WTN: Lagrange St.-Julien '03 (readers digest version: sucks)

Lagrange St.-Julien 2003 13% 45,90€

A controversial wine and controversial vintage. I've saved half for tomorrow. Tonight's portion acted wildly. Initially it was dark toned on the nose, terribly roasted fruit, but gladly not raisiny. Though the label says 13% abv, it was massively alcoholic and it stung both my nose and the back of my throat. There was also a touch of VA but (as a Musar and Madeira lover) I don't mind that in the amounts that it was noticable here. There was also that disgusting scent of bananabread that I noticed in the Montrose 2003. This was undrinkable.

I left the glass alone and made dinner. Two hours in a glass had done miracles. It is now a fair wine (I would not call it great) if you happen to like the very ripe style (I don't). The nose is very dark toned, yet fresh and lifted - i.e. it's not noticably VA anymore. The fruit is still roasted in character and it is noticably oaky but in the way I expect young Bx to be rather than as flawed. There is admirable depth to the nose, but unfortunately the scents are such that they just don't appeal to me. The alcohol has subsided and I am very glad it doesn't smell like raw spirit anymore.

The palate is, on the contrary, more red toned and berryish in its fruitiness. I don't think the palate has mended itself as well as it should: the attack is smooth and light and very sweet - it seems a bit confected. The structure becomes noticable only with a slight delay. The tannins are soft but noticable. The acidity is really freakish: it is non-existent on the attack, barely noticable on the mid-palate and is frankly un-fresh and harsh on the finish. That coupled with the heat of the alcohol makes for a distinctly unpleasant finish.

Though it improved very much in two hours, I still find this a terrible disappointment for the property. I would avoid this even at a quarter of the price.

I really hope it improves distinctly tomorrow.

-O-

Too bad, Otto.. typically this is a reliable producer. Given the VA, could the bottle be bad???

Too bad, Otto.. typically this is a reliable producer. Given the VA, could the bottle be bad???

I don't think so - it wasn't an excessive touch of VA (I think even Anders would tolerate this amount ), much less than Musar for example. Also it was obviously not corked (way too much fruit), not cooked, not flawed in anyway I can imagine. This is a very controversial wine with many having been sorely disappointed by it. I have a feeling that I just don't like it - simple as that. We will have a half-blind tasting of 2003 Bx next month, where this will be included. That should shed light on whether this bottle was flawed or whether I just don't like it.

-o-

[David M. Bueker]

The '03 Lagrange is very controversial all over the net. I've seen a few notes praising it, but most have damned the wine either openly or with faint praise. I passed on it, even at a good price.

I'm generally a big Lagrange fan, but I too disliked the '03.

What I've found strange about the controversy is that people who usually have similar tastes to mine and whose judgement I trust have been all over the board with this wine.

I tried this again with dinner today - in case it had improved. I poured some for Suvi. She took one sniff, wrinkled her nose and told me to open up something else instead. I agree, it hadn't improved much with a day of air. Avoid. Since Lagrange has usually managed to make wines I like even in hot vintages (1990 rocks!), I had real hopes for this one.

I'm still hoping for a miracle (it was bloody expensive), so back in the fridge it goes. I have a feeling that tomorrow I'll be using the rest in cooking rather than for drinking.