Just came home for the Ducru vertical.
I posted earlier a bit on my expectations of the wines.
Tasting is always single-blind.
The wines were supposed to be 67, 78, 81, 82, 83, 90, 97 and 95
Lalande Borie.
Apparently though the Lalande Borie went missing somehow, with
transferring from cellar to the venue and whatever stops in between.
Instead they left the intended mystery wine mixed in with the other
Ducru's.

I'll post my notes in my order of tasting. I noticed that the wines
evolved a LOT in the glass over even a short period of time.

1982: Brick colour. Some tobacco, cedar and vanilla. Full, smokey,
mineral. Not sure if it was some greeness but very closed. I thought
on the palate a little simple, short, lacking in concentration. There
was some discussion but mutlitple bottles tasted were consistent. Hard
to judge but it might seem Ducru 'messed up' perhaps? My 6th, Group
7th

1989 Branaire-Ducru. This was the mystery wine. I thought it was full,
rich concentrated, still a lot of oak and smokey/toasted notes. Good
length and more fruit coming through in the palate. A ways to go. My
3rd, group 3rd.

1997: quite a bit more fruit here. Ripe berry, plum, integrated oak, a
bit of spice. Quite plush, good length, soft very enjoyable. My 1st,
group 1st.
It won out because this one is drinking the best, by far. I just
wonder how much some of the others will actually improve.

1981: Had a weird stink intitially, almost faintly like chemically
treated water. It blew off after a short while to show a lot more
earthiness, and mineral. Lead pencil as well. This was quite tannic,
perhaps a bit too extracted and comes up short on the finish. Not sure
it will be much better. My 6th, group 6th

1990: I initially thought it was corked but again it blew off. Some
good berry fruit, but I thought the wine a little green/vegetal.
Lacked concentration. My 7th, group 4th.

1967: Clearly the oldest of the bunch (and the only one I guessed
right). Orange-brick. Caramelized, oxidized, thin, dead, tired. Donate
to charity if you still have it. My 8th, group 8th (by a lot)

1978: I thought this was still closed, oak but I couldn't find the
fruit. Quite a full wine, with some cab franc characteristics, lead
pencil and leafy/cigar aromas. I liked it. My 2nd, group 2nd.

1983: I thought this was the mystery wine (Cal Cab was my thought).
Maybe it sat in the glass too long but mocha, chocolate, raisin,
overripe fruit. Seemed out of place to me with the other wines. Good
length and well integrated tannins. My 5th, group 5th.

Overall I can't say the wines really wowed me. Maybe my expectations
were too high; I'm not sure. The characteristics of Ducru came out in
the wines and you could see the common elements (terroir) in each
vintage but I just thought the wines would be better. I think if we
had done this tasting maybe ~7 years ago. (Obviously we couldn't have
had the 1997 back then). The 89 Branaire-Ducru will get better I think
and so will the 1990. The rest should be drunk IMHO.

"Peter Muto" > wrote in message
om...
> Just came home for the Ducru vertical.
> I posted earlier a bit on my expectations of the wines.
> Tasting is always single-blind.
> The wines were supposed to be 67, 78, 81, 82, 83, 90, 97 and 95
> Lalande Borie.

Drat. I was hoping that the 1989 Ducru would be included. I have one
bottle, and don't have any idea when to open it. I tasted it when it was
released, and it seemed to need a _lot_ of time then.

Tom S

>
> 1989 Branaire-Ducru. This was the mystery wine. I thought it was full,
> rich concentrated, still a lot of oak and smokey/toasted notes. Good
> length and more fruit coming through in the palate. A ways to go. My
> 3rd, group 3rd.
A good vintage overshadowed by the 2000
JT

"John Taverner" > wrote:

>> 1989 Branaire-Ducru. [...]

> A good vintage overshadowed by the 2000

What about 1990, 1995, 1996 etc.?

M.

>1982: Brick colour. Some tobacco, cedar and vanilla. Full, smokey,
>mineral. Not sure if it was some greeness but very closed. I thought
>on the palate a little simple, short, lacking in concentration. There
>was some discussion but mutlitple bottles tasted were consistent. Hard
>to judge but it might seem Ducru 'messed up' perhaps?

Have you any idea of what the storage conditions were? I have a number of '82
Ducru's in my cellar and drink them often. They're still dark and inky with
just a faint hint of brick. Cedar, tobacco notes but in no whay do I find them
green or tight but just the opposite with rich dark cassis fruit and terrific
concentration. Mine hae been kept at 55F since release.
Bi!!

> > A good vintage overshadowed by the 2000
>
> What about 1990, 1995, 1996 etc.?

oops! only a decade out, meant pairs of vintages 82/3 89/90 etc
must keep taking the tablets :-)
JT

Michael Pronay > wrote in message >...
> "John Taverner" > wrote:
>
> >> 1989 Branaire-Ducru. [...]
>
> > A good vintage overshadowed by the 2000
>
> What about 1990, 1995, 1996 etc.?
>
> M.

From everything I've read (I've only tasted a few 89's and not much
90's) the 1989 are probably generally better. The difference being the
90 is more approachabel, fruit forward, supple tannins. The 89's are
more classic Bordeaux, all structure and good acidity.
Take a guess which is most popular. I have a suspicion that once the
1989's start drinking better, the 'accepted wisdom' will be that 1989
was better.

(RV WRLee) wrote in message >...
> >1982: Brick colour. Some tobacco, cedar and vanilla. Full, smokey,
> >mineral. Not sure if it was some greeness but very closed. I thought
> >on the palate a little simple, short, lacking in concentration. There
> >was some discussion but mutlitple bottles tasted were consistent. Hard
> >to judge but it might seem Ducru 'messed up' perhaps?
>
> Have you any idea of what the storage conditions were? I have a number of '82
> Ducru's in my cellar and drink them often. They're still dark and inky with
> just a faint hint of brick. Cedar, tobacco notes but in no whay do I find them
> green or tight but just the opposite with rich dark cassis fruit and terrific
> concentration. Mine hae been kept at 55F since release.
> Bi!!

This was discussed briefly. I believe the club purchased the wines as
futures or shortly after release. Other than that, I don't know
anything about the condition/temperature/etc. of the club's cellar.

I do know however (since I asked) that the wines were not decanted.
Those with minimal sediment were simply poured (and probably sat in
the glass for awhile; ~30 mins I'm guessing). Those with significant
sediment, were filtered through a 100% organic filter. (I don't know
the exact kind, nor do I know which had been filtered.) They said they
have done extensive testing and that only one club Director ever could
tell (or guessed?) which one was the odd one out when a wine was
poured 3 times, two glasses being identical (be it filtered or not)
and one the opposite.