Mouton Notes 1970 - 1995

Your notes on Mouton are interesting. The most recent I have is 1982. Of the older vintages, I still have a case of the 1975 and have not even opened it yet. I still have 15 bottles of the 1970. I have found the

1970 to be very full and consistent. I am guessing it will last many more years. I place the 70 Latour ahead of the 70 Mouton, but(with the exception of Petrus) I would place the other 70 first growths lower - much lower in the case of Margaux. I have a single remaining bottle of the 1966 Mouton. It probably still is holding well, but has been ready a long time. The best I remember, the 1966 was a somewhat more dry style than the 1970. I only have 2 bottles of the 1961. I suspect they are better than the 1970, but I have not made a direct comparison. In any event, I am only drinking what Mouton I have slowly. There are other 1970's that need drinking first.

Of course Mouton can on occasion equal or exceed all of the other first growths. I need only mention the 1945 when it upstages Latour, as great as the 1945 Latour is. Of course I have no opinion of vintages since the

1982.

Salut/Hi Bill Spohn,

Once again, thanks a million for your fascinating notes. I wish....

le/on 22 Jan 2004 00:34:34 GMT, tu disais/you said:-

I've one comment and one question.

I've not been lucky (or wealthy) enough to drink that many 1st growths, but I have to say that at a parallel tasting of Lafite and Mouton '59 in about

1980, the Mouton shone compared to the Lafite and was arguably the best red wine I've ever drunk (and I'm a Burgundy man!).

My question. If you consider the classification as being qualitative (instead of a reflection of consistent market price as originally drawn up in '55), which Chateaux _would_ merit being 1st growth over - say - the last

50 years? Surely not Margaux, which went through a VERY lean patch up until relatively recently. And is Lafite _really_ that consistent?

Bill Great notes.

82, Mouton like Lascases 82 Lascases has never impressed, despite the 100 from RP. Always rather mean with fruit lessening over the years.I have now sold all my 82 Lascases at a good price and bought 2001 Burgundy.

Back OT, I had 70 Mouton and 70 Latour on my 40th. birthday, some years ago :-(

The Latour was stunning, portlike in many ways and so long. The Mouton was austere and a bit like the 82 Lascases.

John

The 70 Latour is one of my all time favourite wines. It is almost ready to drink now, after almost 35 years in bottle.........

In the Good Old Days, when LMHB was under the Woltners, it would outperform Haut Brion in many vintages - anyone who has ever tasted the magnificent 1975 could never doubt the quality.

Call it the cynical lawyer in me, but when LMHB was bought by the Dillons and united under the same management, we entered an era in which (IMnot so HO) LMHB will never be ALLOWED to surpass Haut Brion, again.

Sure, in specific vintages some people may prefer LMHB to HB, but in general the Grand Vin will remain the Grand Vin, and may expect competition only from the other first growths.

Which for anyone that has tasted the great vintages of La Mission made under the Woltners, is really rather sad.....1929, 1955, 1959, 1975 - a remarkable track record.

I suppose you could argue from the 89 and 2000 that I am wrong, but then Haut Brion made wines arguably as good in those vintages too.

Bill, thanks for the notes.

I don't drink a lot of first-growths, so take my opinions with a grain of salt. But I'd argue against Mouton really deserving first-growth status - even though I've quite liked some (and my experience with the '82 Mouton was that it was great, btw -one of the best wines I'd ever had). But to me the true test is the so-so vintages. Mouton from '94, '97 & '99, for instance, did not impress me as much as Lafites, Haut-Brions, or Latours from same vintages (don't think I've had all 4 in any vintage, but 3 in each- by Margaux experience is very limited and in other vintages).

Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

instance, did not impress me>as>much as Lafites, Haut-Brions, or Latours from same vintages

For fun (or what passes for it around here) we did a tasting of everything but Petrus in 1980 and 1984 vintages - because they were available at a low price and to see exactly what you mention - Mouton does not excel in poor vintages

Or mediocre. Only the '97 of the ones I mentiond might qualify as poor (and I think '97 is more mediocre, far better than say '92 or '91). '94 & '99 aren't poor vintages to my tastes. It's very interesting that almost every example of a great Mouton cited is from a universally accepted very goof to excellent vintage. Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

I always felt that Lynch Bages deserved a higher classification status but it's prices reflect a higher classification of late so perhaps it's moved up by consumer demand. Bi!!

Hi Dale What's a goof vintage? ;-) Anders

You could leave it another 10 years with no problem, Alex. I just don't think it is a 100 year wine as Parker predicts.

Can I put a vote in for Ch Lafleur? A friend served me the 1985 recently and it was wonderful; nowhere near being embarrassed by the 1947 Margaux served at the same dinner.

Joel