WTNs: Léoville Poyferré, Clos de L’Oratoire, de La Rivière

1999 Léoville Poyferré, Saint-Julien: When it comes to the three Léoville estates, I must admit that I have always had a strong preference for Poyferré. This wine rarely is a big, extracted wine like Las Cases or a muscular, tannic beast like so many Bartons, but very often a perfect example of balance and elegance, and the 1999 is in no way an exception.
On the contrary, this is a perfect wine for Bordeaux beginners as well as for connoisseurs with a sensitive stomach like me.
Wonderful subtle, classic nose of cedar, red and black fruits, spices, tobacco, and a hint of leather. The palate is utterly captivating, with a creamy texture, soft, ripe tannins, and lovely acidity. Not to forget a touch of smoke, and a certain Port-like sweetness on the finish... Perfect to drink now.

2004 Clos de L’Oratoire, Saint-Emilion: Somewhat overdone in style. Typically Graf Neipperg. This St.-Emilion Grand Cru Classé exhibits dark fruits with earthy undertones, licorice, chocolate, tobacco, and a round texture. Fruit and tannins linger in the finish. Too much wood and too much jammy fruit to me, but probably ideal for friends of modern Merlot monsters.

2005 Château de La Rivière, Fronsac: I have been following this Château since the early eighties. What A surprise! To say it clear, this Fronsac is even a little bit better than the 1999 Léoville Poyferre. A wonderful combination of pure energy and elegance. Nothing is overdone. There is no over-extraction and no over-ripeness. Instead an explosive, delicate nose of sweet black cherries, cassis, spices, and licorice. The attack on the palate is generous, smooth and fruity, and the tannins are silky and extremely elegant. The complex finish lingers and lingers... This is Merlot at its best, and one of the best Fronsac wines I had so far, and certainly the best de La Rivière...

I have a bottle of the 2005 Clos de L'Oratoire. Should have known better, but it was a very good price.

Since I am "used to" drinking Napa Merlots, it may still be OK for me.

Rudi,

Interesting note on La Rivière.
I'll watch out for it. Thanks.

Alex R.

Brian, the 2004 Clos de L’Oratoire is an excellent wine, no question, but simply not my liking. BTW, a similar disappointment was 2001 Branaire Ducru last week. An excellent wine, but too modern and flashy, and no sign of the unique Saint-Julien terroir. However 2006 La Bridanne was a revelation. Classical in style, not as concentrated as the Branaire, but very complex, subtle, and elegant… Good Luck with your 2005 Clos de L'Oratoire!

Alex, it seems that things have significantly improved since James Grégoire took over Château de La Rivière seven years ago. Oenologue conseil is Claude Gros.

[David M. Bueker]

Rudi,

Interesting comment regarding the 2001 Branaire. I've been buying quite a lot of Branaire from the earlier part of htis decade & love the wines. In fact the vast majority of my Bordeaux buying has been Leoville Barton, Leoville Poyferre, Branaire & Lagrange. I'm a St. Julien fanatic, and I love the modern Branaire wines.

Thanks so much for the notes, Rudi. I have never tried Château de La Rivière, so I am glad I happened upon this thread.

You sound like your appreciation of Bordeaux is at least as strong as mine. Let me ask you this: Can you find, say, a California, or Italian, or German red wine to be as pleasurable as your Bordeaux wines? I haven't been able to and feel somewhat limited. Once in a while I like a Burgundy, but that is the only other region that holds any interest for me. I like white wines from a number of regions.

Hi Covert,

As for red wine, it is pretty hard to beat Bordeaux .

Only Chile, parts of Spain, and the Rhône Valley really qualify as competitors in my experience.

The greatest wines are, to a certain extent, untouchable and wines such as Ch. de la Rivière (under 20 euros a bottle) abound.

California makes some stupendous wines, but there are also many overpriced duds, and the cheap ones ain't cheap.

Best regards,
Alex R.

David, no question, Branaire wines today are much more impressive than in earlier decades. The 2001 is excellent, maybe even outstanding, but this is not what I do expect -after three decades of extended experience with wines from this appellation- from a true Saint-Julien...

Covert, I’m with Alex. Indeed, it is really hard to beat Bordeaux. Especially in a price region under €20, you can find around 200-300 wines -depending on the vintage- in ‘Grand Cru Classé’ quality. I don’t know any other region with a comparable density of top class wines.
As for the appreciation of Bordeaux, I have to say that I’m a Bordeauxphile and certainly a little bit ‘fanatic’, to use David’s words. The competence of the winemakers has grown considerably in recent decades as well as the technological evolution. Today there are outstanding wines all over the world, but still I find the deepest satisfaction only in red wines from Bordeaux… and to a certain degree in whites wines from our region Saar-Mosel-Ruwer, especially our wonderful dry Weissburgunders, and older off-dry Rieslings...but this is a very subjective thing...

The greatest wines are, to a certain extent, untouchable

Burgundy, Northern Rhöne, Barolo, top Tuscan Sangiovese.....? Where top Bordeaux scores is in quantity and easy availability.

and wines such as Ch. de la Rivière (under 20 euros a bottle) abound.

We just have the hard job of identifying them. This is where you come in, Alex, with your Bordeaux knowledge. Any recommendations in the Carrefour range would be particularly welcome.

Speaking of Château Branaire, I almost hesitate to bring this up, after recommending my marvelous Babette find, only to discover that every wine lover in the world other than moi has seen it a dozen times. But for any fellow troglodytes who have not read Taste by Roald Dahl, it is the world’s best wine identification story. The summary with the spoiler ending lopped off from Roalddahlfans.com:

"The setting for this story is a dinner party at the home of stock broker Mike Schofield. The guests include Schofield and his wife and daughter, the narrator and his wife, and a man called Richard Pratt. Pratt is a famous gourmet and enjoys showing off his knowledge of fine wine and food. He is also a thoroughly unpleasant man. Both times prior that Pratt dined with Schofield, the two men made a curious bet: Schofield bet that Pratt could not identify some special wine that he had procured for the night. Pratt had always won. On the night this story takes place, Schofield thinks that he will finally win one over on the gourmet. He has a very rare bottle of claret from a tiny chateau in France, and he boasts that Pratt will never be able to guess it. Pratt, who had been spending the night engrossed in conversation with Schofield's daughter Louise, takes the bet and asks to up the stakes. He offers to bet two of his houses against the hand of Louise in marriage. Both Louise and her mother are against it, but Schofield manages to convince them to accept. He believes that Pratt has no chance of winning. Pratt then proceeds to smell and taste the wine, and he slowly begins to narrow down its possible origin.”

An aside: I recognized that Dahl borrowed Pratt’s character from Somerset Maugham’s Oliver Haddo (from his Magician) for which Maughm borrowed the character from Aleister Crowley’s real life character. Crowley sued Maughm over it, like in the recent Lindsay Lohan’s suit over the TV commercial referencing her character unflatteringly. It was so obvious I felt it was an intentional “inside” joke, which I was proud to get.

Louise is also the name of a protagonist in an equally marvelous wine story, The Growth of Marie-Louise, about two divine growths (vintage and the girl) by John Le Carré.

Then there is our own Jenise Louise Stone. Louise is apparently for some reason deep in the soul a lady’s name that lends itself to wine.

[David M. Bueker]

Rudi,

Please define for me a "true St. Julien." I may not have 3 decades of experience, but in the 15 or so years I have been truly serious about wine I have had many St. Julien from the '60s, '70s, '80s and more recent decades. Most of that experience is with the Leovilles, Lagrange and Branaire (too few bottles of Ducru have crossed my path), and if I were to judge true St. Julien on what I have tasted from the '60s and '70s I would have to hazard a guess that a true St. Julien was often (though not always) a wine of green tannins and too little fruit to sustain it for the long term pleasure.

Bear in mind that I am no fan of wines like the monster right-bank beasts (e.g. Pavie, Monbousquet, etc), but the current wines of St. Julien (not to mention some of my favorite wines from in and around St. Estephe) really do seem to be that golden mean for me between overly austere and overly fat.

David, it is impossible to objectively define such an emphatic term like ‘true Saint-Julien’, ‘true Pauillac’, or ‘true Margaux’. Is Pichon Comtesse a true Pauillac or is it a true Saint-Julien? For me, it is often a Saint-Julien in character, for you maybe not. All depends on our skills and our own very subjective experiences with wines from different appellations. The more experience we have, the more reliable intuition we can develop for the nuances that make the difference, but an objective judgement is impossible... There is no such thing as a true Saint-Julien.

David, it is impossible to objectively define such an emphatic term like ‘true Saint-Julien’, ‘true Pauillac’, or ‘true Margaux’. Is Pichon Comtesse a true Pauillac or is it a true Saint-Julien? For me, it is often a Saint-Julien in character, for you maybe not. All depends on our skills and our own very subjective experiences with wines from different appellations. The more experience we have, the more reliable intuition we can develop for the nuances that make the difference, but an objective judgement is impossible... There is no such thing as a true Saint-Julien.

There are too many variables affected by too many factors. A drawn border around Saint-Julien would not prevent conditions outside of that border from being sometimes more like some theoretical average typical set of variables on the inside than some particular set of variables on the inside, if that makes any sense.

Nevertheless, it is fun to try to guess where particular Bordeaux comes from when you drink it before you know. I never get the chance because I am the sommelier in my household. I ask my wife to try, however, and I am surprised at how often she can pick the appellation, and often the year, and sometimes even the property. Generally when she struggles and can't decide where a particular bottle comes from, whether from Pauillac or even from Graves because of some tobacco influence, by default she will guess Saint-Julien, figuring that when a bottle has a chameleon-like or mocking bird-like quality, it must be a Saint-Julien. I sometimes give her a hint by asking her to concentrate on the finish. Often a Saint-Julien has a little accent of spice which can be the tip-off. Because of Saint Julien’s trixter nature, it was the perfect appellation for the story, Taste, I mentioned.

[David M. Bueker]

David, it is impossible to objectively define such an emphatic term like ‘true Saint-Julien’, ‘true Pauillac’, or ‘true Margaux’. Is Pichon Comtesse a true Pauillac or is it a true Saint-Julien? For me, it is often a Saint-Julien in character, for you maybe not. All depends on our skills and our own very subjective experiences with wines from different appellations. The more experience we have, the more reliable intuition we can develop for the nuances that make the difference, but an objective judgement is impossible... There is no such thing as a true Saint-Julien.

Rudi,

Isn't that pretty much an "I know more about this than you do, but I can't tell you about it" cop out then? It's the sort of pseudo-mystical response that gives wine appreciation a rather snobbish veneer.

As for the Comtesse, I don't have a ton of experience with that wine, so I will defer commentary. I do find the Pichon Baron to be very Pauillac though, if in more of a Latour mold than a Lafite mold.

What a nonsense, David... but it is no problem to me to post my 'snobbish, pseudo-mystical' responses on other places...

[David M. Bueker]

What a nonsense, David... but it is no problem to me to post my 'snobbish, pseudo-mystical' responses on other places...

Oh come on Rudi. It's nothing personal, it's strictly wine speak. Sorry if you felt it was personal, as that was not my intent. I honestly don't understand marking down a wine for something you cannot define in a way that anotehr person can understand it. That's all.