Two days after the dinner I attended by Château de Fargues, there is the “dinner of Bipin’s friends » that I organise for the 7th year. Bipin Desai is a great collector of wines who makes the greatest verticals of the best wines of the planet. This dinner is held by restaurant Laurent. Every participant should provide a wine or more. The friends who come are :
Jean Berchon of champagnes Moët & Chandon,
Alfred Bonnie of Château Malartic-Lagravière,
Didier Depond of champagnes Salon and Delamotte,
Bernard Hervet of domaine Faiveley,
Jean-Nicolas Méo of domaine Méo-Camuzet,
Etienne de Montille of domaine de Montille,
Jean-Charles le Bault de la Morinière of domaine Bonneau du Martray,
Alexandre de Lur Saluces of Château de Fargues,
Aubert de Villaine of domaine de la Romanée Conti,
Bipin Desai and myself.
I come to open the wines at 4 :30 pm with the intention to prove to these famous wine makers how my method is efficient. The nicest smells are the one of Haut-Brion blanc 1966, La Tâche 1962 and Fargues 1947. To wait for the guests to come, we drink a champagne Laurent-Perrier Grand Siècle NV which flows in mouth with easiness. It is the best possible way to prepare our palates to the dinner to come.
Here is the menu conceived by Philippe Bourguignon and Alain Pégouret :
Rouelles de pied de porc
Huîtres spéciales « Gillardeau » N° 2 lutées dans leurs coquilles, bouillon de mousserons citronnés
Homard cuit dans un beurre mousseux, pleurotes et trompettes de la mort
Foie gras de canard rôti posé sur une cracotte, truffes noires
Lièvre à la cuiller
Râble de lièvre saisi en cocotte, salsifis et jus court
Risotto à la truffe blanche d’Alba
Mille-feuille gaufrette à la mangue
Petits financiers aux noix.
The Champagne Dom Pérignon Œnothèque in magnum 1973 is imposing. Its style is of a rare nobleness. The nose has truffle and buttered cake. The bubble is thin and distinguished, but what strikes me the most is the trace in mouth, determined, hearty, which invades with no rescue. The rouelle is ideal to make shine this very elegant champagne of a strong personality.
The oysters are iodic and delicious. Their originality pleases everyone and it is the perfect partner for Champagne Salon 1979 for which I have a constant love. This is probably not the most adventurous year, but it is proper, comfortable, and enjoyable without restriction.
On the lobster, we have two wines. The Château Haut-Brion white 1966 presents itself with a slight tiredness for the first contact, but all that disappears rapidly. To my big surprise, a wine maker of Burgundy who is a friend begins a verbal fight with me on this wine that I had brought, saying that it is a too simplified wine which does not justifies its statute and that Haut-Brion should never make white wine. I am surprised because I had already tasted many wines with him and I was impressed by his ability to be open minded. Bipin comes to my help and says that 1966 is a great year for Haut-Brion white. I find the wine pleasant, expressive, complex and subtle. Is it due to the fact that this wine maker is influenced by the taste of his white wine ? Anyway it was friendly and he decided to taste one again one day to learn this wine. We smiled and drank the Corton Charlemagne Bonneau du Martray in magnum 1969 with a golden colour, which is amazing, unexpected, but absolutely charming and intense. The year has a great signification for Jean Charles, as it was the last year made by an uncle who made the wine for a long time, so he drinks it with a great emotion. The wine is very different from a Corton Charlemagne of today, is intense and has a great length. It went marvellously well with the mushrooms, the Haut-Brion working well with the lobster sauce.
Alfred Bonnie should feel alone to represent red Bordeaux in front of this army of Burgundy men. But his Château Malartic-Lagravière 1947 was clever enough to bear the challenge. It is not the most powerful of the Graves but it has a great subtlety and elegance, revealed by the foie gras. The small biscuit is too sugared for the wine, but the delicious and light meat of foie gras makes this delicate Bordeaux shine in a convincing way.
The hare is extremely strong and with Bipin we wondered if a lighter taste would not have been better for the Pommard Rugiens Domaine de Montille in magnum 1978. But the wine is able to accept such a wild dish. What strikes me is the nose which is particularly elegant expressive and powerful. Etienne is happy that his Pommard performs so well. It is an excellent wine, fruity, full of joy, wine of pleasure, which flows in mouth with an extreme easiness.
The hare’s back is delicious and goes with two wines. Philippe Bourguignon had thought of putting the two 78 on the same dish but it is much better so as it avoids competition, the two wines which come being completely different. The Chambertin Clos de Bèze Faiveley 1978 is a very precise wine, clear, straightforward, and reacts very well. The Corton Clos Rognet Méo-Camuzet 1959, that I had already shared with Jean-Nicolas in his family cellar has a density which is immense, invades the mouth and leaves a trace which is without end. A very great Burgundy.
It is time now for two elegant wines which come on a risotto with white truffle. The dish shows a great refinement, but I am not sure that it is the best help for the wines which are able to live by themselves. The La Tâche Domaine de la Romanée Conti 1962 comes with a high reputation and a great expectancy. The wine has a perfect balance, an immense subtlety and behaves in mouth exactly in a contrary way to the Dom Pérignon. The Dom Pérignon leaves a trace in mouth like a skier, making a very direct lane in the brain. The La Tache throws arrows on lateral directions, trying to develop its complexity in mouth. It is exciting even if I do not recognise some of the complexities and finesses that I like in the wine of the Domaine. Aubert who wrote me the day after told me that he expected so much from this wine that he was a little dissatisfied. I answered him that he is more severe because it is his wine. This La Tache is an immense wine and we discuss about a quarter of a point in its virtual note.
When I wrote the list of wines of the dinner I had a look at the previous dinner of Bipin’s friends and to my big surprise, I had included last year exactly the same wine : Pommard Epenots Joseph Drouhin 1929. Is there a hidden tropism which leads me to choose the same wine again? It is probably because I know that this wine performs always in a total security as my Nuits Cailles Morin 1915. And it is exactly perfect as it should, showing an accomplishment that only such an age can give. As the atmosphere was smiling and relaxed, some Burgundy wine makers began to ask with a smile if this wine had been a little “helped”. But when one smells the wine and tastes its purity, it is absolutely clear that it is a pure Pommard. Aubert made me many compliments on this wine of an extreme elegance.
The dessert of Alain Pegouret is perfect for the wine which comes. The Château de Fargues 1947 is absolutely extraordinary. Bipin says that it is even better than Yquem 1947. I would probably not go so far but it is true that seven hours of oxygen have enlarged the wine which shines at a level that I would not have supposed. I had drunk two days ago Fargues 1951 which was very good. This 1947 is highly above with a deepness and a width which is unique.
I have added the Vin de paille Jean Bourdy 1921 which is like a delicious candy, with an intelligent softness, made of dry grapes. It is elegant, with a balanced sweetness, and a length to die for. It was the best possible conclusion.
In all the dinners that I organise, we vote at the end, for pleasure more than for intrinsic quality. As the wine owners or representative were there, the vote would not have the same signification so we decide not to vote. It is the next day that I made my own vote :
1 - La Tâche Domaine de la Romanée Conti 1962,
2 - Château de Fargues 1947,
3 - Champagne Dom Pérignon Œnothèque magnum 1973,
4 - Corton Clos Rognet Méo-Camuzet 1959.
I did not include my wines, and not the 1929 Pommard which I had put as first last year as I prefer to choose among the wines of my friends.
At restaurant Laurent, the staff always tells me the impression that they catch when people ask for their coats. They told me that everyone was extremely happy, ready to make such a dinner next year. I have been extremely flattered by the lice words that Bipin had to my intention. It motivates me as I consider Bipin as my master in the field of very old wines.
One anecdote to finish : President Kadhafi, in official visit in our country, had sent this morning a deputy to reserve the whole restaurant Laurent, saying that he would pay any price for the cancellations. Philippe Bourguignon and Patrick Lair refused definitively. We must thank them because we would have lost one of the most precious dinners of our lives.
As I have tested the idea of PIME, PAME, PUME (performed within my expectation, performed above my expectation or performed under my expectation), I tried to use it for the wines of tonight. Even if La Tache was the greatest wine due to its unparalleled subtlety, it is the only one which did not completely fit to my expectation :
PAME : Magnum Pommard Rugiens Domaine de Montille 1978, Château de Fargues 1947, Vin de paille Jean Bourdy 1921
PIME at a top : Magnum Champagne Dom Pérignon Oenothèque 1973, Corton Clos Rognet Méo-Camuzet 1959, Pommard Epenots Joseph Drouhin 1929
PIME : Champagne Salon 1979, Château Haut-Brion blanc 1966, Magnum Corton Charlemagne Bonneau du Martray 1969, Château Malartic-Lagravière 1947, Chambertin Clos de Bèze Faiveley 1978
PUME just slightly : La Tâche Domaine de la Romanée Conti 1962.