TN: Lynch Bages 1970 to 2000

Apr 01, 2010 4 Replies

A small group gathered at Mortons last night to try some Lynch Bages. This offline was more somber than normal, as Paul informed us that Richard Mavricos had passed away the previous day. Richard was one of the core members of this group, and never has there been a more generous winegeek. During a 3 year battle with cancer he still showed up for a lot of offlines, usually bearing the wine of the night even if he was unable to actually drink. An incredible guy, and our group is the poorer for his loss.



Starter was the 2005 Domaine Leflaive "Clavoillon” Puligny-Montrachet



1er Cru. Leflaive seems to have dodged the PremOx bullet more than most, but why take a chance? And actually this was drinking quite well. Young, with a honied body of baby fat over a balanced base of acids. Sweet pure pear fruit, some mineral and hazelnut, classic Puligny to my taste. I enjoyed it on its own, but the small bit I kept to have with my crab cake (tiny, but one of the tastiest I've ever had) really shone. A-/B+

First flight was a solo, the 1970 Lynch-Bages with an ok but not great fill (I didn't look closely, but from memory high shoulder). Nice mature nose with leather, a little poop, flowers and dark fruit. On the palate it's quite mature, with that ashtray note beginning to creep in. With time the ashes show on nose also, though I'm surprised that a teeny pour at end of night is still holding on. B-



Next flight, 85 v. 86



1985 Lynch-Bages Soft texture, ripe, seems a little more mature and less fresh than bottle we had at '85 horizontal recently, I think Matt says this is more typical of ones he's had recently. But it holds on nicely and I like more as it fills out a bit, showing some sandalwood and spice. B+


1986 Lynch-Bages Still some tannins, but not some unapproachable beast. Big and masculine next to the 85, solid fruit structure, just a tad less charming. B/B+



Next up, the 89/90 combo as our steaks arrive (I had the bone on filet, which I find the best cut there, the only place I order filet- but only place that has it with bone!)


1989 Lynch-Bages My WOTN. Still some tannic/acidic structure, but beautiful cassis fruit, notes of pencil lead, earth/stones, and leather. Young but drinking well. A-


1990 Lynch-Bages Good, riper, softer, fleshy. Some spice, leather. B+



While we still had some food, next pair made rounds



1982 Lynch-Bages Still plenty left in this, a bit exotic, ripe, complex. Nice showing, though not mind blowing, and the 89 (or 83) provides better value imho. B+/A-


1983 Lynch-Bages Tough for this to be paired with '82, but I'd happily have this on my dinner table anytime. Mature, feminine compared to others this night, medium bodied, good finish. B+/B



Last, the young'uns



1996 Lynch-Bages Big blast of ripe fruit on the nose, this precipitates big argument over what is age, vintage, and style change. Fresh and fruit forward, seems quite Californiaesque compared to others. Nice in the style, I hope it shows more restraint with a little more age. B+


2000 Lynch Bages This might just be an awkward stage, but at the moment not a lot of there, there. Fat, ripe, some tannins, surprisingly short. B



Brian had also brought the 1989 Suduiraut. Nice flavors of candied oranges, apricot, and vanilla. Quite mature, and maybe needs a bit more acidity. Still a tasty way to finish the evening. B/B+



Never fun to hear of a friend's passing, but best to do it in the company of mutual friends.



Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency.  


Thanks for the notes. I've alwasy been a fan of LB. Yoiu can find some pretty good values in older vintages. I usually prefer the '90 to the '89 and the "85 to the '86.

Just for record, the group votes for WOTN (we vote 3 points for fave,

2 for 2nd, 1 for 3rd):

1989 (15)

1982 (10) 1990 (8) 1985 (4) 1983 (3) 1986 (2) 1996 (1)

Pretty good spread!

Yes but a clear winner with the 1989. I'm surprised that the '82 scored as well as it did and surprised that the '85 only garnered 4 votes.

I am very glad to hear about the 1989. I bought two cases of 1989 at a Mammoth (grocery chain in France) in Cognac, and paid about $15 per bottle. I think it was mis-marked. I have not yet opened any of them, but think it might be time to open one.

Thanks for the review.

Just for record, the group votes for WOTN (we vote 3 points for fave,

2 for 2nd, 1 for 3rd):

1989 (15)

1982 (10) 1990 (8) 1985 (4) 1983 (3) 1986 (2) 1996 (1)

Pretty good spread!

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required