Last night 8 good geeks gathered at Mortons to sample through some
1983 Bordeaux. This was originally supposed to be a Barton/Poyferre
comparison,but a couple crucial people couldn't do this month, so we
had a horizontal instead. A good group, with strong (sometimes
divided) opinions, but all fun to be with. I quite enjoyed myself- the
company was better than the wine, but the wine wasn't bad at all!

Served blind, a white. Someone thought white Rhone, but Brian and I
were both thinking Chardonnay. I thought Burgundy from a producer who
like oak, but it was CA. The 1999 Peter Michael "La Carriere"
Chardonnay had good Fuji apple and Meyer lemon fruit, a streak of
minerality (that and a bit of acid was why I thought Burg), decent
finish. That vanilla sticks out just a bit, but a pretty nice version
of Cal Chard for me. B+

On to the reds, not served blind:

1983 Ch. Canon (St Emilion)
Great nose, red fruit with cedar and cigar smoke. A bit of a
disappointment on the palate, high acids seem unintegrated, tannins a
bit tacky, dark fruit is fading. Mortons was generous with stems and I
saved a bit, seemed to round out on palate. Did I say great nose? B

1983 Ch L'Evangile (Pomerol)
Lusher and lower acid than the Canon, nice black plum fruit with a
smooth Pomerol texture. Nice wine, wished I had saved some. B+

1983 Ch. Boyd-Cantenac (Margaux)
Truly funky/weird nose, menthol/eucalyptus meets meat. Fruit on palate
is actually fairly full and forward, but can't get past nose. Someone
(Matt?) suggests in would be better holding nose (or maybe in a small
glass). C+

1983 Domaine de Chevalier (Graves)
This probably has as much acid as the Canon, but it seems more
integrated. Red fruit, bright, some pencil lead and smoke. A bit held
back is better with the steak than alone. B+

1983 Ch. Gruaud Larose (St Julien)
I get that Cordier funk right away. When I remark, someone says "what
brett?" while Paul is pushing away his glass saying too much brett.
Ah, the variabilities of brett sensitivity. This amount (and strain)
of brett doesn't bother me at all. It's more cow pasture than bandaid,
more animal than sewage. The fruit is rich and dark, the wine
structured and virile. Cassis, tobacco, barnyard, and spice. A-

1983 Ch. Palmer (Margaux)
I liked most of the wines, but this was my WOTN without question. I've
had some '83 Palmers that made me wonder what the fuss was, but the
last 3 I've tried have been marvelous. Beautiful, full, lush, very
young fruit but with lovely secondary aromas of cigarbox and leather.
Some cocoa mixed in with that lush fruit, too. Iron fist in velvet
glove, etc. A/A-

1983 Ch. Rausan-Segla (Margaux)
Good red and black fruit, fully integrated tannins, nice balanced
acidity. Lots of tobacco, some allspice. Doesn't have quite the length
or power of the Palmer, but a nice wine. A-/B+

1983 Ch. Lynch Bages (Pauillac)
Really nice nose - forest floor, floral, and dark fruit. Complex and
exotic. But fruit is a bit flat/tired on palate, this seems just a tad
past it to me. B/B-

1983 Ch. Pichon Lalande (Pauillac)
Higher acid, bright, good cassis fruit and a lot of graphite. I think
I liked more than the rest of table. I have liked this before a bit
more on other occasions. B+

Ben suggested our own blend, a Pichon Bages. It certainly brightened
up the Lynch Bages fruit, but I still gave a slight edge to the Pichon
Lalande.
In our little "vote for your top 3", Palmer walked away,followed by a
tight grouping of Gruaud, Evangile, and Pichon Lalande.

One sticky:
1983 Ch. Rieussec (Sauternes)
Waiter asked if we'd like new glasses, we said sure. Wish we hadn't -
they brought out those little pony glasses. Seemed to make the alcohol
prominent, but underneath there's nice honied apricot flavors. Nice. B
+

Good night, I enjoyed my steak, I enjoyed my wine, but mostly enjoyed
the company. Thanks Matt and Paul for organizing and making
reservation, and everyone for bringing nice wines.

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.
*

On Aug 8, 9:23�am, DaleW > wrote:
> Last night 8 good geeks gathered at Mortons to sample through some
> 1983 Bordeaux. This was originally supposed to be a Barton/Poyferre
> comparison,but a couple crucial people couldn't do this month, so we
> had a horizontal instead. A good group, with strong (sometimes
> divided) opinions, but all fun to be with. I quite enjoyed myself- the
> company was better than the wine, but the wine wasn't bad at all!
>
> Served blind, a white. Someone thought white Rhone, but Brian and I
> were �both thinking Chardonnay. I thought Burgundy from a producer who
> like oak, but it was CA. The 1999 Peter Michael �"La Carriere"
> Chardonnay had good Fuji apple and Meyer lemon fruit, a streak of
> minerality (that and a bit of acid was why I thought Burg), decent
> finish. That vanilla sticks out just a bit, but a pretty nice version
> of Cal Chard for me. B+
>
> On to the reds, not served blind:
>
> 1983 Ch. Canon (St Emilion)
> Great nose, red fruit with cedar and cigar smoke. A bit of a
> disappointment on the palate, �high acids seem unintegrated, tannins a
> bit tacky, dark fruit is fading. Mortons was generous with stems and I
> saved a bit, seemed to round out on palate. Did I say great nose? �B
>
> 1983 Ch L'Evangile (Pomerol)
> Lusher and lower acid than the Canon, nice black plum fruit with a
> smooth Pomerol texture. Nice wine, wished I had saved some. B+
>
> 1983 Ch. Boyd-Cantenac (Margaux)
> Truly funky/weird nose, menthol/eucalyptus meets meat. Fruit on palate
> is actually fairly full and forward, but can't get past nose. Someone
> (Matt?) suggests in would be better holding nose (or maybe in a small
> glass). C+
>
> 1983 Domaine de Chevalier (Graves)
> This probably has as much acid as the Canon, but it seems more
> integrated. Red fruit, bright, some pencil lead and smoke. A bit held
> back is better with the steak than alone. �B+
>
> 1983 Ch. Gruaud Larose (St Julien)
> I get that Cordier funk right away. When I remark, someone says "what
> brett?" while Paul is pushing away his glass saying too much brett.
> Ah, the variabilities of brett sensitivity. This amount (and strain)
> of brett doesn't bother me at all. It's more cow pasture than bandaid,
> more animal than sewage. The fruit is rich and dark, the wine
> structured and virile. Cassis, tobacco, barnyard, and spice. A-
>
> 1983 Ch. Palmer (Margaux)
> I liked most of the wines, but this was my WOTN without question. I've
> had some '83 Palmers that made me wonder what the fuss was, but the
> last 3 I've tried have been marvelous. Beautiful, full, lush, very
> young fruit but with lovely secondary aromas of cigarbox and leather.
> Some cocoa mixed in with that lush fruit, too. Iron fist in velvet
> glove, etc. A/A-
>
> 1983 Ch. Rausan-Segla (Margaux)
> Good red and black fruit, fully integrated tannins, nice balanced
> acidity. Lots of tobacco, some allspice. Doesn't have quite the length
> or power of the Palmer, but a nice wine. A-/B+
>
> 1983 Ch. Lynch Bages (Pauillac)
> Really nice nose - forest floor, floral, and dark fruit. Complex and
> exotic. But fruit is a bit flat/tired on palate, this seems just a tad
> past it to me. B/B-
>
> 1983 Ch. Pichon Lalande (Pauillac)
> Higher acid, bright, good cassis fruit and a lot of graphite. I think
> I liked more than the rest of table. I have liked this before a bit
> more on other occasions. B+
>
> Ben suggested our own blend, a Pichon Bages. It certainly brightened
> up the Lynch Bages fruit, but I still gave a slight edge to the Pichon
> Lalande.
> In our little "vote for your top 3", Palmer walked away,followed by a
> tight grouping of Gruaud, Evangile, and Pichon Lalande.
>
> One sticky:
> 1983 Ch. Rieussec (Sauternes)
> Waiter asked if we'd like new glasses, we said sure. Wish we hadn't -
> they brought out those little pony glasses. Seemed to make the alcohol
> prominent, but underneath there's nice honied apricot flavors. Nice. B
> +
>
> Good night, I enjoyed my steak, I enjoyed my wine, but mostly enjoyed
> the company. Thanks Matt and Paul for organizing and making
> reservation, and everyone for bringing nice wines.
>
> 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.
> �

I've always thought that the '83 vintage in Bordeaux was under rated.
I only have a few left but I've been drinking them over the past five
years and they are quite good. I especially like the Pichon Lalande
and the Gruaud Larose.

On Aug 8, 12:24�pm, "Bi!!" > wrote:
> On Aug 8, 9:23 am, DaleW > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Last night 8 good geeks gathered at Mortons to sample through some
> > 1983 Bordeaux. This was originally supposed to be a Barton/Poyferre
> > comparison,but a couple crucial people couldn't do this month, so we
> > had a horizontal instead. A good group, with strong (sometimes
> > divided) opinions, but all fun to be with. I quite enjoyed myself- the
> > company was better than the wine, but the wine wasn't bad at all!
>
> > Served blind, a white. Someone thought white Rhone, but Brian and I
> > were both thinking Chardonnay. I thought Burgundy from a producer who
> > like oak, but it was CA. The 1999 Peter Michael "La Carriere"
> > Chardonnay had good Fuji apple and Meyer lemon fruit, a streak of
> > minerality (that and a bit of acid was why I thought Burg), decent
> > finish. That vanilla sticks out just a bit, but a pretty nice version
> > of Cal Chard for me. B+
>
> > On to the reds, not served blind:
>
> > 1983 Ch. Canon (St Emilion)
> > Great nose, red fruit with cedar and cigar smoke. A bit of a
> > disappointment on the palate, high acids seem unintegrated, tannins a
> > bit tacky, dark fruit is fading. Mortons was generous with stems and I
> > saved a bit, seemed to round out on palate. Did I say great nose? B
>
> > 1983 Ch L'Evangile (Pomerol)
> > Lusher and lower acid than the Canon, nice black plum fruit with a
> > smooth Pomerol texture. Nice wine, wished I had saved some. B+
>
> > 1983 Ch. Boyd-Cantenac (Margaux)
> > Truly funky/weird nose, menthol/eucalyptus meets meat. Fruit on palate
> > is actually fairly full and forward, but can't get past nose. Someone
> > (Matt?) suggests in would be better holding nose (or maybe in a small
> > glass). C+
>
> > 1983 Domaine de Chevalier (Graves)
> > This probably has as much acid as the Canon, but it seems more
> > integrated. Red fruit, bright, some pencil lead and smoke. A bit held
> > back is better with the steak than alone. B+
>
> > 1983 Ch. Gruaud Larose (St Julien)
> > I get that Cordier funk right away. When I remark, someone says "what
> > brett?" while Paul is pushing away his glass saying too much brett.
> > Ah, the variabilities of brett sensitivity. This amount (and strain)
> > of brett doesn't bother me at all. It's more cow pasture than bandaid,
> > more animal than sewage. The fruit is rich and dark, the wine
> > structured and virile. Cassis, tobacco, barnyard, and spice. A-
>
> > 1983 Ch. Palmer (Margaux)
> > I liked most of the wines, but this was my WOTN without question. I've
> > had some '83 Palmers that made me wonder what the fuss was, but the
> > last 3 I've tried have been marvelous. Beautiful, full, lush, very
> > young fruit but with lovely secondary aromas of cigarbox and leather.
> > Some cocoa mixed in with that lush fruit, too. Iron fist in velvet
> > glove, etc. A/A-
>
> > 1983 Ch. Rausan-Segla (Margaux)
> > Good red and black fruit, fully integrated tannins, nice balanced
> > acidity. Lots of tobacco, some allspice. Doesn't have quite the length
> > or power of the Palmer, but a nice wine. A-/B+
>
> > 1983 Ch. Lynch Bages (Pauillac)
> > Really nice nose - forest floor, floral, and dark fruit. Complex and
> > exotic. But fruit is a bit flat/tired on palate, this seems just a tad
> > past it to me. B/B-
>
> > 1983 Ch. Pichon Lalande (Pauillac)
> > Higher acid, bright, good cassis fruit and a lot of graphite. I think
> > I liked more than the rest of table. I have liked this before a bit
> > more on other occasions. B+
>
> > Ben suggested our own blend, a Pichon Bages. It certainly brightened
> > up the Lynch Bages fruit, but I still gave a slight edge to the Pichon
> > Lalande.
> > In our little "vote for your top 3", Palmer walked away,followed by a
> > tight grouping of Gruaud, Evangile, and Pichon Lalande.
>
> > One sticky:
> > 1983 Ch. Rieussec (Sauternes)
> > Waiter asked if we'd like new glasses, we said sure. Wish we hadn't -
> > they brought out those little pony glasses. Seemed to make the alcohol
> > prominent, but underneath there's nice honied apricot flavors. Nice. B
> > +
>
> > Good night, I enjoyed my steak, I enjoyed my wine, but mostly enjoyed
> > the company. Thanks Matt and Paul for organizing and making
> > reservation, and everyone for bringing nice wines.
>
> > 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.
> >
>
> I've always thought that the '83 vintage in Bordeaux was under rated.
> I only have a few left but I've been drinking them over the past five
> years and they are quite good. �I especially like the Pichon Lalande
> and the Gruaud Larose.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Until recently, I felt it was a sleeper vintage, since it was in
shadow of '82. Some great wines (Cheval Blanc, Ch. Margaux, Palmer,
Rausan-Segla, Gruaud, Poyferre) that were often half or less the price
of the '82s; plus some solid bargains in the lesser Margaux wines.
Prices have creeped up, however.

I think this bottle of Pichon Lalande wasn't quite up to snuff, very
good, but that wine can be great. Thanks for reading

DaleW wrote:
> Last night 8 good geeks gathered at Mortons to sample through some
> 1983 Bordeaux. This was originally supposed to be a Barton/Poyferre
> comparison,but a couple crucial people couldn't do this month, so we
> had a horizontal instead. A good group, with strong (sometimes
> divided) opinions, but all fun to be with. I quite enjoyed myself- the
> company was better than the wine, but the wine wasn't bad at all!

What a great lineup of wines, Dale! It speaks well for the company that
they were better.


> 1983 Ch. Gruaud Larose (St Julien)
> I get that Cordier funk right away. When I remark, someone says "what
> brett?" while Paul is pushing away his glass saying too much brett.
> Ah, the variabilities of brett sensitivity. This amount (and strain)
> of brett doesn't bother me at all. It's more cow pasture than bandaid,
> more animal than sewage. The fruit is rich and dark, the wine
> structured and virile. Cassis, tobacco, barnyard, and spice. A-
>

Count me among the Brett-tolerant (more or less essential for a lover of
Red Rhones), but I know what you mean about the strain, too.
Gruaud-Larose (and Meyney) has always had a meaty, animal element that I
know is probably Brett (no Mourvedre here!) but which I find quite
appealing.


> 1983 Ch. Palmer (Margaux)
> I liked most of the wines, but this was my WOTN without question. I've
> had some '83 Palmers that made me wonder what the fuss was, but the
> last 3 I've tried have been marvelous. Beautiful, full, lush, very
> young fruit but with lovely secondary aromas of cigarbox and leather.
> Some cocoa mixed in with that lush fruit, too. Iron fist in velvet
> glove, etc. A/A-

No surprise, given how successful Margaux was in '83. Too bad no one
brought the Ch. Margaux for a head-to-head. (It just happens also to be
the only '83 left in our cellar).

Mark Lipton

--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.cwdjr.net

On Aug 11, 3:16�pm, Mark Lipton > wrote:
> DaleW wrote:
> > Last night 8 good geeks gathered at Mortons to sample through some
> > 1983 Bordeaux. This was originally supposed to be a Barton/Poyferre
> > comparison,but a couple crucial people couldn't do this month, so we
> > had a horizontal instead. A good group, with strong (sometimes
> > divided) opinions, but all fun to be with. I quite enjoyed myself- the
> > company was better than the wine, but the wine wasn't bad at all!
>
> What a great lineup of wines, Dale! �It speaks well for the company that
> they were better.
>
> > 1983 Ch. Gruaud Larose (St Julien)
> > I get that Cordier funk right away. When I remark, someone says "what
> > brett?" while Paul is pushing away his glass saying too much brett.
> > Ah, the variabilities of brett sensitivity. This amount (and strain)
> > of brett doesn't bother me at all. It's more cow pasture than bandaid,
> > more animal than sewage. The fruit is rich and dark, the wine
> > structured and virile. Cassis, tobacco, barnyard, and spice. A-
>
> Count me among the Brett-tolerant (more or less essential for a lover of
> Red Rhones), but I know what you mean about the strain, too.
> Gruaud-Larose (and Meyney) has always had a meaty, animal element that I
> know is probably Brett (no Mourvedre here!) but which I find quite
> appealing.
>
> > 1983 Ch. Palmer (Margaux)
> > I liked most of the wines, but this was my WOTN without question. I've
> > had some '83 Palmers that made me wonder what the fuss was, but the
> > last 3 I've tried have been marvelous. Beautiful, full, lush, very
> > young fruit but with lovely secondary aromas of cigarbox and leather.
> > Some cocoa mixed in with that lush fruit, too. Iron fist in velvet
> > glove, etc. A/A-
>
> No surprise, given how successful Margaux was in '83. �Too bad no one
> brought the Ch. Margaux for a head-to-head. �(It just happens also to be
> the only '83 left in our cellar).
>
> Mark Lipton
>
> --
> alt.food.wine FAQ: �http://winefaq.cwdjr.net

Nice orphan. Would have loved to try head to head with Palmer (and
RS), but as its a $4-500 bottle would have seemed a bit presumptious
to ask if someone else had it!

DaleW wrote:

> Nice orphan. Would have loved to try head to head with Palmer (and
> RS), but as its a $4-500 bottle would have seemed a bit presumptious
> to ask if someone else had it!

No kidding! It was my graduation present to Jean in '88, purchased for
$45 at Garnet *sigh* Those times are sure long gone...

Mark Lipton

--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.cwdjr.net