Clos Rougeard at the tgjp

pab

pierre-alain benoit
Hello,
We made a great dinner at the tgjp in Paris last friday with Bob Semon, two Bellivires 2002, a vertical from Clos Rougeard (90, 95, 97, 00 & 03) & a qdc Suronde 1997.
See www.tgjp.com
Ask any questions on the forum and I will try to answer.
Best regards
pierre-alain benoit
 
Impressive wines.

The '03 Poyeux was my least favorite of that vintage, and maybe of the decade, from the Foucaults. Which says what good wine they make, I suppose.

I share your feeling that the '97 Poyeux is early in its life. I'm starting to drink mine, but feel no hurry at all.

I wish I had '90s in my cellar, but I haven't seen them in the US. Kermit brought them in at one point, but I don't think I'd heard of them then.
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
Impressive wines.

The '03 Poyeux was my least favorite of that vintage, and maybe of the decade, from the Foucaults. Which says what good wine they make, I suppose.

I share your feeling that the '97 Poyeux is early in its life. I'm starting to drink mine, but feel no hurry at all.

I wish I had '90s in my cellar, but I haven't seen them in the US. Kermit brought them in at one point, but I don't think I'd heard of them then.

The 03 is a almost a blockbuster and it's not what we're waiting from the Foucault brother's. But, it's very well made and it should be juged in 10 years.
Best regards
pierre-alain
 
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:
Two questions, actually.

Why did you drink the 90-95-97 in reverse age order?

Why pair red Saumur with leek risotto? Cruel joke.

We served the three vintages in the same course. About the risotto, I knew before that it wouldn't be the best match but the recipe was tremendous.
But with red Rougeard, the "accords" are not very easy : it's elegant wine and need discret food.
Best regards
pierre-alain
 
They did a great job, considering.

It's a question of the tannin quality for me. I haven't had the wine in 18 months, but my recollection is that the tannins have an immature harsh quality about them that matches a bit the overripeness in the wine. It's a common vintage signature in the region, but one that their other wines seemed to avoid in '03.
 
Sounds like you were treating Bob well, nice. I've never had the Bourg but I have very fond memories of the 90 Poyeux.
 
My lazy-ass Americain self wishes these notes were bilingual, like Canadian government forms, but I guess I've have to salivate and decipher them from my (non)existent French. Out of the 2005's, is the basic 'Clos' worth buying? (others are rich for my blood)
 
originally posted by MarkS:
My lazy-ass Americain self wishes these notes were bilingual, like Canadian government forms, but I guess I've have to salivate and decipher them from my (non)existent French. Out of the 2005's, is the basic 'Clos' worth buying? (others are rich for my blood)
Yes. An emphatic yes. Two times yes. The close of Ulysses yes. (Even with the various interpretations of that finale I stand by that last yes.)
 
Mark,

Cory isn't giving you a bum steer based on the general quality of the wine, but general enthusiasm isn't enough. When do you want to do with the wine? Is it for dinner next week, next year, next life?

It's great now and for maybe the next 5 months, and after that, my guess is that you have a wine that you'd rather put away for a decade.

I bought them myself, am psyched to have them, but I'm not even half the way through my '97s, and that is a more forward vintage.

I also bought Bourg in 2005, and I look at my watch regularly to make sure I'm still alive so that I may survive to drink them.

IMO it's not just about an absolute scalar value of how good the wine is. With wines like these, you have to fit them into your plan.

Or alternatively, you have to not care at all about their considerable expense.

My $20 input.

Joe
 
I'm a dissenting voice on the 2003s. I like 'em. It's nice to have some variability and they showed very well young. Well, in a certain way I guess.

I find the 1997 Clos to be drinking fantastically right now and really enjoyed some 1995s last year.

Joe, have you dipped in to your 1997 Poyeux or just the Clos?

Mark, I buy as much Rougeard as I can afford. I tend to start at the top and then buy Clos if I have money left over. .sasha has made an argument to me that the Clos is the best in the stable. This has to do with how it is raised.
 
originally posted by VLM:
Dissent

.sasha has made an argument to me that the Clos is the best in the stable. This has to do with how it is raised.

What does this mean? It doesn't get the same treatment as the Bourg and the Poyeux, does it? It has always tasted less glossy to me (and I don't mean that glossy in a negative way, clearly the oak tastes integrate wonderfully on these wines).
 
Every time I have a bottle, I wonder why I didn't buy more. A bit like Huet, really. The '97 Poyeux showed bretty and oaky young (tasted with Peter Ruhrberg, if memory serves), but it's grown up very nicely. I've drunk all of mine.
 
A devilishly tempting dinner, pab!

Reports like this can be hazardous to one's carefully crafted drinking plan re the Foucault wines.

I've been trying to postpone drinking any of my supply until they begin turning twenty, which, in a limited fashion, begins next year. And I can make it... I CAN do it... I think I can do it...
 
originally posted by Cole Kendall:
Where is the justice? I get waterboarded and Bob gets Clos Rougeard?

Yes, but Bob brought the Obama glasses !
Your 1973 Port is still waiting for you.
A trs bientt
pierre-alain benoit
 
Don, I think that Melissa would have been entranced by the 2000. I couldn't get my nose out of the glass. It may not make old bones, to echo Pierre-Alain (I think), but I may not either. BTW, Pierre-Alain and Marie Sabine host the best bistro in Paris.

Cole, fate is cruel.

As for those wondering whether they can out-wait their Rougeard, (Moliere) we die only once, and for such a long time. (OK, OK, I'm all about France right now).
 
Back
Top