1996 René Engel, Vosne-Romanée
Medium ruby-red. The nose right from opening is a bit of a star. Deep with a twist of oak before transparent red berry and redcurrant notes come through. Plenty of higher, slightly volatile notes too – but always quite compelling. The palate is just a little more challenging – very forward acidity, indeed borderline ‘too much acidity’, very, very linear presentation, still a little astringent tannin remains, but there’s also some bitterness in the finish. No sign of decline because this is exactly how the wine presented itself for the whole 3 hours before it was gone. A bit of a challenge this bottle, balanced by the lovely aromatics.
Rebuy – Maybe

A wine to separate the men from the boys! Joking aside I think you have to be that curious ‘burgaholic’ breed to take enjoyment from a wine like this – the ‘unconverted’ will simply screw up their faces and cry!
1996 Hospices de Beaune, Corton Charlotte Dumay
Classic 1996 Corton. The nose is of blood and iron, eventually red berry fruit from the partially drained glass. The palate is linear and intense – almost metallic acidity pushes you into a quite long finish. The only thing that this wine gives away is the free polish of your teeth. I wouldn’t go as far as to say it’s enjoyable right now – but I was (just about) up to the challenge!
Rebuy – Yes

And the winner is – the one and only Mr Tom Blach !

Bouchard’s Chambertin today only has an average vine age of 25 years – I’m not sure about in 1998.

The vines are on the Chambertin, Latricières-Chambertin border and on average there are much less than the 100 cases I initially mentioned – closer to 60 cases from a tiny 0.15 hectare plot – so 2 barrels.

Now if I were to look at winesearcher:

Bouchard

de Vogüé

Grivot

That’s a difficult value proposition! Oh, and that’s before you even think of comparing to 2005 prices!

So, the last piece of the jigsaw – everything should be easy now.

Wine #3
The first 20 minutes:
The first few sniffs disappoint, a little undergrowth but little else. Slowly a dense red note builds at the core with a slightly herbal, menthol note above. The palate is dense, plush and very well textured – contrasting to the minerality of wine 2. The tannins come through on the mid-palate onwards and finish slightly bitter but there’s a real creamy base and this is probably the longest finishing.
After 45 minutes:
The nose is good but not great, some extra width of high-toned fruit and occasional glimpses of coffee – the herbal element is now much more in the background. The palate remains dense, plenty of silky tannin and exquisitely long if not particularly involving.
90 minutes on:
The nose was almost coming together, but then a little cedar thing started to develop. The palate stays unmoveable; concentrated, perhaps a little dense and very long. Side-by-side with wine 2 this denser, but #2 is more mineral and fresh.

Wines two and three are easily the best of this trio as they show greater length and more importantly sophistication. I would not rebuy #1. Today I would rate #2 above #3 – for it’s wonderful aromatics – for the longer term I’m happy to keep checking back every 5 years or-so and even add to their number in my cellar – if I had both the cash and the opportunity.

Faces put to the names on Friday!