TN Beaucastel Vertical

Thanks John for the great notes. Sounds like a pleasure.

In general I think with the possible exception of 2005 there has not been a vintage in CdP to rival the greats, 89 and 90, since. So it may be unfair to judge modern Beaucastels based on these references...

Haven't had this but in general the 04s are drinking well young, with plenty of stuffing though, and will I think go the distance too. Good value also compared to the more expensive 05s. When will they begin their long nap I wonder?

[]

Yet another 95 CdP with an uncertain future. I have rattled on about it before but I really think this vintage was over sold by producers. Some of them it just seems to have fooled...

[]

pleased to have a couple of bottles of these great wines, wish I had more!

[]

The 89 was always much more austere, but in 10 years it will be better than the

2. Thanks again,

-E

I'm sitting on a total of about case an a half of the 89 and 90 and they should hold up well, but I am also holding 18 of the 1995 and am wondering where it is going.

I am going to host a vertical some time this Fall and will make sure I open one to see what it is up to. I am hoping it just needs more time.

Some CNduP from that vintage are drinking beautifully now - the Les Cailloux for one.

And I just found a half case of 1990 Vieux Donjon in the cellar - anyone tried that recently?

John, why recent to older?

Typically I would have gone the other direction so that the less tannic, more developed were first followed by younger.

Serious question.

Not that long ago, Bill: drinking well to my tastes.

Mark Lipton

In my experience, recent to older is the usual order for verticals. I think the logic is that you keep the more interesting and complex wines till last, so you finish on a high.

I do absolutely see your logic, but I have never noticed it being a problem. Maybe because the step in tannin leveles between each vintage is never too great.

Steve, is that for Beaucastel only...what about cabs, bordeaux etc...

The order?

Tradition also based on experience., IMHO withrespect to wines that age.

younger wines have more raw tannins and unbalaced acidity, to taste a raw claret at the end having started with a mature claret would be a bit of a let down.

any other comments from other posters.?

It's the usual order for ALL verticals. But again, I would add "in my experience" - there may be other norms in other countries - I'm in the UK.

In Michael Broadbent's 'Winetasting' he writes 'Appropriate order of tasting: Dry before sweet; young before old; modest before fine. Whether red wines are tasted before white depends on their relative "weights"'. I thought he also discussed your point, but apparently not - maybe that was in some other book I read.

It's complicated. :) I'd say in the US there is no "usual" order(and that's even though there's a few Englishmen in my drinking pack). I recently read of a Beaucastel vertical in Toronto (by an auction house that partners with Sothebys) where they went '88 to '00. I'd say my vertical experience is split about evenly between:

1) youngest to oldest (the way we did Haut Brion) 2) oldest to youngest (we did Gruaud that way, and the Clos de Vougeot Th night- the organizer was English!) 3) mixed The latter is my personal favorite. There's a lot to be said to grouping "lesser" vintages together - a Medoc '93 might have more in common with a '97 or '99 than a '96 or '95, and a delicate '81 might not be best in a flight with a young and vigorous '82. If we are doing a group-organized vertical (as opposed to one host) we usually discuss this ad nauseum. Part of the decision might be the type of restaurant. if not at a home. If we're at a steakhouse, I might be voting based on trying to ensure that the wines that come around main course are bigger/more tannic, as I like my steak blue to rare. Maybe not best for a '79 or '70 Bdx. Part will be decided by what the lineup is- if the older wines are '66, '67, or '81, it might be quite different than '75s and '86s. Another factor is sheer number of wines. A 5 wine vertical is easy to go younger to older, but if 17 wines I might not want palate fatigue when we get to the '61.

As to serving reds before whites, I believe it's the usual tasting order in lots of Burgundy rooms. I know Serge Hochar prefers to do tastings of Musar red before white. Rare for us, but we have done a couple of Burgundy dinners where a flight of whites was saved as better matches for the cheese course.

At dinners at my home, I the most common order is: light white or bubbly apertif white flight red Burgundy flight Bdx red flight sweet wine

But I'm up for anything that's well thought out.

cheers

Steve Slatcher wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

While I have not been offered as such I have been offered a Beaulolais like wine after Reisling and wished it didn't go that way.

I have to agree with you. Younger to older is always the order I follow.

Mark Slater

I have to disagree with you. As you stated younger wines have more raw tannins and unbalance acidity est.. That is just the reason to taste the older wines first. with all of the tannins and acidity in your mouth you cannot really appreciate the complexity of a fine older wine. You cannot appreciate the nuances that age gives to wines and since a great part of tasting comes from the bouquet of fine aged wines which, in most cases, is lost when you have tasted younger wines.

Well.... when Jacquie & I were invited - thanks to Michael Pronay to dinner at Ch Cap-de-Mourlin in St Emilion, a few years ago, we drank wines from that estate and also from their top estate , Ch Balestard La Tonnelle. The order of wines was 1998, 1988, 1945 and 1927 (or was it '28?). So Jacques Cap-de-Mourlin, certainly, doesn't agree with you.

Mind you, we weren't "tasting", but drinking wines with a meal. Delicious it was too.

-- All the best Fatty from Forges

When I had dinner with Tim Mondavi here in Charlotte, we drank older to youngest on a verticle of Mondavi Reserve Cabs...

The dinner was at the Duke Mansion in Charlotte, and the food was also quite good. Pretty sure the wine and food would have been good if they wine was serviced in the opposite direction.

I respect your opinion, but this past February I attended two seminars with the owners of classified Bordeaux growths. We tasted from old to young. This may be the case that there is no defined correct way.

Found this at a web site, link shown:

I do think there is no right or wrong and I think the years I had the Mondavi Reserve...they would have been a first growth of Napa. :-)

"How are the wines served in a vertical tasting? Generally wines are served in chronological order. However, there is some disagreement about whether wines should be served oldest to youngest or youngest to oldest. Traditionally, wines in a tasting are served youngest to oldest, the theory being that younger wines are more simple and older wines are more complex so your palate builds up through the tasting. However, very young wines can be quite big and powerful and old wines can be subtle and mellow. So the other way around you may burn out your palate early on young burly wines and then cannot appreciate the subtleties of the older wines that come later. How you decide to order your wines in your vertical wine tasting themes is up to you but you should take the particular wines into consideration. While the order may not matter much if all the wines are relatively new, an ancient bottle may be distinctly different from the others and deserve special consideration and planning."