TN: Margaux Mania

Hi Dale- Thanks for the nice tasting notes as usual. Myself being an inexperienced but enthusiastic Margaux supporter I was especially interested to see that you had preferred some of the lower classed wines over their more expensive counterparts. I know that the they never get much recognition but after a tour and tasting at Durfort Vivens last fall, I really wish that they could break out of their under achieving reputation and be more easily found in the US market.

My best, Jason (temporarily residing in Napa)

Actually, by Bordeaux standards, only the Palmer and Ch. Margaux tend to be very expensive- despite being 2nd growths, Rauzan Segla, Rauzan Gassies, and Brane Cantenac tend to be regarded as mediocre performers. But I also wouldn't draw too many conclusions from this. It's not like comparing horizontals of wines from the same source- provenance, vintage variations, etc. all play a role.

That's not a wine you see much of. I'll make a point of paying attention next time I see.

Give us some Napa reports. :)

Take care, thanks for readng.

Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

If I do recall, Rochambeau was offering some Durfort '00 for about $30 a few months ago. I unfortunately only have one bottle of such to my name from the Chateau itself, but would easily be inclined to purchasing more. We had spent several months in Paris drinking their second wine "Segund de Durfort" from the '99 vintage (10 Euros) which tilted my tastes towards the tendencies of Margaux. As I will profusely declare though, I am new to wine appreciation but have spent most of my energy and funds in France and have subsequently enjoyed the finesse and subtlety of Margaux the most.

I have been privileged enough to do a lot of tasting in Napa on my days off from the restaurant on a complimentary basis and have found that the Stags Leap district actually reminds me in sense of Margaux verses its Medoc counterparts. Clos du Val, Regusci and Sinsky seem to have elements of Margaux that intrigue me. I shamelessly haven't been posting any tasting notes lately and will try to contribute more in the future. :)

FWIW I have really enjoyed the Robert Sinsky wines and consider them to be the best that I have tasted across the board from whites to reds in Napa thus far.

Jason

To bad they did not taste the 1986 Rauzan or Rausan Segla. That was my favorite of the Rauzan. It was spectacular and I might have about

3 or 6 bottles remaining.

Does anyone know the story or why the spelling changed. Was there a misprint on a label that they kept?

I remember a 1982 tasting back in 1992 when (then) Rausan-Ségla came 7th of some 50 wines, abolutely spectacular: I personally mistook it for Lafite. So there were exceptional Rauzans under the previous owners, too.

No. The new owners since 1994, the Wertheimer Family, owners of Chanel (and to-become owners of Canon in St-Emilion), together with President David Orr and Managing Director John Kolasa, decided to return to the historical spelling of the 1855 classification, but only with the first vintage truly vinified under their aegis, 1995 iirc, or possibly 1996, after all the earth works in the vineyards (setting drainage tubes etc.) had been completed.

HTH,

M.

Based on some emails, it seems the group favorite for the night was the 1983 R-S. Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

Beyond issues of bottle variance, we all taste differently. The organizer of the Margaux Mania event, Arvind Rao, just posted his notes on another forum. I thought some of you might find it interesting how the exact same bottle could have some different impressions:

Arv's notes:

00 Donnhof Oberhauser Lesterberg Riesling Kabinett - Yum. No idea really about this other than Donnhof = "Don't Turn Down" in English. 75 Giscours [Margaux] Nice nose, some burnt sugar going on. Tannins all resolved now. Pretty tasty but not perhaps as wonderous as auction prices indicate! 87 pts 90 Giscours [Margaux] Pleasing and delicious. Aromas of tomatoes! But still yummy all around. This has historically done well at tastings. 88 pts. 70 Rauzan Segla [Margaux] Tired! Drink up. Cracks up quickly. Those who had it earlier in its life attested to its power. 77 pts. 83 Rauzan Segla [Margaux] Very good, perhaps even outstanding. Deep fruit that keeps on improving. 1983 was an unusual year for the appellation. 90 pts. 88 Rauzan Segla [Margaux] Has a sense of tanginess the other R-S don't have. While competent, I would pass on future purchases. 85? pts. 95 Rauzan Segla [Margaux] Very popular for its deep fruit and long flavors. I am not as much of a fan, preferring the 83 and 00, but one cannot ignore its vigor. 89 pts. 00 Rauzan Segla [Margaux] Flamboyant, exotic and stunningly awesome with its deep black fruit. Obviously infanticide...but the prodigy has arrived. Some were strangely put off by it. 93+ pts. 83 Rauzan Gassies [Margaux] Another "second" growth that has historically not been treated like one, price wise. Still this is an exceptional vintage by their standards, probably not to be surpassed until their freak 00 effort. Worth buying and drinking today. 88 pts. 83 Palmer [Margaux] We were blessed with two bottles of this singular, brilliant Palmer. One was markedly more tannic and grippy than the other...but both had huge pure fruit. This is an expensive wine at auction but I can see what the fuss is about. I kind of doubt I will ever taste a Palmer as good as this -- partly due to my non professional tasting background but more due to the radiance of this vintage. 95/98 pts. [two bottles and slightly different scores] 89 Cantemerle [Haut Medoc] A cru classe Haut Medoc commonly grouped with the Margaux's due to geography. Pretty dense and otherwise good. If you like the house, this is probably their recent benchmark level wine. 88 pts. 96 Marquis de Terme [Margaux] A very big surprise in the night. Very high quality and fine depth of fruit with a long concentrated finish. It has everything you would want in a young wine except a fancy label. This 4th growth is not that common, but in this year is worth buying and cellaring. It gets a whopping 90 pts. 96 du Tertre [Margaux] OK, kind of a decent finish but a tight nose. I would hold this more and see what happens. 81 pts. 81 Ch. Margaux [Margaux] Pretty wine, long finish with 30 seconds length but still not something that would excite you beyond the label. Flavor authority is missing the oomph! 87 pts. 82 Brane Cantenac [Margaux] A meek and short wine. 75 pts. 86 Brane Cantenac [Margaux] Deeper and stronger than its 82 flight mate. This was a good vintage supposedly for Margaux. 83 pts. 89 de Malle [Sauternes] Pretty yummy. Honey colored but low acid so drink up! 87 pts. My response: Arv, Thanks again for all your work organizing this. Thanks for the notes. As usual when I take notes at an offline, it seems we mostly agree on 50% of the wines, with 25% we have different degrees of "liking" (but seem to have tasted same wine). And there's 25% where it sounds like we tasted different wines. :) The biggest divergence being those Palmers. A wine I'd had before and was really looking forward to. I think I actually liked it better than anyone sitting at my end of table, but I thought it disappointing. Go figure. That's why I like to post early- afraid I'd let others notes influence me. I'm already sitting here thinking "man, I blew it on the Palmers" Then Michael's (another attendee) reponse: concur with most of the notes, but I guess Arv was drinking from two '83 Palmers that our table didn't get. :) This was the third time that I've had '83 Palmer and each experience has been with seemingly bad bottles. I found the '83 Palmers at Margaux Madness to have a great deal of volatile acid and lacking the concentration and fruit that I've heard this wine posseses at its best. I deemed both bottles unrateable, but I respect Arv's assessment and palate.

Sorry for taking up so much space, but I find it interesting these divergences. Which is why I take ANY tns with a grain of salt (but not in my wineglass, please).

Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

Most of Dale's Margaux notes snipped.

I tried a bottle of 70 Lascombes this summer in Minneapolis. I was surprised he still had the bottle I gave him years ago.

Very light and elegant, with nose of light smoke. My only regret is that we did not serve with a roast chicken.

What a surprise, from another Margaux second growth with a spotty reputation.

Tom Schellberg

Tom,

Pleasant surprise seems to be the order of the day for 1970 Bdx. Even wines from estates with as you say spotty reps seem to be holding on, a bit over the hill but fading gracefully. In past year or so, besides the Rauzan-Segla, I've had the '70 L'Angelus (from a 375!) and Gloria, both held interest (the Gloria doesn't really have a spotty rep, but a good 33 yr old Cru Bourgeois is always a little surprising).

I've heard good things about Lascombes over lst few years, think there rep is being restored. Dale

Dale Williams Drop "damnspam" to reply

I actually had 1970 Gloria from a 375 this year and it definitely held interest. I don't have much experience with mature or over-mature wines, but I thoroughly enjoyed it and wish I could have it again!

jason