On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 14:24:44 -0500
Mark Lipton > wrote:

> Emery Davis wrote:
>
> > '89 Font de Michelle (regular cuvee) with rotisseried duck,
> > saute of sprouts and chestnuts. (A very fine duck from
> > a different duck guy than we usually use). A very elegant
> > CdP, fully mature from IMHO the best year of the extraordinary
> > trio of 88-89-90. Clear color going a bit brick, rich
> > spicy kirsch nose, very long and with terrific balance,
> > layer after layer of fruit confit with overtones of white pepper
> > and spice. A true pleasure, this is why we have a cellar!
>
> Thanks for the notes, Emery. And your last statement couldn't be truer.
> I still have a few '89s left in the cellar (Beaucastel, Ch. de La
> Gardine, Clos du Mont-Olivet) but no Font de Michelle. I agree with you
> about '89s status: the wines have been deeper than the '88s but more
> structured than the '90s. I find that I've finished my '90s before my
> '89s (I still have a few '90s left, but not many after opening the Vieux
> Donjon I recently posted on) for just that reason.
>

Mark, I think everyone but Bill Spohn is starting to find those 89 and
90s thin on the ground. But as it happens I've got nearly a case of the
89 in question, I think I forgot about it for a while. Not to mention that
'89 cuvée Etienne Gonnet, which is still waiting for you and Jean (and
Andrew) to taste!

I also have been hitting the 90s first, but also 93 (which wasn't half
bad) and even some 95s. I _do_ have a jeroboam of '90 Grand Tinel
waiting for the right occasion, though! That one I think will be
aging nice and slowly.

About the cellaring issue, every once in a while someone asks, why
bother to keep a cellar? It sure is obvious to those of us who do,
but somehow the idea is hard to convey. Kinda like Tivo, I guess.

cheers,

-E

--
Emery Davis
You can reply to ecom
by removing the well known companies