WTN: the 2003 Kirwan experiment

This half bottle was very generously sent to me by David Bueker - here's the backstory:
viewtopic.php?f=32&t=28017&p=240021&hilit=kirwan+2003#p240021

So I told David I would conduct an experiment to see how/if the wine would develop over several hours in the decanter. Thank you very much David - it was an experience . . . . and not at all a bad one either. And I agree now with suggestion of giving this 10 years - it should be pretty nice at that point.

Chateau Kirwan, Margaux 2003
This half bottle was openned specifically to examine how this wine would open over the course of several hours:
(1) 3 ounces poured for initial tasting (consumed over 30 minutes), the rest decanted. Dark ruby red, perhaps going toward garnet with a bit of orange / brown (i.e., a bit of age showing). Nose: initially like pruney port, then resolving a bit (but only a bit), to prunes, cassis, black cherry, roasted herbs / tobacco, and a hint of stoney earth. Very 2003, and if it was a California Cab Sauv, I'd call the nose excellent. Palate: What is this? Prunes, red currant, a hint of greeness, and an acrid, roasted quality. There is actually a note of roses in there, and one can sense something of Margaux aromatics, but they feel strangely suppressed. Viscous in texture. The whole wine feels oddly suppressed and thin, totally discongruous with its apparent ripeness. This is a strange, out of whack wine that feels like it could collapse rather than open. Is it identifiable as Bordeaux? Sortof, if you focus on what Bdx qualities it has. The better question might be if it is identifiable as anything. At this point, not good or bad, just confusing; not a good Bdx though. Unratable.
(2) Next 3 ounces, at two hours (consumed over 30 minutes). Nose: more low key, less pruney and porty, some euchalyptus perhaps, a bit singed, but there is some ripe, attractive fruit in there. Palate: less pruney, more tarry, some blackberry, and roasted herbs. Actually tastes like a Bdx now, albeit a ripe one, but generally behaving closed and young. There may be an attractive wine lurking here . . . . Very Good (84 - 88).
(3) Next 3 ounces, at 4 hours 20 minutes (consumed over 10 minutes). Nose: almost non-existant, but aromatic. Palate: hint of black cherry upfront, blackberry, accentuated currant, a hint of roses, roasted herbs, and stoney earth, all with a note of tar. Prune notes gone, fruit now attractively ripe, and with some respectable Margaux aromatics. A bit hot. A really nice Bordeaux now. Excellent (88 - 92).
(4) Last 3.5 ounces, at 5 hours 5 minutes. Nose: again, almost none, maybe cherry and tar. Palate: similar notes to previous pour, with perhaps some blueberry in there now, but shut down, and not aromatic. Summary: there's a nice wine waiting here for those with patience, though it may always require some decanting. Based on this half bottle, I'd say give full bottles another 5 - 10 years, and it should last until 2025 or longer. Excellent (88 - 92). [12/3/10]

Interesting, and always nice to do this kind of experiment - thanks for the notes.

Are you thinking it has a long future ahead because, as it got air, it morphed before shutting right down?

Is the consensus that Kirwan no longer tastes quite like Margaux? If so, roughly when did the change occur? I quite enjoyed early 2000's and even then I'd say is was a bit riper and more "new school" Bordeaux than traditional Margaux, though I did find it struck a nice balance between the "traditional" and "modern" styles. The 2003 vintage is perhaps an exception too(?).

Fun experiment! I'll have to try this sometime. I think it might be interesting to open a 750, pour half of it in a 375 bottle and the other half in a decanter and then taste them back to back after a few hours. Or even to open two 375s from the same case several hours apart and taste them together. Neither are perfect scientific conditions, but might be interesting anyway.

I've never tried the '03 Kirwan, but I've been hearing rumors of short lived '03 Bordeaux so I'm keeping my eye on mine.

[David M. Bueker]

Thanks for posting your experience Ryan.

I've never done any decanting of half bottles at home, as i tend to use them as pop and pour mid-week wines where I don't want half a bottle sitting around for the next day. I likely won't change that practice, but perhaps opening the wine & pouring a glass a couple of hours before I intend to consume it might be in order.

Are you thinking it has a long future ahead because, as it got air, it morphed before shutting right down?

In part yes. Here's how I read it, and I could be completely wrong: I think it need that time in the decanter to blow off some off some of its juvenile aromatics, and that the last two pours more accurately reflect where the wine is in its current evolution. But, I can also see where there is an outside chance the wine will just get to that point and die. I don't feel like that's what will happen, but it's possible.

Is the consensus that Kirwan no longer tastes quite like Margaux? If so, roughly when did the change occur?

According to Broadbent's notes, it started with the 1998 vintage, when Rolland came on as a consultant at Kirwan. Broadbent says of the 2000: "A Michel Rolland-inspired renaissance. Is it still Margaux, though?" And if, for example, you look at the notes for recent vintages on Cellar Tracker, the descriptor "Cali Cab" comes up quite often, especially in reference to the 2005.

I've never tried the '03 Kirwan, but I've been hearing rumors of short lived '03 Bordeaux so I'm keeping my eye on mine.

I've now had two 2003 Cru Classe, Kirwan, and Pontet-Canet. Although the Pontet-Canet definitely had more "conventional structure" under its 2003 character, I think both of these will eventually achieve a more conventional Bordeaux maturity once they shed some of their baby fat. OTOH, I also think there's about a 25% chance that I'm wrong. However, it should be said that on the whole, I actually like the 2003s, but for very different reasons than I like 2000 or 2005. I actually prefer the 2006s stylistically to 2003, but when 2003 gets it right, they are damned delicious wines.

Having conducted dozens of verticals of Bordeaux from all major appellations, I've concluded that 1998 was a turning point at many chateaux.

[David M. Bueker]

Is the consensus that Kirwan no longer tastes quite like Margaux? If so, roughly when did the change occur?

According to Broadbent's notes, it started with the 1998 vintage, when Rolland came on as a consultant at Kirwan. Broadbent says of the 2000: "A Michel Rolland-inspired renaissance. Is it still Margaux, though?" And if, for example, you look at the notes for recent vintages on Cellar Tracker, the descriptor "Cali Cab" comes up quite often, especially in reference to the 2005.

Although I am willing to bet that if you placed Kirwan blind, in a line up of today's "typical" California Cabernet it would stick out like a sore thumb.

if, for example, you look at the notes for recent vintages on Cellar Tracker, the descriptor "Cali Cab" comes up quite often, especially in reference to the 2005.

Surely that's more because of the 2005 vintage though(?).

on the whole, I actually like the 2003s, but for very different reasons than I like 2000 or 2005. I actually prefer the 2006s stylistically to 2003, but when 2003 gets it right, they are damned delicious wines.

I'd be interested to know which 2003's you think have "got it right". Thanks.

Having conducted dozens of verticals of Bordeaux from all major appellations, I've concluded that 1998 was a turning point at many chateaux.

Interesting. I'd say that's the year similar changes occurred elsewhere in the world (e.g., a significant stylistic change in Barossa Shiraz). If I had to put a year on the "international style" turning point, it would probably be 1998!

Obviously it varies by estate, but 1998 is a damn good guess at most common turning point.
David, don't know about Kirwan (haven't tasted recent one), but I think Giscours and du Tertre in recent years would be very hard to distinguish from Cali blind/

Lascombes goes on the list too.

if, for example, you look at the notes for recent vintages on Cellar Tracker, the descriptor "Cali Cab" comes up quite often, especially in reference to the 2005.

Surely that's more because of the 2005 vintage though(?).

I don't recall the vintage as a whole, or any other specific wines, being described as Cali-like (that doesn't mean they weren't just that I haven't seen it, and I wouldn't set much store by what I purport to know . . . . ). 2009 on the other hand produced dozens of specific wines described as Cali-like.

on the whole, I actually like the 2003s, but for very different reasons than I like 2000 or 2005. I actually prefer the 2006s stylistically to 2003, but when 2003 gets it right, they are damned delicious wines.

I'd be interested to know which 2003's you think have "got it right". Thanks.

Keeping in mind that I haven't tasted anywhere near as many wines as many of folks around here, some examples are (and this is just my opinion): Pontet-Canet, Les Hauts de Pontet-Canet, La Tour de Mons (which is a textbook Margaux!), and Forcas-Hosten. Myrat and Lafaurie-Peyraguey are especially delicious.