One of the most spectacular events of the year make that my life – was a recent vertical of Chateau Margaux held in New York City. The event was held over two-days at 11 Madison and Per Se, and it spanned over a century of Margaux back to 1900, with all bottles sourced from a single, Northern European cellar. While Burgundy has stolen the spotlight this Fall, this was an event that reminded me that nothing can age quite like Bordeaux. With Paul Pontallier, Chateau Margaux’s managing director and Bordeaux ambassador extraordinaire, in attendance to lead us, this was an event fit for a king, and a strong statement by Bordeaux that it will always be king.

I unfortunately missed the Saturday evening session, as I was in Chicago hammering down a few million of wine. Duty called, but there was no way I would miss Sunday’s session. It isn.t easy waking up at 6am after an evening auction; in fact, it is brutal, and I almost missed my flight back to New York. Were it not for the help of a couple of Angry alums, I might not have made it. Basically, I had to hand off my luggage at the check-in curb at the last second, and I just made my flight back to New York. I wasn.t the only one to fly into New York for this event. People came from all over America, Europe and even as far as Hong Kong and Korea. I arrived to Per Se in the nick of time, and while my sea legs weren.t exactly with me upon arrival, after one sip of Margaux, I instantly felt better.

The Sunday session featured wines from 1900 to 1959, twenty-nine years in total, including many super-rare and impossible-to-find vintages that many have already written off. If there is one lesson to be learned from this event, it is something that I say over and over: the greatest producers make great wines every year. Even Paul would later say that this was the greatest Margaux event of his life, admitting he had to re-write the Chateaux’s own notes on some of the obscure vintages. Dare I say that Acker events rewrite wine history?

You know it is a historical event when the first wine of the tasting is from 1907, and the 1907 Margaux was an omen of the good things that would continue to come. Pavillon Rouge was actually created in 1907, as a result of all the young vines at the time, due to the phylloxera outbreak of the late 19th Century, of course. The 1907 had a pleasant nose, still fresh with its rosy fruit. Its aromas were quite complicated, with leather, strawberry fields and glazes of toffee and citrus. The wine was incredibly exotic, and a touch of tea rounded out its surprisingly vibrant nose. Its flavors were not full of fruit and were more in the citrus and tea directions. There was nice flesh to its body still, and flavors of dry cherry and glue emerged. It was almost Burgundian. per one, having a Barolo color. per another. Say what you will, but this 1907 lasted in the glass and was an excellent beginning to this legendary afternoon (93).

The 1908 Margaux was clearly a reconditioned bottle, with a much darker color, and lots of vanilla and nut on top. It was fuller and fresher, but a bit square. I think I have gone on the record that there ain.t nothing like the real thing, aka an original bottle. I am fairly certain that after years of experimenting, most Chateaux would now agree (85).

While The Cardinal was not in attendance, we did have The Bishop instead. Quite good, he commented about the 1909 Margaux. Its nose was creamier, a vanilla city built on great, mild and mature cassis. Dapper Dave noted, Absolutely fantastic. You can smell the velvety texture.. This was a classic; it was round, soft, balanced, elegant and smooth. Paul concurred, admiring its balanced, elegant, sweet finish. (93).

The 1910 Margaux had a deep nose that was more in the purple and black direction, with supporting tea, chocolate and vanilla aromas. The palate was lean and a bit unyielding. Even Paul found it, short and acidic. (88).

The 1915 Margaux had this weird banana butter nose. It was way too oaky and a bit brutal, probably an off bottle (NR/DQ?)

However, the 1917 Margaux brought our first flight to a close in fine fashion. It had a gorgeous nose, full of musky elegance. Its palate was round, lush and tender, inviting like a trip to Grandma.s. This was classic in every sense of the word. Paul hailed it, best of the flight, still power and freshness.. I seconded that emotion (94).

I must say, for a series of random, ancient vintages that were not historically significant, that first flight was impressive. It set the tone for the rest of the afternoon, and each flight added more and more to Margaux’s legend. The 1922 Margaux that led off the next flight was stunning. 1922? I don.t even think I have even had a wine from 1922 in my life, that’s how rare or how little regard there was for the vintage. The nose was nutty, with sweet caramel kisses and oats in there. Its aromatics were very open and forward; this was a wine where any guy would immediately think he has a chance, and that’s a good thing. The palate was rich, beefy, brothy and chocolaty. Brawny and tasty, the 1922 had flavors of wheat, chocolate and saddle sweat, and a great, dusty finish. Paul noted a touch of benevolent oxidation, and Magnum Mark had it in first place for the flight (94).

Another obscure vintage was the 1925 Margaux, and it was even more stunning. 1925? Come on, you mean 1928? 1929? Wow. Its nose was so different, full of mint and olive, deep and enticing. The palate was soft and seductive in a very velvety way, unfolding into this creamy and toasty finish. There was great flesh and nice smack to its finish. Black cherry and cassis took over, spilling out of the glass in a tasty, taste me way. The finish got thicker, and we were officially in outstanding territory. I should note that Magnum Mark found it, a little sugary. (95).

We continued with the 1936 Margaux, another vintage that basically doesn.t exist anymore. It had a dirty nose with a bit of 1915 in there with its oaky fruit and mild banana and caramel aromas, along with a touch of celery, and I hate celery. Talk about one of the vilest vegetables on the planet! If I was a superhero, one of my arch-nemeses would have to be Dr. Celery, who would of course be funded by Lord Overoaked, but I digress. Mr. Wine Vegas observed, rosehips and aged cranberry.. The palate was ok, drinkable and pleasant, more so than the nose. It was a bit waxy, and my last note summed it up best, I could still drink a bottle of this on my own, which is my version of inspected by number 12. lol (88).

The 1937 Margaux had a mild and clean nose with aromas of light earth and a bit of bread. The palate was lean and pleasant, a touch chalky at first, but clean and fresh with a dry finish (92).

The 1942 Margaux was a wow wine, seconded by Gil, who was practically shrieking over it. The nose was nice, but the palate is what set this vintage apart. Aromas of spice, chocolate, hay and fireplace set the stage for the big show. The palate was delicious, rich and amazing&.so chocolaty, I wrote. It was full-bodied and long, quite balanced given its heady fruit. Not that it’s that unusual, but Gil could not stop talking about this monumental wine.. He continued, one for the historical perspective, adding the best bottle of 1942 that I have ever had.. Ok, ok, we get it (96).

The last wine of this extraordinary flight was the 1951 Margaux. Paul was immediately smitten by this archetypical. Margaux. He admired its elegance, softness and freshness without being too acidic.. It was another sweet core in the nose, but in a more perfumed way. It, too, was delicious, delivering plenty of cassis flavors, supported by a touch of chalk. This was sexy and juicy, and Gil was back with sweet tobacco and truffle, and amazed at this wine, because it was from a truly shitty vintage.. We here at Acker always prefer a shitty Truly vintage lol. This was another wow. wine, especially given the vintage (94+).

Most were in the 42 and 22 camp, although the 25 and 51 certainly got a lot of attention. Almost the entire flight was spectacular. Dapper Dave summed it up, every bottle was as good as it could be, and Aurelien added, all of them give pleasure.. We had just finished the second flight of six. Could we be in for a letdown the rest of the way? The beginning was far too story book. for this continue, could it possibly?

The next flight began with the 1905 Margaux. Truffles. were immediately noticed, and its nose was hailed as mind-blowing.. There was great musk and spice aromatically. The palate was soft and tender, with nice spice as well. Light citrus abounded, and its finish was pretty. Paul found it to be built like a modern Bordeaux, and later added he thought it was wine of the day so far! The 05 Latour I had the night prior wasn.t nearly as good, oh yeah, that was 2005, oops (94).

The 1918 Margaux had a milky, nutty nose with aromas more on the milk chocolate side. The Fink noted, perigord truffles and cumin, while I was stuck on my nuts. That probably didn.t come out right. There was excellent balance to this World War I wonder (93).

The 1919 Margaux was unfortunately shot, complete vinegar. It was like biting into a lemon. Hey, it happens. Get over it, and move on (DQ).

1933 is another vintage rarely seen today no matter what the region, and the 1933 Margaux was up to the challenge of resurrecting its vintage’s reputation at this last chance corral. Gil noted, old Burgundy, and The Fink sous bois.. The 33 had the same mint and olive combination of the 25. Its fruit was big, black and chocolaty, with a buttery and rich personality. Olive and mint joined the palate as well in this excellent red (93).

Only seven years separated all the wines in the next flight, and we started with the 1943 Margaux. It had a wafery nose, mild yet rustic. There was a touch of mint lingering here, in a leaf way. This was a bit of a bruising Margaux by its usual, charming standards, and clearly the most powerful and muscular of the day so far. The length goes on and on, cooed Magnum Mark. This was a healthy combination of power and acidity, and another great showing for another wartime vintage (95+).

The 1946 Margaux was from a high-acid year, per Paul. You could see that right away. It was nice but a touch square and zippy, a touch bitter but sturdy. Someone called it, sharper than 1948. (91).

The 1948 Margaux had pleasing aromas of wafer and bread along with forward cassis and a hint of tobacco. There was great nuttiness here, but its palate was a bit sweet, almost cough syrupy. It had a full, gritty finish but was a touch medicinal (90).

The final wine to this flight had Paul a bit disappointed. at first, as the 1950 Margaux is a wine he knows well and loves. However, with time in the glass, the wine became outstanding, finishing strongly. Dapper Dave noted, dry cigar paper, while Magnum Mark added, a satisfying, rich robe. of a wine. The aromatics unfolded into freshness and greatness, with zip and the doo-dah to go with it. The palate was very tasty with sweet fruit and a great mid-palate. A touch of swimming pool was not enough to keep me out of this creamy and tasty red, which I found to be a Miss Congeniality. of a wine (95).

The fifth flight began with the 1921 Margaux, a veritable liquid gourmet Cheeseburger, per Gil. Dapper Dave agreed, finding it definitely most meaty.. Once the cheeseburgers were gone, there was great dust and spice to its superbly floral and perfumed nose, leading one to call it, the perfect nose that is Chateau Margaux.. The palate was clean and bright, fresh, long and elegant, while the nose got dustier. The bottle was hailed as pristine, and its citrus elements were still fresh from the tree, so to speak. Paul loved the tenderness, and its acidity, freshness and power. (93).

The 1934 Margaux was unfortunately a touch corky, although we could see the sweet fruit underneath its corkiness. 1934 will always be a vintage close to my heart, as that is when Prohibition was ended, and when grandpa bought into Acker. Although I must confess, 1934 is all about the Burgundy. Paul instructed that 1934 has always been powerful and tannic. (93A).

The 1952 Margaux had a clean nose, with again a touch of pool. Aromas of rock and rose were on display from this tannic vintage. It had a dry finish accordingly, and got at least one spectacular. from the crowd. It remains an underrated vintage, especially in the Right Bank, where the wines can be truly special (93).

The seemingly three-way tie was broken with the last wine of the flight, an outstanding 1955 Margaux. The nose was a touch grassy at first, but that aired into these aromas of outdoor goodness. The palate was pure 1955 deliciousness, delivering a rich, tasty, lush and long experience. Heady and delicious, I wrote twice. The wine was even better with the rib-eye beef dish from the kitchen. Flavors of wheat and chocolate went on and on, supported by hay and earth. Most people were in the 55 camp when it came to this flight, although the 1921 got significant play as well (95+).

It was time for the last flight, the five theoretical finest of the afternoon, and they were all up for the challenge. It would turn out to be, in the words of Paul Pontallier, a moving experience.. We began with a bottle of 1900 Margaux, or should I say THE bottle, as this was the bottle of 1900 Margaux that I had been looking for my whole life, being previously disappointed on a handful of occasions. There was a level of complexity here unmatched by any other wine so far. There were lots of wows from the crowd, along with oohs, aahs and omg.s. Its nose was perfect, so good with its smoke, wheat, earth, chocolate and cassis. The palate was rich and complete, with great sweetness and a long, scintillating finish. There was still zip to its dusty finish, and the fruit stayed great to the very last drop. Unbelievable. came from the crowd and summed it up perfectly (99).

The 1945 Margaux had a tough act to follow. Paul did recommend that we drink the 1900 last, but I wanted to be consistent with the fact that I had gone oldest to youngest for each of the prior flights. The 45 had aromas of wafer, wheat, stone and black fruits. The palate was tasty with chocolate and caramel flavors, but a bit overshadowed by the 1900 (94).

And the 1947 Margaux, for that matter, which was another scene stealer. A rare appearance by cinnamon graced the nose, along with wheat, grass and black fruits. This bottle had been recorked in 1988, and it was one of the few reconditioned bottles of the afternoon, benevolently so. It was rich, saucy and lush, capturing the essence of the hot 1947 vintage and offering an earthy, complex finish (95).

The 1953 Margaux proved why it is considered to be one of the greatest Margaux of all-time. It would only prove second to the 1900, which still means about as good as it gets. The nose had gorgeous spice and a creamy feel. There was classic, pure fruit here, and a delightfully nutty glaze. This is what Margaux does at its best, one gushed. Gil chimed in with apricot, and it was definitely there with an exotic twist. One could see the proud father in Paul’s eyes when he likened the 53 to the same family as 1905 and 1921. (98).

The last wine on this magical afternoon was the 1959 Margaux. There were aromas and flavors of chocolate, cassis, wafer, grain and smoke in this classy and classic Margaux (94).

The concept of tradition came up, and Dapper Dave quoted Freddie Mugnier of all people, saying that tradition is trying to make wines better.. Even one of the greatest Bordelais, Mr. Pontallier, could not disagree with that dose of Burgundian common sense. The tradition of Chateau Margaux, one started in the 17th Century, was on full and majestic display on this afternoon. It is an afternoon I will never forget.

I’ve been getting a lot of congratulations about the success of the business this Fall. While always nice to hear, I always have the same reply: I know I will be truly successful when I am able to write up every wine that I taste. While time may not always be on my side, one thing remains a constant in the search for the world’s greatest wines: passion. Tasting a great wine just never gets old, and as I get older, the significance of tasting the world’s finest and rarest wines becomes more and more meaningful. In my world, drinking a great wine is akin to sitting next to Picasso while he painted, and it won’t cost you $100 million when it’s finished, either.

I suppose it didn’t cost that then, come to think of it. Then again, wine never does, either. It is always worth more today than yesterday. The rare occasion it goes down in value, it goes back up higher than before, and quickly. The second you blink, the best are 20% more expensive. And in the worst case scenario, you can always drink it, wasn’t that the idea in the first place?

That’s the idea when we have an auction, and for our first auction in Chicago, we came, we saw and we drank. Even though I am in the top of Stott week (and there is plenty of wine going down from the Don as I speak), I just had to share the happy, windy recap before I continue. Once I go Don, I can’t go back! Forgive the abridged notes, but we drank a lot of shtuff, ok? It started off with a small, afternoon gathering of a couple of notable friends. We sampled a quartet of wines, some curiosity, but at least one kitty cat.

There are two things of which I have been drinking a bunch, 2008 White Burgundies and 2007 Reds. This Raveneau was a bit disappointing, to be frank, as it was not that expressive, and seemed less complicated than the usual Raveneau experience. It was clean and ‘pretty accessible’ but a touch yeasty and simple. The Pichon Lalande was class in a glass and why I drink Bordeaux. I have always loved this wine, although I found it a point behind usual, a touch closed. The cassis and pencil mélange worked its magic, as did the high Merlot content that makes Pichon so seductive. The 2007 Cathiard had the charm of 2007 but the oak of Cathiard, coming across on the beefier side of Burgundy. Ultimately, I liked it. The Clos des Papes was jammy and sweet, seemingly mature”¦already? Sweet and sweeter, I felt like this was a spoonful of sugar to help the medicine go down. Not sure what all the fuss is about.

The Pape Clement was smoky and had classic Graves aromatics, although charcoal dominated. It was dry and with earthy, mesquite flavors, and it kept improving in the glass. The Palmer was seductive and fleshy after shedding some initial greenness. There was great acidity and minerality, but it didn’t lose touch with its sensual side. Palmer has been on a real roll and remains one of my favorite Bordeaux chateaux, and undervalued in many vintages. Something was wrong with the Calon Segur, or the wine just isn’t that good. It was a bit stewed and the ‘last by far’ of the flight. The Cos had a big nose and the most aromatics, as well as the most power. It was a bit rugged in style, and a precursor to the next level that Cos has achieved over the past decade.

The Grand Puy Lacoste had a great Pauillac nose, classic in style. Minerals, pencil, slate, anise and earth all competed for attention in this hearty and also rugged wine. Two Pichon Lalandes in one day is never a bad thing, and the 1996 again proved to be sensual with its high Merlot content. There were great aromatics and excellent acidity on its impressive finish, but again I found this wine a point behind usual, perhaps in a closed phase. Vitamins screamed out on the Pontet Canet, Pauillac’s newest big boy, and it had this pungent edge the other’s didn’t. It was breadier and jammier, and ‘always hard,’ per one horny gentleman. The Lynch Bages started slowly and finished strongly. While at first grassy, green and gamy, it opened up into a meadow of goodness, and bread and anise soaked up all the grass, and it blossomed with more flesh and power on the palate than anything else prior.

Of course, the flight was a bit anti-climactic with the corked Las Cases, but no one can do anything about a corked bottle. Just to remind everyone, a corked bottle has nothing to do with storage, but rather a genetic selection of sorts for wine, one that affects 2-3% of bottles, in my experience. It certainly isn’t one out of ten, or whatever they want to tell you down in New Zealand, or wherever else they love screwcaps. The Leoville Poyferre was pleasant and elegant, smooth and lovely. The Leoville Barton was more powerful, as it typically is, with a touch of game and exotic boysenberry in there. The Ducru Beaucaillou was a bit disappointing, gamier and jammier than I remember. I have been a big fan of this wine before, and I felt this was a bit too much in those directions.

The Haut Brion was the best showing of this wine that I can remember. It flirted with being outstanding and ultimately got there. It was full, fleshy and big-bodied with the classic smoke and charcoal. Big, long and gritty, it was a clear step up from almost everything prior. The Margaux took it up two notches and lived up to its reputation as one of the wines of the vintage. I have consistently found this to be one of the great, young Margaux”¦period. There were rich black fruits, and the wine was so seductive, yet firm. The iron fist and velvet glove were in full force and syncronicity, and while meaty, the Margaux remained simultaneously svelte. The Latour quickly took control, however. This was a deep, classic and great wine from the very first sniff, its touch of wood integrating into a wealth of mint, eucalyptus and black fruits. This was clearly special stuff. Mouton had two tough acts to follow, but it still was outstanding, showing more gourmet bread action of rye and pumpernickel alongside some other usual suspects.

Gary busted out a 1970 Latour for all to share. I knew Chicago was ‘Our Kind of Town’ once he did that. On cue, it was one of the best bottles of this wine that I have ever had, and the first one in a while that hit outstanding territory. It had a great nose of pencil, nut, carob, musk and ‘good’ barn, you know, when you’re in there with the farmer’s daughter lol. The palate was creamy, clean, long and balanced. This was young and fresh for 1970, and it reminded me that drinking Bordeaux is always best when it’s older (95)

This was a fascinating retrospective from an excellent vintage for the Left Bank, and two things stuck out in my mind. One, it is generally an excellent and not outstanding vintage, although there are a handful of outstanding wines. Two, the quality of the First Growths really stood out from the rest of the pack. Like the saying goes, ‘you get what you pay for,’ and it was clear to everyone why there are the Firsts, and everything else.

The next night we slid into Burgundy for another evening of 1996. A generous guest of the X-Factor clan slipped me a glass of 1993 Domaine Leflaive Bienvenues Batard Montrachet. Sorry I can’t remember which of you brought it, there are too many of you :). It was another act of kind generosity, and the Leflaive showed well accordingly. Mature and tasty, it was delicious and oh so ’93, with only a kiss of noticeable oak as the only flaw. If it was a bad kisser, it made up for it in the sack (94)

We started with a trio of Cote de Beauners, and I was happy to see them.

The hallmark acidity of the vintage jumped out immediately in the Lafon; it was tight and screechy in the nose, but still lovely and citrusy in the mouth. While a touch dry, it was full and steely. The d’Angerville was the class of the flight, as it usually is for the region. It was more aromatic with purple fruit and a touch of nuts. There were round, vitamin flavors and a touch of game and smoke to this thick Volnay. The Armand was a bit stinky and dirty, although it had excellent flesh and that mountainous, full fruit of Pommard.

The X-Factor threw a mystery 1996 in front of me, courtesy of Magnum Man. Of course, Magnum Man represents a significant step in the evolutionary chain of mankind; he only drinks wine. The wine had a deep nose full of black and purple fruit, and it was ‘very concentrated.’ Vitamins, meat, smoke and a rich, fleshy palate impressed me, along with its long tannins and finish. It was a good showing for this 1996 Louis Jadot Bonnes Mares (94). Another off-the-record wine flew by, a 1996 Dauvissat Chablis Les Preuses. It was yeasty, gamy and delicious in that mature Chablis way (93)

We headed North for some Cote de Nuits; there was no turning back, and the next flight led off with one of my wines of the night.

The Meo-Camuzet was a stunner, and it stole the show from its Grand Cru peers. There were great aromatics of fresh fruit and touches of seemingly everything ”“ cedar, spice, sawdust, alcohol and acidity. This was a fine and gorgeous wine. The Clos de Tart was deep, big and round, heavy and beefy, yet impressive. The Jadot Richebourg had a similar aromatic profile to the Bonnes Mares, but it smelled deeper. However, it was leaner on the palate, and the X-Factor wisely noted, ‘it may have more potential, but right now it’s awkward.’ The Anne Gros was serious; there was a great balance between its fruit, spice and game in the nose, which was cleaner and fresher than expected. There was lots of grass on its palate, and the finish matched its clean nose.

A trio of Romanee St. Vivants tested both typicity and terroir, and while our evening of Bordeaux taught us there are the First Growths and everything else, this flight taught us that there is and everything else.

The Drouhin was outstanding at first glance. Its nose was a bit on the milky and stemmy side, but I didn’t mind. There was great cedar and spice to its palate, and it had great balance and style, with a long and thick finish. However, it thinned a bit in the glass. The Confuron was much deeper and darker, pungent and purple. The palate was more elegant than the nose led me to believe, and while bigger, that didn’t mean better, especially in Burgundy. The had an unmatched level of nuance and complexity to the nose. It was deep, rich and thick as a brick both aromatically and on the palate. Menthol emerged in a great way; this wine was impressive city.

In Vino Veritas,
JK

Over the summer, there were a few special gatherings outside of Europe that merit some attention before Fall overtakes us all. Thanks for all the positive feedback about the new format; while it wasn’t the plan, it will be from now on, although the next couple articles might not have as many nice shots as the last one; like I said, it wasn’t planned! Anyway, it is difficult to get photo approval from a King and now Cardinal, and that is upon whom this article centers.

Significant occasions call for significant wines, and significant Champagnes. A trio of Champagnes set a high bar for the evening. A 1982 Krug kicked things off nicely with some usual big vanilla and cream soda aromas, accompanied by lightly grilled nuts. It was full and yeasty, served a bit warm, but its big and brawny style shined on. It was still young (95+).

A magnum of 1973 Dom Perignon was exceptional. It was just one of those great bottles. It had strong wafery flavors and tasty sugar, with a creamy and somewhat delicate finish by comparison to the Krug. It still had muscle but in a more cut way, and its elegance lingered like good manners (96M).

Controversy emerged early over Bad Boy’s 1979 Salon. Carl, our resident Chief Oxidation Officer, had to be called in rather quickly for a ruling. The Hillbilly was not appreciating the Salon, calling it ‘tight and metallic.’ I think he was trying to set Bruce’s goose loose, as this was a pretty special bottle. A few profanities were exchanged; New York guys can be sensitive about their bottles J. I happened to be on the Bad Boy’s side here; I, too, thought the Salon was ‘great,’ and one of the better ‘79s I have ever had. There was tremendous acidity here, with the signature laser-like qualities. Yellow and white chocolate blended together into great citrus expressions, and the Salon kept getting better and better the more time we gave it. The Salon clearly had the best raw materials of the three; its finish went on forever. Bruce muttered something about The Hillbilly being a ‘minuteman,’ due to his inability to show patience and stamina in getting to know the Salon. As with half of what Todd says or does, I can’t put it in writing (96+).

The wines came out of order at times, beginning with a 1969 Vogue Musigny Vieilles Vignes. ‘Stinky,’ decreed the Cardinal, and it was so. The Hillbilly added, ‘compost and end trails,’ reminding him of home sweet home as a young Cackalackan. It had a rusty style, with red citrus and autumnal floor action, along with some vinomy tension, although I don’t know what that means lol. My writing sure looks like vinomy! The acidity was quite present on the palate, along with bouillon-y fruit and dirty, backburner action. Its fruit was spiny, red and tight, but it dried out quickly in a beefy way (91).

The Champagne resumed again briefly thanks to a 1976 Roederer Cristal. The Punisher reluctantly noted, ‘quite delicious,’ and The Cardinal went even further, finding it ‘unbelievable.’ It was a great Cris for sure, showing the buttery, sweet, kinky side that makes old Cristal so good. White cola and fruits as well as musky caramel crossed the border from nose to palate, and there was outstanding acidity as well. While quite tasty, a hint of square wood emerged on the finish, and the ’76 started to lose steam quicker than I wanted (95).

A 1996 Domaine Leflaive Chevalier Montrachet had a toasty nose full of big kernel, and that Leflaive gassy pop that their bottles can sometimes have initially after being opened. Yellow fruits emerged in a sunnily sweet way. The Artful Roger, who always seems to be on Central time, finally joined us and found the Leflaive ‘really good.’ It really opened up, but its acidity seemed mild for ’96. Corn and nut were there, along with toast and diesel. The acidity emerged more with time (95).

Roger brought a rare 1986 Raveneau Chablis Valmur, at which The Punisher sneered, ‘mature, yet quite good.’ It came across cleanly for an ’86 white but was still rich and chunky. It was sweet in a pampered way, and its palate was delicious with yellow and white grape flavors, along with papaya on its finish. Roger hailed this smooth and excellent wine ‘a smokin’ bottle,’ and the Raveneau stole some thunder from the Leflaive. Although ultimately the Leflaive was the better wine, the Raveneau was the wine with which to have a good time on this night (94).

Eddie and I continued to butt heads with the No Joy, No Luck Club over the 1990 Rousseau Chambertin. The ’90 had deep fruit with intense, reticent perfume. It was certainly tight, but everything about it said ‘mammoth.’ It was much blacker and deeper than the ’91, which was more open and easier, so to speak, but there was no doubt in my mind what was the better wine when both glasses were empty. The Hillbilly observed, ‘heavy and ponderous,’ although perhaps he was having an introspective moment lol (97).

Roger also pulled a 1980 Dujac Clos St. Denis out of his bag, and it was elegant and perfumed. Light cedar, mahogany and raisin danced around its pretty fruit in the nose. Candied fruit, raisin and garden flavors were on the palate, and The Cardinal preferred it to both Rousseaus due to its mature personality (93).

The 1999 Richebourg got another ‘heavy’ from Todd. The Richebourg was deep, rippling with iron, minerals and black fruit. Its nose was so young yet so good, but the palate was closed, adding menthol to its profile. While 1999 is considered to be one of Burgundy’s great vintages, most recent Grand Cru experiences have been in the closed category (95+).

The 1990 Romanee St. Vivant that followed was dirty but good, thick with cedar and straw aromas. It was a touch primordial and a bit earthy, but classic ’90 behind that. Meaty fruit, menthol spice and a foresty finish rounded out this slightly awkward bottle (93).

It was time for some Bordeaux, and the 1982 Mouton Rothschild set the table nicely. There were lots of ‘greats’ going around, and our Bordeaux transition was officially and successfully achieved. The Mouton was still young, delicious and long, full of cassis, nut and chocolate. My notes, however, begun to get shorter and shorter. There were only eight of us, and thirteen bottles were already down the hatch, and we were only about halfway through the night (97+).

The Bollinger was poo-poo’d by The Hillbilly, although Eddie thought it wasn’t so bad. It had a wafery and slaty nose and a ‘burnt orange’ edge. The Ruinart was all about vanilla and butterscotch, morphing into a white, sasparilla cola. While very good, it was merely that and didn’t stand out on this star-studded night. The Phillipponat was disgorged in 2007, and too young accordingly. It was spiny and full of character, but too tight and mean, for lack of a better word. Champagnes need time from the point of disgorgement to the point of drinking; perhaps The Cardinal will pass some sort of law to ensure proper aging in the cellars of the Domaines after disgorgement. I have written up the 1996 Krug Clos du Mesnil on many occasions already, and all of my notes are consistently in the ‘best wines of my life’ category. The Krug screamed, ‘I AM LEGEND,’ and every wine took a number and got in line. Mass + force + balance = awesome. Oh yeah, the 1988 Krug was outstanding, as usual, but there were more no words left for Champagne after the ‘96 Clos du Mesnil.

The 1983 Margaux was classic and clean, with a touch of windex that I often find in this vintage of Margaux. It was lean, elegant and beautiful. A bottle I had last week was a bit richer and with more noticeable acidity, but I would rate them the same. The 1990 Margaux was richer and a bit more manly than the ’83, showing more cassis, and somehow coming off even more elegant despite more richness. It was clearly a step up from the ’83, despite both being outstanding. Bruce started bashing the Beausejour, saying that it has ‘never been more than 93 points, and this is another one.’ The Big Ticket was trying to convince us to ‘let it warm up,’ but at this point in the evening, that wasn’t going to happen. It was super fruity and kinky, exotic like three of The Hillbilly’s best friends: Cinnamon, Jasmine and Bubbles J. My score is probably generous and more of a technical one, as I am not sure I could even drink a bottle of it. It’s like 91 points with a Facebook ‘Don’t like’ attached to it lol. The Cheval was a touch weedy and wafery at first, a bit oily a la some of its best vintages. It put on some weight and became quite concentrated, and despite a touch of mustiness to the palate at first, ultimately it was delicious. The Lafleur was as good as any other wine in this extended flight. ‘Solid’ and ‘rich’ started off my waning notes, along with kinky cocoa, nut and coconut as well”¦yes, all three. The palate was also delicious, another hedonistic Right Banker with foundations of earth and rock to support its deep, kinky Pomerol fruit.

‘Eddie, Eddie’ could be heard in the distance as The Punisher pulled out a 1959 Latour. It had a fantastic nose, pure and special. This was a great, old bottle, whose fruit was fleshy, nutty and tasty, and whose acidity still balanced its headlining act. It just reminded me how much more pleasure older wines give. Even if a rating is less, an older wine may still give more pleasure than a higher-rated wine. While the sips were small and more evaluatory on the 1990 flight, I finished every drop of the 1959 (97).

It was a coronation ceremony fit for a king, make that a Cardinal. The Cardinal then reminded us that despite his newfound position, and perhaps mission, that he has not rescinded any sovereign authority whatsoever. Long live the King.

I have spent a lot of time on the road this summer, both business and a bit of pleasure. July had me all over Europe, visiting 18 cities in 25 days. Before the trip, it looked really good on paper, but about halfway through, it started to hurt. I think it was the 22 courses in two days, combined with eight straight meals with foie gras that had something to do with it. Not to mention the insane amount of wine that was sampled. Our favorite cellars in Europe were quite generous, and it is my goal to get the recap article done by end of Labor Day. I still have a dream, to write more notes. Most of what I taste unfortunately does not get published – yet. Our new website will force me to change that, but that is still some months away.

Monday night this week brought me back to New York City for basically the first time in two months. It was only fitting to ease back into the rotation with Mr. Unfiltered, who bottle shocked me with a bottle of 1993 Romanee Conti. I had two other bottles of RC while in Europe, one being a 1923, the other being a 2004. Both were better than great. I’ll get to those later. I was sniffing away at the 1993 when it occurred to me that a bottle of RC a month is a $100k a year habit. Amazing. As was the 1993, although 1993 has always been a bit of a hot topic when it comes to due to the woodier and stemmier nature of many bottles.

The ’93 RC was deep yet tight; it had a killer nose that could only be Romanee Conti. There is a natural weight and breed that comes from the vineyard of Romanee Conti that is unmatched by any Pinot in the world. It ain’t 10k a bottle for nothin’, as we might say here in New Yawk. Mr. U called it ‘a stainer,’ and its aromas did feel like a stain on my membrane. Black fruits, rust, forest and almost a shot of Fernet Branca-like liqueur were all there in its rusty and spicy nose. Green fruit and stems were also there, as that woodsy quality of this vintage for made itself evident from the first sniff. It did get saucier in the glass, both in the nose and on the palate, which was also deep and rich. The forest floor and stem flavors were there, but so was this luscious quality that oozed creamy black and red fruits. A little licorice crept out of the wood, and the acidity lingered well. While 1993 may have some more ‘issues’ than the average RC, there is still no doubting the heavyweight champion of the world (95+).