Never ever heard of this cru bourgeois, must be a very minor one. Given the fact that 1992 by long and large was the weakest vintage of the 1990s, and given the fact that you can count the 92s that still have ageing potential with one finger (Leoville Las Cases), this wine is over the hill with a probability of 99.9 percent.
Open & try, and have a backup bottle ready.
M.
My experience with 1991s was about as dismal as 1992s, but I drank my few bottles of each several years ago. Wil try and make a mental note re the '92 LLC, though. Thanks. Dale
Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply
As you probably know, I organize a yearly Bordeaux tasting "10 Years After". 1991 emerged as a kind of Cinderella vintage (on a small scale, of course: no great wines, but many enjoyable drinks), while 1992 was really diluted.
M.
Actually, I think that makes sense. Both vintages were somewhat light on fruit, with 1991 having a slightly hard/tough profile young and 1992 being diluted. Tannins can fade, but dilution only gets worse. Maybe I should keep my eyes open for some 91s at firesale prices.
Dale
Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply
Dale,
We've still got some '91 Prieure-Lichine left, and it drinks very nicely. Was never very big, but quite elegant, and did get much better. I pronounced it over the hill in about 96, but lost it; it was much much improved when it turned up again! :)
Wasn't very expensive to begin with (I've an minor 'in' there) and I'll bet you could get it cheap now, if you could find it...
-E
Hi Guys
Thanks for your advice - I think we might just open it and see!!! I'll let you know what the result is after this weekend.
Cheers
John
NZ Winelinks - Linking you to the Wines, Vineyards and Viticulture of New Zealand. Web:
DrinksForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.