+- WineBoard (https://www.wines.com/wineboard)
+-- Forum: TASTING NOTES & WINE SPECIFIC FORUMS (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-200.html)
+--- Forum: Bordeaux (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-18.html)
+--- Thread: 5 bordeauxs at a mini-tasting (/thread-6106.html)
- newsguy - 10-06-2003
went to a mini-wine tasting this weekend that included white burgundys and red bordeaux.
here are the four bordeauxs (in descending order of preference), plus a bonus wine that was served blind out of a decanter:
1999 Chateau Belair Lalande de Pomerol ($32.50) - ruby colored with just slight bit of orange around the rim. spices on the nose and on the tongue, with coffee notes on the good finish. medium-weight but still fairly powerful for a merlot.
1999 Ch. Siaurac Lalande de Pomerol ($13.95) - simply put: the nose was nasty, but it tasted very good. at this price, worth buying -- if you can just drink and not sniff. that's not easy to do.
2000 Ch. Leydet-Figeac ($19.95) - ruby color with a typical bordeaux nose including traces of tar and barnyard. slightly bitter taste and quite a few tannins. not much now, but i'm guessing will be better in 2-3 years.
2001 Saint Marie Rouge ($8.95) - a light colored blend. slightly musty nose with cinnamon notes. light entry, fairly hollow midpalate, with a decent finish.
and now for the mystery wine of the evening. all i knew was that it would be a bordeaux. dark in color at center, but giving way to bricking, then orange at the rim. strong nose, dominated by green peppers (i swear) and spices. big flavors, of green peppers and spice (again), plus dark fruits. good finish, with some minimal tannins. OK, have any guesses folks? you all probably know that bordeauxs are far from being my strong suit, but here's how my thought process went. i started thinking of good bordeaux vintages. i figured the wine looked way too old for 95 (at least for something that they would age for a while and offer to guests and for sale). so i settled on 1989. to me, this was cab-based, but didn't taste like any paulliac i've had. not powerful enough for a st. estephe, so i'm guessing st. julien. and i only know a couples wines from there, so what came to mind because of its price (and one they might well serve because this was a tasting of modestly price wines), is chateau talbot. so, that was my guess: 1989 chateau talbot. and, stunningly to me, i was right! i was proud of myself, since i've only really been into wines for about three years now. but i also realized that this was more about detective work, following the clues, than wine expertise. BTW, although i didn't like the nose and flavors of this wine, they were both big and obviously this is a well-made wine that is absolutely ready to drink.
[This message has been edited by newsguy (edited 10-06-2003).]
- wondersofwine - 10-09-2003
Congratulations on your deduction! I have some Chateau Talbot from later vintages that I look forward to trying someday. Hope they are not too vegetal.
- joeyz6 - 10-09-2003
Newsguy, that is very impressive. Great thinking!
- newsguy - 10-10-2003
thanks you two. like i said, it sure impressed me [img]http://www.wines.com/ubb2/wink.gif[/img] what luck!