We are now in the ‘home straight’ and things should be becoming clearer(?) For those that missed it, here’s part 1, part 2, part 3 and part 4.

Wine 13
Medium, medium-plus cherry-red colour. High tones overlay a nose of considerable depth – earthy and cedar aspects and a slightly ‘lifted’ impression – but throughout our time together the nose remains completely understated. This wine bursts with excitement; it’s intense and the forward acidity makes it difficult to hold the wine in your mouth. The tannin is very well covered and the finish only slowly fades. It’s not as long as the best here but it’s not too far behind. This is an excellent bottle.
My mark: 18.25/20, group average 17.8/20

Wine 14
Medium, medium-plus cherry-red colour. The nose starts wide and creamy – I though a little lactic too but this was transient – quickly taking on a forward cream coverd red cherry aspect and eventually coffee notes too. Understated, concentrated and tons of mid-palate dimension – many of these wines are one-dimensional in comparision. The fruit is so well done that it completely buries any necessity to discuss acidity or tannin. The creamy finish is understated but very long. Really top-class wine.
My mark: 19.0/20, group average 17.7/20

Wine 15
Medium-plus cherry-red colour. The wide nose showcases well delineated soft red fruit and a little coffee too. High-toned fruit in the mouth that is both concentrated and bursts into life on the mid-palate. There is some astringency to the tannin but the combined sweetness of the fruit and the considerable spicy oak means that it’s not overpowering in the finish which also shows plenty of cream and just a touch of espresso. In quality terms this wine is quite close to the previous wine, just a little shorter and less precise – mainly due to the layer of sweet oak which I don’t find ‘additive’.
My mark: 18.5/20, group average 18.6/20

I’ll let you consider until tomorrow’s results which might be which, but in the meantime here is my summary of the scores:

For those that missed it, here’s part 1, part 2 and part 3.

Now I’m starting to get confused because previous wines that I thought were ‘xxx’ cannot be, because surely some of these are those…

Wine 10
Medium, medium-plus cherry-red colour. An understated and tight nose slowly becomes creamy with glossy fruit. The cream of the nose is paralleled on the palate with impressive density to the precise creamy fruit that has a licorice edge. Mouth-watering acidity and understated smooth tannins that just cling a little to your gums. There is just a faint edge of bitterness in the finish which I can’t quite decide whether it comes from the grape or oak tannin, but it’s a good length. Very young – certainly a 2004 – but a very nice package.
My mark: 18.0/20, group average 17.4/20

Wine 11
Medium ruby-red colour with a hint of amber at the rim. A very deep, wide, earthy and impressive nose. Mouthfilling, still with plenty of drying tannin. Given the nose and structure this slips disappointingly unobtrusively into the finish – but it’s one very long, if slightly oaky finish! In the end the astringent (though ripe) tannins dominate the mid-palate and finish a little too much for current enjoyment. Taking stock there’s a modicum of maturity on the nose and surely a great grand cru nose at that. If the nose hints at maturity the palate is way too young; it’s concentrated and long but the structure is dominant today. When the palate catches up I think this will be a stunning bottle.
My mark: 19.0/20, group average 19.0/20

Wine 12
Medium, medium-plus cherry red. The high-toned nose also starts with a little reduction and earth – it never really becomes fully fruit driven. The stance of this wine is althletic and ‘wiry’ with plenty of intrinsic muscle. The texture is good and the acidity helps to push the finish reasonably long – though in this company it’s (at best) average – with a little raisined aspect and some underlying oak being the dying notes.
My mark: 17.0/20, group average 17.4/20

For those that missed it, here’s part 1 and part 2.

It’s not getting any easier…

Wine 7
Medium-plus cherry red colour. A high toned and wide nose that mixes red and blue-skinned fruits. A wonderfully effusive wine with excellent acidity and super depth. There’s a real extra dimension of fruit on the mid-palate before going into a discrete but long finish. The tannins are completely buried by the fruit. A few of the previous wines are longer but this wine is a compelling ‘complete package’. I started with a score of 18.5 but given that I thought it better than some later 18.5’s I added a quarter.
My mark: 18.75/20, group average 18.1/20

Wine 8
Medium ruby-red colour. The nose starts quite high-toned and a little creamy before going through a mineral and earthy stage with flashes of red fruit then bonfire – you need a little patience, but there is just so much dimension to be found – bravo. The entry and mid-palate start a little disappointing after the previous wine but minute by minute the palate opens wider and wider. The finish is very good and whilst the tannins are a little grainy but they are ripe and grab the mouth and help cement the flavours of the finish. Slow to blossom, but excellent and pips the previous wine.
My mark: 19.0/20, group average 18.3/20

Wine 9
Medium, medium-plus ruby-red colour. A wine and mineral nose that slowly releases dark cherry fruit, gradually becoming higher toned before giving glimpses of coffee notes. The palate is clean, muscular and intense with really good, fresh acidity. The length doesn’t come close to match some of the previous wines, but it’s a very good finish if just a little oak-driven. A very nice package that needs two or three years before it starts drinking well.
My mark: 18.0/20, group average 17.7/20

For those who missed it, here’s part 1. I’ll avoid commenting too much on other people’s guesses – simply because it’s unlikely I can do so without giving clues. Anyway, here are the next three contenders:

Wine 4
Medium-plus ruby-red colour, still with hints of cherry. Shiny red fruit on the nose with a black undertow and a little earth, eventually a little orange too. Sweet and concentrated with real mid-palate intensity. Soft entry, well covered tannin with a slowly fading good length that maybe even has a hint of licorice. Rather like wine #3 this displays apparently less ripe tannin when compared to others in its flight.
My mark: 17.0/20, group average 17.7/20

Wine 5
Medium, medium-plus ruby-red. Quite an intense minerally nose that becomes higher toned and I thought just a little lactic but this a short phase before a nice creamier presentation. On the palate there’s a dark aspect to the fruit, good acidity and a nicely expanding and intense presentation in the mid-palate. This is very long with a good creamy fruit flavour. Very nice and accomplished wine – second-best so-far.
My mark: 18.0/20, group average 17.9/20

Wine 6
Medium-plus ruby colour. A very high-toned and forward nose that slowly goes deeper and spicier. Fresh presentation, very nice texture, very good acidity and darker oak-driven notes. The oak is also on the finish, but darkly spicy rather than bitter. The tannins are quite well textured, just a little grain but they are very ripe.
My mark: 18.0/20, group average 17.5/20

Just to jog your memory, the following wines make up our tasting you only have to guess which ones!

1. 2004 Denis Bachelet, Gevrey-Chambertin 1er Les Corbeaux
2. 2004 Ponsot, Chapelle-Chambertin
3. 2004 Haegelen-Jayer, Clos de Vougeot
4. 2004 Fourrier, Gevrey-Chambertin 1er Clos St.Jacques
5. 2004 Fourrier, Griottes-Chambertin
6. 2004 Geantet-Pansiot, Charmes-Chambertin
7. 2003 Cornu, Corton
8. 2003 Guyon, Echézeax
9. 2002 Tollot-Beaut, Corton Bressandes
10. 2002 Guyon, Vosne-Romanée Les Charmes de Mazières
11. 2002 Hudelot-Noellat, Vosne-Romanée 1er Les Suchots
12. 2001 Armand Rousseau, Chambertin
13. 2001 de Vogüé, Musigny Vieilles Vignes
14. 1999 Gros Frère & Soeur, Richebourg
15. 1999 Hudelot-Noellat, Romanée Saint-Vivant

Arranged in blind flights of three. A leisurely 20 minutes or-so was given to each flight. I went from wine to wine to contrast the aromatics before tasting – given that the first was obviously a 2003 I initially chose to taste it last given the expected extra ripeness. Then went backwards and forwards between the wines. We were requested to mark the wines out of 20, quarter-points allowed.
PS There’s no clue intended from the picture above

Wine 1
Medium, medium-plus cherry-red colour. A soft and dusty fruit nose, red fruit, some cream and relatively modest toasty/spicy oak – eventually coffee/mocha overtones. On the palate the ripe fruit is a little oak-marked, and that oak is slightly bitter and for a while dominates the quite long finish. Slowly some creamy fruit comes through, eventually aeration provides a nice balance.
My mark: 17.5/20, group average 17.5/20

Wine 2
Medium, medium-plus cherry red colour. Initially the nose is very tight with faint estery notes, slowly going deeper and a little spicy – eventually this becomes plusher, more red and with quite creamy sweet oak. The fruit is quite high-toned in the mouth, with well-covered tannin. There’s a fantastic length on display – even longer than wine #3 – there’s also quite a lot of oak on display but it’s not in the slightest ‘untasty’ and quite creamy. I came straight in with a 19/20 for this but given a close grouping of high scores later on I edged this up a quarter!
My mark: 19.25/20, group average 18.0/20

Wine 3
Medium, medium-plus cherry-red colour but just starting to transition to ruby. Initially it’s a narrow and high-toned nose that hints at a red fruit depth, eventually some pretty red fruit comes through. Good concentration, the tannin seems to have some grain at the first encounter but they seem to smooth out with the very good acidity. This wine is long, very long. I had a reasonably good score coming through – perhaps 18+ – but if you taste this after wine #1 it seems quite unripe and the tannin becomes very astringent. Eventually I marked it below wine 1…
My mark: 16.0/20, group average 16.6/20