But that isn't AFAIC proof positive of spoofulation. For instance, I would argue that a gentle RO treatment of wine brought in after a week-long torrential rain wouldn't necessarily result in a spoofy wine. Likewise, microbullage done as a substitute for racking doesn't strike me as devilry in the cellar. Maybe I'm just not Taliban material.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Is a CWD possible regarding Bordeaux?
- Thread starter Marc D
- Start date
But that isn't AFAIC proof positive of spoofulation. For instance, I would argue that a gentle RO treatment of wine brought in after a week-long torrential rain wouldn't necessarily result in a spoofy wine. Likewise, microbullage done as a substitute for racking doesn't strike me as devilry in the cellar. Maybe I'm just not Taliban material.
David M. Bueker
David M. Bueker
originally posted by SFJoe:
So your position is that the winemaking is the same, and it's just a question of time?
Interesting.
No. My position is that the wines (well, except Monbousquet) are going to be just fine given the needed time. This despite the differences in winemaking.
But let's face it - none of us really knows. I choose to be positive about it.
originally posted by David M. Bueker:
originally posted by SFJoe:
So your position is that the winemaking is the same, and it's just a question of time?
Interesting.
No. My position is that the wines (well, except Monbousquet) are going to be just fine given the needed time. This despite the differences in winemaking.
But let's face it - none of us really knows. I choose to be positive about it.
I think that an interesting corollary is something that Eric wrote about great terroir shining through industrial winemaking. The same could be true in Bordeaux, although I'm not sure the terroir is all that great for the most part.
As a comparison, I don't think anyone really believes that the cabernets from Napa in the 90s are going to age like the cabernets from the 70s and 80s. My experience has been otherwise.
Keith Levenberg
Keith Levenberg
Read Stephen Brook's book Bordeaux: People, Power, and Politics - he names names. It's fascinating. One interesting part of the book is his discussion of the saignee practice - not a high tech cellar intervention, but a pretty low-tech way to put your wine on steroids. It seems even many producers who wouldn't go for high-tech spoof rely pretty heavily on this.originally posted by Marc D:
It made me wonder, when did all the high tech cellar interventions start in Bordeaux? It had to be before 1994, but I don't follow it that closely to know this.
Some producers like Leoville Las Cases have been spoofing for awhile, but in general I think of the 1995 vintage as the last classic vintage before the spoof era. Going back and reading old reports on the '96s is a real head-scratching exercise. All they talk about is how there was too much rain to make a top-notch vintage. And then, lo and behold, the wines somehow end up with more fruit concentration than the '95s.
The problem got worse a few years later when the St. Emilion garage wine movement was the flash in the pan. I think that many more established producers saw those wines getting big ratings, tasted them and saw the only distinguishing characteristic was inky super-concentration, and said, "Hey, we can do that!"
Pichon-Lalande is one of the last Bordeaux left that tastes pretty much completely unspoofed. Although I seem to remember some recent report that there were plans to "rejuvenate" it or something, as if it needed rejuvenation, so spoof vintages are probably on the way.
Levi Dalton
Levi Dalton
originally posted by Keith Levenberg:
Going back and reading old reports on the '96s is a real head-scratching exercise. All they talk about is how there was too much rain to make a top-notch vintage. And then, lo and behold, the wines somehow end up with more fruit concentration than the '95s.
This may also be due to the Left Bank/Right Bank; Cabernet Sauvignon/Merlot difference. Most people who are fans of '96 seem to limit that praise to Cabernet heavy wines from the Left Bank. Cabernet Sauvignon ripens later than Merlot, and gravel drains better than clay (of course there is more than clay on the Right Bank, but...). I think the supposition is that the Merlot harvest got caught in the rain, but that the Cab was harvested under more optimal conditions.
Mr. Bueker: did you get a chance to bring any Valandraud with a few years of age on it to that tasting group? Or the equivalent? My own experiences with the like have not been positive.
David M. Bueker
David M. Bueker
No Valandraud. Don't buy it as I don't have access, can't afford it & I don't buy the "garage" wines anyway.
What I have opened for them are recent vintages of some of the wines that have been called spoofed here (or on Therapy in the past): Pichon Baron, Troplong Mondot, Leoville Poyferre, the above mentioned Pape Clement & Las Cases.
What I have opened for them are recent vintages of some of the wines that have been called spoofed here (or on Therapy in the past): Pichon Baron, Troplong Mondot, Leoville Poyferre, the above mentioned Pape Clement & Las Cases.
Keith Levenberg
Keith Levenberg
Right, even at the time they were saying the northern Medoc conditions were better than elsewhere, but I don't think anyone was calling them optimal. When the wines came out they were denser than the '95s, bitter, and a little ornery; for the most part I think that personality generalization still holds true. Combined with the reports suggesting they should have been more dilute, I'm surmising more was done in the cellar to get them that way. But that could just as easily entail the low-tech (saignee) as high-tech (RO). Either way, sometime between 1995 and 2005, many producers who previously would spoof to improve suboptimal vintages began to spoof as a general rule.originally posted by Levi Dalton:
originally posted by Keith Levenberg:
Going back and reading old reports on the '96s is a real head-scratching exercise. All they talk about is how there was too much rain to make a top-notch vintage. And then, lo and behold, the wines somehow end up with more fruit concentration than the '95s.
This may also be due to the Left Bank/Right Bank; Cabernet Sauvignon/Merlot difference. Most people who are fans of '96 seem to limit that praise to Cabernet heavy wines from the Left Bank. Cabernet Sauvignon ripens later than Merlot, and gravel drains better than clay (of course there is more than clay on the Right Bank, but...). I think the supposition is that the Merlot harvest got caught in the rain, but that the Cab was harvested under more optimal conditions.
Carl Steefel
Carl Steefel
But then Pichon Lalande was (or is) one of the best of the 1996. I have not really heard of these as being more bitter than the 1995--mostly the reverse.originally posted by Keith Levenberg
Pichon-Lalande is one of the last Bordeaux left that tastes pretty much completely unspoofed. Although I seem to remember some recent report that there were plans to "rejuvenate" it or something, as if it needed rejuvenation, so spoof vintages are probably on the way.
The 1996 I have had have been very traditional, no spoofing there, with the possible exception of the 1996 Leoville las Cases. The bottle of LLC I had early on was that signature almost creamy style, remarkably similar IMO to the 1982, so even here I don't think there was much spoofing going on...