Notes from a dinner tasting of Ch. Pontet Canet,


We were hoping to have Alfred Tesseron with us in Vancouver to share
our experience, but the untimely death (at age 65) of his brother
Gerard prevented that.

This 5th growth has definitely gone through some changes. It was much
lower profile during the Cruse years (1865 – 1975), often making
unremarkable wines, including a non-vintage wine for the French
railway. One experienced taster indicated to us that there had been
some notable highlights in vintages like 1945, 1959, 1961 and1962, but
generally speaking the property, which is well located with excellent
terroir, did not really distinguish itself in those years. Considered
in competition with some of the other aggressive Paullac 5ths like
Grand Puy, Lynch Bages, Clerc Milon and Armailhac it has really been
no contest.

Sadly, even when taken over by new management in 1975, there was no
quick turn around and the latter part of the 70s and much of the 80s
were basically wasted time. It was only quite recently in the 90s that
things seemed to get back on track and the wines became something to
seek out, especially at the prices, which were rather good compared to
some of the other Pauillacs. Our tasting spanned this latter period
with the intention of seeing just what was happening with this
property. The 2005 unfortunately stayed in France with M. Tesseron,
as did the 2005 Hauts de Pontet Canet, - it would have been
interesting to compare the second wine with the grand vin..

We started off with some bubby to calibrate our palates – a 1996
Nicholas Feuillatte Grand Cru Cramant Brut – a great all round bubble
with surprising complexity in the nose at this age and fresh and crisp
on palate. Matched with bacalua fritters, a sushi assortment, tuna
tartare, and smoked salmon mousse.

With a very nice dish of roasted garlic flan with morel mushrooms
topped with crispy prosciutto:

1999 – some obvious wood in this nose, along with good fruit and hints
of cassis. A fair bit of soft tannin on palate, and ample fruit, with
a medium length. Certainly no rush – this drinks surprisingly well
now.

2001 – vanilla and rich fruit in the nose, perhaps a tad jammy, and
excellent flavour concentration and length. This will improve with
cellaring.

2002 – totally different nose on this one. Lighter colour and a
softer wine, although the tannins are there lurking in the
background. Despite the tannins, I just can’t see this as a classic
vin de garde – I just don’t detect enough fruit to carry this one long
enough for it to make old bones when the tannins have abated.

I noted that the use of oak on the 2001 and 2002 was a bit heavy
handed – probably a pretty dark toast. Trying to be something they
shouldn’t be, perhaps?

With grilled beef tenderloin and bordelaise sauce:

1995 – a big wine with a hint of cassis in the nose, full flavoured,
long and smooth – quite supple. This one is just starting to show its
stuff and has a god life ahead of it.

1996 – spicy sweet fruit nose from a dark wine with good legs. This is
still quite tannic and stands well above the 1995 in quality. Unlike
the 2002, it shows ample fruit and should be very good when it comes
into balance with a bit (well, OK, maybe a lot) more time.

With lamb short loin with pumpernickel rosemary crust:

1989 – colour getting a bit pale but not too bricky. mellow mature
nose showing some interesting secondary characteristics, although
there were hints of an herbaciousness - green hints that I wasn’t
fully onside with. It had good acidity and decent length and should be
drunk now.

2000 – dark with a spicy currant, vanilla and smoke nose, not too
tannic and drinking quite well now and over the next few years, I
should imagine. Nice wine.


With cheese:

2003 – currant and a hint of anise on this nose, an impressive wine
with a rich sweet entry and fairly soft tannins already. This one
would be hard to stay away from but should continue to develop for
many years.

2004 – some deep fruit here, if you try hard enough, but not much else
in the nose at thios point. Hard to read – lots of tannin and acidity
nothing has started to come together yet.


Conclusions? Well, this property has benefited, as have many, from
the ministrations of Michel Rolland and the vinification techniques
have been updated, and the owners now seem to be concentrating on
upgrading the quality of their wine (some would say it is about
time). Definitely a wine to watch, and to collect, at least until the
prices catch up with the quality.

"Bill S." > wrote in message
...
Notes from a dinner tasting of Ch. Pontet Canet,


Sadly, even when taken over by new management in 1975, there was no
quick turn around and the latter part of the 70s and much of the 80s
were basically wasted time. It was only quite recently in the 90s that
things seemed to get back on track and the wines became something to
seek out, especially at the prices, which were rather good compared to
some of the other Pauillacs. Our tasting spanned this latter period
with the intention of seeing just what was happening with this
property. The 2005 unfortunately stayed in France with M. Tesseron,
as did the 2005 Hauts de Pontet Canet, - it would have been
interesting to compare the second wine with the grand vin..
__________________________________________________ _________

The Calgary Costco had some of the 2005 in recently and I managed to snag a
couple of bottles, but only with the help of a friend who works there. They
received some 05 Cheval Blanc the other day but at ~$1150 per bottle I'll
give it a miss!

Graham

On Jun 13, 10:11 am, "Bill S." > wrote:
> Notes from a dinner tasting of Ch. Pontet Canet,

> This 5th growth has definitely gone through some changes. It was much
> lower profile during the Cruse years (1865 – 1975), often making
> unremarkable wines, including a non-vintage wine for the French
> railway. One experienced taster indicated to us that there had been
> some notable highlights in vintages like 1945, 1959, 1961 and1962, but
> generally speaking the property, which is well located with excellent
> terroir, did not really distinguish itself in those years. Considered
> in competition with some of the other aggressive Paullac 5ths like
> Grand Puy, Lynch Bages, Clerc Milon and Armailhac it has really been
> no contest.

I did have the 1961 Pontet Canet which was very good, but that is
hardly a rave review considering that many of the lower classified
growths made outstanding wine in 1961. I tried a few bottles from the
70s after that, but never found any I liked much. Some of the wines
were fairly concentrated, but they often offered much harsh tannin and
little fruit as they aged. After the 70s, I bought no more Pontet
Canet. There were rumors from time to time that this or that vintage
may have returned to form, but usually these did not reflect the
quality of the wine after it had aged a few years. I am glad to hear,
from your review of much more recent Pontet Canet, that they may have
improved quite a bit.

On Jun 13, 10:35*am, cwdjrxyz > wrote:
> I did have the 1961 Pontet Canet which was very good, but that is
> hardly a rave review considering that many of the lower *classified
> growths made outstanding wine in 1961. I tried a few bottles from the
> 70s after that, but never found any I liked much. Some of the wines
> were fairly concentrated, but they often offered much harsh tannin and
> little fruit as they aged. After the 70s, I bought no more Pontet
> Canet. There were rumors from time to time that this or that vintage
> may have returned to form, but usually these did not reflect the
> quality of the wine after it had aged a few years. I am glad to hear,
> from your review of much more recent Pontet Canet, that they may have
> improved quite a bit.

Your comments accord with those of my friend that basically gave up on
them in the Cruse years - they always seemed to be making 1975 profile
wines even in really good vintages.

Their return to form only came in the 1990s, maybe from 1994 on. And
of course they will now be speedily 'Parkerised' and the price will
head out of sight.

Why can't an underacheiver 5th growth like Lynch Moussas or Croizet
Bages suddenly make a killer wine - which stays unreviewed by anyone
so we could afford it!

On Jun 13, 2:07�pm, "Bill S." > wrote:
> On Jun 13, 10:35�am, cwdjrxyz > wrote:
>
> > I did have the 1961 Pontet Canet which was very good, but that is
> > hardly a rave review considering that many of the lower �classified
> > growths made outstanding wine in 1961. I tried a few bottles from the
> > 70s after that, but never found any I liked much. Some of the wines
> > were fairly concentrated, but they often offered much harsh tannin and
> > little fruit as they aged. After the 70s, I bought no more Pontet
> > Canet. There were rumors from time to time that this or that vintage
> > may have returned to form, but usually these did not reflect the
> > quality of the wine after it had aged a few years. I am glad to hear,
> > from your review of much more recent Pontet Canet, that they may have
> > improved quite a bit.
>
> Your comments accord with those of my friend that basically gave up on
> them in the Cruse years - they always seemed to be making 1975 profile
> wines even in really good vintages.
>
> Their return to form only came in the 1990s, maybe from 1994 on. �And
> of course they will now be speedily 'Parkerised' and the price will
> head out of sight.
>
> Why can't an underacheiver 5th growth like Lynch Moussas �or Croizet
> Bages suddenly make a killer wine - which stays unreviewed by anyone
> so we could afford it!


I thought the '82 Pontet Canet was a decent wine,but still an
underachiever for the vintage. It seems to me the '94 was the turn-
around vintage. But for my tastes the evolution has continued, to the
point where I find most recent P-C bordering on over the top on
occasion. Haven't crossed the line, but close!

Why can't an underacheiver 5th growth like Lynch Moussas or Croizet
Bages suddenly make a killer wine - which stays unreviewed by anyone
so we could afford it!

Bill
Did you see my post about the Decanter review of 2005 claret?

Lynch-Moussas at GBP 20.80 ,,,,,,,AND 5stars in the tasting.

Croizet-Bages at GBP 30 and only 3 stars

John