2003 Chateau D' Armailhac

A novice question: What is the percentage of wines, in general and in case of your example purchase above, that a wine would go to a B or C+ "with a few more years." Would the fact that it was a good or bad year enter into how it continued to become more or less drinkable? Thanks. Dee

I have no idea regarding percentages, I don't have any stats. Vintage would make a difference but I always feel that good winemakers make good wine in bad years. 2003 was a good year and D'Armailhac is a good property with great lineage in a terrific neighborhood.

Thanks for the note, Bill. I bought a case of this, too. Haven't tried it, probably won't for a couple of years anyway.

Dee, those of us who cellar a fair amount usually have wines we buy to lay down long term, for medium term (say 5 years) or for short term drinking. Some of these latter we forget about and they aren't as good when we find them years later... :)

I recently had a medium term wine (some medoc 2nd label or other) that positively collapsed after a few years. (Probably Michel Rolland got to it.) But that's the exception rather than the rule.

I think with a little experience we tend to do rather well in this regard, given a good cellar, and only a small percentage is actually worse than when it started. Also given that we don't misjudge the time and get to it 10 years too late!

I bought the Armailhac without tasting, based on my knowledge of the property, so I'm glad to know that it's a good one. (Didn't see any reviews that I recall.)

The year is very important in the ageability. I wouldn't consider 03 particularly great in this regard.

-E

FWIW, I just checked for reviews on the D"Armailhac and WS and Parker rated it 91 and 90 pts which is pretty good for a $25 USD wine.