2007 seemed like a perfect time to evaluate the legendary and getting-more-expensive-by-the-minute 1982s from Bordeaux. As the next universally ‘great’ vintage after 1961, 1982 represents the first big-time vintage of most of our wine lifetimes, and because of that fact it is hard to think of these wines as being ‘old,’ per se, yet these wines are now twenty-five years of age and approaching that thirty-to-forty year old sweet spot for great clarets where true greatness is achieved.

Originally, I was going to make this a weekend and have fifty or sixty wines from the vintage, but we ended up toning it down to twenty-five of the vintage’s best wines, both Left and Right Bank. It was a most enjoyable and fascinating evening, and I came out with a real perspective of this vintage and where it stands right now here in 2007. We played a bit of a spontaneous game and selected one word to describe each flight, and when you put all of these words together, I think it paints a clear picture of the vintage on its highest level, as well as two conclusions that are ‘can’t miss TV,’ so to speak. In addition, ten of the seventeen Left Bank wines were sourced directly from the Chateaux, creating an interesting side bar about provenance and wines being ‘ex Chateau.’ They weren’t cheap either. One of the two First Growths that we were able to get from the Chateaux came with a price tag of 1800 Euros! As far as getting Right Bank wines from the Chateaux, as Tony Soprano would say, ‘Fugghedaboudit.’

We started with three St. Juliens and a 1982 Ducru Beaucaillou. It had that classic Ducru nose of elegance, lead pencil and almost cardboard but not quite. There was nice spine, olive aromas and pungent fruit in this gritty ’82. It had a minerally palate with a nice spike of alcohol and a soft finish. Lush cassis eased on out in this smooth and stylish wine. Mike remarked how the 1982 Ducru is ‘amazingly consistent.’ It got more chocolaty and nicely spicy, gaining a point in my glass (94).

The 1982 Gruaud Larose (sourced from Chateau) was a contrast in style, possessing a beefy character and darker, deeper fruit. There was a touch of wild grass to this ‘pumped up Ducru,’ as King Angry, aka Ray, remarked, and a touch of cardboard as well. The Gruaud was spinier than the Ducru, both in the nose and on the palate, and its flavors were beefy and full of black fruits. There was a slight hole in the middle of the Gruaud, and Mike found it ‘a little square.’ John, our Australian ambassador, found ‘a touch of greenness,’ not that that was a negative in this case. It was Ray’s favorite of the flight; I guess big guys like big wines (93+).

The 1982 Leoville Las Cases (sourced from Chateau) had more noticeable oak in its nose along with supporting vanilla cream aromas. I actually did not mind the oak as much as I usually do when it is that noticeable. The palate clearly had the most structure and texture of the three, possessing class, length and style. Dan found it ‘seductive and violet.’ Ray found the Las Cases not as forthcoming and lush as the Gruaud. The more I tasted the three over and over again, the closer I found the quality to be amongst the three (95).

Speaking of lush, after Ray made that comment I wondered to myself, ‘Is the lushness of a great vintage like 1961 really here?’ Also, there was no real noticeable difference in the quality of the Ducru relative to the two wines sourced at the Chateau. We conferred for a minute about what single word could sum up this first flight and decided on ‘SEDUCTIVE.’

St. Estephe was next in line, beginning with an excellent 1982 Calon Segur (sourced from Chateau) , which had a great nose. There was excellent t ‘n a, chocolate, cassis and blackberry in this singing wine. It also had edge, spice and perfectly singed beef aromas. I was loving this wine. In the mouth, there were peanut flavors and solid t ‘n a to this long and minerally wine, but the nose was so exciting that the palate seemed almost a touch disappointing. Cassis and olive flavors came out in this still excellent wine (94).

The 1982 Montrose was extremely peanutty, also possessing ‘sesame,’ as Ray pointed out. It was aggressive in those regards, but I didn’t mind it. It had nice t ‘n a, and a little bull and its blood, too. There were more olive flavors in the mouth, a bit of brick and game, and a touch of that cardboard but excellent length. Australian John summed up the Montrose emphatically, calling it ‘a real prizefighter of a wine that will never give up. It will be there forever.’ Its spiny, alcoholic finish certainly said so (93+).

The 1982 Cos d’Estournel (sourced from Chateau) has always been one of my pet 1982s, and its nose was again a knockout. It had a little bit of every aroma that I have written so far in this article; just add tobacco. It was a rich, spiny wine with great structure. There was real breed here and despite a little burnt rubber in the nose, there was also gorgeous jasmine and spice. Long and stylish, the Cos had a nutty finish (95).

A few did guess the Montrose as being the one wine in this flight that was not from the Chateau, for what it’s worth. It did seem more mature in its profiles than the fresh Calon and Cos, but it was still what I would consider a sound bottle. When comparing the two ‘Saints’ of Bordeaux, I remarked how ‘St. Julien will kiss you while St. Estephe will spank you”¦and Ray will just beat you silly.’ I settled on ‘VIMFUL’ as the best word to describe this flight, which ruffled King Angry’s feathers, as he was quick to point out that vimful is not a word. Take it to Webster’s, buddy, because it’s in JK’s official dictionary of wine!

Pauillac was the next stop on our tour, beginning with a 1982 Grand Puy Lacoste. The GPL had a clean and pungent nose, a spiny edge with an indoor cleaner impression. There was a great, fat core of cassis wrapped in minerals and t ‘n a. It kept getting spinier. It had big, rich flavors of cassis and tea, as well as some tang without the citrus. Round, plush, smooth yet a bit square, the bigger, brawnier style of Pauillac made many stand up and take notice (92).

The 1982 Pichon Baron (sourced from Chateau) was a spectacular bottle of this wine. Its nose was noticeably sweeter with lilacs, lavender and purple honeysuckle aromas. There was a flamboyant intensity to its seductive nose, almost Right Bank-ish in its style. Dan called it ‘stony yet jammy,’ and referred to that combination as ‘the summit of Bordeaux.’ Long and stylish with nice spice and style, the wine was again more acidity than tannins, much like all of the wines so far. Dan found ‘fraise des bois’ flavors, and its finish was very stony. Ray and I quickly huddled for a consensus that 1982 was all about the acidity and had very soft tannins in general. Ray summed 1982 up already as ‘a Burgundian vintage for Bordeaux’ (95).

The 1982 Pichon Lalande (sourced from Chateau) was a disappointing bottle of this wine to me despite its perfect provenance. Its nose was full of animal and horse aromas and a healthy dose of wood like the Las Cases, but way too much so. This was not consistent with the greatest examples of this wine that I have had. It had some signature olive there, but this green, woody pungency dominated the wine’s aromatics. The pungency carried over to the palate, which did have a smooth and supple finish that also had a little ‘pop’ to it. However, in the end, this bottle was way too oaky for me, even though its texture was a redeeming quality. I will reiterate that I have had much better bottles, but this came from the Chateau (91)!

The 1982 Lynch Bages (sourced from Chateau) was classic Lynch all the way. I think it caused Australian John to whisper ‘oy oy oy’ under is breath! The wine was big, dark and almost medieval with a dungeon-like complexity. Beef and minerals dominated the nose, with supporting nominations to soy, salt and animal. Its earthy palate was salty and spiny with that indoor cleaner, fresh edge that reminded me of the 1989. Australian John commented how this flight was ‘a step up’ (95).

The flight of Pauillacs was summed up with ‘DRIVE’ as its word of the flight.

Graves was next, and a trio of Brions was on tap, beginning with the 1982 La Tour Haut Brion from the cellars of our own Dave Hamburger. The LTHB had a spiny, gravelly nose with lots of alcohol, cleaner and pungent intensity. There was a touch of pool chlorine and cinnamon stick spice, as well as some Cheerios in this complex wine. Cassis finally fought through and unfolded like origami once it did. Its palate was explosive, and this was the evening’s first, truly vigorous wine not only in acidity but also tannins. Flavors of cigar, plum, chocolate and dry minerals abounded in this superb bottle, although Australian John did not like that ‘varnishy’ quality (96+).

The 1982 La Mission Haut Brion got lots of oohs and aahs and such praise as ‘exceptional’ and ‘decadent.’ There was sweet perfume underneath a bed of cassis, plum and wildflower with a flash of ripe fruit. It was a bit coy on the palate, with its gravel buried in its fruit, and game and flower cased in tobacco and minerals. It was a great wine, but not the best bottle I have had, and I am a La Mission guy! Vigor came out with time in the glass on its minerally, stony and long finish (96).

The 1982 Haut Brion (sourced from Chateau) was very aromatic with a perfume of grape and cassis, also with peanut and game. There was that touch of Cheerios again, and Ray confirmed with ‘oats.’ The wine was spiny with a flash of ripeness, but the Haut Brion was definitely a step behind the other two Graves, but just a step, although it seemed on a faster evolutionary track than its two siblings. King Angry scoffed at that notion, saying that it has ‘been there for two decades.’ Australian John found it ‘fragrant and exotic.’ There was beautiful balance to this classy wine (94).

‘COMPLEX’ was the word of choice for our Graves flight.

We transitioned to the remaining four First Growths in the next flight, beginning with a phenomenal bottle of 1982 Margaux (sourced from Chateau). The Margaux had a pungent nose, and its t ‘n a jumped out at first. It also had cinnamon, iron, rock and gorgeous perfume. It was ‘beyond licorice’ according to Dan, and Australian John admired its ‘cherry liqueur.’ The palate was rocky without the horror but with the picture show, ‘not its usual feminine self,’ Ray observed. Though spiny and long, the Margaux was still stylish with a touch of that Maraux elegance. This was a great bottle of this wine, and it ended up being wine of the flight (97).

The 1982 Lafite Rothschild, most desirable Left Bank of the vintage according to the auction index, was, well, Lafite. Very shy at first (as always) , it was still stylish in a subtle way, long and penetrating. Its palate was smooth and soft with kisses of wood, leather and carob. Ray remarked, ‘It’s good but doesn’t ever blow me away.’ Australian John was a bit more optimistic, saying ‘it has to happen,’ meaning that it was not in a great spot just yet but will be (93).

The 1982 Mouton Rothschild (sourced from Chateau) had ‘coca cola’ in its nose per Ray. I saw what he was saying, and it was black cherry city. Its nose was divine with a great meaty perfume full of caramel, game, peanut, honey and decadent fruit. Rich yet more polished than I remember and expected, the palate seemed shut down relative to its orgasmic nose. Australian John found the palate ‘simple,’ but it kept gaining in the glass and was indubitably an outstanding wine (96).

The 1982 Latour was very vigorous and ‘mouthsearing,’ according to Ray. There was some barnyard in there to go with its deep, brooding walnut and pencil. It was a ‘metallic’ sentinel of a wine. Long and stylish on the palate, it was also a bit polished and ‘almost Barolo,’ someone noted. It gained in the glass as well but seemed shy (95+).

After a most heated debate where grace, finesse and polish were all nominated, we settled on ‘CLASS’ as the best word to describe these four First Growths.

It was time to cross the river to the Right Bank and experience a trio of St. Emilions. The 1982 Pavie had a nice nose full of spice, classic wintergreen and the redder fruits of St. Emilion. Delicious and classic, it was near outstanding with impeccable balance, great acidity and a nice kiss of olive. I may not like what they are doing now, but this was an impressive and classic ’82 (94).

The 1982 Ausone was slightly cooked, our nineteenth yet first affected or off bottle. Figgy and sweet with a yeasty and confectioners’ nose, there was nice spice and texture but the wine was clearly affected (91A).

The 1982 Cheval Blanc was also a touch figgy but also had a kaleidoscopic smorgasboard of aromatics. Despite its gamy edge, there was a lot of complexity behind it of very sweet red fruits and a caramel glaze. With a rich and round mouthfeel and a very concentrated palate, the Cheval was long and stylish with nice minerals, yet ‘consistently disappointing,’ as Ray observed, and I do concur with that. You know expectations are high when a 95-point rating is still disappointing (95).

We joked around that this flight needed two words to sum it up, ‘stay left.’ However, after the Pomerols that followed, we decided that ‘ACIDITY’ was more appropriate.

Last but certainly not least were a quintet of Pomerols; make that a quartet as the 1982 Vieux Chateau Certan was corked (DQ).

The 1982 La Conseillante had an incredibly exotic spice to its nose that blended in perfectly with its t ‘n a qualities. The wine had a cedary edge similar to that of a Left Banker, but its cassis and olive tapenade aromas were amazing and decidedly Right Bank. There was also great cinnamon stick, rose and stems to this complex nose. The wine had a rich and meaty mouthfeel with game, olive and vitamin flavors. Rich and smooth with nice dust and minerals, this ’82 was excellent and just short of outstanding (94).

The 1982 L’Evangile had sweet cherry jumping out of its nose with a nice forest-like complexity. Band-aid was also there in this daty, fruity wine. A touch of freshwater marked the palate, which had more alcohol and spice than the Conseillante and a vitaminy finish (94+).

The 1982 Petrus was a 1982 Petrus, which is not as easy a task as one might think since it is probably the most counterfeited wine of all-time. Thankfully, the Acker dilegnce came through (plug, plug). It was actually a great bottle of this wine with purple wildflowers and classic olive in its nose. Very classy, the Petrus also had ‘menthol’ (Ray) in a very light way. It was rich and meaty with tea flavors on its finish, but I do not think this vintage for Petrus will ever get better (95).

We saved the best for last with a great bottle of 1982 Lafleur. King Angry was very merry upon his first whiff of this wondrous wine. It had a unique nose with that signature, kinky, fleshy Rayas-like sweetness that the 1982 and other vintages of Lafleur have (but not all Lafleurs!) Its fruit was reined in with leather aromas suitable for a brand new Hermes bag. It had a super cherry and strawberry core of overripe Rayas flavors, exotic, vimful and oh so delicious (97).

That gamy, olive quality that all the Pomerols led us to select ‘KINKY’ as our word of the flight, although that word really only applies to the Right Bank wines. Or maybe, it was just that time of the night.

So, we summed up the vintage as:

SEDUCTIVE
VIMFUL
DRIVE
COMPLEX
CLASS
ACIDITY
KINKY

What really jumped out about this vintage were its finesse, elegance and acidity. With its soft tannins, this is a vintage that is all about the acidity, which is why its best wines will continue to age well. However, despite its larger than life reputation, 1982 is not a vintage that produced powerful wines by any stretch of the imagination. These wines were graceful, stylish and long, but definitely not powerful. For one of the vintages of the century to not have any 98 or 99 point wines in my book says something as well.

In summation, there are two conclusions that I made. One, I doubt we will ever see wines like this coming from Bordeaux ever again. The concentration and extraction achieved in today’s world are much greater than those in 1982, and I am not saying that is a bad thing. It’s just that after tasting hundreds of 2000s-2006s in Bordeaux over the past year, I don’t see wines of this 1982 style being made anytime soon again. This is not to say that today’s wines lack finesse or style; it is just to say that they are being made differently, hopefully and easily arguably for the better. Two, I found it most ironic that the king of concentration and the world’s number one wine critic made his reputation on a vintage of such elegance and finesse. Life’s full of irony, huh?

Our first evening sale was an extraordinary success, and a packed salesroom witnessed our first ever 100% sold sale. Our last single cellar auction in March was 99% sold with only one lot unsold, but thanks to a bevy of eager and benevolent bidders in the room, every lot found a new home this time around.

The fabulous offering of the cellar we affectionately dubbed Dr. Vino. drew bidders all over the world out of the woodworks in order to acquire some of his impeccably stored collection. Even wine celebrities such as Dominique Lafon and Bernard Magrez, owner of Pape Clement and many other distinguished wine properties around the world, came to observe. The few that knew the identity of the owner were some of the most active bidders accordingly. The sale’s low estimate of $1.15 million was shattered with an overall gross of $1.75 million, and a world record was set for a single, 750ml bottle of wine as a 1945 Romanee Conti went for over $40,000.

The top ten grossing lots of the sale were as follows:

In case you forgot, it was an Acker auction, and we like to taste the fruits of our labor. We started things off with some complimentary Multi-Vintage Krug for everyone. While most houses call this type of offering non-vintage, Krug differentiates itself as multi-vintage, as the blend is a carefully made one, consisting of multiple vintages, and not just the leftovers. In fact, the Krugs will tell you that it is the product that they work the most on and actually consider their finest Champagne. Obviously, there are different batches of MV. released over time. The one in the market right now is fantastic. Crisp, clean, fresh, full, linear and long, it is everything a glass of Champagne is supposed to be. Every cellar should always have a couple six-packs on hand (94).

The greatest collector of Champagnes in the world today, aka Big Boy, kept the bubblies flowing with a magnum of 1976 Salon. The Salon was a bit woodsy at first but blew off into a creamy, meaty mouthful of Champagne. Its flavor hues were yellow, orange and brown as it gave some autumnal impressions to go with its gamy fruit. It never completely shook its wood, but I still managed to polish off two glasses (93M).

About 100 lots into the sale, I was politely serviced with an outstanding magnum of 1992 Ramonet Montrachet. Possessing none of the typical 1992 over-ripeness, the Ramonet was still racy like a rocket and very youthful by most 1992 standards. Its acidity was extraordinary, enough to easily last another couple of decades. Ramonet’s signature style shone through, as its white and yellow fruits, sun-dried corn, mint and minerals were all in harmony. Still on the way up while most 1992s are heading in the opposite direction, the 1992 Ramonet Montrachet is definitely the white wine of the vintage (97M).

The Ramonet got me through the rest of the auction, but now the sale was over, and it was time to eat, drink and be merry. There was one more white wine that I sampled, a delicious Roulot Meursault Mon Plaisir.. Clean, fat and round, this balanced Meursault made me want to check out more whites from the overlooked 2001 vintage (92).

King Angry, aka Ray, had bought a trong>1991 Roumier Chambolle Musigny Les Amoureuses. off the list. It was a bit simple by the usual Roumier standards, almost a bit sweet with its cherry and strawberry fruit. Soft, tender and lush, it did not seem to have much backside left, although it could have been partially due to the fact that it was open well over an hour by the time I got to it. I do not think 1991 was a successful vintage for Roumier by his usual standards; however, the wine was still tasty and easy (91).

A magnum of 1993 Meo-Camuzet Vosne Romanee Les Brulees. was hanging out on The Don’s table, and he made me an offer I couldn.t refuse. The greatness of the 1993 vintage was quickly apparent with its sturdy backbone and definitive tannin flavors. There was still dark plum fruit to this long and stylish wine, with pinches of vitamins, stems and deeper, purpler hues (94M).

King Angry was busting my&chops, as usual, looking for the wines that I was going to buy and share with everyone. Magnums of 1990 Mugnier Musigny and 1988 Rousseau Chambertin Clos de Beze. were on the way. Take that! Well, he took it, and he was loving every minute of it.

The Mugnier was its usual outstanding self, and since the Burghound was not in the room, this 1990 wine showed quite well (that’s an inside joke about how whenever Allen Meadows is around, any wine from 1990 is doomed to show poorly). Rich and a bit fuller than the usual Musigny, it still retained the class of the vineyard while delivering a mouthful of rich red fruits, earth and game. It was ripe yet not over-ripe and an awfully good glass of wine (95M).

The Rousseau was no slouch either. It was more robust around the edges, typical of 88, delivering a hearty experience full of tannins, alcohol, rust and brick. However, it also had a lot of flesh to it, full of menthol, game and earthy fruit, which is atypical for a lot of 88s. It was borderline outstanding, but a bit rough and rugged to cross into that territory (94M).

.The Big Ticket. had arrived towards the end of the auction and quickly snapped up ten or fifteen lots. He also snapped up a 1961 Palmer for us to drink. Now you know why the artist formerly known as Eric the Red Wine Bandit. is now officially The Big Ticket.. The Palmer was superb, classic all the way. The earth, minerality and acidity jumped out first, but there was still a core of dark cassis fruit behind all that with only a hint of autumn in the wine. Robust, still youthful and long, the Palmer still maintained its hallmark elegance (96).

Bad Boy Bruce, another late arrival whose presence was most felt at the auction anyway, decided it was time for a palate refresher and ordered a 1975 Pol Roger Reserve. Yeasty and meaty, there were lots of vitamins in this gamy and still vibrant Champagne. Rich, round and complex, the Pol Roger was excellent as usual (93).

Eddie had since been long gone, yet his magnum of 1928 Vieux Chateau Certan remained. It was a beautiful glass of wine, possessing some gamy and figgy Pomerol fruit kissed by traces of old oak. Tender, elegant and balanced, this wine was starting to enter its twilight in a most distinguished way (92M).

The Big Ticket was back with a 1989 Clinet. The Clinet showed why it is considered one of the greatest Pomerols of the last 20 years. Deep, dark and brooding, it had a core of massive purple fruit. Traces of chocolate were around its edges, but the fruit was so fat and plump (in a reserved and brooding way), that one could barely pick up on its t n a. The mouth revealed a chunky, rich and fat wine, stylishly long and deceptively big since it was so elegant (96).

Bernard Magrez satisfied some curiosity with a 1990 Ornellaia. Mr. Magrez owns 34 vineyards worldwide at the moment, and Italy is on his radar. The Ornellaia was excellent, with a touch of that Italian designer leather to go with its earthy fruit (93).

It was time to go back to Burgundy and the other side of the room where The Don was holding court. 1969 Clair-Dau Bonnes Mares? Yessir. The Clair Dau was spectacular, showing that a 1969 Burgundy could actually be ripe. While autumnal in its flavor profile, there was still a wealth of minty (more menthol actually) freshness and brickhouse fruit. Fleshy, long and stylish, this was a great bottle of wine (95).

I had the pleasure of having my second recent bottle of 1969 Rousseau Gevrey Chambertin Clos St. Jacques. from Cru’s stash, and it was spectacular again. There is no doubt that Rousseau made the wines of the vintage in 69 and hit the proverbial bullseye. This wine was decadently good, tender, sweet and rich, brimming with cherry fruit and touched with tobacco. It was perfectly round in the mouth, textured and satiny, just absolutely delicious (96).

The Big Ticket wasn.t done yet, and ordered a 1989 La Mission Haut Brion. I matched his generosity with a second bottle, so it could make its way around the room. The La Miss was spectacular as always, encased in its buttery popcorn kernel, this time with more butter. Its smoky, gravelly style was there yet buried underneath an avalanche of buttery fruit. Buckets of cassis and grape poured out of the glass. Its long, stylish and gravelly finish somehow managed to balance out its wealth of fruit. This is a true vin de garde (97).

Before we headed south for the evening, we headed south to the Rhone and a pair of magnums. A magnum of 1989 Chave Hermitage was one of my better experiences with this wine. I have had much variation out of bottle and more disappointments than heights. Perhaps it was the magnum. The Chave was big and robust, full of roasted fruit and that Hermitage beef, blood, iron and menthol. Big yet balanced, long yet fine, the 89 was talking loud and saying something (95M).

King Angry got me one last time and a magnum of 1989 Rayas Chateauneuf du Pape was our final chapter, another spectacular bottle. The profit margin was definitely affected for the sale on this night. I have to say that every bottle that came from Cru’s cellar was spectacular and in outstanding condition. That’s one of the reasons it is the greatest restaurant on earth, and one of the reasons why I rarely dine anywhere else. The Rayas was rich and sweet in that Grenache/C du P way, full of sweet strawberry fruit, game, Provencal herbs, stones and spice. Peppery, spicy and full of t.n a, it was a nice way to end the evening&with a bang. Isn.t that a great way to end every evening (96)?

In the words of Montell Jordan, This is how we do it.. It was not just another auction, but as far as the Vintage Tastings. go, it was just another day at an Acker Auction.

It was time for a gathering of the 12 Angry Men at the end of March, as winter had bottled up much angriness that needed to be uncorked. 1970s Burgundy was the theme, and much generosity was on display as we gathered in our favorite haunt, the private room downstairs at Cru.

We started with a couple of bottles of 1973 Krug, original not Collection. bottlings. Although one bottle was a touch more mature than the other, the fresher bottle had a nice nose of mature honey, dust, wheat, light white chocolate and touches of yeast and dirt. Round, smooth, honeyed and tender, the palate delivered more of a wine-like experience, although it still possessed a pinch of petillance. It got meatier in the nose with air, and its nice citric edges and white chocolate flavors made it easy to drink, but it seemed a bit more mature than it should have been, which was probably the bottle. It wasn.t a bad bottle and was perfectly enjoyable, but probably not a perfect one either (92A?).

A blind trio of 1979 Champagnes was the official first flight courtesy of Bad Boy Bruce, a living testament to the fact that rock n roll will never die. We sat down to the first bubbly, which had a kinky nose with a waxy, pungent, dried apricot fruit aroma. There was also mahogany and lemon pledge in the nose as well, and a bit of maturity crept in quickly. Ray immediately found it a bit off.. It did have iodine, as Gorky noted. Ray preferred to call it gym socks, and he wasn.t being complimentary. There were flavors of earth and milk chocolate, but this bubbly got dirtier and dirtier in the glass and fell apart quickly, a bit stinky. as someone remarked after a few minutes. It was the 1979 Alain Robert Le Mesnil. Since I had a crummy bottle of this in Chicago as well, please, no one serve me this sucker again (85A).

The second bubbly was very aromatic with this floral, acacia-like exotic honey, the type of honey that Carmine would break out at Celeste, one that was made in a certain way at a certain time and only go with a certain cheese. I’m talking exotic here. Some all-bran graced the nose as well. The flavors were pungent, big, rocky and tangy with a wildflower kink. Its big, full-bodied style was full of gamy flavors. Its acidity was a bit more mellow than I expected, not exactly soft, but the Champagne seemed to be on a plateau, but a plateau that it will be on for a while. It had that delicious, wine-like edge to its citrus, vanilla and wheat flavors. It was the 1979 Krug (94).

The third Champagne in this starter flight was incredibly fresh and pungent with fantastic anise, bread and cream aromas. By far the freshest of the trio, there were still loads of acidity here; this was an infant next to the first two. Its flavors were taut and lemony; its finish stony and its acidity longer than a day with the in-laws. Bruce gleefully hailed the 1979 Louis Roederer Cristal as Champagne of the vintage.. It was tough to argue (96+).

A trio of whites comprised the next flight, and we began with the 1973 Leroy Meursault Charmes. It had that waxy, fresh, straight from the Leroy cellar nose. I felt like I could have cleaned the table with it as it smelled like anise wax indoor cleaner. The palate was soft and easy with a touch of yeast and citrus, coconut. as Peter observed, and a touch woodsy on its finish. Uh oh, some angriness crept out from King Angry himself. Ray huffed, there’s no way this is 34 years old.. He said it, not me, but it is tough to be an experienced wine taster and not agree; these cellar wines have to be at least reconditioned. The wine was still pleasant and enjoyable (90).

Roger pulled another amazing old Leflaive out of his cellar as he did at La Paulee, this time it being a 1978 Domaine Leflaive Batard Montrachet. Its nose was Five Alive, aka big-time fruit basket. There was also a stick of butter and an exotic pinch of almost Worcestershire to this smoky wine. Its palate was rich, meaty and buttery, full of exotic garden flavors and possessing great balance. Ray found it milky and smoky, while another found it briny. (94).

The 1978 Drouhin Montrachet Marquis de Laguiche was gorgeous, very fresh, dusty and intense in its long and smoky nose. There was this dried BBQ jerky exotic edge here. Earth, smoke and waterfall rounded out the nose, although Suss was lost in the forest and its woodsy. nature. Its austerity was distinguished, and there was this splash of Worcestershire and tobasco on its finish, probably the same woodsiness that Suss was referring to, although who knows what was happening under the table over there (95).

The Don happened to be upstairs, and I grabbed swallows of a 1996 Dauvissat Chablis La Forest, which was clean, tasty, pure and delicious. I do love a good Chablis (93). Also, there was some 1996 Coche-Dury Meursault Perrieres. 1996 is an extraordinary year for this already extraordinary winemaker, and the 96 Perrieres was absolutely singing on this night, full of flavor and acidity yet balanced and delicious in that smoky Coche way (96).

The reds commenced with a procession of 1979s, three to be exact. One was a last second substitute due to a last second cancellation of a potential new member. All wines in this flight were served single-blind except the one substitute was double-blind.

The first red had cotton candy. in its nose per Peter, and I found this distinct green apple sour to it as well. Rob noted the sweetness of Richebourg, and it was cherry juice city. Very modern and candied, it had that Gros Frere style and indeed was the 1979 Gros Frere et Soeur Richebourg. It had a chalky finish and some t n a to it (90).

Unfortunately, a magnum of 1979 Richebourg was cooked and sickly (DQ).

Due to a last second cancellation, we were forced to throw in a ringer of a wine for this first flight, all the more needed after the DQ.d magnum. It had a fabulous nose, make that incredible and was clearly wine of the flight, although there wasn.t much competition. Leather, spice, tar and dried black roses graced its spiny nose. Long, balanced and still with lots of life, this 1979 G. Conterno Barolo Monfortino Riserva was a stunning glass of wine (95+).

A 1976 Pousse d.Or Volnay Clos des 60 Ouvrees. was corked (DQ).

A 1972 Dujac Clos St. Denis was not. Baby’s bottom was the first thing to jump out of the nose, along with tomato, rust, lemon and benevolent oak. It tasted like a Bloody Mary, a dead ringer for the Sunday brunch tasting group. Suss also picked up on tomato and soy sauce. in this pleasing 72, which had good acidity still (93).

Another mystery wine came out, and its nose was roasted and hearty yet seductive. While feminine, graceful and elegant, the wine was still forceful. Suss picked up on bell pepper. and Ray olive. in this outstanding 1972 Chave Hermitage (95).

We were back to our regular programming with a 1976 Roumier Bonnes Mares, which had some big and heady Worcestershire aromas, saucy in nature and soaking up its noticeable t n a. There was a touch of tomato flavors and wood, its wood being a touch over the top. Rich and long, there were hearty bouillon flavors in this still respectable 76 (90).

A flight of 1978s was next, and Slover was silently slurping them down before informing us of the great flight that would follow.

The 1978 Ponsot Clos de la Roche was not the Vieilles Vignes; I am not sure they even made one in 1978 strangely enough. Anyway, the Ponsot had a gamy, olivy nose with lots of stiff tannins, soy and marinated meat aromas. The palate was spicy and spiny with lots of citric twists, olives and game. Menthol flavors were on its finish, and the wine was flirting with outstanding and ultimately got there. Gamy, spiny and long, the Ponsot also had teriyaki beef. flavors per Suss (95).

The 1978 Rousseau Chambertin took it up a notch and was the best bottle of this that I had ever had. Brooding, long, reserved and refined, there was great dust in the nose of this reticent behemoth. Its flavors were pungent and full of great citrus, iron, stem, stalk and beef flavors. It was still smooth, long and great (96).

The 1978 Dujac Clos de la Roche, one of the wines of the vintage, was still excellent yet less than its finest examples. Full of olives and a touch of gas, there were also lots of garden and vegetable aromas: carrots with the ranch dip, tomato, green pepper.&it was big-time green pepper and pungent both in the nose and on the palate. Rich, smooth and with great texture, the Dujac made a nice recovery on its balanced palate. Suss noted toasted sesame seeds. (94). It should be a 98 or 99 point wine, though, but I think this was bottle variation more than an affected bottle.

A 1978 La Tache was aromatic and perfumed, shy and perfumed, more lavender and wildflower than the typical 78 beef and menthol I have come to expect. This potpourri quality carried over from the nose to the palate, where more of the classic beef and menthol emerged in the flavor profile. It was a very good bottle but not a great one; again, not necessarily off but another bottle variation situation. We all know bottled barrel by barrel very often (and to this day) , right (92) ?

A final 1978 was served blind. Meaty, gamy, chocolaty, dirty, and earthy, its nose was quite complex. Graham and honey rounded things out aromatically. Rich, creamy and meaty, its palate had vitamins and the most power of the flight so far. A touch of animal rounded out this earthy and robust 1978 Vogue Musigny Vieilles Vignes. It was a great showing for this overlooked vintage of Vogue, whose wines many feel are lackluster between 1973-1989. Well, not on this night ong> (95+).

We needed a palate cleanser, and it was a spectacular one, a 1966 Louis Roederer Cristal. Caramel oozed out of the glass like Scarlett Johansson out of a limousine. Ray took my daydream away from me with brittle, more burnt, cooked caramel, and I immediately saw his four best high school buddies getting out of the limo after her. Bruce gushed, the best vintage of the best decade in Champagne.. Bread crusts, honey, orange rind and hazelnut. (Pat) resulted in an orgy of aromas. It was pure vanilla sex going down the hatch, and it was so good it caused Big Boy to ramble about the 1911 and 28 Pol Roger for about ten minutes. It was a short speech by the usual standards (97).

I think I was back upstairs for a swallow of 1995 Roumier Bonnes Mares with The Don. I had to be, as this was 1970s Burgundy night. The 1995 was so concentrated and extremely impressive, especially for a 1995. While this seems to be a vintage most collectors avoid nowadays, I now see why Roumier most likely made the wines of the vintage and why this rusty Bonnes Mares gets $500+ a bottle (95+).

The 1971 Prieur Musigny had a brown sugared, 1959-like nose. Earthy and big, the palate was brown sugary and oaty. Balanced and pretty tasty, it was good but seemed mature for a 71 (92A).

The 1971 Giroud Bonnes Mares had a weird, peanut butter nose, and so did the palate. There was great structure to its big and long palate, and band-aid on its finish. This seemed to be very atypical Burgundy (91).

The third wine of this 71 flight was a 1971 Rousseau Chambertin Clos de Beze.. Its nose was a bit off-putting, to be frank, full of celery and wood. Its structure was great, though, and its acidity enormous. Its citric twists, tang and length were very special, and its flavors became more benevolent and in the garden spice direction (94).

It was another intermezzo, this time a 1928 Louis Roederer Brut. Caramel and glue, Gorky observed. Asian plum wine. was another’s observations. Wine-like, old and intense, this was another regular. Roederer Brut that showed spectacularly (96+).

A quartet of 1971 s was next, beginning with a delicious 1971 Echezeaux. It had a great nose of classic rose, leather, menthol, garden and iron. It got a little woody without crossing the line, and the palate was of similar character (93).

The 1971 Romanee St. Vivant was very big yet very square, chunky and with lots of acidity and indicators, yet overall a rusty brick of a wine (90+?).

The 1971 La Tache was another one of those magical 71 LTs. It had been a while for me; after having about half of a magical case that Cru once owned, there had been a few tough luck 71 LTs for me, never achieving the same magical heights as before. Well thanks to Big Boy, we were back in the saddle of this Burgundy stallion. Serious. and ridiculous. came from the overjoyed crowd. The beef, the menthol, the tar, the leather, the citrus, the huge lingering acidity&the 1971 La Tache. It is a wine more timeless than Roger Clemens in that it can still bring the heat (98+).

It was a bad night for Richebourg, as a 1971 was (DQ). No one cared. That’s how you have to be with old wines. If you get an off bottle, it’s on to the next. Of course, when you have thirty wines, that helps ease the pain, but so does a good backup or two for less monumental occasions.

One of the wines of the night was courtesy of The Don, upstairs sipping on some 1966 Clair-Dau Chambertin Clos de Beze.. All I can tell you is that it was fantastic (96).

Somehow, I had a swallow of 1973 Krug Collection (93).

Big Boy quickly bought the rights to the evening and made it a Big Boy Production by purchasing a 1999 Romanee Conti and 1999 La Tache off the list. The RC had ridiculous concentration and insane baby fat. Its richness, super freshness and super crushed berry core were the stuff of legends.. It was still such a baby yet able to show an enormous amount of greatness. Broad-shouldered and flamboyant, the 1999 RC is up there with the greatest ever made. Aubert certainly thinks so, and even one of my fellow enthusiasts recently admired the 99 after tasting almost 100 years of RC. It is indubitably one of the great, great wines of all time (99).

The 1999 La Tache was/is no slouch, either. Pure game, Pat admired. The LT had a spectacular nose as well. The wine seemed more mature with its gamy notes and animal fat, but it was actually more spiny and full of enough brick to make a very very very fine house. Great. appeared over and over in my notes. It was qualitatively equal to the RC yet LT all the way (99).

No one was angry anymore.

The Doctor Is Still In

A recent stopover in LA had me dining with the one and only one of my fellow enthusiasts . I can safely say that reports of his demise are greatly exaggerated, and that there are still a few jewels left in the cellar. Quite a few. We were joined by the Burghound, always on the scent of the best Burgundies opened anywhere he is, Etienne de Montille, and another one of America’s most important collectors, one I would put in the Top Ten. as well. Cut was the location, Wolfang Puck’s hot new restaurant in the Beverly Wilshire Hotel. There were lots of pretty women, but wine was first and foremost on all of our collective minds.

We started with a true connoisseurs. delight, a pair of off-vintage Montrachets from two of its finest producers. The 1977 Lafon Montrachet might very well have been the last bottle of this on Earth. Its nose was still special, caramel creeping out at first followed by corn, wheat and pan-fried butter. The palate had old, yeasty flavors and a touch of tangy citrus. Earth and book flavors were on its finish. This was still a good drink at age thirty despite the fact that it came from one of the least collectible vintages of the last thirty years. Soft, tender and with a touch of wax, the Lafon was pleasant, still holding on. I believe it was Allen who remarked, quite remarkable, not a good vintage at all. I’m impressed. In the context of the vintage, it’s brilliant. It’s lovely wine but not a great wine.. Then a ratings debate ensued. Our anonymous friend felt it was flirting with four stars, I found it flirting with 90 points, but each of those ratings do not really justify the quality.. Allen gave us some vintage details: high acid, low ripeness, a lot of rain.. In the end, I decided to give it 90 points because of the context; however, I couldn.t argue with an assessment of a point of two less (90).

Unfortunately, the 1984 Ramonet Montrachet was corked (DQ).

Wolfgang came down to sit and drink with us for a few minutes. We were just starting to get into a pair of 1959 Burgundies. After a glass of Lafon, a Riesling and beef tangent and upon seeing the 1959, Wolfgang reminisced about when he was living in or near Dijon with his father in the mid-sixties, and he had a great 59 Burgundy and went out and spent all the money he had that week on a couple cases of fine 59 Burgundies and carefully nestled them in the cellar, away from the stash of house wine, which back at that time was a Gigondas, complete with the fancy. wire mesh around it that many Rhones used to have. So a few months later, Wolfgang finally had an occasion that was appropriate to open some of these rare wines. Significant friends were over, and Wolfgang wanted to share these 59 treasures. He went down to the basement to pull out some wine, and everything was gone!!! He confronted the only possible culprit, his father, who defended, What? I left all the good wine with the gold foil on it for you!.

That got a big laugh, but it was time to get serious with a 1959 Rousseau Chambertin. It had a brilliant nose; rich, hearty and beefy with saucy cherry fruit. Oil and nut also were present along with a touch of just right secret. garden aromas. Its leathery spice was exquisite, and it had great power and t n a. It was the total package aromatically. Its flavors had a touch of that 59 hot, sugared quality without the brown and oat, though. It had a gritty edge and a tannic, long finish. Its acids were also long and big. This was special stuff (96).

A 1959 Roumier Bonnes Mares was technically flawed. as Allen observed, a touch oxidized in the nose. It had a Worcestershire quality to its meaty, gamy, mentholy and spiny nose. It was rich and got richer and more complete with food and air. It gained in its beefy and spiny qualities and was quite drinkable despite its flaw (94+A).

A tangent developed about old Burgundies and how even if a Burgundy has a low 6 or 7cm ullage, as long as the color is great, the wine will still be delicious. Hundreds of experiences, our anonymous friend continued. If a Bordeaux is mid-shoulder, he countered, it means trouble. Geometric, perhaps?.

The next wine stopped time. It was one of the greatest wines of my life, a 1934 Roumier Musigny. Everyone at the table couldn.t stop thanking the Doctor over and over again. We were all suddenly groupies happy to be backstage. Spectacular stuff, my notes began. Whoa!. cried the Burghound. It then proceeded to get a woof, and then two more. Yes, it was an official three woof. wine from the Burghound. Before I knew it, Allen was humping my leg. Ok, ok, it was actually Wolfgang’s leg 🙂 The nose had the amazing sensuality of Musigny, and I could see here why release prices of this terroir are approaching $1000 a bottle for the 2005s. Taut red fruits were impeccably balanced with its incredibly rusty spine. The wine had a never-ending finish that never lost its femininity. Chocolate came out on its expansive finish. What a wine (99).

The 1937 Roumier Musigny was no slouch, either. It also had an unbelievable nose, refined and du classe, as Allen put it, yet the 37 was much more decadent and ripe, like the vintage. Allen remarked on its velour.. The initial sweetness of the 37 bothered Etienne a bit, but its softness he admired. The power of the tannins was evident, and the oak showed more of itself here. Allen told us it was the power of the tannins of the vintage.. The power in the 37 stayed strong; lush, hearty and good woodsy. It was hailed as really good. and having good brett.. The 37 versus 34 debate was likened to more hits versus more home runs. Then 29 versus 28 debate was similarly called more spectacular versus better average. The 1937 Roumier really showed the difference between the vintages of 37 and 34 on an ultimate level (96).

I had a couple of other recent, quiet evenings with only one compadre and two wines, so I have decided to include those in this week’s article.

I had the pleasure of dining at Michael Mina while on my recent West Coast swing that saw me in multiple cities on three consecutive nights. If fine dining had a Final Four tournament, I think I would have Michael Mina winning the West Region, Grant Achatz from Alinea winning the Midwest, Gunther Seeger winning the South (even though he recently closed in Atlanta I hope he comes to NY as I saw him here recently) , and Shea Gallante winning the East in what many would consider the upset, except for those of us that already know better. From there, it’s anyone’s game!

Anyway, it was a 2002 night, beginning with a 2002 Ramonet Batard Montrachet, which had a fresh nose full of that Ramonet wax, mint, corn, butter and baked white fruits. It had a very rich and hedonistic nose with vanilla, white chocolate and oak kisses. Its minerality and acidity smelled great. Delicious, fat and rich, it was a mouth-filling wine, still lush and full of sweet corn and yellow fruit flavors despite its youth. Its acidity was under control while going down, yet still lingered in the belly. The 2002 had the texture, weight and dimension to improve but at age five it was a touch shy. It needs to mature a little and blossom (94+).

The 2002 Roumier Bonnes Mares was in a similar position. It had intoxicating aromatics of stems, vitamins, cinnamon and purple fruits. It had its eyes wide shut with its royal fruit, spice and structure components. Its flavors of cherry juice and dust made for a sweet dense core with amazing spice box to it. A pinch of citrus and a hollandaise sauce made with dill instead of tarragon added to its complexity; those came from the wine, by the way. Violet, cherry, blueberry, bright fruit. my friend waxed. Stems, leather, earth and spice were still packed into this long and distinguished wine. Its acidity exploded after some lamb. Raj called it dense. and velvety, but again I felt this wine needs some more time before it is truly outstanding (94+).

There is little doubt in my mind that these will be outstanding wines (ie, 95 points and up) ; however, I just couldn.t give it to them on this evening. I like my wine old, and these infants still need to age in the bottle and blossom into the butterflies they will be. Yes, another ratings debate, I know. Don.t you know it’s the chicken not the egg that matters?

Another top secret get together in New York City turned into a veritable celebrity death match when my 1999 G. Conterno Barolo Monfortino Riserva squared off against my friend’s 1988 Rayas Chateauneuf du Pape. It was pocket 9s versus pocket 8s, and the 9s held up after the flop, turn and river, aka the scallops, risotto and rack of lamb.

The Monfortino had a gorgeous nose; a good time to drink before it shuts down, was observed. It had the tar, anise, licorice and t n. a, but also deep, chunky black fruits. The palate was thick and tight, very dry and leathery with the tannins of a boa constrictor preying on my tongue. The fruit was a bit lean in the mouth but fattened. A touch of citrus peel, anise, spice and dust rounded out this classic (95+).

The Rayas had a sweet nose that was a mix of garden and kirsch. It had a hearty yet nice balance of fruit and finish. Cherry and cola flavors were up front; rust and pop on the finish both explosively and flavor-wise. Brick and fireplace grew into the nose. My friend felt this bottle was showing a little older than it should have, but it seemed good, as well as ready, to go to me (94).

See I don’t only drink Burgundy!