Fifteen Years On: The 1995 Vintage
I can’t quite recall when it was that I first learnt of the concept of a ten- or twenty-years on tasting. It was most probably through reading about one – perhaps in Decanter magazine, which has been known to run such a feature in the past – rather than partaking in one. But it wasn’t long before I joined in the fun for myself, and I have been publishing the tasting notes from my own annual ten-years on tastings since Winedoctor first fired up its cylinders, back in May 2000, when I (obviously) looked at the 1990 vintage.
More recently, with the help of others or with wines from my own cellar (increasingly the latter), I have also been publishing notes from an annual twenty-years on tasting, beginning with the 1982 vintage and then moving on in a sporadic fashion, looking at 1983, 1988 and 1989. These have given even greater pleasure, especially – and this is just as true at ten years of age – when the wines are served completely blind. It is remarkable just how well some wines perform, often wines which you perhaps wouldn’t think have twenty years in them.
Over the last few years I have, however, noticed one particular problem with the ten-years on concept; at this age, many wines are just still too young to drink well. Indeed, it has been somewhat of a surprise just how many minor wines – the likes of Guigal’s Côtes du Rhône in 1999, Tim Adams’ Semillon in 1998, or the Cosme Palacio y Hermanos Rioja in 1995 – are just singing at ten years of age. I think sometimes I (and perhaps you too?) underestimate the ability of many wines to improve, or to at least survive, in the cellar. Meanwhile more ‘serious’ wines, those that come with a track record or aging well, show a more surly, adolescent reticence when opened for this assessment. The implication is that ten years is a rather early point at which to take look at many truly cellar-worthy wines; it is instructive to taste them, but a part of me wishes I had just left the bottle for a few more years.
