Blog

A pair of Dujacs took the table next, with a Vogue Musigny following gently behind.

The Dujac Clos de la Roche was stemmy, woodsy, foresty and rocky. It was a bit lean and tight, getting more chocolaty and citrusy on the palate, while the Bonnes Mares came across deeper and stinkier. There was more breadth and zip here in this brothy, earthy and horsy wine. I made some joke about horse, ass and black fruit which I found quite amusing at the time, but I can’t figure out what the heck was so funny now lol. The Vogue slinked and slithered its way past the Dujacs, possessing lots of vitamin and forest qualities, as well as ‘incredible concentration.’ There was one more flight to go, and the evening was starting to go into crash landing mode for me. The final flight was an all-expense paid tour de Chambertin.

The Bachelet was served blind by you-know-who, and its purple fruit, game, smoke, chocolate and yeast were to my nose’s liking. There was a touch of Robitussin on the palate at first, but that blew off into a thick and milky wine that kept improving. The Matthieu, made by Roumier, was floral and smoky with some zip and a big, earthy, cigar-laden finish. The Ponsot was very good, but that’s about all I had to say about it at this point, while the Roty, as usual, toed the line between modern and old school with its big and beefy style.

Somehow, I missed the 1996 Dugat-Py Charmes Chambertin. Oh well. At this point, I was ready for the exit. What did this evening teach me? Pretty much the same as the prior: 1996 was an excellent vintage, but not an outstanding one, at least not yet. There is no questioning the superior acidity of the vintage, which will indubitably allow it to age and make it fascinating to watch. However, the knock on ’96 reds has always been whether there will be enough fruit to support the acid, and while we started to see some begin to blossom, the acid still dominated. Perhaps 1996 will emerge out of other vintages’ shadows like 1961 to become preferred by many decades from now, or perhaps it will always be a four-star vintage as opposed to a five-star one, one that produced a bunch of excellent wines, but only a handful of outstanding ones. The great thing about wine is that time always tells.

The next night saw over sixty people join us for a BYO spectacular. Some of Chicago’s finest collectors came out of the woodworks with some great bottles and celebrated our entry into the market in fine and rare wine fashion. It turned out to be ‘the wine event of the year’ per numerous locals. I think Montel Jordan said it best, ‘This is how we do-oo itttttttttt.’ Now an Acker BYO is a pure stream of wine consciousness, bottles coming from every angle, often relentlessly. I had spent so much time making sure that everyone knew what table they were on that I missed the jero of 1988 Pol Roger Sir Winston Churchill that we brought!

Damn, this was a thirsty bunch! I saw again why Chicago is our kind of town lol. Let me list all the wines first and foremost, at least the ones I tasted:

Where to begin? Let’s start with the whites. The Coche-Dury was courtesy of Sweet Lou, and it delivered a delicious start to the evening. There was that signature smoky kernel along with ‘bacon fat’ and mineral-y white fruits. There were great nutty flavors, and this special white was just starting to show its mature side. The Raveneau was ice and nails in the nose with a pungent mineral core. It was tight and young, but screamed potential. The Ramonet was stellar, with ice, smoke, corn and light butter all framed by a sweet touch. This was a full and powerful white, with real depth and layers in the mouth and a tasty touch of mint to its thick finish.

Let’s talk Bordeaux. The Commander brought two gorgeous ‘82s which were both singing. L’Evangile, which is now owned and run by Lafite, and Trotanoy, which is owned and run by the Moueix family (aka Petrus) remain two of the best buys in all of Bordeaux, and these two wines showed why. The L’Evangile had sexy aromas and flavors of plum, olive and chocolate, and while still a bit tight, it was thick and delicious. The Trotanoy was a bit more open, dare I say sexier in its nose, showing blacker fruit and great autum floor action. It may be maturing a touch faster than the L’Evangile, but I found them qualitatively equal. The 1985 Petrus has never been considered a great Petrus, but out of double magnum, it came damn close. It was another sexy Pomerol nose, with more wheat and dust, along with touches of purple marzipan. The palate was rich and beautiful, with hints of olive and plum, and richer and more tannic than I expected, probably thanks to the larger format as much as anything else.

The 1990 Latour and 1982 Margaux were two of my wines of the night. I have always loved the openness and sweet, giving personality of the ’90 Latour, which is atypically not brooding. This penguin left the glacier a long time ago, but the ’90 shows no sign of early advancement either. It is just one of those wines that has always been delicious, as long as I can remember. The Margaux has always been underrated and overlooked when it comes to 1982. This bottle reaffirmed its status amongst the elite wines of the vintage. The last major retrospective of 1982s that I did, which was in 2007 and blind with twenty other tasters, had Margaux emerge on top, for those of you that forgot or weren’t around then. The 1990 Pichon Baron really made me take notice at the end of the night; I was impressed. I have still found the ’89 and ’90 PB to be up and down and inconsistent, but some bottles are truly great.

I guess we have to go to red Burgundy next. It seemed that there was more of it than any other wine type, which shows its staying power amongst wine’s greatest connoisseurs. Let’s talk 1999. We had a great run of the vintage that Aubert de Villaine once said might be the personal best of his lifetime. It was great to see a bunch of them showing well, as the last few here and there had me wondering if the vintage was shutting down. After this night, I can safely say no. The Roumier was the first ’99 we had, and it set a bar that no other equaled. This wine was sheer magic, with an ocean of perfectly sweet fruit, and a balance and style that were everything I could ask for. Go, Christophe, go. You can go back to 1996 for my notes on the Bachelet, which was similar in a big, ’99, catnip kind of way. The Rousseau was outstanding, but the Roumier stole its usual thunder. There was lots of pop to the nose, along with corn, kernel and a sweet core of fruit. A touch of sulfur needed time to blow off, and its finish was in the thick as a brick category. I had to thank ‘The Greek’ for this bottle, and probably more. The Lambrays impressed me more than I expected, delivering a rock solid performance. It was bright despite its beef, finishing with vitamins.

There were a couple of very good to excellent s, but neither stood out in this crowd. The 2001 Grands Ech was solid but stemmy, a bit bitter on the finish and one of the few ‘01s I haven’t adored as of late. The 2002 Vo Ro 1er Cru was seductive and had great spice, but it still felt like premier cru in the end despite that unique and delicious seal of approval. It led nicely into an outstanding 2002 Vogue, which was a beautiful and classic 2002. It was balanced, long, elegant and full with a perfect hint of cedar. It was one of the better young Vogues I have had recently. The 1978 Vogue was unfortunately a touch corked, holding it back a bit.

Two other wines really stood out for me, the first being another Roumier, this time a 2006 Les Amoureuses. This was that clean ’06 style, with mint and wood chips dancing around a core of sweet red fruit. It was silky and already great, but still young, of course. Sweet Lou’s 1988 La Mouline helped end the evening with a bang, continuing his perfect provenance streak with me at 121 bottles. Joe Dimaggio couldn’t have done it better himself. It was a great bottle, and it stood out from the crowd, for sure.

The next night was supposed to be a night of rest, were it not for the fact that the Cardinal just came to town. There was so much traffic in downtown Chicago as a result, I thought he brought the Pope with him. He only brought his Minister of Finance, aka The Bone Collector, another Angry Man alumnus. A small, intimate dinner followed for eight, featuring the following casual wines:

The 1976 DP was a fantastic bottle, with a classic sugary and toasty nose, followed by white cola and salted minerals. Flavors of bread soaked in oil stood out on this rich and fleshy bubbly that was still showing excellent acidity. The Krug was a bit square and less than I expected, more brawny than big. Drouhin’s Montrachet Marquis de Laguiche is the best bang for any Montrachet buck, and this 1993 was tasty and sweet, perhaps a touch advanced, but still good going down. It was creamy and lush with sunny, yellow raisin fruit along with mint and nut.

The Laville Haut Brion was outstanding. I love this wine, especially since it is usually 1/5th the price of the wine it is called now, which is La Mission Haut Brion Blanc. Hey, pay five times more for something that isn’t even close to ready”¦no thanks, but I will gladly scoop up Lavilles when they come up for immediate pleasure, times five. Its nose was really quiet, with only light glue, hints of straw and some exotic fruit lurking. The palate continued the exotic theme with clove flavors and nice spice on the finish. Hints of anise lurked about in this gorgeous and oh so drinkable white that will also age for decades more.

The obscure 1961 Chambolle was tasty and ‘drinking spectacularly’ once it shed its initial metal. Unfortunately, a 1972 RC was shot, which was semi-suspected going in. Per the Cardinal, we immediately put it under the shit and no giggles category lol. The 1949 Leroy Mazis Chambertin was a special wine, and we had to thank”¦hmmmm, I am stumped as to what to call our generous friend . anyway, the Leroy had a great nose full of vitamins, bouillon, garden and chewy fruit. It was ‘still climbing the mountain’ per its benefactor, and The Cardinal chimed in with ‘floral, red fruits, berries and leather.’ It was rich, chewy and delicious with excellent, supporting earth flavors. The d’Auvenay was saucy and soupy a la 1997, with olive, mint, rose and rust. It was excellent for 1997, and it showed nice structure at first, but it got a bit rubbery with time. The Roumier had aromas of cereal, wheat and earth and was a bit dirty for Roumier. The Bone Collector observed ‘camouflage and mushroom,’ and its finish showed excellent acidity. The Lafite had a bit of volatile acidity to it, but some nice pencil, cedar and roasted fruit behind it. It was tender and slightly rich in the mouth, with a leathery finish.

The next evening, it was finally time for the main event, and as usual, a lot of wine was consumed at the auction. I took scores, but no notes, and after nearly 4500 words, none will follow!

Ok, one brief note. I found the 2005 Latour to be completely undrinkable out of magnum, and it was my magnum. It confused and scarred me so badly, I may not revisit 2005 Bordeaux until 2015!

So the next morning, I had to get up at 5:30am to catch that 8am flight, in order to meet Paul Pontallier and twenty others for lunch at Per Se, in order to celebrate sixty years of Chateau Margaux, from 1900 to 1959. It would turn out to be one of the greater wine events of my life, it was that special. You’ll have to wait until after we get through The Don Parts I and II for that one. Don Part I came up only three days after Margaux, and now that article is on deck. Batter up!

I told you I do this every week 😉

Thanks to all in Chicago who helped make our first sale out there a memorable one! We’ll see you all again in January.