1999 Dujac, Morey Saint-Denis
Medium-plus ruby-red colour. The nose is brown-sugar sweet with quite some understated density, very subtle stems and eventually a mix of black cherry and a last note of redcurrant. The palate is very well textured with fine grained tannin offsetting dense fruit and very good acidity. The only negative today is a little oak-driven bitterness on the finish. This is showing as a very young wine – much younger and denser than the 1995 at the same stage of evolution (or perhaps better to say age) – I wouldn’t open another for 3-5 years. Perhaps it’s time to dig out another 95…
Rebuy – Yes

2005 Joseph Drouhin, Laforet Bourgogne Pinot Noir
Bright medium cherry-red with a trace of purple. The nose is like a bowl of fresh cherries, a little tart and high-toned with just a faint edge of garden mint. The palate shows plenty of freshness and an unexpected intensity in the mid-palate. The texture is good and tannin only shows as transient rasp on the tongue before a almost good finish. In any other vintage this would be a great bourgogne, in 2005 it is ‘merely’ well above average – and did I mention the value – it’s only around €10.
Rebuy – Yes

2000 Bouchard Père et Fils, Beaune 1er Clos du Roi
This was lovely for about a year after release, was far less pleasant for about 2 years thereafter, but now it seems to be coming back into favour. This is made with purchased grapes from a long-term contract and is usually great value wine – if relatively simple vs their Beaune 1er du Château. The colour is medium ruby-red. The red-fruited nose just about avoids a baked/cooked effect and is high-toned and sweet with a hint of garden mint. The palate has just about enough acidity, a little fat and an interesting length. The finish has more than a hint of oak about it, but all the positives from oak and none of the negatives. Soft sweet and friendly – a nice wine.
Rebuy – Maybe

1996 Jean-Claude Belland, Chambertin
The colour is a rather deep mahogany with just a hint of ruby-red in the reflections. The nose shouts of toasty oak when first poured but rapidly starts to show a super depth and even height of red shaded fruits then finally some floral violet notes – super complexity and quite impressive. After the 2000 Thomas-Moillard St.Vivant this is excredibly lithe, tight and acid-driven – it takes a few sips to adjust before calm is restored. There’s real intensity here and though the finish is quite understated, it is very long. You sense rather than feel the tannins due to a faint astringency, but they are very well behaved. Slowly the density builds in the mid-palate rounding the wine out more and more – I’d say this conservatively needs another 5 years to make the next step from impressive to excellent. This was really super value costing ‘only’ ~€50, I seem to remember the price jumping significantly for the 1999 vintage, today I’ve lost touch on the pricing.
Rebuy – Yes

Another en-primeur purchase – this time for around €50. Just like the Bonnes-Mares, these vines are now owned by Dujac – I expect the 2005 vintage will also be rather aspirationally priced! I opened a 99 last year and found it incredibly young so decided to pop my lone 91 for comparison – blind you would have difficulty spotting which was which! Time to see how approachable the 2000 is…
2000 Thomas-Moillard, Romanée Saint-Vivant
A lovely medium-plus ruby red colour – still just a hint of cherry red at the rim. The nose starts just a little meaty and beetrooty – not so great – but soon there is creamy black cherry but with a hint of reduction, finally it becomes redder, softer, more floral and much more interesting. This wine equals the concentration of the Bonnes-Mares but with a totally different and much more elegant personality. The tannins are in there somewhere, but the super-smooth, high quality fruit is the main attribute. The finish is borne on nicely judged acidity and again hints towards cream-edged black cherry – oh and it’s excellent – really long. Very young, but this is a wine I should perhaps have gone for the ‘full 12′ rather than the 6, it’s also more ‘honest’ about the vintage than the Bonnes-Mares was; obviously ripe with understated acidity and just a little plump. Versus the 1999 at the same time last year this is all the more interesting, elegant and drinkable – the 99 probably needs 10+ years to excite.
Rebuy – Yes

This wine ‘only’ cost about €45 as an en-primeur – at that price it’s fantastic value. These vines are now owned by Dujac – I expect the 2005 vintage will cost at least €150!
2000 Thomas-Moillard, Bonnes-Mares
Medium-plus garnet-red colour. The nose starts wide with a deep red core. Time adds a faint cedar with a mint edge that’s subtle enough to add a nice additional complexity rather than an obvious unripe element. The palate offers quite some surprises; the slightly astringent tannins are just a little rustic, but there is depth, plus a shape and acid balance that you would never assume to come from the ripe 2000 vintage. The concentration is ample, and delivered in a fresh and lithe, rather than fat way. The finish shows good, if not amazing length, but there’s a lot of complexity and depth here. It’s a young, rather ‘old school’ wine, but one that brims with value. I’ll revisit ~2012.
Rebuy – Yes

For the 1999-2001 vintages these wines were an absolute steal, but from 2002 and presumably boosted by the stellar burghound reviews the prices crept ever-higher. I would estimate that 2005 is about 70% more expensive than 2001 – it’s still a good value package – but…

What a blow – to add to the higher cost, I decided to christen my cellar with the first bottle from this case; carefully opening the wooden case, I placed one bottle on the floor while re-sealing the case – then knocked over the bottle! concrete floors are not so forgiving, so despite no ‘fall height’ I am left with a wet floor and no Le Clos!

Now only 10 are left – this note from bottle 2:
2001 William Fevre, Chablis Le Clos
A young lemon-yellow colour. The nose is a little reticent but wide and with some citrus bite – slowly increasing in depth with time. The palate is well textured – even waxy – also, like the nose, it’s understated and tight though the perfect acidity and length go unquestioned. This is showing about 50% of what was on display about 18 months ago so I won’t touch another for 4 or 5 years. Should still be top-class in the future
Rebuy – Maybe

Drunk as a counterpoint to yesterdays Lignier – it’s not a great start (by comparison) leave it with me a while – I’ll come back in a couple of hours…

1999 J-F Mugnier, Chambolle-Musigny
The first bottle from a pack of 12 halves. Medium ruby-red, still edged with cherry-red. The nose starts just a little lactic, but the raspberry fruit soon dovetails to give a better creamy raspberry effect – the last sniffs are quite brown sugar… The palate is lithe, though seems rather less concentrated than the preceding Lignier, but it’s light on its feet with a medium finish – the acidity slowly lingers. These 1999’s were lovely on release but just now they are ‘only’ showing as ‘pretty good’. Much less compelling than the 2000 Lignier today. I’ll let them rest for 3-5.
Rebuy – Maybe

2000 Hubert Lignier, Chambolle-Musigny
Medium garnet but it still retains more than an edge of cherry-red. The nose impresses with lovely high-toned fruit over a deeper base – it starts with a twist of black, but gets redder and finer all the while – eventually I even find wild strawberry, a common descriptor for pinot, but one that I rarely find. This wine shows an impressive level of concentration to go with its smooth texture. There’s plenty of oak artifacts on the finish – vanilla cream – but it’s very long for a village wine and continues to impress as the glass empties. What differentiates this from other ‘beautifully oaked’ wines is the fresh, complex and compelling ‘Chambolle’ fruit on the nose – devoid of oak. I remember this being relatively expensive, but it’s a wine that I can say I wish I had more of. Smooth and ‘giving’ there’s definitely no rush to drink this.
Rebuy – Yes