2009 Louis Jadot, Bourgogne Chardonnay
Medium, medium pale yellow. It’s an interesting nose that at first seems to have a lot of aniseed and then as you take the glass away from your nose the aniseed seems to split into yellow fruit and sulfur, eventually there’s a little baked bread too. In the mouth this starts round, up-front and full but decays very quickly into the mid-palate. What’s left is a little linear though with apparently decent length. To start with I didn’t think it completely to my taste – over about one hour either I or it moved position a little and it became reasonably palatable. Just in-case the problem was sulfur I left it ‘topless’ in the fridge overnight. Still pretty dull on day 2 I’m afraid. I can’t honestly say I’ll be searching for more, which is a shame as I really enjoyed a few vintages of this.
Rebuy – No

Before this wine was another ’85 from Bertagna – the better known (for the domaine) Clos de la Perrière. It showed a little more density and concentration than the ‘Cras’ but was seemingly a little less fine. After 20 minutes (maybe the reason) in the glass there was a very occasional whiff of something like cork taint. I’m not the most sensitive to TCA, often tasting it before smelling it. The Perrières remained tasty and quite drinkable but always with a nagging doubt…

1985 Louis Remy, Clos de la Roche
Medium colour. The nose starts without incredible depth, rather it’s relatively wide with pretty layers of fresh fruit with a very faint spice accent in the background, slowly it becomes ever-more delicate and well-defined with wild strawberries and perhaps raspberry too – swirl and it is a more leathery effect – I really could sniff this all night! The freshest acidity of all these recent 1985s and clearly the most mineral too – some impression of violets in the mid-palate where it’s actually rather linear but with achingly long (if narrow) flavours that continue as long as your mouth keeps watering – which was quite a while. Remarkably pretty, but should there be a bit more Grand Cru depth and dimension? I suppose I’ll never find out if I just keep sniffing! On day two this has a little oxidation – unlike all the other 85s I opened – so it’s fragile as well as delicate. Drink up in the next couple of years seems to be the way forward…
Rebuy – Yes

Exquisitely pretty as this wine was, versus the two Bertagnas of the weekend it lacks plenty of concentration. Forgetting the premier/grand cru distinctions, this bottle in its own right was still a lovely thing.

No point rushing into a Grand Cru when there are premiers in the way! Of-course Vougeot these days is largely dismissed as an early drinking wine, and that’s despite the presence of AOC premier cru labels. After a couple of concentrated Gevreys this won’t stand a chance, will it?

1985 Bertagna, Vougeot 1er Les Cras
Medium colour. The nose is edged with a little mushroom but swirl and you fall headlong into a depth of sweet, blood-red fruit – lovely! In the mouth this doesn’t have quite the same fat as either Gevrey, but it has for my taste a nicer balance; the acidity is a little more to the fore, there is a slightly more mineral stance and the mid-palate has a lovely growth of still lacy fruit flavour. More complex and finer if less impact than either Gevrey – but impact isn’t everything – I might look at food to tone-down the Gevreys but I’m savouring this on its own – delicious!
Rebuy – Yes

I openly admit that I’m an advocate of letting wines age; I may not be searching for near-death experiences but I’m also interested in letting wines express themselves. With a rush (rash?) of decent vintages starting to pile-up what should you expect if you stock up on 2009s and look to play the ‘long game’? 1985 was a ripe vintage, analogous might be 1990, 1999, 2002, 2005 and 2009, though that middle trio will have more acidity and perhaps even more aging potential.

It’s a simple test: take a couple of basic, twenty-five year-old villages wines from 1985 and see what awaits. In this case one is from a no-name negociant which nobody has heard of but apparently was still making wines in at least 2000 (I think they are a Swiss importer with an office in Nuits), the other, again from a negociant, but one with more to lose in the reputation stakes!

1985 Lionel de Pontbriand, Gevrey-Chambertin
Medium-plus ruby-red that fades and transforms to mahogany at the rim. Deep, slightly musky and meaty aromas over a sweeter, almost sugared core of fruit – if anything it puts on ever-more weight with time. This has a lovely silky fatness to the texture and hints at sweetness before snatching it away again – fully ripe at harvest? – yet there is a mineral, almost metallic flavour at the core that seems almost cleansing, the acidity is quite understated. Half an hour in glass and the metallic impression is gone and there’s more than a hint of some extra mid-palate flavour. The finish may be a little understated but its reminiscent of sweet and dark, bitter-chocolate and it’s very long.
Rebuy – Maybe

1985 Joseph Drouhin, Gevrey-Chambertin
Medium-plus colour, tending more to mahogany than red. The nose has limited width, but quite some brown-sugared and warm-fruited depth. There is less silk to the texture but a more open and sweet flavour, like-able as it is, I still have the occasional faint impression of something oxidative (the cork slid out very easily) and a last vestige of tannic astringency. Slowly fading on a similar bitter-chocolate note to the previous wine, though perhaps not with the length of the Pontbriand.
Rebuy – Maybe

So a 25-year report? There actually was quite some similarity in terms of depth of colour, concentration and overall character. The Drouhin is the easier to like – a comfy wine – the Pontbriand has more interest and eventually complexity too, you need to sit up to drink it. Although it’s easy to be ‘intrigued’ by older regional wines (Bourgognes), at this age your starting mateial should really be a good villages because here you will get the first hint of ‘somewhereness’ and the requisite density and character to deliver something more than ‘just’ intriguing! I expect 1985 could be a good model for 1990s and all those 2009s you are ordering!

The $64,000 question, of-course is, is it worth waiting that long? Clearly that will depend on your taste, but at this village level and for these particular wines, with 20:20 hindsight I might have drunk 75% in the first 3 or 4 years and the last 3 bottles from the case for now. For decent premier crus, I’d expect to invert those proportions and more-so for the Grand Crus. Talking of which, I think I might be able to rustle up one or two of those too…

2006 Roger Belland, Bourgogne Pinot Noir
Medium colour. The nose has wide, slightly alcoholic top-notes that mix with a little spearmint and narrows to a base of dark red fruit. In the mouth the fruit has a nice sweet dimension, but the acidity is just slightly in the ascendant providing a sour, perhaps for some people too sour reflection. The tannin is far from evident. I’d say this is in the last days of pinot-noir youth, an adolescence of acidity like a breaking voice just compromising the performance. I’ve enjoyed a number of these over that couple of years, but this is the last – a job done because I’m not looking to keep this 20 years, but done well!
Rebuy – No (not anymore but it was great fun for 18 months…)