MEDOC
The Medoc, Haut Medoc, Moulis & Listrac was shown at Chateau Citran. (pictured) Not one I'd visited before but it seemed a beautiful estate, complete with a strutting peacock on the front lawn! I headed straight for Chateau Beaumont, which is never awesome, but always amazing value. In good years it's a brilliant buy & I certainly recommend it in 2010. Fresh fruity nose, silky in the mouth, warm but well built tannin. What's not to like at sub £100 a case? I didn't buy 09 but I'm in this year. Mags perhaps? Onto Ch Cantemerle which is a cut above, but not quite as much as I hoped. It had a slightly metallic quality that I wasn't sure about. Quite a big finish after a pretty good ride. The 09 was hard to beat I think. Ch Camensac had a big fruity nose, intense tannin & good balance. I liked it. Am I allowed to say I don't like the label? Presentation is important right? Prob (def!) a bit harsh but when there are sooo many choices
…La Lagune is a 3rd growth but didn't really taste up at that lofty height to me. I noticed hedgerow, huge cassis hit, but the tannin needed to be expelled sharpish. Needs a good 'settle down' talking to in barrel! La Tour Carnet is a usual favourite of mine & TBC. They don't mess around with subtlety here, but as long as it works, I'm OK with that. The 2010 is deep, damsony and tasted like a step up to me. Others thought it was a bit over the top. So what…it's super value, moated castle, 4th Growth fare! However… my Haut Medoc tip this year is Ch Bernadotte which I tasted at Pichon Lalande (same stable!) It was really sumptuous wine. Vivacious, herby, lush, easy going, fine wine. It's always inexpensive & this is where we should be concentrating out drinking in the days of silly money & investment. I liked it last year…I love it this year! Finally a quick mention for Ch Potensac, which was not easy going but I considered could age really well. Plenty of everything (kitchen sink actually!) but if it works out it will be a bargain. I loved the 09 & have plenty of it so will perhaps wait on this.
MOULIS/LISTRAC
I only ever seem to consider 3 Chateau from Moulis because there never seems to be others on show. I must make an effort to try some more from this tiny AC but for now, for the second year running, Ch Poujeaux leads the trio. Loads of sweet tannin, and berry fruit driven charm. Ch Chasse Spleen was similarly rounded but just missed a smidge of spark IMO. Great wine still. Ch Maucaillou had a nice cassis & forest floor nose but I was hit with a metallic finish that again turned bitter. Later perhaps. I may jump again for Fourcas Hosten from Listrac though. It's especially aided by it's Beaumont-esq price tag! I can use over achieving wines like this very well at TBC. Plummy, damsony, not too much tannin, nice mouthfeel. Fine enough for moi!
GRAVES
Generally I love the zesty white wines of the Graves & Pessac Leognan region and therefore decided to devote a decent amount of time tasting them. However, I did struggle to find a 'vintage theme' & came away wondering if the huge variation was an indication that they were just too young to judge. If that is the case, I think it's pointless being detrimental about some & just pick the highlights that I can be positive about. Ch Chantegrive Blanc I thought showed really well. This is a £10 ish bottle of wine & for that gives a good amount of minerality & citrusy tang. I've never bought it before but the 2010 is certainly on my radar now. It seemed to have taken on enough weight. Similarly, Ch Bouscaut Blanc stood out too with a zing to remember! It has a smoky minerality and higher complexity about it. Ch Smith Haut Lafite Blanc stood head & shoulders above the pack! (that included Pape Clement, Domaine de Chevalier & Carbonnieux). This is lovely, tingly white wine that jumps out of the glass & dances in the mouth. Grassy, melony, zingy citrus but with weight, grace & style. It won't be cheap so I think Chantegrive has got to be the one that makes my own cellar.
The Graves reds were a far more successful looking bunch. SHLafite again doing well with an impressive earthy, savoury factor mixed with the shinier black forest cherry aromas. Full bodied but holding the weight well. Chantegrive Rouge was almost as good as the white, but not quite. Again a bargain to watch for though. Ch Rahoul produced a big finish I enjoyed & an attractive cherry liqueur nose. Domaine de Chevalier was much better than the white with a pronounced (tannic and acidic!) mouthfeel and long, long finish. A different animal than the 2009, which was more of an immediate charmer. This will take some time but I'd like to be there when it arrives! Ch Fieuzal Rouge had creamy, vanillary polish about it that impressed me. A well regarded Chateau with 'in the know' Claret fans that doesn't cost the earth. Haut Bailly had monster proportions with large tannin & acidity and fruit and, and, and…I have to say I didn't enjoy the sample but I had just finished 4 days of big tannic wines. It's probably great! Haut Bergy I did warm too though. Perhaps that does say something about the tasting schedule as prettier wines seem to get the best marks on day 4! This is indeed pretty & should be a bargain again this year. Similarly with Larrivet Haut Brion. Smoky, lively, bright, black fruity, zingy but not OTT acid/tannin. Malartic Lagraviere was even better. I usually like their whites but the red shone out for me this year. Very refined, with grainy tannins & fruit 'a plenty. I might just buy this! Ch Pape Clement 2010 won my top marks in the red corner! This is intensely compelling wine with huge swaths of black fruit, cassis, globules of sweet glycerine and dark chocolate vying for attention in the mouth. I'd seriously like t
o spend time with a bottle sorting out all these young, unruly factors into order in my head, but it will probably be out of my price range as usual. I'll settle for assessing the young princely wine for now & perhaps in 20 years I'll be rich enough to own it? Yes…let's be positive shall we!