The Rule of 15 Validated

MLipton

Mark Lipton
Now, I am one to view any empirically derived rule with a jaundiced eye, so with the arrival of my birthday on Friday, I decided the put BJ’s Rule of 15 to a test. To do this, I pulled from the cellar my last bottle of Compagnie de l’Hermitage 2010 Hermitage Cuvée Des Moines. I’d started in on my 4 bottles of back in 2019, so have a six-year perspective on how this wine evolved:

January 19, 2019 - Dark fruit, licorice, roasted meat developing with air. Not the most complex or deep example of Hermitage, but also doesn't bear the price tag of Chave. It'll almost certainly get better over the next decade.

May 9, 2021 - Pure Syrah fruit, resolved tannins, modest acidity. Very pretty but primary. I'm not sure that this wine has the structure to age for another decade, so I'm unsure whether it'll ever develop much tertiary character.

May 11, 2022 - Not much change from the last bottle. Still, resolved tannins and classic Syrah fruit, but it fails to wow me. If someone told me it was a top Crozes, I don’t think I’d disagree. I’ll let my remaining bottle sit for a few years to see how it develops.

June 7, 2025 - By far, the best showing for this wine yet. More savory now, still with a solid core of fruit, it’s showing clear signs of developing tertiary character. Medium-full in body with plenty of acidity and fine-grained tannins, it is well suited for service with red meat (in our case, venison tenderloin) and has clear N Rhone character.

So, yes, at age 15 it sits right at the cusp of shedding most of its fruity character and entering into a more savory stage of its existence. I don’t have enough firsthand experience (my last bottle being a ‘99 Chave that I won as part of Dale Williams’s Katrina benefit in ‘04) with Hermitage to opine on whether any of those bottles showed that degree of a sense of place, but they clearly were N Rhone.

I’m still not sure about the Rule of 15 with regard to any other grape, so more research is definitely warranted.

Mark Lipton
 
i clicked eagerly fully expecting you to have rested a bottle of ancient nebbiolo for fifteen months prior to opening, but have nevertheless found this an entertaining and instructive read
 
originally posted by Pavel Tchichikov:
i clicked eagerly fully expecting you to have rested a bottle of ancient nebbiolo for fifteen months prior to opening, but have nevertheless found this an entertaining and instructive read

Oooh! Another empirical rule for me to test. The oldest Nebbiolo in my possession is a ‘91 Bramaterra. Does that qualify as ancient? (Kinda hope not, since I predate it by 32 years)

Mark Lipton
 
I have never heard of anybody prepping a bottle of barolo for 15 months.

Nice post, Mark. The Rule of 15 does seem to work for N. Rhone syrah, whether that's the grape, the wine-making, or the audience is hard to know.
 
Happy birthday, Mark!

Sometime back in the 1980s or early 1990s, I read in La Revue du vin de France that Rhône wines (reds; we've discussed the whites elsewhere, I believe) could be drunk and enjoyed at any age. Also, I've never had a Rhône producer tell me that one of their red wines needed more time (whites, again, yes). So I've followed that "rule" of drinking at any age and been very happy with it.

Red Burgundy from the 1990s and early 2000s followed a rule of drink within first three years or after 15 (with adjustments for individual producer, vineyard, and vintage) or you were risking a closed-down bottle. With global warming, I'm not sure that rule still applies to contemporary Burgundy.
 
The Mme and I just started a walking tour (Oxford to Bath) and I saw and read this thread with great delight.

I just have had too many heartbreaks with premature openings, later validated. I will admit as I age, young wine tastes better to me and so at times doubt the Rule, esp w recent releases.
 
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
Happy birthday, Mark!

Sometime back in the 1980s or early 1990s, I read in La Revue du vin de France that Rhône wines (reds; we've discussed the whites elsewhere, I believe) could be drunk and enjoyed at any age. Also, I've never had a Rhône producer tell me that one of their red wines needed more time (whites, again, yes). So I've followed that "rule" of drinking at any age and been very happy with it.

Red Burgundy from the 1990s and early 2000s followed a rule of drink within first three years or after 15 (with adjustments for individual producer, vineyard, and vintage) or you were risking a closed-down bottle. With global warming, I'm not sure that rule still applies to contemporary Burgundy.

Interesting, Claude. I’ve long believed that most vignerons are unreliable judges of ageability of their own wines owing to their repeated consumption of barrel samples. That being said, my post was partly tongue in cheek: factors such as stem inclusion, new oak and age of vines undoubtedly affect the time it’ll take to reach a plateau of maturity, so one can be only so dogmatic about these issues.

Over the years, I’ve grown to appreciate the aromatic complexity of older wines, which usually entails non-fruit elements. The result is that I almost always enjoy wines well beyond the “expiration date,” whether it’s proclaimed by some critic (present company excepted wink wink) or some crowdsourced figure on CT. However, I have no truck with disorderlies such as my esteemed simian compatriot who prefer their wines younger and fresher. Chacun à son goût, after all.

Mark Lipton
 
originally posted by MLipton:

Interesting, Claude. I’ve long believed that most vignerons are unreliable judges of ageability of their own wines owing to their repeated consumption of barrel samples. That being said, my post was partly tongue in cheek: factors such as stem inclusion, new oak and age of vines undoubtedly affect the time it’ll take to reach a plateau of maturity, so one can be only so dogmatic about these issues.

Over the years, I’ve grown to appreciate the aromatic complexity of older wines, which usually entails non-fruit elements. The result is that I almost always enjoy wines well beyond the “expiration date,” whether it’s proclaimed by some critic (present company excepted wink wink) or some crowdsourced figure on CT. However, I have no truck with disorderlies such as my esteemed simian compatriot who prefer their wines younger and fresher. Chacun à son goût, after all.

Mark Lipton
I'm not saying that the wines don't change, just that they are enjoyable at each age and there is no reason to avoid them at any point unless you are specifically looking for the qualities that come with long aging. As I indicated above, Burgundy has not followed such an aging curve, although global warming may have changed that situation.

As far as vignerons being able to judge ageability of their own wines, in my experience and judgment, some are quite competent and others less so. Same with journalists and importers. I think I've seen a large enough selection of Northern Rhône producers that when I say none has ever said not to drink at a certain time, that means something. Contrary to commonplace perceptions of French vignerons, there are some who very much appreciate long-aged (I mean going back many decades into the 20th century) wines.
 
originally posted by Claude Kolm: I'm not saying that the wines don't change, just that they are enjoyable at each age and there is no reason to avoid them at any point unless you are specifically looking for the qualities that come with long aging.

Claude, your comment is in line with my feeling. The level of enjoyment is often a function of the wine's maturity thereby affecting a person's preferences, but a good wine is still enjoyable. Especially true with Burgundy probably.

. . . . . . Pete
 
originally posted by Peter Creasey:

a good wine is still enjoyable. Especially true with Burgundy probably.

. . . . . . Pete
Well, as I said before, at least in the past that was not the case with Burgundy. If you caught a Lafarge or a Roumier at the intermediate stage, they could be pretty mean. But I think with global warming, that's less so today, or maybe not even so at all.
 
originally posted by Pavel Tchichikov:
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
originally posted by Pavel Tchichikov:
rule of 15 with roumier?
sure, until it's rule of 20... 25... still waiting
It depends which wine.

thanks Mr Doghead :-)
No, really. The MSD 1er Cru, before the change in 2002, did take indeed forever (I'm still not sure I should try another bottle of the 1993). The Bonnes-Mares have always been fine at age 15, better at 20 and with the new Terres Blanches in the blend and global warming, it should be coming around even faster. Amoureuses comes around relatively fast and the Chambolle, too. Cras has been very sticky, but recent ones should be developing earlier. No experience with aging the Noirots. Musigny does need a long time (but that's Musigny). Ruchottes has been ok at 15, Charmes-Chambertin should be the same. Echézeaux is too new to know, but I imagine it will come around fairly early.
 
originally posted by Claude Kolm:

Red Burgundy from the 1990s and early 2000s followed a rule of drink within first three years or after 15 (with adjustments for individual producer, vineyard, and vintage) or you were risking a closed-down bottle. With global warming, I'm not sure that rule still applies to contemporary Burgundy.

That seems an astonishingly long period for a wine to stay closed, in my experience. I'm sure I have far less experience in tasting the development over time of various specific Burgundies than you, but I'm wondering if we have different definitions of "closed".

When I think closed, I'm thinking very limited and mainly primary aroma, and flavor that is a combination of subtle or subdued fruit buried in the wine's structure. Is that simiilar to your definition of closed, or are you thinking more along the lines of the wine being sub-optimal in terms of its flavor potential?
 
originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):
originally posted by Claude Kolm:

Red Burgundy from the 1990s and early 2000s followed a rule of drink within first three years or after 15 (with adjustments for individual producer, vineyard, and vintage) or you were risking a closed-down bottle. With global warming, I'm not sure that rule still applies to contemporary Burgundy.

That seems an astonishingly long period for a wine to stay closed, in my experience. I'm sure I have far less experience in tasting the development over time of various specific Burgundies than you, but I'm wondering if we have different definitions of "closed".

When I think closed, I'm thinking very limited and mainly primary aroma, and flavor that is a combination of subtle or subdued fruit buried in the wine's structure. Is that simiilar to your definition of closed, or are you thinking more along the lines of the wine being sub-optimal in terms of its flavor potential?
Actually, looking back at my notes, I see that I had a bottle of the 1993 Clos de la Bussière in September 2020 and it had smoothed out but still was very rustic, so it no longer was closed. But the changes in 2002, which eliminated the rusticity also promoted earlier maturation.
 
We had what I suspect was my last bottle of 1993 Clos de la Bussiere in late 2018, and thought it was lovely. Inherently rustic indeed, but quite successful in that idiom, or so I thought - Jayson do you remember the bottle??
 
Back
Top