Bright, savoury nose. Lovely fresh fruit on this sample. Caresses the palate, and only very slightly scrawny. Certainly not hot. Light and spicy with great flirtatious refreshment and value. Round. Much softer than usual at this stage. A bit harsh on the finish. (JR)
Cask sample. Fresh and racy. Good entertainment value. Needs a bit of time. Bright crimson. Slightly dull. Quite concentrated and intense on the nose, then definitely charming on the palate. Relatively light and gentle. Probably not quite enough intensity for the price. (JR)
Pretty fine and lively. Sweet, rich, desperately trying to stay inside a corset to be as elegant and lean as possible. Slightly dry finish. Easy, open. (JR)
This plot is virtually surrounded by Corton-Charlemagne and was planted for the first time only 15 years ago. Sweet, jolly, floral. Not fine but friendly. (JR)
Tense, mineral, exciting nose. Quite soft acidity but lots of sweetness too. Fairly open already though obviously youthful. Pure, fresh, not especially dense. Transparent. Just good sweetish white burgundy rather than thrilling. (JR)
Deep crimson. Quite alcoholic. Powerful and meaty. Sweet start with lots of cherry flavour – almost cherry syrup in fact. Round, velvety. Pommard’s iron fist in a velvet glove but terribly forward. (JR)
Rich, mossy nose. Acid sticks out a bit which is a shame because there is very good fruit underneath. Again, slightly dusty tannins. A bright light shines under a layer of intervention. Definitely sweet! (JR)
Very sweet and winning – cherry sweet – and then the tannins insist, especially on an extremely dry finish. Long but lacks a bit of freshness. This amount of sweetness makes the low acidity so obvious. (JR)
Not a deep colour, nor a deep scent. Quite pronounced acidity and then very dry tannins on the finish. Stolid. Very dry, inky finish. The 2002 tasted alongside had much more refreshing fruit. (JR)
Relatively light crimson. Very slightly cheesy on the nose, then extremely solid. Full and rather exuberant, but definitely house style. Sweetness and density. Needs a bit of time. (JR)
Deep crimson. Slightly cheesy nose, but beautifully sweet on the palate. Very true to the domaine. Very correct and 2003. I’d like slightly more acidity. (JR)
Broad, scented and solid. Utterly true to its origin, despite vintage character. Thick, dense and pretty stolid. Strawberry mivvi (for those who remember these ice creams on a stick…) Too expensive for my taste. (JR)
Relatively light crimson. Very slightly cheesy on the nose, then extremely solid. Full and rather exuberant, but definitely house style. Sweetness and density. Needs a bit of time. (JR)
Mid crimson. Quite liqueur like on the nose. Intense. Thick and dense with a certain polish. Quite dramatic and certainly sweet and quite brûlée, which is house style. (JR)
Deep crimson. Sweet and thick and very exotic, with masses of concentrated fruit. Good balance. Lots of beguiling ripe cherry flavours, with real texture and structure. Definitely sumptuous. Tannins very well hidden. (JR)
No pressing need to spend the extra (over the standard Chablis). Exotic hazelnut cream nose, but some acidity, too. Lots of concentration, even a bit hot. Not classic. (JR)
Perfumed. Big and round, but not as pure as Clos de la Mouchère. A bit big and formless. Clumsy. Still slightly astringent. Hot and oily. Use for massage purposes? (JR)
Not as deep as some. Intense, rather exaggerated oak on the nose, but lovely ripe, if very slightly flabby, fruit on the palate. Just not very like Burgundy. (JR)
Quite deep crimson. Fresh, lively nose. Crunchy and rather severely dry, and drying, fruit. Even slightly bitter. Stolid but certainly not charming. (JR)
Mid-crimson. Slightly chestnut flavours, similar to those I often find on the wines of his wife Ghislaine Barthod, on the nose. Exotic nose. Round, gentle palate. Sweet, but too facile. A bit flabby. (JR)
Quite evolved nose. Gentle. Very, very fruity and sweet. Positively unctuous, with very good acid balance. Raspberry cordial. Not the most serious or ambitious, but bags of pleasure. (JR)
Really delicious nose with exciting tension and some creaminess. An early developer nevertheless – but much more successful than the two wines tasted before it. (JR)
Relatively pale crimson. Very slightly charred note on the nose, but the fruit is relatively fresh and lively. Slightly powdery edge. Round and chewy. It will probably come right, though the finish at present is terribly dry. (JR)
Big, burly and almost cheesy on the nose. Lots of acidity, and quite sleek and silky. Quite open and accessible already, although the tannins insist. Rather delicious and charming. Slightly hot finish. (JR)
Rich and round. A crowd-pleaser. Pretty evolved already, though the acidity seems sufficient to hold it together for a few years. Useful for restaurants? (JR)
Again, still quite discreet on the nose. Some rich savour on the palate which convinces. This should get somewhat more interesting eventually. But it’s far from thrilling. (JR)
Green, nerveux nose with mineral undertow. Sweet start on the palate, then creamy. A very intriguing, sleek, sophisticated wine. Quite sinewy. Long. (JR)
Much less open and expressive than the Chevalier-Montrachet. Some citrus notes after the obvious mass on the nose. Round and seamless, but not, yet, especially intense. (JR)
Paleish purple. Surprisingly “cool”, introvert nose. Then something slightly stewed on the palate. I yearn for fresher fruit. Ultimately a bit hollow. (JR)
Quite deep purple. Brambly fruit with a dry edge. If this were Australian, I would not be surprised. Far from the purest Pommard I have encountered. (JR)
Mid bluish purple. Some vegetal character on the nose. Quite savage tannins. These need time, but on the other hand there is great concentration of fruit. (JR)
Deep purple. Slightly fusty nose – an old attic? Good fruit attack on the palate. Still quite chewy. Honest expression of the appellation. Needs time. Dry tannins. (JR)
Mid crimson-purple. Slightly stewed nose. Vivacious fruit captures the palate and initially distracts it from pretty severely dry tannins on the finish. Stewed cherry pie. Great if you like stewed cherry pie. (JR)
Mid purple. Relatively fresh, lively nose. Lots of pure Pinot for a change. Tannins seem convincingly in balance. What the French call gouleyant, juicy and appetising, sappy. Long and refreshing. (JR)
Real intensity and some prunes on the nose. An edge of something exotic and burnt. 'Eau de Beaune'? Certainly an essence rather than anything less concentrated. Exotica. Not for me, but some will adore the concentration. (JR)
Deep crimson. This one vibrates with life. Round, sumptuous fruit. Exceptional depth of round fruit seems soft to counteract the dry finish. Bravo! (JR)
Slightly vegetal and stewed on the nose. Quite dry, severe tannins. Hard work, without the inner glow of the Volnay Caillerets Ancienne Cuvée Carnot. (JR)
Deep crimson. A sturdy nose. Quite impressive. Round, cherry flavours. Good fruit on the front of the palate. Dry finish, but this is a wine trying very hard to get its balance. (JR)
Deep colour. Playful nose – a rather confident depth of ripe fruit flavour without any too obvious burnt or stewed notes. Great depth of cherry fruit completely overlays the tannins, which are considerable. Wait for this wine. (JR)
Scented, confident nose. Quite intense. Lots of fruity attack on the palate. Tannins are a little dry. Very convincing wine for the medium term. In balance and lively. (JR)
Light nose. Not quite the depth of the Nuits St-Georges Clos des Argillières, but more race and nerve. Slightly drying finish. Sturdy. Okay, but not inspirational. (JR)
Racy fruit dominates, though the finish is very dry (versus sweet). Fresh cherry flavours. Lively, but not obviously grand cru quality. A bit disjointed. (JR)
The second year they have produced this bottling from the cooler soils of Vergisson. Full, round and fleshy, though still quite restrained at the moment. Strange sort of sweetness overlays this at the moment. (JR)
Mid-crimson. Very sweet and charming, if not the most serious. Round. Slightly fizzy. Not much weight, and very, very slightly lacking in acidity. Very dry, fine tannic finish. (JR)
Cask sample. Quite deep. Strong stewed-fruit nose. Quite jagged fruit on the palate. Out of balance at the moment. Less charming than Saint Véran, without great weight on the palate. (JR)
Cask sample. Very deep crimson. Some rhubarb. A hint of tar and liquorice. Pommard definitely asserts itself. Quite dry and tough. Uncompromising. (JR)
Very difficult to see grand cru quality or intensity on the nose. Sweet and full, but not exciting. A bit chewy and angular. Big, but not interesting at the moment. (JR)
Cask sample. Quite deep crimson. Vegetal/herbaceous topnotes. Big, round, and sweet. Again, a very light hand on the oaking, and it produces quite voluptuous, very, very fruity wines. (JR)
Lively, if relatively simple, nose. Straightforward, ripe, very slightly pruney fruit on the palate. Slightly drying tannins on the palate. Hard work! Some life here, though. (JR)
Bright crimson. Very slightly cheesy on the nose. Some cough medicine quality. Sweet, but not desperately refreshing. Dry finish. Grainy texture. Rasping tannins. (JR)
Cask sample. Very light and attenuated. Astringent. Almost green. Very light, almost spindly nose. Very drying sensation on the palate at the finish, lighter than the Savigny. Where’s the fruit? Not what I seek in Burgundy, though it’s definitely a 2003. (JR)
Something noticeably vegetal on the nose. Curious. Quite solid, ripe fruit on the palate. Almost a burnt note. More substance than the Aux Fourneaux or the Ile des Vergelesses. Not graceful. (JR)
Good colour. Good balance but very light on the nose, but not immediately grand cru quality or weight. A sweet, almost bonbon start. Quite insistently dry tannins. A lack of freshness and slightly obvious acidity. Not harmonious. A bit too self-consciously confected. (JR)
Cask sample. Exceptionally deep crimson. A bit exaggerated on the nose, as though given a very dramatic cold soak. Big, round, sweet brambles. Gives a lot of pleasure, but absolutely no relation to what one usually expects from a burgundy. So sweet and strong it almost tastes like a Grenache. (JR)
CS. Exceptionally deep crimson. Quite silky texture and much more life than the Teurons or the Vignes Franches. Still some tannin and something left to give. (JR)
Full and sweet and rather exaggerated. Very, very carefully made, but the finished result seems a bit unnatural to me. Big and smooth and heavily oaked. Not good value. (JR)
Very dark and rich and thick. A real crowd-pleaser, till the end. Very dry tannins. But lots of fruit, too. Slight plum notes. But sufficiently refreshing. (JR)
Cask sample. Dark, bluish purple. Intense, fruity, sweet and very slightly jammy, but with lots of charm and punch. The first 2003 with even vaguely animal notes. Big, burly and autumnal. Quite severe, chewy finish for now. Great sweetness underneath. (JR)
Cask sample. Deep purplish crimson. Very slightly overripe on the nose. Needs just a little more freshness. Quite rich and fruity and round. Lots of spice and fruit. The most accessible tannins of these Nuits St-Georges. (JR)
Very exciting, vibrant nose. Real tension there (unlike the Clos St-Jacques). Relatively loose and open, but with lots of lacy, entrancing fruit. Expensive, but not ludicrously so. (JR)
Lightish crimson. Very sweet, “modern” nose. Slightly tarty wine – too much makeup and not enough true vineyard flavour. Not expensive, though. Should appeal to lovers of New World Pinot Noir looking for a bargain. (JR)
Very deep crimson. Very, very full and ripe. Sweet and charming. Rich, ripe, cherry flavours. Very, very round and satiny with far more ripeness than usual. Quite unusual, and a good buy. So round and fruity! Very, very well made. Great balance. (JR)
Cask sample. Very firm, concentrated nose. Lots of density and no shortage of acidity and tannin. This is slightly more like the old Comte Armand style, but with an additional smoothness. Dry finish. Not as magisterial as the Hubert de Montille Les Rugiens. It may take on weight. Already quite full, convincing and round. Powerful cherry flavours with structure and some appetizing vegetal character. (JR)
Quite rude and crude on the nose. Sweet and relatively loose, with lots of CO2. Very chewy. Ambitious. Confident. Something almond-like. Very strong. Very lively. Very bio. (JR)
Heavily perfumed. Scented. Lots of fruit in a quite raw, but admirable, state. A hint of rhubarb rock. Like a wild animal. Real pizzazz. It delivers, though it’s too expensive. Very, very long. It really vibrates on the finish. Difficult to spit. It’s a great story that someone as relatively young and untutored as this is making a wine with such vitality and character. (JR)
Quite deep crimson. Strange oak notes on the nose? Lots of sweet fruit to start, then an extremely savage, dry finish. Unbalanced. A bit stringy. Certainly not charming. (JR)
Cask sample. Quite dramatic impact. Flirtatious cherry fruit. Very sweet and round and charming. Concentrated. Quite dry finish, but confident and convincing for the mid to long term. (JR)
Cask sample. Transparent crimson. Quite light and not very perfumed. Good substance. Very sweet and round. Lively. Good balance. Still lots of tannin in evidence. Needs time. (JR)
Quite deep on the nose and very, very rich. Very exciting, heady nose. Lovely, round, bright and with good balance. Chew and life and interest and length. Nice bite (as opposed to astringence) on the finish. Really lively. Well done. (JR)
Cask sample. Deep crimson. Slightly rhubarby nose. Lots of simple fruit at first, but very, very dense and astringent. Raw, but intense and lively. Some freshness. Quite cool. True Pommard but I can’t quite see the elements for greatness, myself. (JR)
Cask sample. Bright crimson. Fragrant. Lots of fruit and some structure. Much more convincing than the Vaumuriens. Still stern, but there is potential. (JR)
Cask sample. Deep crimson. Slightly roasted flavours, then disconcertingly gassy. But there is some substance here. Dry finish, but just about enough cherry fruit. Some vegetal notes on the nose. Sweet, seductive, flattering start. Round. Pretty good. (JR)
Cask sample. Sweet and seductive. Some slightly toasty/coffee-flavoured oak. Freshness and real Pommard density. Very taut, but a charmer, too, with lots of sweet fruit. Great fruity attack and more or less enough acidity. Bravo! This is very convincing. Real energy and sufficient concentration. (JR)
Quite dangerously low acidity. Not expensive. Interesting experiment with minimal stabilisation but one feels that five minutes in the wrong cellar could spell disaster. (JR)
Again, slightly cheesy (something to do with the particular oak used here?), though much denser than the village Pommard from this producer. Full, lively, quite punchy. Rather strange acidity. (JR)
Exceptionally deep crimson. Quite heady and raw, but very pronounced fruit on the palate. Still chewy, but lively and convincing. Bright fruit, though not subtle. (JR)
Perfumed and relatively flirtatious. Lots of ripeness, but relatively gentle, too. Very serviceable restaurant wine. For a private cellar, you could probably find more personality. (JR)
Very dark purple. Some liqueur and damp fur quality on the nose, but the fruit is surprisingly fresh on the palate. Quite winning. Good package. Slightly dry, but honest and good. (JR)
Quite raw fruit. Quite a bit of acidity and gas. Definitely unformed. Not the confident bargain of most vintages. Rawness. Brutal. Not comfortable. (JR)
Cask sample. Very dark. There is lots there, but it’s not the freshest sample that I’ve been offered. Fizzy with biodynamic life. Lots of microbugs in there. Very intense, very slightly stewed fruit nose. Lots of character certainly. Thick and quite dry. This may eventually push its way through to a graceful middle age. (JR)
Deep crimson. Again, quite brutal primary aromas. A shortage of fruit on the front of the palate, then gripping tannins. May get there, but pretty uncomfortable to taste now. (JR)
Quite deep. Sweet, round and almost rude and crude on the nose. Tastes as though it was made with huge effort, but ultimately the results are not very comfortable to drink. Tannins a bit too obtrusive. Full marks for trying. (JR)
Deep crimson with a pale rim. Rather soupy nose. Lots of fruit hits the front palate and there is the real chew of dried fruit here. Certainly not elegant! Will Irancy ever be as thick and ripe again. No shortage of acidity though. Straightforward but short. (JR)
A little more obviously mineral than the Vaillons with a bit more race and nerve. Lots of density here and lots to chew on. Wait a while. Promising extract. (JR)
Very alcoholic nose with a hint of filter pad? This strikes me as very heavy, astringent and old fashioned. The Chablis character has difficulty asserting itself through the flab. Short. (JR)
Sweet, charming, broad and gorgeous. Most appealing. Scented and, again, more delicate than most at first. Real power underneath. Pretty tough tannins, but probably worth waiting. (JR)
Not expensive but true, authentic (not a common term in 2003 tasting notes), relatively pale, aromatic and charming. Quite scented. Lots of fruit and great delicacy. Bravo! Correct, and it delivers. Quite powerful finish, but (just) not too hot. (JR)
Cask sample. Not quite fresh fruit. Broad hit of ripeness on the front of the palate, but with an edge of CO2. The matière here could be the vintage. (JR)
Deep crimson. Intense. Broad and sweet and glamorous. Suave fruit. Pretty low acidity, but very, very charming. A please-all wine for the short term. (JR)
Cask sample. Very deep crimson. Not very fresh fruit on the nose. Almost more like a liqueur. Sweet, then dry and rich. Definitely more concentration and more successful than the Chevrets. Sweet finish. (JR)
Cask sample. Very dark. Old leaves and undergrowth on the nose. Sweet, broad and slightly fizzy. Slightly exaggerated cold soak mummification. More fruit than Clos des Angles. (JR)
Cask sample. Deep crimson. A bit mulchy on the nose. Quite intense. Sweet and taut as it hits the palate. A bit of cool tension on the finish. A bit dry and inky. (JR)
Very light nose. Almost disappears in the mouth, though at least it has no jagged edges. Very, very light. Lots of fruit, but of a very, very simple, primary sort. (JR)
Mid crimson. Rather pretty, light nose. Like a peck on the cheek from the vineyard, rather than a guiding hand. Very, very fruity. Nice drink, but not very Gevrey. (JR)
Very deep crimson. Scented and alluring on the nose. Dramatic fruit, assuredly handled. Real texture. The fruit is sufficient for the tannins. Well done. (JR)
Dark crimson. Slightly tired fruit on the nose. Lots of impact and quite round. A bit sweeter than usual. Inky tannins dominate the finish, though. (JR)
Deep crimson. Thick and sweet and almost medicinal. Very, very dense. But it needs time. Set on one side. It’s all there, but still pretty severe. (JR)
Quite introvert for now with some almond character. Not quite the weight I would hope for, though a valiant attempt not to make something top-heavy. (JR)
Mid-crimson. Quite sweet and full and mellow. Very successful, if quite light – but then that’s Monthélie. Note of dryness on the finish, but good for current drinking. Acidic finish. (JR)
CS Bright, deep crimson. Very, very sweet and round. More balanced than some, though not especially noble. Not too expensive. Spicy. Quite worthy but this desperately needs just a point more acidity to stop it being heavy and foot-dragging. Shame because some of the fruit quality is very appealing. For early drinking. (JR)
Very deep crimson. Slightly macerated bitter cherries on the nose together with some quite obvious oak. A bit disjointed. Very sweet, but a little bit short. (JR)
Bright crimson with a pale rim. Charming, but not very ambitiously concentrated on the nose. Lots of acidity and chew. Not quite enough fruit in the middle. (JR)
Light crimson. Sweet and jammy, not especially Pommard, nose. Quite light and round. In the New World, I’d marvel at its purity. In Pommard 2003, I wonder why it is so light? (JR)
Juicy, sweet and charming. A bit more astringent than Clos due Dessus des Marconnets on the palate. Lots there for the price, but not especially harmonious. (JR)
Cask sample. A bit muddier on the nose at present than the Volnay. Some spice, even camphor. Sturdy, ambitious, long-term wine that tastes of Pommard! (JR)
Cask sample. Relatively restrained on the nose. Lovely fruit quality on the mid palate. Real lift and charm. Quite refreshing and no excess dryness. (JR)
Notes of cheesiness and veg on the nose – quite different from the Chambolle with more marked acidity. Real texture and race but still that amazing sweetness, plus a certain jewelly texture. Still quite light for a grand cru but clear and bright. (JR)
Cask sample. Very heady yet clear, fleshy with fabulous topnotes. Lively, lots of fruit but it’s the nose that is its strongest suit. Some meat in the middle though not the flesh of some other years. (JR)
Cask sample. Very powerfully fruity nose and bright colour. Extremely sweet and gentle – almost simple. Tannins hardly noticeable though the low acid is. Very charming if a little disconcertingly evolved. (JR)
Lighter than the Nuits Saint Georges Chaignots at the moment. Very muted nose. Slightly fizzy. Surely a cask or tank sample. Difficult to read at present. (JR)
Cask sample. Very bright, dark crimson. Scented and lively. Very sweet and gentle. Intense, chewy fruit. Quite vibrant and long. Intense. Definitely 'masculine' when tasted straight after Mortet. Taut beginning, middle and finish. Really lively. (JR)
Some interesting coffee-bean topnotes on an ultra-fruity base. His reds really are good, too. Smooth, powerful, and good value. Almost rude health! (JR)
Cask sample. Very deep crimson. Almost voluptuous and certainly intriguing and layered on the nose. Real power and stonking concentration. A certain silkiness, too. Very serious. Very, very fine and no hole anywhere in the experience. Lovely coverage of the palate. (JR)
Cask sample. Bright crimson. Sweet, almost lolly notes on the nose at first, but then interesting, seductive layers emerge. Dense and yeoman-like on the nose. Again, extraordinarily sweet on the front of the palate, almost at the expense of freshness. Convincing. Sturdy. Quite masculine. Definitely Pommard. Quite fine tannins. (JR)
Cask sample. Quite autumnal nose. Very, very sweet start, then lots of acidity. Very strange balance. Still slightly fizzy. Lots of spine. Still chewy. More structure than fruit at the moment. (JR)
Cask sample. Firm colour. Quite big and burly on the nose. Then marked acidity on the palate. Still quite firm and definitely grainy. No excess of flesh at the moment – may take it on. Some ink. (JR)
Cask sample. Quite deep crimson. Intense, ripe nose. Very full and round start to the palate. Quite fine, but more initial fruit than usual for de Montille. Firm. Spice. Ambitious. (JR)
This is a bit much for me. Even though it was picked on 18 August (all Le Moine’s wines were picked quite early) there seems to be a lack of freshness on the nose. It’s all a bit tarty and furry. Exaggerated. (JR)
Lighter and rubier than the Charmes. Flattering coffee bean aromas. Very lively and sweet. You just might be confused as to whether it was burgundy in a blind tasting. (JR)
Exceptionally rich and dense. (This is one of those wines into which carbon dioxide was fed over the lees.) Nerveux now, but it almost tastes as though it will stay like this rather than developing. Who can know? This is a very uncommon technique. (JR)
Heady with the ripe smell that is just slightly reminiscent of old socks. Sweet and fruity, but not enough freshness for greatness or serious longevity. (JR)
Much better acidity and balance than Frémiets or Champans. Better excitement and balance. Slightly dry, but this is really interesting wine. Much more like the ancient regime. (JR)
Very deep crimson. Sappy, rather extraordinary, opulent nose. Rich and round and jewelly. Lots of exuberant fruit. Very sweet. Very unlike the old style. Slightly dry finish. Difficult for the new regime to be given this vintage as a debut. (JR)
A bit inexpressive on the nose, then lots of concentrated, if slightly brutal, fruit. Not expensive, but not especially fine. I’d like to see another vintage. (JR)
More fragrant than the Chaillots below. Slightly treacly nose with a little cheesiness but some real life and vivacity compared to the Chaillots. Very chewy end suggests it might be best to wait awhile before attacking this wine. Rather dry finish. (JR)
Very dark crimson. Mushrooms and truffles on the nose already! Rather winning (not as porty and heavy as the Vignes Franches) although it seems more marked by the vintage than by the appellation. Big, and bold. and assertive. A very wide girth this one has. Slightly disconcerting coconut note on the nose as though the oak is not 100% classic. Already very round and fruity – and alcoholic. (JR)
Bright crimson. Quite lively, fresh nose with rather more appellation expression than some. Good balance. No evidence of sweetness or dried grape quality – apart from some slightly dry tannins on the finish. Honest, true, transparent and a very pleasing drink even if without any enormous subtlety. Not big but harmonious. (JR)
Very dark brownish crimson with a pale rim. Sweet, cheesy nose. Very big, bold and porty! Again, there seems to be some residual sugar in this wine. Burgundy but not as we know it today. Extraordinary. Those who hanker after the old Berry Bros bottlings of the 1960s and early 1970s might love this – Doudet Naudin style. And why not? But I have marked it according to my own personal taste for fresher, more delineated burgundy. Dry finish again. (JR)
Light crimson with a hint of purple. Muddy nose – nothing very clear and distinct about it. Also a bit soupy and unexpectedly sweet on the palate. Dry tannins close in on the finish. Rather austere in structure and that candied sweetness is a bit odd. Dry finish. Certainly not classic!< (JR)
Deep crimson. Relatively evolved nose with unusually attractive freshness for a 2003. Now this seems to have some race and soul. Lively without much raisin character. Relatively simple but a good wine for early drinking. Just a little tannic still. (JR)
Mid healthy crimson. Sweet cloud of boiled sweet aromas plus something a little woody. Quite good attack but no real soul. Mid weight, quite chewy. Alcohol notable on the finish. Hot. (JR)
Mid crimson (much paler than the Irancy). Some autumnal mulch on the nose and lots of acidity and tannin on the palate. Very little charm! Austere, tart finish. Dries the palate at the end. (JR)
Much more nerve and excitement on the nose than the Corton-Charlemagne. Weight, opulence and (relative) excitement – though not truly, truly thrilling. This certainly has weight – and 14% alcohol like the Corton-Charlemagne. There’s a certain tension in the undercurrent. Remarkably open though for a grand cru of less than two years old. Tingle of life but arguably middle-aged before its time. (JR)
This wine was a bit reduced on the nose when I tasted it. Certainly there is no grand cru glamour at the moment – just lots of alcohol but not an enormous amount of flavour or excitement. Edge of filter pad? Not nearly as exciting as the 2002 currently stocked by Majestic with its telltale almond note. We must hope that it grows into greatness. Still quite astringent. Alcohol but not remarkable depth. Just sweet and simple at the moment. (JR)
Very light nose. Sweet and muscular. No real distinction at the moment but perhaps it’s just brooding? Too sweet on the finish for my palate – not exciting or nervy enough. But let’s hope it will grow into being a more intriguing wine. (JR)
Gold. Real personality. A bit of oak and a bit of sulphides but there is fruit here that sparkles and some lemon cream character that distinguishes it from an oaked Chardonnay from anyway. Some savour and attack. Grainy texture. Density and life. Still very slightly chewy. Good acidity – a green streak, tant mieux. (JR)
Deep gold with no hint of green. Very lightly smoky nose. Heavy, alcoholic, a bit loose and formless. Water and alcohol in the ascendant to the detriment of flavour and extract. Very hot finish. (JR)
Attractive lemony raciness, and a little oak, on the nose. Quite full bodied and opulent with a green creamy streak. Not bad. Not that much individuality but very competent. Certainly serviceable. Quite long. (JR)
Not very clearly Chablis on the nose – quite fat on the palate. Sweet start – oddly lacking in green fruit or wet stone flavours for a Chablis but a perfectly serviceable drink. (JR)
Again, quite deep gold. A bit more freshness than the wine above on the nose. But awfully dull and hot on the palate. Very difficult to justify the price. Other vintages have had more clarity and fruit. Very short. (JR)
Quite dark gold. Simple. open nose. Some slightly underripe(!) notes on the palate – difficult to see how this could be in 2003! very short and slightly astringent without much delightful fruit character in the middle. If this were behind a supermarket’s own label rather than one of Louis Latour’s super-elegant ones, you wouldn’t give it a second thought. (JR)
Very deep crimson. Sweet, slightly low-key nose. Lots of fruit and charm if not the most refreshing wine. Quite dry tannins on the finish. Lots of personality. Not expensive. Truly an exceptional wine in the context of St-Aubin. (JR)
Interesting life and liquorice on the nose. Ripe pears. Broadcasts life. Fairly sweet, but rewarding as an inexpensive, ready white Saint Aubin. Another of those Saint Aubins with unaccustomed ripeness, and liveliness, too. Real nerve and still slightly astringent on the finish. (JR)
Cask sample. Bright, deep crimson. Low key, but relatively complex nose and lots there on the palate. Teenage, but should get there. Sweet, round, and fruity. Oak a little too prominent? Lots of fruit in there. Excellent tannin management, but is there something just a little overworked about this? (JR)
Cask sample. Something interesting on the nose. Chestnuts? Very sweet fruit at the start of the palate. Quite a distinctive wine with lots of pleasure to offer. (JR)
Ah – not yet bottled! This sample seemed quite heavily sulphured. Too much so to taste. I’m surprised this is not yet in bottle. Alcoholic finish. Impossible to judge at this stage. (JR)
Dark, healthy crimson. Very light nose. Sweet, gentle palate entry. Quite marked fruit impact. Fine tannin quality, though I wonder about the acidity. A good mouthful. (JR)
Deep crimson. Slightly stewed nose. Very chewy. Correct for conventional Pommard in terms of ageing potential, but still a long way to go before it charms. (JR)
Cask sample. Quite an alcoholic nose. A bit heavy and flabby on the palate. So sweet! Substance, but not much flavour – like so many wines, of both colours, produced from very hot summers. (JR)
Cask sample. Heavy nose with some liquorice notes. The satin texture appeals, and it has a bit more acidity than some. Round. Pretty masterful. Quite long. (JR)
Cask sample. Opaque on the nose. Definitely dense, but not enough purity. Something to get your teeth into, but all texture as opposed to refreshment. (JR)
Quite deep crimson. Rather more harmonious than the Morey Vieilles Vignes or the Gevrey-Chambertin. Not 100% fresh fruit on the nose, though no shortage of acidity on the palate. A bit awkward at this stage. Still lots of oak in evidence. (JR)
Cask sample. Purplish crimson. Very exotic with opulently toasted oak. Lots of dramatic fruit and alcohol. Quite an impact. Slightly overoaked. Good value for fans of this style. (JR)
Floral, vegetal nose. Lovely texture and slightly denser than the Hautes-Côtes de Beaune. Both are admirably and unusually ripe even for this producer, the king of the Hautes-Côtes. (JR)
Lightish crimson. Lively, relatively tense for a 2003 red burgundy, almost as though it has been acidified. A bit mean and unyielding at present. Pretty sulky. Some core of bitter cherry fruit. (JR)
The nose is still a bit raw. Lots of quite grainy tannins but quite supple and fine on the palate. Just a note of dried fruits on the finish. Still quite hard work. I may well be underestimating this. (JR)
Cask sample. Surprisingly light in colour for a 2003. Lovely supple integrity on the palate. Almost fully formed and ready! Spooky! A delicious drink already. Round and charming though not the most intense. (JR)
Cask sample. Very deep crimson. Extremely embryonic compared to the wines above. Lots of matière – very impressive, but still surly. Not sweet like so many wines above, just dense and brooding and convincing. Dry notes on the finish seem to come more from the barrel than raisined grapes (?) (JR)
Interesting velvety, nutty nose. Pretty severely dried fruit on the palate. Best option is surely to wait out those tannins though it’s impossible to say whether the fruit will hang around long enough. (JR)
Very deep colour for the appellation. Sweet, broad and slightly jammy with quite marked tannins. Chewy finish. May never have quite enough fruit on the mid palate though it certainly was not made from underripe grapes. (JR)
Very firm deep crimson. Something distinctly, and distinctively, mossy and vegetal about this nose. Really very majestic and round. Extraordinarily developed but very satisfying. Long and already quite complex. (JR)
Light, perfumed nose and then dried fruit characters on the palate. Not especially harmonious but this could well come right. Relatively racy and sleek. Still a little dry on the finish. (JR)
Cask sample. Deep crimson. Possibly the most powerful nose I have ever come across on a Pernand! Very fruity with some oak – in another year you might find these sort of flavours and depth on a Pommard! Very juicy and attractive. Round and ripe and almost supple – just a slight note of dried fruit. Relatively succulent for the vintage. (JR)
Deep crimson and powerful ripe nose. Extremely “sweet” on the nose with some dried fruit flavours rather than fresh fruit flavours and no shortage of tannin. Very big and certainly not classic. Needs time. Very dry tannins on the finish. (JR)
Noticeably leaner and racier than the Batard but still not that clearly defined. For the moment this is just a big mass of ripe fruit, with decent acidity. An edge of coffee bean and some interest but I have to take the potential on trust at this stage. Good balance of acidity though. (JR)
Very full, almost oily (not a common tasting note for white burgundy). Rich and round and satiny. Lots of concentration and alcohol but, as yet, very little flavour. A big, bold thing but I think in this vintage being super-ripe does not carry the premium it does in other, less naturally ripe, vintages. For my money I’d go for two bottles of the Chassagne Clos de la Chapelle. (JR)
Monopole. Some green highlights in the aroma but lots and lots of alcohol on the palate. Still very unknit and unformed. The acidity seems reasonably integrated but certainly not excessive. This needs a bit more time than most. Some nutty character. (JR)
Within the context of appellation and vintage, this is almost austere! Full and round and full blown without being particularly complex. Quite a hot finish, but a lovely texture. Just a bit stolid. (JR)
Florally scented on a deep undertow of ripe fruit. Exceedingly winning for the short term if almost New World in its slightly blowsy appeal. Lime and glucose. But enough acidity overall. (JR)
Quite intense and intriguing nose with some green fruit ripeness and the acidity much better integrated than in the Santenay above. A bit of astringence on the finish but really quite an impressive package. Quite nerveux. Grainy, appetizing texture. Quite pretty for the vintage. (JR)
Hot, alcoholic nose gives way to great intense, ripe, almost tropical fruit flavours and then quite searing acidity. Certainly much bigger and bolder style of wine than average. Should provide short-term pleasure, though certainly not complex. (JR)
Mid-crimson. Sweet, cherry flavour. Not totally pure aromas. But very flattering and sweet fruit on the palate. Very fresh and ripe. Some life and dryness on the finish. Good breadth. (JR)
Cask sample. A bit fresher than the Gevrey-Chambertin. Lively and punchy with good acidity as well as fruit. A little tannin on the finish. Very charming. (JR)
Lean, lemony nose. Quite fine, and no excessive 2003 characters. Well balanced and refreshing. This may be thanks to added acid, but the overall result is very pleasing. (JR)
Scented, but with a weary sigh rather than a breath of fresh air. Lively acidity and definite fruit weight. Much more successful than the Echézeaux. Dense but not fine. (JR)
As with the Aux Réas, there is a certain cheesy weariness on the nose. Some brightness on the palate, but still the fruit is not fresh enough for the price. Lots of weight and tannin. (JR)
Quite thick and heavily scented on the nose. Animal fur? Relatively lightweight on the palate. Fruit not the freshest. Something a bit tired about this. CS (JR)
Very, very deep crimson. Strong perfume and a wonderful spread of fruit across the palate. Very chewy, but I think it will get there in the end – there is certainly enough of a core and lots going on in its not-entirely-evident-yet depths. (JR)
Very, very deep. Intense. Quite painful and exaggerated. A broad nose and lots of intensity on the palate. Definite bite. Needs ages. Such harsh tannins. I preferred his 2002s. (JR)
Cask sample. Very deep crimson. A certain green note, as though there are some leaves in here. Then pretty uncompromising tannins. Very, very inky finish. (JR)
Cask sample. Quite opulent, almost exotic, fruit. Extremely sweet palate entry, then extremely severe tannins. This will be a bottle worth watching. (JR)
Deep crimson. Concentrated and – for Grivot prices – charming on the nose. Lots of ripe cherry flavours. Very soft and fruity. Really different from the rest of the Grivots. Very, very ripe. (JR)
Deep crimson. Very lively and brutal on the nose. Sweet start. Really does taste wild. Uncompromising and very youthful. Quite “wild” tasting. Lots of fruit and nature in the glass. But very firm tannins. In this case, the wine is very lively, so will probably be okay. (JR)
Cask sample. Deep crimson. Sweet, spicy nose. Definitely 'cool' on the front of the palate. Very restrained. Correct. A beginning, middle, and end. No excesses. This tastes as though the vines are very old and very comfortable. Assured, but will this take on weight? Definitely a bit sullen at the moment. (JR)
Lovely seductive nose. Perfumed, sweet, rich with good, integrated acidity too. Silky, mouthfilling (the only 2003 I have written this word about!). Lots to chew on but great ripe tannins. It has masses of alcohol but hides it well. No hot finish. (JR)
Juicy sweet, round, almost coffee flavoured. Slightly dry finish but good balance overall. Crunchy, from a vineyard very close to Pommard. Quite long. (JR)
Bright crimson. Pointu, sharp and directed, cool nose. Lots of fruit on the front of the palate. Very charming. The spread across the palate is impressive. Chewy finish, but not excessively so. Very lively. (JR)
Quite fat. Hidden nose which took time to emerge. Some grainy texture. Definitely alcoholic, slightly astringent, not fine but there is obviously more buried in here than in either of the two wines above. (JR)
Deep lemon cream flavours. Quite soft. Pleasant short-term drink but the rest of the world has been catching up on this style. Again, the acidity seemed to stick out on the palate, especially on the finish. (JR)
Quite minty on the broad, ample nose. Tastes as though there may well have been quite a bit of added acid. Good smooth texture but little that is definitively burgundian. (JR)
Lots of fruit. Great whack of flattering fruit on the nose. A very slightly spindlier version on the palate. Quite a bit of gas – too much to make evaluations fair. Not expensive, though. Slightly drying tannins on the finish. (JR)
Cask sample. Quite dense and thick, with substance and a bit of life. For the vintage, this truly dances. And edge of iron. Long. Just needs a tad more acidity. (JR)
Deep and very, very healthy red. Very dense and thick. So sweet and gorgeous! The first 2003 that I have had difficulty spitting. Real power. Real fruit. Lots of very, very ripe tannins underneath. Quite alcoholic. (JR)
Very deep crimson. Very slight hint of cheesiness on the nose. But very opulent, seductive, sweet, raspberry fruit on the palate. Sweet, round and winning though no excess of acidity… Perhaps the oak is slightly too dominant at this stage. Very engaging though. Good structure. Very glamorous. Long. (JR)
Sweet and thick. Masses of sweet, ripe flavours. Not much acidity. Ready to drink now. Very, very round. Lovely harmony. Very ripe, gentle, round and juicy. Long with layers – unusual at this stage in 2003. (JR)
Very, very big and rich. Great density. Not a very long-term wine. A risky wine, but still obviously throbbing with life. Definitely worth the money. (JR)
Mineral scent. Quite big. Tingly and lively. Should get there. Real density. Some astringence. Deep and mouthfilling. Very intense, yet entrancing. (JR)
Dense and thick. Real intensity. Approaching grand cru quality, or at least grand cru 2003 quality. Quite fine and delicate and dancing. Quite a different texture to the standard Meursault and Les Gruyaches. Quite crunchy. Needs time. Dry and savoury – unlike so many 2003 whites. Bravo! (JR)
Rich and creamy. Proper Meursault. A good corset of acidity. Green and cream. Quite classic and exciting. Lovely, silky texture. Bravo! Quite open, though. Don’t keep. Sweetish. (JR)
Very, very rich and concentrated. Thick and dense, but true. Definitely Burgundy, not New World Chardonnay. Spice and fruit. Integrity and excitement. Very round. Great texture, even at this price. Long. (JR)
Some classic 'fume' with concentration of fruit and real structure, but still awkward. Pretty massive. The label notes just 13%, but it tastes more. (JR)
An edge of molten honey on nervy, tingling green-fruit Chablis. A little fat for classic Chablis perhaps, though very user-friendly in the medium term. (JR)
Still very youthful and introvert, but there is intensity here. A real creamy concentration. A spine of green vegetation. All the ingredients are here. Very long. (JR)
Some exciting mineral tingle on the nose. Some true Chablis character – rare! High acidity and some astringence. Definitely chewy. Possibly too chewy? (JR)
Lovely and most unusual in 2003. Coffee-bean aroma. Nice balance of fruit and acidity. Some vegetal character, and tannins kept well under control. (JR)
Smells like proper red Burgundy. Lovely satiny texture, yet the tannins are there, too. Well managed up front, even if some pretty fierce tannins insist on the finish. (JR)
Only mid crimson. Fully exotic, round and charming. Not a great core of fruit in the middle. Slightly more vegetal than usual. A bit more restrained than Les Brûlées on the nose, then a great whack of ripe fruit on the palate. Very impressive. Pretty fierce tannins, but the fruit is good. (JR)
Cask sample. Scented, sweet nose with lots of fruit. Still quite unevolved. Lots of acidity. Only half formed. About another sample I wrote: Very rich and attractive and flattering. A round and wonderful spread of ripe fruit. Bravo! But I scored both highly. (JR)
Mid-crimson. Quite interesting flavours and raciness. Round and very, very fruity. Not self-conscious about being slightly light. Confident, juicy red Burgundy. Very, very juicy. Actually, almost like top Moulin-à-Vent (which would be cheaper). Great drink though. (JR)
Very deep crimson. Exceptionally ripe and just possibly dangerously unstable but certainly very dramatic, extremely glamorous and sweet. Rather muddy nose, but lots of ripe fruit and a certain silkiness offsets a potentially drying finish. Quite impressive, but not a coup de coeur. Solid. (JR)
Scented. Relatively juicy. Very impressive tannin management (or disappearance). Round and sweet. Perhaps could do with slightly more acidity, but good. (JR)
Lovely flirtatious scent on top of fabulous breadth of ripe fruit. Still very youthful, but with good, refreshing qualities. Dry finish. Needs lots of time. (JR)
Really interesting, entrancing nose. Lots of fruit, but real stature and structure, too. Racy, yet deep flavoured. Great freshness of fruit. Intriguingly autumnal, but not burnt or stewed. (JR)
Dark crimson. Some quite lively, cherry scent. Punchy. Quite vibrant. Quite dark and vibrant, but respectable, especially for the money. Tannins just this side of too dry. (JR)
More vegetal and meaty on the nose. Lovely top notes of mocha, too. Very rich, and some obviously thick skins, too. Needs lots of time. A real mouthful. (JR)
Quite deep for a Drouhin red. Full, very ripe nose. So unlike the usual Domaine Drouhin style. Almost rudely sweet. Something quite raw and unformed. Big! Some acidity and tannin. (JR)
Deeper than the standard Chambolle-Musigny. Lots of sweetness and life. Pretty good and, sensibly, not much different in price. Quite tough finish. Should last. (JR)
Relatively light crimson. Very fresh and sweet on the nose. Very, very charming already. Lovely dancing fruit. Gentle. Not a whore (see Alix de Montille in the film Mondovino). Quite delicate. Could enjoy this enormously tonight. Not big. A little fine tannin underneath. (JR)
CS. Deep crimson. Thick and sweet and spicy. More sweetness than practically any other Burgundy wine. So much flattery – can it be good for one? Almost reminiscent of a Fisherman’s Friend throat lozenge. Drying, but treacle-sweet and spicy and very intense. Some will love this, others will hate it. (JR)
The fine sparkling-wine producers of Oregon are getting organised. Above, Lytle-Barnett’s Windfall vineyard in the Eola-Amity Hills, Oregon (credit: Lester...
