Betsy took David to a college interview today, as they were on their
way back I made dinner. Herb-roasted chicken, broccoli, and rice with
furikake. Wine was the 1990 Cantemerle (Haut-Medoc). Good color, seems
rather youthful. Tannins are fully resolved, and there are mature notes
of leather and tobacco, but the fruit is reasonably lively for a 16 yr
old cru bourgeois. The fruit is more red plum than black, and does have
a little bit of the roasted notes that can distract in the 1990s. This
is not especially deep or complex, but a nice soft Bordeaux. Blind I
bet I would have guessed Right Bank (merlot), though label says it is
45% CS, 40% Merlot, 10 % CF, 5 % PV. This isn't a great Bordeaux, but a
decent mature Bordeaux with roast chicken isn't a bad way to dine. B/B+

Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent
wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't
drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no
promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency.

Brain fart. My friend Arv pointed out to me on another forum that
Cantemerle is classified (a 5th). I knid of mentally group it with
Poujeaux, Potensac, etc. Sorry!

DaleW wrote:
> Betsy took David to a college interview today, as they were on their
> way back I made dinner. Herb-roasted chicken, broccoli, and rice with
> furikake. Wine was the 1990 Cantemerle (Haut-Medoc). Good color, seems
> rather youthful. Tannins are fully resolved, and there are mature notes
> of leather and tobacco, but the fruit is reasonably lively for a 16 yr
> old cru bourgeois. The fruit is more red plum than black, and does have
> a little bit of the roasted notes that can distract in the 1990s. This
> is not especially deep or complex, but a nice soft Bordeaux. Blind I
> bet I would have guessed Right Bank (merlot), though label says it is
> 45% CS, 40% Merlot, 10 % CF, 5 % PV. This isn't a great Bordeaux, but a
> decent mature Bordeaux with roast chicken isn't a bad way to dine. B/B+
>
> Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent
> wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't
> drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no
> promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency.

DaleW wrote:
> Brain fart. My friend Arv pointed out to me on another forum that
> Cantemerle is classified (a 5th). I knid of mentally group it with
> Poujeaux, Potensac, etc. Sorry!

AFAIC, you never said it wasn't classified, just that it was Haut-Medoc
AOC, which it most certainly is. So now you should mentally group it
with du Tertre, Camensac, Clerc-Milon and Pontet-Canet -- a fine group
of reliable performers in my book (then there's that Lynch-Bag or some
such...)

Mark Lipton

(Just avoid that Hot Bag Liberal, or risk the wrath of Ann Coulter)

Mark Lipton wrote:
> AFAIC, you never said it wasn't classified,

I referred to it as a "16 year old Cru Bourgeois". You can't deny my
wrongness!

"DaleW" > wrote:

> Brain fart. My friend Arv pointed out to me on another forum
> that Cantemerle is classified (a 5th).

In fact, the addition of Cantmerle to the list in December 1855 -
months after the closure of the 1855 Paris Universal Exhibition
where the classification was presented - was the first amendment
to the 1855 classification. Mouton's upgrading in 1973 was the
second.

M.

"Mark Lipton" > skrev i melding
...
> DaleW wrote:
>> Brain fart. My friend Arv pointed out to me on another forum that
>> Cantemerle is classified (a 5th). I knid of mentally group it with
>> Poujeaux, Potensac, etc. Sorry!
>
Now, we all know that the 1855 classification is pretty different from a
2006, had there been one.
Whether a wine is 5th or cru bourgeois is of no real importance, don't you
agree? There's a number of chateaux that have faded away from what they
were, and others that have improved immensely.
Michael P. surely could provide us with a tentative list for a new
classification? :-)
Anders

Mark Lipton wrote:
> with du Tertre, Camensac, Clerc-Milon and Pontet-Canet -- a fine group
> of reliable performers in my book (then there's that Lynch-Bag or some
> such...)
>

As to Lynch Bages....it's no longer priced like a 5th. And since 2000
I've not actually liked a one (2001-2003). For my tastes has gone from
great QPR to poor.

Admit it Anders, you're hoarding Rausan-Gassies!

To me the classification isn't a big thing, but it does make a
difference in some pricing. Given a choice of Mouton or LLC without
knowing vintage, I'd take LLC (I admit Mouton can be spectacular, but
also pedestrian). The wines I buy regularly span 2nd-5th growths (do I
buy any 4ths? thinking..) and cru bourgeois. I agree the classification
means little to my buying, though it does make a difference to real
estate values.

I guess I do- quite a few Talbots. I have a bottle or three of
Branaire, Duhart, Lafon Rochet , & Marquis-de-Terme too. Shows you I
don't pay much attention to classifications (beyond Firsts)

DaleW wrote:
> Mark Lipton wrote:
>
>>with du Tertre, Camensac, Clerc-Milon and Pontet-Canet -- a fine group
>>of reliable performers in my book (then there's that Lynch-Bag or some
>>such...)
>>
>
>
> As to Lynch Bages....it's no longer priced like a 5th. And since 2000
> I've not actually liked a one (2001-2003). For my tastes has gone from
> great QPR to poor.
>

Agreed. That's why I didn't include it in the list initially and only
added parenthetically. It used to be one of our rock-solid "go to" Bdx,
but the last vintage of it that we bought was IIRC the '97 (heavily
discounted at a Sam's sale). Looking at the DB, I see that we have only
the '89 and the '96 in the cellar. Quelle dommage! The '61 L-B still
ranks as one of my all-time favorite wine experiences. du Terte and
Camensac I still put a lot of faith in, but we've bought so little Bdx
in the new millenium that I really haven't much experience with recent
bottlings of either Clerc-Milon or Pontet-Canet.

Mark Lipton

"DaleW" > skrev i meddelandet
ups.com...
> Admit it Anders, you're hoarding Rausan-Gassies!

Then it might be a Swede thingy, because I have found out, to my
astonishment, that apparently I am.
Now, how did that happen?

Cheers

Nils Gsutaf