Text 11955, 112 rader
Skriven 2007-02-17 16:50:18 av Ian Hoare
     Kommentar till en text av MICHAEL LOO
Ärende: Re: ELECTRIFYING 74
===========================
Salut/Hi MICHAEL LOO, 

 le/on Fri, 16 Feb 2007 13:36:00 -0500, tu disais/you said:-

> IH> I don't think so. The best sweet wine I've ever had in my life was the
> IH> '67 Yquem
>
>I've had Suduiraut and Yquem from that vintage, and I
>found them equal.

For some complicated reason which I won't bore you with, I laid my hands on
a case of Suduiraut '67. I agree that it was amazing, though I'd not say it
was better than Yquem. Different, slightly less "creamy" more crystalline if
you like. Both fabulous wines. 

>I think the '61 Yquem might have been better (not had
>at Nicholas's).

I don't think you can be thinking of '61 Yquem! 

> , and the best red wine I've even tasted was the '59 Mouton -
> IH> I think I've said this before here. It made me completely rethink what
> IH> I thought I knew about reds.

>I had all the 1sts from '59 and and all the 1sts and would-be
>1sts from '61. Can't say that I can remember all the details
>at this late date,

I was lucky enough to go to a Sotheby's tasting where the Bordeaux
highlights were the two '59 rothchilds and all the 1st growth '61s. OK, it
was in the early '80s and so the '61s were still babies while the 59s were
at their peak, but for me the '59 Mouton eclipsed the other wines. To give
an idea of the quality of this tasting, we had Krug 52 as a rinse-bouche
before coming to the stars of the tasting, two Contantia's from the 18th
century. In that decade I was lucky enough to get to drink a bit of '61s,
mainly at the Tate, but honestly, they weren't ready. They were good, but
not as good as they would be now. 


>I hate to say this, now that I think about it, as I'm not
>generally a Merlottish type of guy, and I think the stuff is
>hopelessly overpriced, to milk the Asian feline market, but I
>think my top wine of all time might be the '61 Petrus,

Interesting... never got to taste that. In fact I've onlt had a couple of
Pétrus. I agree with you that many of the Merlots do go for a lot, I guess
because they peak quicker. 

>The other wines, well, I can't speak to the DRC, as my budget
>forbids intimate acquaintance with many of these, 

I've had three, I think, for which I paid for none. Two at the DRC itself,
one in barrel the other in bottle, and then again an '80, I think at a
tasting of "premium" wines that my brother put on. It was in the company of
blockbusters mainly Cab Sauv blockbusters and it didn't show very well. 

=================

Answering Dave Sacerdote here too

>ML> It was a great thing growing into
>ML> my palate when the '59s and '61s were coming into their own.
>
>Forgive my ignorance, but:
>
>Why were these particular years so fine?
>Have there been no comparable vintages in the 45+ years since?

!959 was a very hot dry year throughout Europe, in particular with a long
sunny fall. The conditions - rain at the right time in the right quantity,
sun in just the right amount but not TOO much, were such that the wines from
Pauillac commune were perfect. Typical of their land, and requiring little
"tweaking" in the winery to make them great. 

1961 on the other hand was a phenomenon. There were late frosts, which many
thought would in fact prevent any crops from growing at all. However the
vines re-flowered, and the summer and fall that followed were heatwaves, but
heatwaves tempered with just enough rain in July and again in September
(iirc) to allow the grapes to ripen, instead of shrivelling on the vine.
Howevr the crops were tiny, the grapes were very small with immensely thick
skins. The result of all this weather, was that the juice was extremely
concentrated (all the energy of the vines went to feed half as many bunches
as usual). The juice was also VERY tannic with high acidity - partly from
the near drought, and partly from the late flowering, This felicitous
combination is exceptionally rare - if '45 was arguably as good as '59,
certainly by reputation - I don't know of another '61. 

As for comparable vintages since. No. there's not been another '61, and it's
not clear that with the advances in winemaking and vineyard techniques, they
would take the risks that they HAD to take in '61. However, (discounting the
inevitable hype) such reliable friends as I have in the business tell me
that 2005 was quite exceptional. I've heard it said (perhaps loosely) that
it's the best Bordeaux intage "for the past 50 years" which would make it
comparable with '59 and perhaps even 45. 

For all that California is a wonderful wine growing area, and grows some of
the Bordeaux varieties, the areas are very different, with the vines
stressed in completely different ways. It's somewhat easier to compensate
for lack of water (irrigation) and over-ripeness - (acidification) than it
is for lack of sun (chaptalisation). So on whole vintages are less uneven in
California than in Bordeaux. That said, with more modern techniques, growers
in Bordeaux are better able to succeed in making good wine in poor or
average years than they could 50 years ago.

Hope that explains a bit why REALLY great years are so rare.
-- 
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a
 * Origin: FidoTel & QWK on the Web! www.fidotel.com (1:275/311)