and it will cellar well for a long, long time. It is not, for this taster on this occasion at least, the wine of the vintage, as I found far more seduction oozing from my glass of La Mission Haut-Brion, as described in my Pessac notes, but there is no objection from me with others holding this opinion. I can see exactly where they are coming from. It should be noted, however, that just next door Lafite-Rothschild offers something of a very comparable quality, slightly different in terms of aromatic complexity and construction, polished and seductive in a different way, but still showing a lovely harmony on the palate. It is a great wine. My best wishes to the investors and Chinese claret fans who will be buying it; you have chosen well!

Two lovely Pichons came next in Pauillac, with Baron slightly superior to Comtesse. This is a particularly important assessment as Baron was one of a small handful of barrel samples that were quite underwhelming when I tasted them in April 2007. The wine showed much better at two years, and this subsequent reassessment confirms that opinion; these are delicious wines. Admittedly, the 2006 Baron doesn't quite live up to expectations set by the recently tasted 2008, but let us not damn a lovely wine with faint praise; the 2006 Pichon-Baron is an excellent wine, as is the 2006 Pichon-Lalande. And they aren't alone in achieving success in this vintage; there are good efforts from the other wines within the two Rothschild stables, especially d'Armailhac, and also Pontet-Canet which, although showing a very dense and solid style in comparison with the rest of the commune, is still clearly brimming with cellar-worthiness.

Bordeaux 2006 St Julien is an interesting commune to assess in this vintage, particularly if we look at the wines in contrast with those from the 2008 vintage. There is perhaps slightly less consistency across the whole commune in this vintage, but the wines are still of a very good quality, and there is a lot of crossover in terms of where the scores lie, although I suspect a detailed analysis would reveal an average score slightly higher in 2008 than in 2006. Nothing in this 2006 vintage assessment quite matched the silky tannic structure of the 2008 Léoville-Poyferré, which was a cut above the rest (not including Ducru and Las-Cases, of course, neither being in attendance) in that vintage, but other than one or two such examples where quality is clearly superior, what sets the two vintages apart is style rather than anything else. In 2006 the wines tend to show less clearly defined fruit than the 2008s, which are more 'crystalline' and more likely to appeal to purists who mourn the loss of fresh, food-friendly Bordeaux, whereas the 2006 vintage has the advantage of greater substance. It is not that 2006 has given us big, fleshy, modern wines, it is more that they have a structure and texture that is perhaps a little more rounded-off than the 2008s. Picking out individual favourites, Léoville-Barton, a perennial pick-of-the-bunch for me, was with Poyferré my most favoured wine here, but also putting in a very notable performance was Branaire-Ducru.

Finally - save for some token representation from Haut-Médoc - comes Margaux. Margaux itself leads the way with a very feminine character, not showing quite the gravitas of the other first growths but certainly streets ahead within the context of the commune. And then comes Palmer with an impressive effort, followed by a motley selection of wines which, although of variable quality (surely a communal trait?) do show some superior character to the offerings from the 2008 vintage. There are some very decent wines here, including yet another example of the work Emmanuel Cruse has done at d'Issan, surely now a regular in the number three slot within the commune, behind the aforementioned Margaux and Palmer? (18/11/10)

The Médoc Communes 2006 - Tasting Notes

Tasted at the IMW 2006 Claret Tasting in November 2010. Click to locate stockists.

St Estèphe

Château Calon-Ségur 2006: A darker hue than some. Still a very fresh style aromatically though; there is a really lovely layer of fruit, slightly earthy, quite dense, but with a clean and crunchy edge to what concentration there is here. Good substance on entry, very broad, fairly well-defined edges, just a touch of soft oiliness to the substance and texture of the wine. Lots of good supporting structure though, some robust tannins in evidence, and bright acid too. This will need longer than many to come around but it has promise. 16.5+/20

Château Cos d'Estournel 2006: A great spicy, expressive character on the nose here; the fruit has a fabulously dark and yet fresh character, the nuances running alongside very reminiscent of crackling embers, iron filings, perhaps just a little dark and challenging bonfire toffee too. A very supple start on the palate, very balanced, with a good presence of structure, the tannins bright and chalky, and the fruit following a similarly well-defined pattern with good freshness. A great wine which will need 10-15 years. 18+/20

Château Cos Labory 2006: A slightly darker character than some, with touches of roasted meats and a rather dense and slightly feral quality to the fruit profile on the nose. A little perfume too. The substance on the palate is appealing, fresh, nicely balanced, loose but buoyant with good acidity underneath to carry along the perfumed fruit. It has a little edge of steel but this may subside. A slightly chewy style to the tannins, giving it rather a firmer finish than it needs, overall though a good effort. 15.5+/20

Château Lafon-Rochet 2006: A slightly dusty but still fresh hue. The nose is really attractive, slightly perfumed, with a good presence of fruit and a gravelly-earthy character to it as well. Fresh and appealing on the palate, slightly soft in terms of structure but nicely composed all the same, there are some well-covered tannins, and nice acids. The fruit just has a rather loose feel to it, sitting all over the structure, without any great intensity, although there is a lifted, perfumed edge which makes up for that. Firms up a little with a second taste. Good potential here, if it all comes together. 16+/20

Château Ormes de Pez 2006: A fairly dark hue here. Not quite as aromatically expressive as the rest of the commune, with dark and withdrawn fruits on the nose and a little toffee over the top. Quite supple on the palate, well composed, with a dark and spiced edge to the fruit lending it some definition. Still fairly soft and loose though. Notes of spiced charcoal lead the way, with intense and gamey blackcurrant fruit later. There is a lot of substance here. This just needs time to come together I think. 16+/20

Château de Pez 2006: A fine spice on the nose here, supple and rather a soft suggestion of fruit, perfumed, savoury too though, with a faint touch of undergrowth and tea leaves. Seems to be rather forward in that respect. A soft and rather supple palate on entry, very softly textured, broad, not vigorous in terms of structure. Coming together better in the midpalate, a bit more grip here, and some nice acids too. Aromatically it gives some pleasure. This will drink soon; it needs just a few more years. 15.5+/20

Pauillac

Château d'Armailhac 2006: The brighter by a whisker of the Armailhac-Clerc-Milon twosome, this has a very open and delicious perfume, beautifully fresh and crunchy fruit with a very fine, earthy, undergrowthy and leafy nuance coming in at the edge. Very true to Pauillac and very pure and fresh. The palate begins in a soft fashion, coming together in a polished whole in the middle of the palate, showing more substance and a touch more vigour as it does so. Good substance, balanced, fresh, very moreish, giving lots of well-judged pleasure, this should be a delight to drink at the table. 17+/20

Château Batailley 2006: Attractive, dark, concentrated fruit on the nose. Comes across as slightly raw, with a heat coming alongside the fruit. The palate has a bold structure to match, violet-tinged fruits but with a very firm substance underpinning it all, a rather hard shell for the fruit, and very grippy tannins too. Nice acids. All rather bold and hard at present with slightly obtrusive tannins with a green edge. Very tannic finish. A touch coarse. 15+/20

Château Clerc-Milon 2006: Slightly more dense character on the nose than the very open Armailhac, a touch more woody, more reserved, more austere perhaps. There is still a lovely autumnal, leafy-red tinge to it though. A fresh and balanced palate but, as the nose suggested, a deeper, heavier substance to the wine. Polished, with a nicely bright character in the middle. This has slightly softer acidity than the Armailhac, but very appealing all the same. 16.5+/20

Château Croizet-Bages 2006: Soft, pretty, perfumed fruits on the nose, with an attractive, sugar-coated grit to them. A rather lean style on the palate, light and broad but without the fruit substance at first. Then in the midpalate a minty and vegetal greenness to it as well alongside the fruit. Pretty straightforward stuff. 14/20

Château Duhart-Milon 2006: This has a fresh red colour, but a more remarkable nose, which is sweet and intense, with a core of well defined fruit carrying a very attractive warm and woody spice to it. Fresh, appealing, with a suggestion of density here. Surprisingly, it starts off a little flat and loose on the palate, tightening up in the midpalate where it has a pretty, perfumed, red fruit character, with good tannins at the edge and very bright acidity. Very attractive overall, even though it finishes up all restrained and tight. Very good. 16.5+/20

Château Grand-Puy-Lacoste 2006: Rather a reserved style on the nose, quite dense and savoury rather than showing overt fruit characteristics. Restrained although still with a little oak softness at the edges, giving it a slight caramelly edge. The palate is very restrained at first, almost refusing to make contact with the palate, an upright but by no means austere balance of fresh, charming substance with chalk-tinged tannins and fresh acids. A bright style, slightly soft and short in the finish, but overall very attractive and set to give good drinking. 17+/20

Château Haut-Bages-Libéral 2006: Quite a dense hue. An attractive nose here, very relaxed and comfortable with itself, showing some open Pauillac spice, with little elements of rust and black tea alongside the cedar-tinged fruit. A gentle presence on the palate, soft and rounded, quite appealing tannins and acids with it though, all very well judged and balanced. Supple, composed, this holds together very well right to the finish where it shows a little vigour as well. A good effort; will be very fine for dining. 16.5+/20

Château Haut-Batailley 2006: A bit of matchsticky reduction here. Underneath that some blackberry fruit, with a suggestion that the style has a fresh, crunchy character, although it is difficult to get past the other aromas. Same on the palate, but there is a supple texture and a light but tangible extract, with a nice vigour to it, in terms of well-judged tannins and fresh acidity. This is really appealing, and despite the current aromatics being a little difficult I think this has some good potential. I'm keeping a little vagueness in my score though. 16-16.5+/20

Château Lafite-Rothschild 2006: There is a little density to this wine's appearance although the colour is bright and with a fresh cherry red hue. A very seductive style of fruit presented on the nose, polished but with a suggestion of substance, more so than Margaux for instance. Fresh fruits, well-judged ripeness, with smoky elements and touches of cedar wood and spice. The palate starts off very fresh and balanced, with good flesh, but it is well reined in and it remains tightly composed throughout. Supple, broad, quite relaxed, the tannins and acids are here but totally hidden within the body of the wine. Rather substantially robust at the moment. Good long finish, although the definition fades a little towards the end. Very long. In terms of aromatic expression and composition there is just a hair's breadth between this and Mouton. 18.5+/20

Château Lynch-Bages 2006: Red and glossy. An expressive nose, attractive fruit here, very red in character, fresh but broad in terms of presence, appealing with a deep, roasted fruit character. With a dark and savoury substance to it, this is very easy to appreciate. It has a rich substance on the palate, broad, quite tangible in terms of texture, with a pleasing and yet lightly-perfumed character to the flesh. Underneath there is a good frame for the wine, well hidden although the tannins are firm and upright. Nice acidity, overall giving it a very charming style. This is a really good vintage for Lunch-Bags. 17+/20

Château Mouton-Rothschild 2006: Tasted straight after the Lafite from the corresponding vintage this wine really impresses with its open and vibrant aromatics. It is so typically Mouton, no other wine has this spicy character on the nose that is so difficult to describe but is redolent of wet potter's clay blended with coffee, iron and rust. It terms of perfume it is superior to anything else this commune can offer; it seems particularly open and ready to please right now, and I just know Mouton fans will love this. A very attractive palate follows on, with perfumed red fruits and a touch of sweet woodland cherry and strawberry to it. Supple, gently honed, minerally, with a tingling structure to it, but still well-judged, maintaining a composed presence through to the finish, when it finally lets go and touches the palate with a little of its tannic core. Very long, charming, caressing. This is an impressive wine, and it is easy to see why many regard it as the wine of the vintage. 18.5+/20

Château Pichon-Baron 2006: Rather more dense than the Lalande with a more violet-tinged hue. Very well defined on the nose, dense and rather splendid in its definition, with elements of roasted fruits alongside a residual seam of toffee oak, all wrapped up in a very savoury, stock and hung-game layer. Quite a cool style on entry, the fruits very red and fresh in style, the definition admirable, the perfume deliciously appealing. There is some substance to it, a full layer of tannins and fresh acids, but all held together in a very reserved fashion. Impressive, tightly composed, appealing. This just has the edge on Lalande I think. 18+/20

Château Pichon-Lalande 2006: Dense and quite rich crimson. Bright and expressive in the nose, a hot and dense concentration of flavour to it, suggestions of roasted fruits. The palate has a very welcome substance, a sweet and concentrated core of polished but warm and comely fruit at the core, around that an elegant drapery of texture with a lightly gritty substance, with a well-formed tannic backbone and fine acidity. The nose really is enticing. A really strong effort from Pichon-Lalande with all the polish you would expect from such an estate. Very impressive. 17.5+/20

Château Pontet-Canet 2006: A glossy, crimson hue. The nose has a powerful presence of fruit, although with a dark and stony character rather than the open and perfumed style found in the rest of the appellation. Dense, rather withdrawn, and on the palate a robust substance shows through, with a less fleshy seam of texture contrasted against it compared to some wines. But there is an elegance to it as well, a more perfumed edge to the fruits than the nose suggested. And the tannins, although coating the mouth, seem to bring the fruit along with them as they do so. This is a powerful composition which is showing very well with the broad, creamy, forest-fruit style that Pontet-Canet has these days. Very good indeed. 17.5+/20

St Julien

Château Branaire-Ducru 2006: A dark, intense, rather meaty style on the nose, perfumed too, rich and characterful. Slightly high-toned and expressive, this is intriguing and fresh. In the same vein the palate is supple and bright, the substance broad and yet lifted by the underlying tannic grip, the fresh core of acidity and most of all the perfumed, dark and gritty fruits. This is a very impressive wine both for the château and the vintage. Well done Branaire! 17+/20

Château Gruaud-Larose 2006: Really attractive, perfumed, feminine and lightly gravelly fruits. A gentle start on the palate, an attractive substance building here, very nicely integrated, just a layer of ripe tannins coming in, then some bright acidity too. This is composed, fresh, light and charming, with a good tannic finish. Supple, and subtle in terms of its impact, this has an appealing composition and it will drink well perhaps earlier than some other wines. 16+/20

Château Lagrange 2006: A nice layer of sweet fruit here, with a little element of sweet, crumble-pastry to it suggesting residual oak. Overall rather appealing. The palate has a very soft presence, polished and with a touch of oiliness to it, although with a firm core of tannins at its centre, and fresh acidity to it as well. Good well-defined fruit on the finish, and quite long with desirable grip here. A good showing but quite disparate on the palate at present - will need to come together. 16.5+/20

Château Langoa-Barton 2006: Dark and rather sweet fruit on the nose at first, just a touch raw, otherwise not very expressive, except for little notes of caramel-tinged fruit. The palate starts off quite loose and open, then in the middle shows a little more substance with a chalky presence of fruit and rather firm tannins at its core. Nicely attractive character in the midpalate, chalky red fruits, and actually more substance and integration than I first found on a second look. 16.5+/20

Château Léoville-Barton 2006: Dense and concentrated on the nose, black fruit delivered in a very precise and well defined fashion, with a gritty suggestion of sweetness but nothing suggesting anything overly soft. Very nicely put together on the palate, elegant, fresh, very appealing in its composition. Good firm edges, vigour, fine substance and stoically firm tannins too. It is not at all unassailable though, plenty of flesh, but tightly honed and structured. Very impressive vigour. It needs the cellar (don't they all!) but it has great potential. 17.5+/20

Château Léoville-Poyferré 2006: A little more open than the Léoville-Barton, more expressive, full of iron-bound clay and earth, overlaid with a crisp fruit character, crunchy autumn leaves, depth and freshness intertwined. Yes, it is as enticing as I hope it sounds. The flesh on the palate has a soft and broad character, polished, not quite the fine vigour of the Barton, although there is grip and some fine acids to be found here. Very attractive, substantial and long but I think for me the Barton just edges it, even if a return for a second taste reveals a more firm and upright character than I first noted. 17.5+/20

Château Saint-Pierre 2006: Really attractive nose here, a good density of fruit, open and with a fresh perfume, still with a little touch of oaky sweetness but not at all an obtrusive character. A soft start on the palate but much better composed in the middle, moderate concentration but certainly plenty of good flavour, substance and style here. Precise, needling tannins and fresh acidity, and a slightly fuzzy black fruit substance although this should come together with time, and a nice lift of tobacco at the end. I think this has really good potential. 16.5+/20

Château Talbot 2006: Dense and polished fruit here on the nose, rather perfumed but tempered by an edge of highly-polished school-desk oak. Attractive though; it is both clean, although with a little gamey tinge to it, and expressive. The palate has good sweet substance, again slightly soft and fleshy, but there is violet-tinged fruit and a nice underpinning structure to it. Overall I find this very attractive. 16.5+/20

Margaux

Château d'Angludet 2006: This old favourite has some bright, crunchy and defined fruit on the nose. Quite dark and defined, a good first impression. A nice substance on entry and it maintains a very appealing composition through the middle too. It does have rather a flat character at present, the tannins and acidity seeming quite well hidden, but all the necessary elements are there and this has to have promise. Potentially this is really good. 16+/20

Château Brane-Cantenac 2006: An attractive perfume, soft but gently smoky, overall quite appealing. A very soft character on the palate, but then more substance in the middle. A nice little suggestion of grit here, this is a wine with some tangible substance. Soft and slightly chewy tannins, and fresh acids. Another competent wine which if it firms up with a little bottle age will drink well. I like the aromatics though; this could have real appeal to those looking for genuine old-school Margaux. Certainly better than my 2007 barrel sample suggested. 15.5/20

Château Durfort-Vivens 2006: Quite a darker style than Brane-Cantenac. The palate is firm and well composed. Rather a solid structure but it does give the wine definition at least. Then a slightly lean fruit character at its core, ripe chalky fruits, lots of grip in fact, a little disparate but this could come together and age nicely. Dense fruit, firm rather than lifted or expressive. Decent stuff. 15+/20

Château Ferrière 2006: An appealing presence of fruit, nicely defined, fresh, bright, with an ever-so-slightly crystalline character. Clean and just a little smoky. The substance of the wine has a slightly soft character, with a supple substance. There is nice tannin, good acidity, just not the vigour of some of the better wines, should come together to drink well, though. 15.5+/20

Château Giscours 2006: There is rather a rubbery edge of reduction here, although a second bottle was much better. This had a light and crystalline cherry fruit on the nose, with dark and smoky nuances without adding any great suggestion of depth or impact. A light and lean start as might be expected, but certainly more appealing substance in the middle, with a nice gentle but tangible extract in the middle. Supple and soft, with a gritty rose-petal perfume at the end, this has some promise in terms of its reserved substance and nice perfume. A nice but lighter style. 16/20

Château d'Issan 2006: A deep and characterful nose here, really rather smoky, with a good suggestion of concentration in terms of fruit character and maybe even complexity too. Quite a dark style. Supple palate, a little soft at the start, firming up in the middle of the wine, quite a nice layer of tannins here with a roasted-toasty edge to them that comes to the fore in an attractive manner towards the finish. This château really is on top of its game these days. A very good effort especially considering the rest of the commune in this vintage. 16.5+/20

Château Kirwan 2006: A rather solid, dense and withdrawn style on the nose, opening out to reveal some perfumed fruit but also a rather raw edge alongside it as well. Very loose and lean on entry, showing a little more depth in the middle. But it remains very low level and diffuse throughout. Soft, smoky, with a touch of tobacco, and with some grip at its core. There is some nice acidity here, but like a few other wines from Margaux in this vintage it seems quite loosely done. Give it time though. 15.5+/20

Château Lascombes 2006: A big and fruit-rich character on the nose here, a roasted character helped along by the overtly coffee-tinged character of oak. The fruit does have a slightly confected edge to it as well, a sort of sweet-feral cherry style. Quite some substance on entry, all polished fruit, rather robust and brawny in character, but well defined with certain edges in the mouth. Dense plum skin fruit, the oak not as obvious on the palate as the nose, the composition rather well done. It is rather top-heavy but in terms of integration it isn't in a different place to the rest of the appellation. In terms of style it is though. But for what it is - a big, grippy, chewy wine, with the potential to drink well - it is good, in this vintage at least. 16.5+/20

Château Margaux 2006: A very savoury style to the nose here, a very broad character too, very reminiscent of iron and stone, gravel with a very light perfume. Aromatically it does very much remind me of the barrel sample I met in early 2008 when it was tasted alongside the just-fermented 2007. There is some appealing fruit behind the stony perfume. A very supple start, elegant as Margaux should be, very relaxed but composed, with a little fleshy substance hiding the tannins and acidity quite nicely here, although the structure does make its presence known, giving the wine life and definition. A very composed and restrained effort, very true to Margaux, a feminine rather than robust style. Impressive, but set against its first growth peers in this vintage it struggles a little I think. 18+/20

Château Marquis de Terme 2006: A rather high-toned style on the nose here, suggestive of medicated cherry sweets, with nuances of smoke, cola and cough candy. Much the same on the palate, which is very loose and lean, with a flavour profile to match the aromatics on the nose. Soft, gentle, a touch gritty, good acidity though. Seems very disparate at present. Let's hope it firms up. Otherwise at present I would advise caution here. 13.5+/20

Château Palmer 2006: A very fine nose here, very defined and linear, with a suggestion of crunch to the fruit that lifts the nose away very nicely, together with a sweet and smoky edge. The palate is very well honed, defined, structured, with a gentle substance just showing a little soft focus at the very edges but otherwise very nicely delineated, with a perfumed violet and rose-petal character, good straight tannins and fresh acidity. This is very impressive, and is already showing an emerging definition that will provide much pleasure for many years. Just fine. 17.5+/20

Château Prieuré-Lichine 2006: Dark and sweet fruit character on the nose, slightly smoky, quite fresh, with a little element of perfume with a dark and spicy character. The palate has a soft style although there is some substance here. Although not brimming with vigour there is a touch of grit at its core, and a good presence of acidity. It has a rather solid presence and the tannins are very slightly chewy, and the acidity good. Overall there is some promise here; it just needs to integrate to give true pleasure. 16.5+/20

Château Rauzan-Gassies 2006: Rather a restrained style, a quiet but dark and smoky nose here. Just a little touch of sweetness to it, also a little tinge of tomato. A supple style on entry, soft with a fairly nice grip, a nice acidity, gently perfumed fruit too. Altogether quite an attractive if slightly loose-knit substance. Good fruit though, very fresh here, a firm acid backbone, slightly chewy tannins but not obtrusive and well covered by fruit. And it is attractive fruit, with a violet tinge. And a good robust finish. This needs time to come together but credit where credit is due, this is a good effort. 15.5+/20

Château Rauzan-Ségla 2006: An attractive and open perfume, a little gravelly, moving into dark fruit character on the nose, gentle and polished but certainly showing some impact. A fresh palate, quite bright and stylish, but with less density of fruit than seen in its Pessac peers (just tasted, hence the comparison). A supple substance, nicely judged tannins and rather firm acidity. I like the nose which has some nice, gravelly Margaux character albeit with some fairly dark fruits. Some tobacco and tea-leaf as well. Reserved rather than fleshy or impressive but nicely done. 16.5+/20

Château du Tertre 2006: A suggestion of deeper fruit here than its Giscours stablemate, rather solid with a slightly caramelly edge suggestive of oak. Rather deeply feral as well. A good substance on entry, rather cool but with a solid feel to it. More flesh in the middle, some perfume too, an attractive wine. Quite a broad substance showing with time, not the most vigorous but there is structure and lift here. If it comes together this could drink very nicely. 16+/20

Haut-Médoc

Château Cantemerle 2006: Earthy, green peppercorn style on the nose. A soft palate, supple, with not a lot of vigour. A nice substance though, slightly stewed red fruits with a chalky edge, and slightly chewy tannins too, around a moderate core of structure. Quite stemmy and stalky and austere overall. Certainly an interesting composition, with a good, robust character. 15+/20

Château La Lagune 2006: The nose is big, spicy, with high-toned red-black fruits. The palate again is broad and soft. Perfumed, with notes of red fruits, in a slightly chewy style. Lots of good substance here, quite firm though, a bit raw, with a hot and spicy character. A lot of structure here that needs to be subsumed. And a big, grippy, tannic finish. There is an awful lot of raw material here and, given appropriate time in the cellar, this could be very good. 16+/20