Blog

Reports of our demise have been greatly exaggerated. Save a couple of anonymous individuals, the Angry Men have been very angry in 2006, gathering on a more infrequent basis as a whole and quite often in smaller contingents. Of course, I led the charge to gather earlier this year and banded together me angry men, who are always kept in check by the one angry chick.

A gaggle of Champagnes kicked off year two, beginning with a 1982 Dom Perignon out of magnum. Fresh, lightly creamy and meaty, the 1982 was showing excellently with some sweet nutty fruit, hazelnuts, butter and seltzer. In the mouth, the fruit was rich, tasty, creamy and nutty, and its palate was lightly spritely, balanced and beautiful. Its richness and sweetness were one step short of outstanding, but this was still toasty and smooth and certainly benefited by being served out of magnum, which makes a big difference for Champagne in lesser years and after age twenty (94M).

The 1981 Krug was also out of magnum, and Ray immediately found it ‘a touch maderized.’ Its nose had citrus and a little bread while its palate was very citrusy with long acidity. I found its palate rich, creamy and tangy and actually very good, good enough perhaps to outlast the DP but not as good on this night. Rob found it ‘White Burgundy at the bottom and green apple.’ I got lobster in the nose later on, or maybe that was what I ate. Its acidity was still special (92+M).

The 1980 Dom Perignon Rose was almost like a chapitalized Burgundy from the 1950’s. Josh found ‘Maraschino cherry’ fruit, and there was also rose, white chocolate and a touch of Marzipan. The palate was both mature and fresh, with nutty and oaty fruit and nice freshness despite an autumnal edge. Someone found it ‘a little oxidative,’ and that someone was probably Ray, who is working on his new novel, The Oxidation Conspiracy; look for it in 2007. I looked at it as being mature, definitely not going to get better and perhaps one to receive a lower score sooner rather than later but still excellent on this night (93).

A flight of Leflaive’s ‘Clavoillon’ opened up the wine portion of our evening, whose theme by the way was 1980s Burgundy. The 1989 Domaine Leflaive Puligny Montrachet Clavoillon had a great nose full of menthol, butter, wax, minerals, nut, game and white meat; it was very complex. There were classic, yellow, sundried fruit flavors and still a trace of grit on its finish, along with flavors of butter, light minerals and lingering acidity. Waxy and minty, I was struck as this being more Ramonet-ish, but then again I generally have not had many Pulignys this old from Leflaive. We try to stick to Grand Cru as much as possible at age seventeen (93).

The 1988 Domaine Leflaive Puligny Montrachet Clavoillon’s nose was a bit sour with some mildew in it, but that sounds worse than it was. It still had a broad, rich, big palate, a bit clumsy but broad. The 1988 was holding on, but there was a touch of alley and vegetable to the finish, again sounding worse than it was. Mike found ‘a little too much oak,’ and the 1988 is a wine to definitely drink up (89).

The 1985 Domaine Leflaive Puligny Montrachet Clavoillon had a steelier style, with its acidity much more prevalent in the nose. There were wax, butter, corn and yellow fruits there as well. Ray admired its ‘youthful’ quality, and it was the most so. It seemed shier on the palate and more medium weight, still smooth and with rainwater flavors (92).

A 1980 Leroy Chapelle Chambertin was ‘great,’ according to Ray and ‘phenomenal’ according to Mike, who was quickly told by Ray, in true Angry Man style, to stop copying him. It had a sweet, seductive nose full of catnippy, brambly, sweet fruit raspberries, cherries and strawberries, oh my! There was serious catnip action, enough to make it pretty frisky in some back alleys around America. There were also aromas of vitamins, musk, stems and tree bark. Its flavors were rich, tangy, briary and earthy, and it delivered a delicious, round, smooth and fully mature experience. There were vitamins and additional earth on the finish. The only drawback was that the wine ‘faded quickly,’ as Mike observed as it got a little woodsier. Those 1980s need to be consumed in a timely fashion once opened for maximum enjoyment (93).

A 1981 H. Jayer Echezeaux was a little musty or corky; there was some richness behind it and loads of vitamins and dark, plummy fruit. Big Boy found it very ‘chocolaty,’ which was very true. There was great richness in the mouth for the vintage, and its earthy and leathery finish was impressive. Jayer is a master in the ‘off’ years (93A).

We continued this experimental flight with a 1982 Rousseau Chambertin, which had lots of wild animal in the nose and tangy and vitaminy fruit, supported by rank meat, citrus, sweet rose and stem. There was lots of citrus on the palate, which lacked flesh but still had good richness, along with good tang and earth on its finish. ‘Asian spice was all over it,’ Mike noted, and we weren’t sure if he was talking about the wine or the porn he was watching last night. Ray then followed with one of his favorite descriptors, the ‘tea bag.’ All hell broke loose early, and if you don’t know, trust me, you don’t want to. Ray also got secondary beef flavors, although usually he is one to be at the primary source of any beef (90).

The 1986 Roumier Bonnes Mares had an incredible nose full of menthol, mint and spice with this incredible rusty vigor to match. I have been a huge fan of Roumier’s 1986s as I believe he struck gold in this vintage. Mike pegged ‘orange peel.’ The wine was balanced and with great menthol flavors and long acidity. It was clearly the wine of the night so far, but I had it as excellent, but not outstanding (94).

Another experimental turn, the 1987 Jadot Musigny, had everybody blasting Jadot and forming a lynch mob. I, for one, was into it. I thought it would be cool to have every vintage from the decade represented and the Jadot just happened to be in the right place at the right time, as you do not see many 1987s hanging around these days. The Musigny still had nice citrus, earth, vitamin and musk aromas. Ray said, ‘it smells like old Bordeaux.’ ‘Palmer,’ Mike observed while Ray countered ‘La Miss,’ though Mike served a forehand winner with a ‘not enough hickory’ comment. The palate was like most ’87s by now tangy and rusty without the vigor or acidity of ’86. Mike observed ‘a little band aid’ and said it reminded Mike of BV ’77. We tormented him a bit about that being his house wine. Ray wisely observed that this is a wine that needs to be drunk within thirty minutes (88).

The 1985 Rousseau Gevrey Chambertin ‘Clos St. Jacques’ elicited a ‘welcome to the big leagues’ by none other than Big Boy himself. The CSJ had an amazing nose that was fresh and full of vitamins, rose and wound citrusy fruit. There was also cherry, mint and Gorky found ‘iodine;’ its nose had almost everything. The palate was outstanding to match, full of vitamin and citrus flavors. Its rich, creamy, taut, spiny and vigorous personality was great, and while it is probably at its peak (where it should rest for a few years), it was absolutely beautiful and a quintessential example of a great Burgundy shedding its adolescence (95).

The 1985 Roumier Bonnes Mares was a controversial wine and a bit of a let down for many. Mike found ‘urine’ in its nose, and Ray corrected him with ‘golden shower.’ I can’t take these guys anywhere. The nose was citrusy and spiny in a mild, feminine, elegant way with lots of musk, earth and almost steam. The palate was all about the citrus and vitamin, balanced and long in an elegant way and still with excellent acidity. Rob noticed ‘smoked oak,’ and the wine, indeed, got woody. Insert Beavis or Butthead laugh here. While the acidity of the 1985 kept it in the excellent ballpark, I would have to say I would be disappointed if I paid $1000 for the bottle, especially when I could pick up an ’86 or ’83 even at less than half the price (93).
The 1985 Dujac Bonnes Mares won this head-to-head, 1985 Bonnes Mares showdown. Ray was all over the wine, oohing and aahing, cooing and sighing, and it got embarrassing when he started licking the stem of his glass up and down, over and over. Ok, I’m kidding, but he was not shy about his adoration of the Dujac. The nose was at first very subtle and shy with aromas of linen, black cherry, earth and charcoal. The palate, however, was exquisite and rich with flavors of iodine, earth, vitamins and minerals. Mike found it ‘complete and balanced’ but didn’t get the extra level of complexity out of the wine that Ray, myself and others did. Ray gave it a 98+ (95).

The 1985 flight continued with a 1985 J. Gros Richebourg, which was also shy yet meaty and chocolaty as well. It had a toasty nose with a kernel quality, maybe a touch of gas and some secondary black cherry and band-aid action. Its palate was rich and meaty with lots of vitamins and just a touch of a positive, medicinal quality. Its acid really lingered and there were loads of citrus on its rusty, toasty and pure palate (94).

We finished this flight with a 1985 Roty Charmes Chambertin Cuvee de Tres Vieilles Vignes. If one wine stood out in this flight as being different or the one that didn’t belong a la Electric Company, it was the Roty. There was ‘Pomerol’ here as Big Boy noted. The wine was incredibly extracted especially after the first four wines in this flight, meaty and dripping with oaky, vanilla fruit. Someone likened Roty’s style to ‘Jayer on steroids.’ There were lots of vitamin flavors, great acidity and what Mike called ‘petrol tires.’ While it may be a modern style and not what everyone wants in their Burgundy, I had to respect its long, tangy and dark fruit flavored style (95).

Sixteen wines were down and only eight to go. Make that nine, as the next wine was served out of magnum, a 1983 La Tache. The LT had an incredible nose. ‘Now that’s a real wine,’ I wrote. Its sweetness was incredible, as Big Boy quickly called out ‘ballgame,’ meaning the competition was over. There was also great iron, big Asian spice and musk. Incredible kept coming up over and over in my notes. The palate was off the charts – rich, creamy, lucious, vigorous and spiny, it certainly did not change my opinion that 1983 wines are delicious right now, especially out of magnum (96M).

Yes, it was a flight, and thanks to a very generous Big Boy we had a 1985 Romanee Conti. There was a bit of cobweb to the nose at first, but once it opened up, it got a ‘six stars’ from Big Boy and a ‘not even fair’ from Robert Bohr. Its nose was earthy, musky and meaty, bordering on seepy. I found it also a bit dirty but in a ‘xxx’ way. The palate had extraordinary concentration as only RC does; so rich, long, briny, earthy and meaty with a syrup-like concentration. The last two wines reminded me about Allen Meadows’ keen observation about the difference between La Tache and Romanee Conti, how ‘La Tache goes to you while you must go to RC.’ I enjoyed the 1983 LT better on this night but would clearly take the 1985 RC long term (97+).

We also had a 1988 Romanee Conti, which was much shier than the ’85 but still extraordinary. It was sandy yet still meaty, soy saucy in an oozing way. Oily and nutty, it was rich and spiny, not like the ’85 but still a killer in its own right. It had both a rustic power like many ’88s, but also an elegance most 88’s lack. That elegance caused the ’88 to take some abuse after the 1985, but make no mistake about it, this was an outstanding wine (95).

The 1988 La Tache was also a great wine, sweet, sturdy and spiny, but it did have some tough acts to follow. Someone noticed ‘a little pencil shavings.’ It was rich and meaty, oily, thick, oozing and saturated in the nose. The palate was long and smooth, less intense and more earthy than the nose and perhaps would have shown better if served earlier on in the night (94).

There were five wines left, and my notes became very brief after the flight, but here they go anyway. A 1988 Leroy Romanee St. Vivant had the deep, rich, meaty, plummy, vitaminy Leroy style. The palate was incredibly musky, rich and tasty. Long, balanced, smooth yet hearty, the 1988 was a solid wine (93).

A 1988 Ponsot Clos de la Roche Vieilles Vignes had ‘super sweet, candy-like, Blue Slide fruit,’ according to Ray, who always has to pick out one Burgundy and go on his Cali tilt every tasting. The palate was delicious – rich, long, tasty, and flirting with outstanding and just barely missed it (94).

The 1989 Leroy Chambertin had an intense nose; rich, meaty and beefier than the ’88. Mike found ‘graphite with lead’ yes, indeedy (94).

The 1989 G & H Jayer Echezeaux was concentrated and so Jayer, with lots of acid and rich, earthy, dark fruit flavors and sundried, intense, Sahara flavors (95).

Apparently we had a 1989 Rouget Vosne Romanee Cros Parantoux as well, but I somehow missed it. By this point, it was no surprise. All of our collective anger had been washed away.