The winning team...magnum mayhem...

A few weeks back I hosted a dinner at 67 Pall Mall that was a reunion of the "Winning team" from a dinner we threw at work for Clos de Tart Day. I say winning team because this was the table that had correctly tasted and deduced their way to spotting that a mystery vintage of Clos de Tart was indeed the 1988. As the hosts we committed to get a dinner together to drink said wine again. Six out of the eight, 75% being quorum in my view, managed to make it. The brief was a simple if dangerous one - bring a magnum. With a few emails back and forth we ended up with a splendidly balanced spread. At one stage a magnum of Port looked likely but that was sensibly, this was a Thursday night, "turned into" a bottle of Port and a bottle of Sauternes.

Stories flowed as they do at these things and we were eventually turfed out through a rather empty club. So to the wines.

Salon Le Mesnil 1997, En magnum, many of you will be aware that I know Salon rather well. Probably my favourite "recent" vintage for drinking right now is the 1997. It just has a lovely blend of freshness with the whiff of maturity, energy but not overly so, all in all a cracking start. Thank you Emlyn. Should all Champagne just come in magnums?

Chateau Laville Haut Brion 1996, Pessac-Leognan, En magnum was sadly the only victim of the night in terms of condition, ironic given that it came directly, in original individual wooden box, from the cellar of none other than blog stalwart Halifax. It was not corked and it was not undrinkable but a bright example of that it should be it wasn't either. Halifax being the man he is was straight into the list and got us onto a bottle of  Chassagne-Montrachet 1er Cru Les Baudines 2011 from rising/risen star Pierre-Yves Colin-Morey. A nice tie-in as Fiscali and I (anonymously in my case) had visited a few year earlier during A very special trip - Burgundy May 2014 and the wines this modest man produces are getting every bit of acclaim they should. The wine was a classic example of a 2011 white Burgundy when the winemaking is refined, drinking now, very little oak influence and a lot to like.

The sommelier made a call next having tried the wines and suggested we go to Bordeaux with Fiscali's kind contribution, Chateau Leoville Poyferre 1996, Deuxieme Cru Saint Julien, En magnum. I think he was proved correct this is just delicious, certainly developed but not in anyway more than a twenty year old magnum should be. It was gentle and perfectly balanced, the classicism of 1996 with none of the over bearing tannins you can find. It seemed to rather fly down. It's a left bank Chateau that you can pretty much buy blind, never lets you down. If ever you see the 1990 you MUST drink it.

We returned to Burgundy next and had the bottle that brought us together - Clos de Tart 1988, Grand Cru Monopole, En magnum - Now it has to be said that the 70s and 80s weren't the sweet spot for Clos de Tart (that's being diplomatic) and the improvements made by Sylvain Pitiot who was in charge from 1996 until 2015 have been well documented especially if you look at 2001 onwards. BUT this was a delicious and "a point" example. There is a bit of everything here, sweet fruit, a little early development with secondary and tertiary elements but a good if melded structure, just spot on for now and as with everything we had this evening very moreish!

And back to Bordeaux but a property that slightly stands apart from the "Shirt and tie brigade". Those that have met Francois Mitjavile will know exactly what I mean. Tertre Roteboeuf 2001, Grand Cru Saint Emilion, courtesy of JT is one of those wines you just can't own/drink/buy enough of. It is vibrantly young but also delightfully ready right now. Degraded fruit and a tiny bit of sweet tobacco...a joy.  

Then we were onto two classic examples of wine styles that don't seem to get a fair bite of the cake these days. Both courtesy of MGC. Suduiraut 2001, 1er Cru Sauternes is both young and ready in much the way as TRB 2001 was before it. Energetic but complex, a delight now and will be with increasing richness for the next three to four decades (and beyond). Despite all the glorious wines before I had been almost the most excited about Graham’s 1970. For several reasons really, I love Port, I recently visited (staying at Graham's) as documented in Back to beginning Port and Douro magic and also you just don't get to have it as much as one could ("should" in my view). The 1970 is just perfect now, rich but mellow and developed, a little marzipan and some nuts but mainly mulled red and black fruit, balanced and persistent.

A splendid evening...thanks to all for their bottles...we need to find another excuse to do this again. Hopefully "Dusty" and "Cross-Channel" can join next time so we can be an Epic Eight...

Bonnes Mares de Vogue 1949 - 1999

Very few Domaines need as little introduction as Domaine de Vogüé. Dating back to the 15th century it has been under the same ownership for 20 generations. The general manager, Jean-Luc Pepin, was in attendance to host the evening with Jordi (to whom so many thanks as ever) in a unique retrospective of the Domaine's Bonnes Mares. Even Jean-Luc has never done so extensive a tasting of Bonnes Mares as this. I must declare my bias here as I work for the UK agent of this great Domaine. The bottles for this tasting were all bought by Jordi over the course of 6 or 7 years with as little research as is possible. 

Ready for battle...

By way of a little background I found this: de Vogue Bonnes Mares - Terroir insight by Wine Hog which I think is a good overview and includes a good map (love a map me!). The one analogy Adam used that Jean-Luc liked and re-uses is that you "would want Bonnes Mares on your side in a fight"...

To kick off as people gathered we had Philipponnat Clos de Goisses 2004 en magnum - A shade reduced, a little cocoa bean and reduction on the nose like a late release Champagne. A food Champagne was how I view this, vinous and rich with good texture and enough life.

A very good appetiser for what lay ahead... 

The team at the square did a good job with the food, all of which was a high standard but importantly played a good second fiddle to the wine. Nothing over powering and the service worked well as there was no over emphasis on trying to match things. A flight of wines was poured, into not overly big glasses (a good thing), then the food followed. The menu is below:

Amuse Bouche

Crisp Milk Fed Veal Sweetbreads with New Season’s Wet Garlic,

Violet Artichokes and Preserved Lemon

Slow Cooked Fillet of Cod with Purple Sprouting Broccoli, Smoked Anchovy and Red Wine

Roast Organic Guinea Hen with Smoked Sausage of the Leg, Creamed Morels, Provencal White Asparagus and Roasting Juices

Cheese

So now it was time to get going:

"Modern" vintages

Modern vintages: These tastings always focus on vintages that are mature or at the very least maturing. Whilst this started with the 1999 I have heard good things about the 2000 and had the 2001 recently at a cracking dinner in St.Emilion and it's delicious...this was a stunning flight.

1999 - Pure colour, actually the colours in the first two flights were very consistent, with a tiny bit of development. Lovely fresh mulled red fruits on the nose. This is the only wine on the evening that was most certainly primary. Really good balance and density, a shade reduced and a little hint of cheesecloth, sweet berry fruit on finish. Very promising.

1996 - Good colour and clarity. A little pine-like spice, richness on the nose, palate good but a shade drier, quite taut and serious. Some sweetness. There is a very "1996 like" sternness. I like this and would like to drink a bottle, it isn't showey enough to standout in a tasting like this but is good.

1993 - A slightly deeper colour, deliciously sweet and succulent, not just red fruit on the palate, good depth, a shade of clementine and tangerine. This is a little bigger than some of the 1993's I've had. Delicious and certainly still loosening up and improving! Very fine.

1990 - Good colour, pure, delicious, opulent, decadent, this is a little degraded. It doesn't quite have the poise and focus of the 1993 or 1999 but has an easy appeal of obviously being good....very 1990-ish 

1989 - A shade lighter in colour but so bright and so clean. A shade of animal character just showing a little more a maturity. Pure and lovely sweet fruit, really delicious, this is a feminine and sweet, poised wine. A little herbaceousness certainly, this is, on this showing, a classier and more refined wine than the good, but more brutish 1990. Special.

1988 - A shade more evolved, a dash more texture, almost a slightly chalky, powdered feel. At the same time it is very moreish and a little saline, the note doesn't seem "glowing" but this is good and a little like the 1996 in being very typical of the vintage.

The classics

Classic vintages: A dangerous title given that it raises expectation.

1985 - Paler and lighter in colour but so clear and clean. A little development but such profound sweetness, a lovely greenness that gives energy. This is a really super wine, focus but generous, rich but not remotely weighty. Special, graceful, perfect now.

1979 - Bright, clean and lean. This is in a similar style to the 1985, it remained remarkably consistent in the glass, not budging an inch. Great persistence and poise. Lovely.  

1978 - Slightly less clear as a colour. More texture, a little more degraded but at the same time saline, this is bigger and bolder than anything else going back to the 1990. Opulent and generous. Nicely a little vulgar.

1976 - More red to the colour here. This is very deep and quite resinous. Serious and with really decadent richness and opulence. There is a sense of the hot and dry season but not of burnt fruit. The image is one of small intense berries. Very good indeed.

1970 - A shade orange in colour, clear madeirisation, the palate initially had a dash of sweetness but ultimately this is not right.

1967 - This has a little madeirsation but whilst the 1970 does not appear to be representative I think this probably is as 1967 is just very tricky.

Illustrious indeed!

Illustrious vintages of the George de Vogüé era:

1966 - Sensational wine this. Good colour, lovely saline, some smoke and generosity but also focus. Rose petals and delicate aromas, a little like the 1985 in character but with even more to give. Staggeringly good.

1964 - Slightly frazzled, degraded even, then a little fruit and some sweetness but ultimately this is not in perfect condition.

1962 - Delicious, seriously giving the 1966 a run for its money. Herbs, cocoa bean and then some spices before a little coffee but all with good intensity. There is an element of the 1976 character here. Special.

1959 - Clean bright colour, some decaying fruit, clinging on a little. Interesting.

1953 - Sweet decay, a slightly milky texture, this actually got a little better with air which was unexpected.

1949 - Smells a little herbal, almost minty with some saline too, a shade powdery in texture. This is interesting and not dead if a shadow of what it probably once was.

The last flight!

Musigny Blanc mystery vintage - So this had to be 1994 or older as the white has been named Bourgogne Blanc since, knowing Jordi it could well have been much older. There was a grapefruit character and some citrus. To me there was an almost Chablis like quality. Clearly very little new oak. It was impressive and enjoyably pure too but I really needed to know what it was. One of our number got it bang on saying it reminded him of another white of the same vintage - Corton-Charlemagne from Bonneau du Martray - it was the 1987 vintage.

Fonseca 1963 followed on and was lovely, a little volatile, slightly raisin like. The marzipan character was there but in perfect balance with the succulent dried fruits. Another reminder, as in the last post, that we really should drink more good port.

Jordi, in a fit of generosity, then opened two more bottles both of vintages we had had earlier - 1976 and 1953. The 1976 was a fresher bottle, insanely so. The previous bottle was superb and what you would hope it would be in terms of maturity. This bottle tasted more like the 1993 than any other wine of the night, amazing really. The 1953 was a more lively bottle, showing more fruit and a little more balance...

All in all a stunning evening, a really good group, everyone's expectations were surpassed. What we learnt I think is that Bonnes Mares from de Vogue is more that capable of Red Burgundy of the highest order and is not to be underestimated. Also that whilst the de Vogue style is one that repays cellaring this has been exaggerated...I look forward to many more vintages in the future.

Thank you Jordi and thank you Jean-Luc for your insights!

Amouse Bouche

Crisp Milk Fed Veal Sweetbreads with New Season’s Wet Garlic,

Violet Artichokes and Preserved Lemon

Slow Cooked Fillet of Cod with Purple Sprouting Broccoli, Smoked Anchovy and Red Wine

Roast Organic Guinea Hen with Smoked Sausage of the Leg, Creamed Morels, Provencal White Asparagus and Roasting Juices

Perfect Petrus...

I am incredibly late writing up this truly wonderful evening that happened before Christmas last year. The evening was all about Petrus. The location was the stunning Dumfries House. It's an easy thing to say but this was a truly memorable time. The hosts were a combination of three of the team from Corney & Barrow (of which I was delighted to be one) then Christophe Jacquemin Sablon (CEO) and Olivier Berrouet (Winemaker from 2008 having taken over from his father Jean-Claude who was in charge from 1964-2008) from Petrus.

We started the evening with a tour of the house and a small explanation of the amazing works that go on all over the estate (this continued with a driven tour the following morning). It is a fascinating estate and story, one worth looking at the website to find out more about it.

We then gathered in the drawing room and started the evening with the rather splendid Delamotte Blanc de Blancs 1996 En Magnum. The 1996 was a vintage of Delamotte that all got sold to the Japanese market so I had never had it before. A lovely combination of toastiness and freshness with a lemon shortbread finish, very moreish and very appetising

We were then piped through to the spectacular dining room and a delicious looking menu of:

Half Lobster with Beurre Blanc

Roast Pigeon Breast with a Pea and Bacon Salad

Dumfries House Estate Venison with Market Vegetables, Roasted Shallots, Potato Puree and Thyme Jus

A Selection of Locally Sourced Cheeses (Aiket, KIlbride, Cheddar and Arran Blue)

With the opening speeches and the first course we had Corton Charlemagne Grand Cru 2011 En Magnum from Bonneau du Martray which, whilst on the youthful side, is drinking very well now like the vast majority of the 2011's. It has a steely classicism but not quite the searing acidity that you might expect of Bonneau at 4 years of age. Very good indeed with the delicious Lobster, quite a combination.

Now of course, it was time for Petrus, this most famous of Pomerols. I have been very lucky to have both visited and drunk my fair share of Petrus over the last decade or so. This 11.5 ha site with vines of 45 years age on average is planted, historically, with 97% Merlot and 3% Cabernet Franc. The wine is actually now pretty much 100% Merlot. We were to have the vintages served in two pairs. Older, and from more difficult vintages, first then the younger stellar vintages. This has the advantage of showing grace and maturity before power although it is not necessarily the conventional order. Olivier Berrouet did comment, with a twinkle in the eye, that of course these were his father's wines and he could not be "blamed". The wines had all come from the Chateau a moth or so earlier.

Olivier speaks...

Petrus 1969 - This was described as a lighter style of Petrus by Olivier, "a style that doesn't really exist anymore". The wine was delicate but persistent, not tired. The nose had notes of grapefruit and citrus almost a cool tropicality. I loved it, a shade of menthol and a good gentle balance.

Petrus 1979 En magnum - A growing season with quite high rainfall and limited warmth. This was by contrast to the 1969 (and accentuated by the format) a richer more succulent wine all round. Very iron-like and savoury, a wine to wallow in, a wine of depth and texture. As with the 1969 this far exceeds the vintages reputation.

Petrus 1990 - Velvet and superb weightlessness, supreme even, so moreish with a battle between red and black fruit. My note is clearly too concise, quite rightly this was a wine to enjoy and drink rather than write about. There was a brief comment about the contrast between 1989 and 1990 for Petrus. Olivier said that in 1989 the spring and early summer were hot then it was cooler later, pretty much the opposite in 1990.

Petrus 2000 - Savoury, granite, stones, so youthful, delicious, packed with fruit, decadent and rich. Stunning balance...depth, depth, depth, so much texture but without being heavy. I was trying to compare it to the 2001 that I once had and it seemed less extrovert than that vintage, may be more serious, more understated confidence.

The combination of the food, the wonderful conversations and the fact that there are never going to be enough occasions in life when you have four vintages of Petrus in front of you made for a wonderful atmosphere. The receptiveness of everyone to the Grahams 1970, bottled by Whighams of Ayr, was tremendous, I find myself saying it often but we don't drink enough good Port! We did on this occasion.

As the harpist, oh yes you have to have a harpist, played her last, rather brilliant notes we were joined by a singer and a fiddler...this went well with the Hine 1987 Early landed Cognac, bottled in 2006, which I find to be the most drinkable of all spirits, so mellow and refined...

The evening carried on late, with singing and cigars back at the lodges, a few sore heads in the morning...

What fun!

Salon 2004 Launch

My kinda bath...

Champagne launches tend to be a bit of a show-off moment and you could argue that we did a bit of that with the Salon 2002 Launch week. The launch this week of the, sadly smaller, 2004 Salon was a lower key affair, deliberately so. A few tastings were put on for press and restauranteurs of course but possibly the main focus was a small, 40 people, dinner at  The Victorian Bathhouse in Bishopgate. Now I had nothing to do with finding this venue but it's a cracker.

Before launching into the evening's activities there are a few other Salon and Delamotte posts you may enjoy:

Champagne Salon and Delamotte at IMW

Champagne in Barcelona with Salon and Delamotte agents
Didier pops in

The food for the evening was good, nicely understated. I am a firm believer that there isn't room for a chef's ego on a plate alongside great wine. One or the other has to be the focus. We were served up a lovely menu of:

Smoked Scottish salmon, wheaten toasts, lemon and samphire tartar 

Broad bean blancmange, golden crispy broad bean crumbs 

Pea gougère, pine nut and parsley butter 

Crispy whitebait, with herb mayonnaise

-

Hen’s egg starter with asparagus tips

-

Pan fried John Dory with roast radishes, Jersey royals and lemon thyme oil

-
Cheese - Gruyère, Manchego, Parmesan

Champagne is a flexible food wine, in fact you often hear of people who go to the top experimental restaurants, be it in Denmark, Spain or anywhere in between, comment that Champagne is about the only wine you can drink the whole way through.

The line-up

So, enough waffle, what did we drink? Well, the kick off was Delamotte Brut NV en magnum, a Chardonnay-heavy blend (55%) that includes both Pinot Noir (35%) and Pinot Meunier (10%). This blend interestingly used to be an equal third split between the three. But under the guidance of "Mr Salon/Delamotte" Didier Depond, our host for the evening, the blend has been swayed towards the house strength - Chardonnay. All Delamotte Brut sees 36 months on the lees rather that the 15/16 months of many houses. It was drinking beautifully, open expressive but with a good focus, a great all rounder. Totally dependable in the good sense of the word.

Once we moved through for dinner and saw the "Champagne Bath" we had a Delamotte double to greet us, starting with Delamotte Blanc de Blancs NV which is made from purely Grand Cru fruit. I did not know that of the 320 villages (yes, seriously) that can produce Champagne only 17 can produce Grand Cru. This Non-Vintage (though Multi-Vintage is a better term generally I think) is made from fruit from Les Mesnil-sur-Oger, Oger and Cramant. It has a little toasty element from the longer lees ageing but is so very moreish, it's probably the one wine that for me most sums up what Delamotte is all about. From here we moved to the Delamotte Blanc de Blancs 2007. The 2007 is a slightly more complex wine than the Non-Vintage and follows on from the 2004. The fruit comes from four villages, the three mentioned above and also Cremant. Cremant only makes up 10% but Didier feels it is an important element. I found this to have a slight note of cocoa bean and then lovely white fruits and delicate toastiness.

A bit of fun...but clever...

We were now firmly into the "Salon Zone" with Salon 2004 and Salon 1997 served side by side. The 2004 was the focus, it is only the 39th vintage produced. 2004 as a whole was a rather vast, record-breaking even, vintage in Champagne but at Salon it is small at only 42,000bts as opposed to an average, but still insanely minute, 60,000bts This is due to two green harvests done in the vineyard. I am borrowing Didier's word but it is an intense serious and saline Salon, there is so much to come, in many ways it reminds me of Grand Cru Chablis in youth and yet it is, one has to remember, a 12 year old wine. Intense and serious for sure. The 1997 alongside it is from the same DNA but is, and always has been, more open, more flirty, the "Audrey Hepburn" vintage as it has been called. I think those with 1997 in the cellar can be very happy and, if they haven't already, open a bottle. When you drink Salon, or almost any Champagne, please use a decent, tulip shaped glass.

Superb!

Then with cheese on the way it was time for a wine that the House only has a few handfuls of bottles left - Delamotte Collection Blancs de Blancs 1985. These bottles were disgorged a year ago. In general there is a disgorgement every 6 months of a few wines to form the Delamotte Collection for the next year. Listening to some facts on the 1985 was very interesting. The 84/85 winter was a savage one, -20 for two solid weeks, then spring was cool/cold also but summer was hot with the temp hitting 40 at times. The proverbial "roller coaster". Production was minute with Delamotte making 20% of a normal crop. In many ways Salon making 32,000 bottles was a great effort. This wine was just delightful, some good depth from the ageing but then a lovely biscuity dried fruit edge and as a friend commented, an element of "Flor" a salty, zesty, freshness...delicious.

Things were supposed to end here but there was one last surprise - Delamotte Collection Brut 1970 En Magnum. Now those paying close attention will notice "Brut" rather than "Blanc de Blancs". That is because this is a 50:50 blend of Chardonnay and Pinot Noir. I thought it was fascinating, far weightier than the other wines and richer. I liked it but possibly find the 1985 more to my palate - I am spoilt!

Alas a lovely evening amongst friends has to end somewhere...this had been a lot of fun and whilst I am biased the evening flowed and so did the Champagne...Bon!

Latour a Pomerol - historic vertical...

After a run of really rather amazing "Jordi dinners" over the last year or so:

40th Birthday
La Tache vertical

Grouse and Richebourg at The Square

Clos des Ducs 1920-2002 at La Trompette

I was especially looking forward to this - a very thorough look at the wines of Latour a Pomerol at Les 110 de Taillevent in London with Edouard Moueix in attendance. I have always had a real soft spot for Latour a Pomerol, now yes there might be a commercial edge to that (I work for the agent) but it is more than that. The estate has made several legendary wines. It is part of a very great collection of right bank estates in the hands of ETS JP Moueix. It still somehow seems to fly slightly under the radar. I think this is for a couple of reasons, it is made as a wine to drink, it tastes well when young but is not showy or uber-extracted. People always tend to think that something must be wrong if the legendary wines of the past have not been replicated, not so. I am always excited to open a bottle, even more so a magnum of course, of Latour a Pomerol.

A few stats and background on Latour a Pomerol

7.9 hectares

90% Merlot

10% Cabernet Franc

Two plots: Firstly the nucleus which is 5 ha from the original Clos de Grandes-Vignes located on the central plateau on gravel soils close to l'Eglise St-Jean. The second plot named l'Ecole is located around the Chateau adjacent to La Grave a Pomerol on gravel soils and produces a slightly lighter wine than the first plot.

Production: Around 2500 cases a year, with no second wine

The team at "110" did well with the wines and the full menu can be seen here (a few pics are at the end of the post).

Pate en croute
Foie Gras canape

Mushroom Tartlet Cocktail

-

Duck egg, poached, lardorns, champignos de Paris, baby onions

-

Risotto, creamy with a fricassee of girolles

-

Turbot meuniere, beurre blanc

-

Saddle of lam, roasted with pickled garlic, glove and rosemary

-

Le Vieux Comte, 30 mois d'affinage

-

Petit Fours

I have resisted the temptation to score the wines in this post. I would find it very difficult and therefore it is rather pointless. When comparing a wine that is young (2005) with a wine that is very old (1929) what do you really achieve with scores?

Bollinger started us off as so often at Jordi's dinners, it was rather apt here as the Moeuix family often serve it. R.D. 2002 en magnum was the choice here, very taut and reductive with a little mocha note, clearly will repay considerable time.

The wines were split into logical flights as below:

Recent Vintages
2005 - So full of vibrant fruit with just a dash of saline. Very moreish and alive, voluptuous but with good structure...excitingly good. As with other 2005's this is just starting to "strut it's stuff".

2000 - A little bit of stink, then opens into a wine that is lovely from now onwards, still primary in fruit but with added complexity. I would love to drink this alongside the 2005 in another 5 years. A little spice to finish. Proper!

1998 - A little more savoury and textured, a little iron on the palate . Very moreish indeed. At a lovely point in its evolution - the beginning of the second phase. The quality of the 1998 right bankers is still not really as well known as it should be. Complete. 

1996 - Quite iodine like, with a little meatiness and then a very slight lack of flesh on the palate (the vintage) compared to what went before. Nice to drink now without profundity coming along. More a wine of minerality than fruit. Solid.

1995 - Really good, a vintage that has somehow not had the profile or praise it deserves. There are proper tannins here with the nicely mellowed fruit to contrast. Will age well for sure but good now. Everything as it should be. Classically Pomerol.

Mature Vintages
1990 - Sadly not a perfect bottle. there was a minty volatile edge but then an overly lean and savoury palate. A shame.

1986 - Meaty but also sweet, elegantly developed, pretty and almost fragile. Surprisingly good for such a "Cabernet" vintage. Really like-able.

1985 - Ever so slightly muted nose initially but then this revealed a lovely red-fruited sweetness and lovely moreish (how many times do I have to say this!) texture. This is perfect now, so wonderfully drinkable, preferably in volume! There is the balance to age further by why would you. Just lovely.

1982 - Some iron-like savoury note then almost sweetness, a little blood but with lovely fresh acidity, expressive, extrovert and slightly high-toned.

It was lovely to see the wines so far had almost perfectly translated the general perceptions of the specific vintages. 

Iconic 1970's
1978 en magnum - Volatile, "bricky", harsh and dried out more like 30 year old Sangiovese than Bordeaux. Edouard commented that this was almost exactly what he had expected from this substandard and very dry vintage. 

1975 - Corked (gutted as this is both Jordi and my vintage)

1971 - Stunning, so easy to enjoy, lovely now, so persistently sweet and fine. A cracking Pomerol vintage. Delicious notes of pure ripeness. Supreme...Wow!

1970 - Corked (a real shame as Edouard spoke very highly of good bottles of this)

Transition to ETS JP Moueix
1966 - A little more gritty and grainy and truffled than the 1971. I initially wondered if this might fade in the glass but it did the opposite getting more focused, there is a lovely nuttiness, not normally a positive in reds. There is a sweetness. Very fine.

1964 - Sightly briney, almost a note of bill-tong and pepper, lovely body with good texture and considerable power, a fully mature but not fading wine. Masculine and intriguing.

1962 - Really impressive, fully mature, precise, really lifted, pretty special, almost a mocha note towards the end, stood up well in the glass. A treat.

1961 - Corked, a rather collective sigh, but then one shouldn't meet their heros.

Madame Loubat
1955 - Really lifted, extrovert, superb, manages to be refined in a mellow way at the same time as being unreservedly hedonistic. Is there a better vintage for Bordeaux? My experiences of the 1955 vintage are almost universally spectacular. This was so good that I don't know I would want to have it again, if that makes any sense.

1953 - I think this suffered from following the captivating 1955 because in every other way it was glorious, a little creme brulee richness on the nose. Decadent. 

1952 - Clearly a cooler vintage, bricky and a little lactic, a very slight Bual character, just a well-bred wine that is getting weary.

1949 - Quite high toned and a shade volatile, a little madeirised and delicate.

1945 - Decadent notes, dates in the mix, delicious, good acidity, lifted (the acidity) but also dense, really lovely. 

1937 - Butch and rich but then disjointed not quite sure what this was, very dry and did not really fit with the other wines. 

1929 - High and dry, a little pithy, the palate is clean but totally dried out, rasping. The acidity means it is drinkable but astringent. By all accounts a very small crop with heat in September.

Climens 1942 - Sweet cep nose, mushrooms and brioche, oranges and now quite dry. weirdly would have made a good appetizing aperitif as well as a fascinating ending.

So what would I say in conclusion or summary? Well, Latour a Pomerol certainly has a great past but it is the present and the future that were the learning for me. I think everyone around the table, with the possible exception of Edouard who already knew, was very pleased to see how beautifully the younger vintages drank. Any site that can make wines as brilliant as the 1955 and 2005 but 50 years apart is exciting. There is a grace and elegance to Latour a Pomerol that can almost work against it in terms of standing out around En primeur time or in amongst other showier, glossier wines at tastings. To me Latour a Pomerol remains a very very good Pomerol that portrays the character of a vintage very well and drinks so splendidly...long may it continue! Thanks for the opportunity to taste these Jordi!

Duck egg, poached, lardorns, champignos de Paris, baby onions

Risotto, creamy with a fricassee of girolles

Turbot meuniere, beurre blanc

Saddle of lam, roasted with pickled garlic, glove and rosemary

Produttori del Barbaresco - a vertical of Pora...

This was the first dinner/tasting I experienced with a group known as the "Rabelaisians" run by Rob and Sara. The idea is a simple split the bill scenario with a theme - horizontal or vertical - for each dinner.

As the title gives away this was vertical of the "Pora" Cru from Produttori del Barbaresco. A little bit of background that is shamelessly botched together from the "net" follows.

The arrival of Cavazza in 1881 in Barbaresco put the spotlight onto the region and in 1894 he founded the Cantina Sociale di Barbaresco with a group of nine growers. Though the quality of the nebbiolo grown in the region had long been recognized, the newly founded Cantina is generally recognized as the birthyear of ‘Barbaresco’. Two World Wars and the subsequent poverty in Italy had a profound effect on the region and revival only started in the 1960s and 1970s thanks to a generation of young growers such as Angelo Gaja, Bruno Giacosa and the cooperative cellar of Produttori del Barbaresco, the successor of the original Cantina Sociale di Barbaresco. Barbaresco became a DOC in 1966 and a DOCG in 1980.

Produttori del Barbaresco was founded in 1958 by a local priest Don Fiorino Marengo to retain Barbaresco’s young farmers in the area. Today it is recognized as one of the leading producers in the region and its members own one-sixth of the vineyards in Barbaresco. Winemaking in the cellars is very traditional with 28-day fermentations and ageing in large casks. Produttori del Barbaresco Website

Pora

Pora is widely considered as the flagship wine of Produttori. It was at one time owned by Domizio Cavazza and among the first single vineyard wines to be released by the cooperative. It is south-southwest facing, bordering Asili on Calcareous blue marl. The single vineyard’Pora’ bottling is always a Riserva and today aged for three years in botti. 

I was very excited by this tasting as I have always looked to buy the Produttori wines and in fact have blogged about some examples before

2005 - Montefico and Asili
1970 - Barbaresco

The venue will surprise nobody - Zucca, the menu is below:

Salumi Misti

Buffalo Mozzarella with roasted pumpkin

Vitello tonnato

Taglerini, rabbit ragu and crispy sage

Slow cooked pork shoulder, porcini and yellow polenta

Chocolate and salted caramel tart, hazelnut ice cream

Taglerini, rabbit ragu and crispy sage

The wines were served in three flights of four wines each.

Flight 1

2005 - Rich, lovely, precise, has a bit of bite, black cherry, quite bold but clean, blacker fruit that normal. 17

2004 - Ever so slightly closed, slightly airy which is just an expression of it seriousness I guess. There is an intensity about it's texture. It seems an odd comment but this is very clean and precise, long also, I am guessing this will be quite something. 18+

2001 - Slightly disappointing...saline and leather, very masculine, tasting 5-10 years older than it should be. A little too degraded. I have a feeling the bottle was not perfect, it just seemed a little heavy. No score.

2000 - You can tell this was a warm vintage, it has that slightly bruised fruit and a slight lack of precision. A tiny bit dry at the end and without much upside in terms of cellaring, you could keep it but why. All that sounds negative but actually as a wine to drink now it's a good glass. It's just a bit more Monday/Tuesday night Spag Bol than Thursday night truffle pasta if that makes sense. 15.5

Verdict - overall I think people liked 2004 then 2005 with the other two a little behind and general agreement that 2001 wasn't "spot on".

Flight 2

1999 - Some maturity coming, clean, intense, tightly wound, a slight bricky red fruit, Iron and lifted herbs. Really pure and for the purist also. Excitingly correct and proper, just what it should be! 18.5

1997 - Almost a slight greek yoghurt nose, deep and sweet, a slight aniseed edge, degraded but with some strawberry fruit, of the same style as the 2000 but with more to offer. 16.5-17
  

1996 - A little bit of "swimming pool" (not a bad note oddly) then some pine and resin, soy and a little spice but essentially very lean and a little angular, a slight wet-hay greenness. There were a few who thought this corked, I didn't. It was just mean to me, very 1996 in a way. 16

1995 - Initial nose reminds me of caramel, good acidity and nicely complete wine, there is richness and a little salinity (never quite managed to be salted caramel). There is not masses of fruit here but this is good. 17.5

Verdict - No real consensus, many preferred the 1997 but it was third in my book, interesting differences, a flight that slightly lacked fruit given it is not old yet. I'd have that 1999 in my cellar any day (wouldn't last long mind you)

Wine of the night? Only just...

Flight 3

1985 - Beautiful, persistent, elegant, saline, red fruit, simple stoney minerality, the only other vintage it could have been was 1982, absolutely lovely. 18 

1978 - Some stink (sewage even) that passed very quickly then some degraded fruit, good acidity is coming through, sweetness is there and then some soy, this is at a lovely stage and is really quite decadent. 18

1971 - "Swimming pool" initially this passes and leaves trademark salinity thereafter you have archetypal aged nebbiolo, fruit of which some is red, then you have a savoury edge, bovril and soy...really delicious. Complete 18.5

1970 - Some spice, rich, blacker fruit, may be the youngest tasting of this flight, amazing texture and darker colour. There really is something different and special about the 1970 vintage, several wines I have had have this deeper darker body, with some there is a specific reason (Monprivato). Superb 18 

Verdict - A dream of a flight, more because all wines showed exactly what you would want them too in terms of the perceived vintage characteristics.

A real fun evening, well organised and Pora showed very well...buy it when it is released!

Thanks to Rob and Sara...