Sipping Fine Wine

9.0

Medium Ruby with aromas of black and red fruits with floral spice notes. On the palate flavors of cherry and blackberry with smoke and tobacco notes. Generous acidity on fine soft tannins with a long finish ending with fruit and floral spice. Drinking well now! — 7 days ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.3

1982 vintage. Decent fill. Opened with a Durand. Cork 95% saturated. Not decanted. Tasted 30 minutes, 1.25 hours and 2.5 hours after open/decant. Earthy, dirty. old-school St Émmie nose that rolled over into the flavors. Light-medium body. Intensity/concentration on point for the duration. Lean and fairly mean but not without a few winks and nudges along the paper route. Based on this 750ml specimen, this kid stays in the game another 3-4 years in this range. 4.17.26. — 10 days ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.1

2017 vintage. Surprising length of finish that went on and on. Some initial richness up front before the usual, St. Estèphe tannic embrace. 4.23.26. — 4 days ago

Ron Siegel

9.3

This is showing well with lots of dark cherry, berry fruit, spice, mineral & floral. — 3 days ago

Jay Kline

9.3

Poured into a decanter about an hour prior to service. The 1983 pours a deep, slightly hazy garnet color with a near opaque core; medium viscosity with moderate staining of the tears. On the nose, the wine is vinous with notes of ripe and desiccated dark cherry, blackberry, dried purple flowers, Poblano pepper, coffee, beef roast, earth and warm spices. On the palate, the wine is dry with medium tannin (integrated) and medium+ acid. Confirming the notes from the nose. The finish is medium+. This bottle of the 1983 was absolutely singing tonight and I found it to be a lovely pairing with braised pheasant. Drink now through 2033+. — a day ago

Tom Casagrande

9.3

My friend @Dave had this recently and said it was drinking well so I pulled one of my bottles. I struggle to find food that good Bordeaux shines with. Maybe our cooking wheelhouse doesn’t click with it. In any event, AFTER dinner this wine seemed really good. Nose is developing some nice complexity, with dark cassis, roasted Persian spices, cedar, moist gray clay, a bit of sweet wafty smoke. Rich and softening nicely in the mouth, with cigar box and cassis/plummy flavors, and some flinty minerality in the finish. I almost always like wine with food better than just wine, but not this. This is really fine to sip and contemplate. Great value. — 14 days ago

Austin Blackwell

9.2

Expressive nose with black fruits and leathery notes. Needs a decant but certainly approachable now. Nice firm tannins. — 8 days ago

with Angelina

Andrew Cullimore

9.0

Actually deeper colour than the 1962 and 1959 . Slightly more medicinal nose , touch of swimming pool , lightly herbal with some dried fruit . On the palate this has a drier profile , darker dried fruit , slightly astringent acidity and quite gritty , rustic tannins . Slightly dry on the mid palate , but good earthy tobacco notes . Quite dense and robust , showing good backbone and body . Reasonable length , with earthy , gritty finish . Quite dense and structured. Not elegant but quite impressive for a 76 year old wine . Now and over the next 5 or more years , though obviously won’t improve. — 11 days ago

Alexandre Pagliano

9.0

Dark rubi robe, no color evolution, reticent nose of cedar, tobacco and dark fruits. Its a small vintage but the wine is balanced and elegant, drinks well, with these more prominent tannins in better vintages, and lacking a bit of complexity. Its still one of the better 2002 bordeaux we had. — 16 days ago

with Jose, veronique and 4 others

romo

9.5

It’s nice to be born just inside of a great vintage across Europe. Sound and fim, still. at Laurelhurst — 5 days ago