The place for all things wine, focused on serious wine discussions.

Drinkable or not?

Moderators: Jenise, Robin Garr, David M. Bueker

no avatar
User

Franky Bly

Rank

Just got here

Posts

2

Joined

Thu Oct 14, 2010 11:51 am

Drinkable or not?

by Franky Bly » Wed Nov 10, 2010 5:58 pm

I recently inherited some of my uncle's wine collection. A few cases were marked "Hold until 2011", and another labeled "Drink 2012". In the former are mixed Bordeaux from the 1986 vintage, and in the latter are California Cabernets from the 1987 vintage. I don't know much about wines this old and twenty-year old reviews aren't much help other than to tell me these were good but tannic vintages. I recognized the wine producers as good stuff, but I don't know if the wines have held up. Was my uncle crazy to hold onto these wines for so long, or was he insightful? The ullage is very good with little or no seapage, so I think they were stored properly. Most of my friends tell me that I have a bunch of vinegar. Some just said to open and taste them. But, if they ARE good, they might be super special and deserve an occassion and/or a special meal. Is there anyone out there who has had recent experience with any of these wines? If they are still good, what kind of foods pair with wines this old? I'm new to this site and I'm looking for some serious (but not snobby) reviews. Also, any idea what these wines might be worth?
Here is a partial list:
'86 Ch. Bahans Haut-Brion
'86 Ch. Brane-Cantenac
'86 Ch. Chasse-Spleen
'86 Ch. Clerc Milon
'86 Ch. Ducru Beaucaillou
'86 Ch. Haut Brion
'86 Ch. La Lagune
'86 Ch. Margaux
'86 Ch. Mouton-Rothschild
'86 Ch. Pichon Lalande
'87 Robert Mondavi Reserve
'87 Trefethen
'87 Whitehall Lane
'87 Hess Reserve
Thanks for any info and/or opinions you share!
no avatar
User

Harry Cantrell

Rank

Ultra geek

Posts

137

Joined

Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:18 pm

Re: Drinkable or not?

by Harry Cantrell » Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:56 pm

First, storage is key. At the minimum, they should have been kept in a cool area in a basement, for example. My comments are based on at least these conditions. The 1987 Cal Cabs are all drinking now or are over the hill. The best of the bunch is the Mondavi. On the other hand, the 86 Bordeaux should be in better condition. The top is the Mouton Rothschild-likely just starting to drink well. After this the Margaux and Haut Brion (although the 86 HB I have had had significant "poopy diapers" smell that none other than Robert Parker-at the same table at this particular tasting-said that was 'typical'-not in my experience, I feel this was flawed.) Next level down would be the Ducru-although this is around the time they started having problems with the cellar and having a musty, wet-cardboard smell. The remaining ones are drinking. This is my opinion, and good luck!
Harry C.
no avatar
User

Rauno [NZ]

Rank

Cellar rat

Posts

13

Joined

Thu May 06, 2010 11:58 pm

Re: Drinkable or not?

by Rauno [NZ] » Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:06 pm

Hi

I would concur that the '87 Cals are very ready, though even if a bit over the hill should still be interesting. From your description it sounds like storage has been very good - and you'll know for sure after you've had a few. None of the Cals require a special occasion other than what you feel like - I guess any occasion to throw a steak on the barbie and remember your uncle will do :)

Most of the Bdx should be in very good nick, as '86 was a very long-lasting vintage there (in general). The ones I would consider "special" are the Margaux and Mouton Rothschild - these are both excellent wines, the former ready to drink (though could go another 5 years no probs) and the latter still too young in my view (that said, if you know you enjoy youthful wines then perhaps give one a try). I imagine both are "worth" around $1k per bottle FWIW.

The Haut Brion is also a "first growth", but unfortunately not a great wine (cf the above) and I too have found distinctly off flavours in it. Many people find that a certain amount of "off flavours" can actually make a wine more interesting, so it will really come down to your personal taste.

The Ducru B is also (often) a very good wine, though some bottles have brett (which leads to a type of off flavour).

Hope you enjoy
no avatar
User

Brian Gilp

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

1440

Joined

Tue May 23, 2006 5:50 pm

Re: Drinkable or not?

by Brian Gilp » Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:33 pm

I recently had the last of my 1987 BV GdL and it was just starting to show its age. I would expect that all your Cal Cabs should still be drinking fine if just a little tired. I liked the Hess, Trefethen and Whitehall Lane during that timeframe but don't recall ever having the 87.
no avatar
User

Clint Hall

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

616

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:39 am

Location

Seattle, WA

Re: Drinkable or not?

by Clint Hall » Thu Nov 11, 2010 1:45 am

Franky, you are one lucky guy. Wish I had an uncle like that. You ask, was he "crazy to hold onto these wines for so long?" Crazy, no; probably just not drinking as much as he planned to during his last few years on earth. Some of these wines may be absolutely fabulous considering the low ullage and absence of leakage. Some will no doubt be duds but, what the hell, you paid absolutely nothing for them so you are in a perfect position to enjoy the good ones and not get wrapped around an axle about the bad ones. And for gosh sakes don't save them for special occasions as that will just make them older and make you unhappy when you serve a stinker on your parents' golden wedding anniversary.

You also ask, What kind of food pairs with wines this old? Just stick with the traditional Bordeaux and Cali Cab pairings, maybe the simpler the better: steaks, lamb chops and so forth, but don't worry too much about that. "Any idea what these wines may be worth?" you ask. You can click on www.wine-searcher.com for that, which will show you what retailers are asking for them, but I think you wouldn't get anywhere near that as buyers aren't willing to pay much of anything for wine as old as yours unless they can be assured of storage conditions, and I gather you can't give such assurance.

So start drinking, and have fun. Which is probably what your uncle would like you to do.
no avatar
User

Paul Savage

Rank

Ultra geek

Posts

152

Joined

Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:13 am

Re: Drinkable or not?

by Paul Savage » Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:24 pm

Frank,

First of all, these are NOT all that old! With Bordeaux, it all depends on the vintage, and '86 will be a very long-lived vintage. Based on what reviews I've read, the Mouton and Margaux deserve maybe another 10 years or more! They are considered as among the very best vintages of those wines in the last 50 years, so they are pretty expensive already and will only get more expensive as time goes on. Ducru tends to be quite sturdy and structured by style so I would expect that one to need more time too. Pichon-Lalande is usually not that "hard" in style, but I see that Robert Parker's review says it is a very tannic and full-bodied example, so that one should get more time too! The review from Parker that I have (4th edition of his book "Bordeaux") of the Haut Brion is also very positive, so that's another expensive one that deserves more time! :D The other Bordeaux you listed are not as expensive, and likely not as "backward", and may be approachable now, though there should be no hurry at all if the wines have had consistent cool storage. I have a few mixed cases of '86s myself, and I have not thought about opening *any* of them yet!

The Cal Cabs will be softer, from a warmer climate overall, though I remember that '87 was a very good vintage. So those should also be in good shape, but more drinkable, as the tannins will be lower and riper. It all depends on the storage conditions, as well as the winemaking style of the particular producer. Bordeaux is usually made in a very ageable style, and 20 - 30 years in a good vintage is no big deal. Cal Cabs may not have been made with that sort of aging in mind to start with, and I am not familiar with the style of those producers in that vintage. But if your uncle chose them, he probably knew what he was doing!

Wines like this deserve great care in terms of serving details. I always try to open the bottle at least 4 to 6 hours ahead of time, and then take a very small initial taste, to see what I am dealing with. If the wine is very big, dark, and healthy, maybe it will need a decanting about an hour before serving time. If it is somewhat "civilized", as the Cabs should be, I just let it breathe slowly with the cork out for that length of time, a procedure detailed here and elsewhere on the internet by the illustrious French collector Francois Audouze, who has an immense cellar of wines going back into the 1800s! With wines that are fragile, even seemingly over the hill at first, this "slow oxygenation" approach is definitely the best, as it somehow allows a wine to develop more depth and fruit, and some that seem "gone" will actually come back to life and show very well indeed after 5 hours! I also prefer this "slow oxygenation" approach (sometimes referred to as the "Audouze method" on wine boards) for reasonably mature Bordeaux, but because they are usually more tannic and structured to begin with they generall need more than 4 - 6 hours to fully develop, which is fine if you are drinking slowly and will consume the bottle over the course of say, an hour and a half. But I always take out that small initial taste, and thus enlarge the surface area to about silver-dollar size, to allow better aeration than would occur if the fill happend to be still in the neck. This "slow" approach best preserves the vitality and complexity of a very fine wine, whereas decanting will often overly soften a wine, and/or "blunt" some of the nuances and complexities compared to the non-decanted example. I always use a moderate surface area carafe too, if and when I decant (which is just about NEVER these days...). You can also experiment, open a bottle 5 hours ahead of time to start the slow oxygenation process, then an hour before serving, decant half the bottle. Then start working on the decanted portion first, as it should be the "readiest", and move on to the half-full bottle later. I always find I prefer what was not decanted, at least with reasonably mature Bordeaux and Burgs.

A gently cool serving temperature is also needed. Around 58 - 62 degress or so for Bordeaux and Cabs maybe, just as a starting approximate guess. It helps the fruit and structure of fragile wines. But too cold and a wine may get hard and lose its nuances. And if a wine is still tannic and/or acidic, a too cool temperature will aggravate those conditions. So experiment with a bottle or two, and see how they react to breathing time and serving temperature. After a while you develop a feeling for what is needed, and what will be best! Good luck!
no avatar
User

Michael K

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

570

Joined

Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:13 pm

Location

Wellesley, MA, USA

Re: Drinkable or not?

by Michael K » Thu Nov 11, 2010 3:25 pm

Frankly that is a nice list of wines and if stored properly and if you do not want them, call an auction house and convert that to something you may like better, say a vacation as a couple of those wines are worth real money. Also your uncle picked a GREAT vintage to age, not so much that the vintage was exceptional (it was very good) but the vintage is very well known as a hardy vintage that can survive the time. In fact, only in the last year or two have people started to suggest that the wines have come out of their sleep and are starting to show well. This wine as noted above are not that old. The Californian's may need drinking but even those are not overtly geriatric.

Mike

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Apple Bot, Baidu [Spider], ClaudeBot, FB-extagent, LACNIC Exp, Majestic-12 [Bot], RIPEbot, TikTok and 1 guest

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign