UGC Tasting, Vinexpo Asia Pacific 2008, Part I: Some 2005s from Pessac-Léognan, St-Emilion and Pomerol

Before all else, many thanks again to Edouard for arranging my invitation to attend Vinexpo Asia Pacific 2008 held at the Hong Kong Convention Center on 27-29 May. Without his efforts, the basis of this and the two previous posts would not have been possible.

I arrived in HK on the 27th with my wife and children, but, since the Union des Grands Crus (the premier association of Bordeaux wineries, a.k.a., "UGC") tasting was held on the 28th, I spent the 27th with my family, sister-in-law and the latter's infant daughter and attended the Commanderie dinner (post on that dinner immediately below) that night.

The next morning (28th), I attended the UGC tasting where they featured the heralded 2005 vintage. I got to taste a handful of the 2005s while in Bordeaux last June 2006, but didn't get to re-taste the same wines this time.

Note: 2005 is and was touted by professional reviewers as a stupendous vintage for Bordeaux, driving release prices to unprecedented heights. It was a hot, ripe year for Bordeaux, similar to 2003. Below are my tasting notes on the wines I got to taste at the UGC Tasting this past 28th May:

Pessac-Léognan:

Ch. Carbonnieux - Dense, ripe, medium length, finish ends a bit abruptly, but fair over-all. Should be enjoyable in 4-5 years from now. I'd pay $35-40 per bottle for this.

Domaine de Chevalier - Not as ripe as Carbonnieux; more cherry in its profile, better length/finish, more refined. Will need more time than Carbonnieux, try again in, probably, 5-6 years from now. I'd pay, maybe $50-60 per.

Ch. de Fieuzal - Nice nose (perfumed with sweet camphor, slightly roasted herbs over the fruit, sweet ripe plum, asphalt. Nice mouthfeel, fullish body, good extraction, impressive length. Big tannins. Good stuff to drink in 7-8 years. Wines from this château are, thankfully, still very undervalued considering its quality.

Ch. Haut-Bailly - Similar nose to that of de Fieuzal, but not as sweetly perfumed with camphor, more typical of the appellation. More expansive. more elegant, with more minerals than the previously mentioned three wines, but not as extracted as de Fieuzal (they seemingly held back on the vintage's typical ripeness - but in a good way). The wines of this château are also still undervalued considering quality.

Ch. Haut-Bergey - They had, by far, the prettiest lady pouring their wine, but, alas, to no avail. Totally uninteresting: weak body (the wine, not the one pouring), weak middle, and a bit shrill. Hints of mocha which I find strange in a wine from Pessac-Léognan. I wouldn't buy this wine.

Ch. La Louvière (Rouge) - Medium-plus body, refined, discreet minerality, cherry/raspberry notes over dark fruit, bit of tobacco. Fruit not as ripe as one would expect from 2005 - but in a good way. Again, with some curious mocha notes. Not bad at all, but I wouldn't pay more than $45 for this.

Ch. Larrivet-Haut-Brion - Interesting gamey/truffled notes under initial mildly toasty oak and alcohol. Medium-bodied, a bit short, relatively weak middle. The nose is definitely intriguing, though, but I would pay only up to $35 per for this.

Ch. Latour-Martillac - Atypical of 2005: not very ripe in the nose and on the palate, and more refined/graceful for it. Demure, mildly truffled cherry, cassis and cedar; nothing serious, but very good. I'd say I'd strike at under $35 per.

Ch. Pape-Clément (Rouge) - Super-ripe, somewhat "stewed" feel to sweet plums/prune/camphor/"tar". Smells like a Pessac-Léognan on steroids - ripe cherry, sweet cedar with added kirsch/cassis/violets/roasted herbs. Forward, attractive, easily accessible, but comes off to me as quite contrived. Should be enjoyable relatively soon. Not my type, but I'm sure many will like this. I've seen it at over $170 per in the USA. No way I'll pay that price for this youngster.

Ch. Malarctic-Lagravière - Lighter compared to all the foregoing, charming, acceptable, fair typicity, but not very interesting. I'd pay $35 or below for this (if at all).

Ch. Smith-Haut-Lafitte (Rouge) - I must mention that this is the only exhibitor from the appellation that took the pains to keep/serve their wine at the proper temperature.That said...an atypically demure SHL (which is good). Still designed to please, but in a more subtle manner than usual. Confident, plush middle and strong finish with toasty oak, tar, cassis, cherry. Generous extraction but not quite over-the-top. I'd say $50 per would be fair enough.

St-Emilion and Pomerol:

Ch. Canon la Gaffelière - The brilliant Count Stephan von Neipperg himself was pouring his wine and entertaining questions. I recall he took us through his winery and vineyards in St-Emilion himself in 2006. He also poured for us himself, letting us sample all of his 2005s. Passionate about his wines and fiercely committed to quality, it is no wonder he is a tremendous success story in Bordeaux.

When I tasted this in Bordeaux in 2006, it struck me as the most elegant and balanced of Stephan's 2005s, preferring it, at the time, to his top-end, hard to find and pricey 2005 La Mondotte. Two years later, "elegance" again defines this wine, not a mean feat due to the ultra-ripe general character of the vintage. My notes state: "Typically elegant, refined, sleek, clean, plummy, underlying cassis, mocha, espresso notes - good balance, not over-the-top at all. Showsproper restraint. Elegant wine."

Ch. Figeac - Wines from this premier cru (class "B", a step below class "A"s Ausone and Cheval Blanc) usually drink well enough young, in my experience, and I normally enjoy them. Their 2006 showed beautifully during Vinexpo 2007 in Bordeaux (the right banks showed generally better than the lefts at the time). That is why I was very surprised that it seemed too dilute, tight, a bit weedy. It is probably closed, in an awkward stage of maturing. I reserve judgment on this.

Ch. Grand Mayne - Reticent, closed nose showing slight plum and camphor. Tannic, robust in the mouth, displaying a sweet cherry/kirsch finish. Probably good potential in this.

Ch. La Couspaude - Nose also reticent. On the palate, very primary (not surprising, of course), tannic, but one can detect designer/crowd-pleaser sweet plum/oak/espresso with a touch of milk chocolate. I wouldn't say it will ever be profound or elegant, but it will most likely please dinner guests in around 4-5 more years.

Ch. La Gaffelière - Not to be confused with Canon la Gaffelière. Slightly gamey, minerally, herbaceous nose. Comparatively the one of the most forward of the St-Emilions at the tasting, with well-extracted, minerally dark raspberry and ripe dark cherry compote primaries, and dark chocolate notes towards the back. Showing well very early.

Ch. La Tour Figeac - Not to be confused with Figeac. Lots of minerality over the primary fruit (plum/cherry) and cedar, ripe, low-acid. Very expressive on the palate with more-than-decent over-all balance. Medium-bodied and light-footed, lithe, agile - plush, with potential silkiness. At its price range of US$42-50 in the US, this would be good value for the 2005 vintage.

Ch. Clinet - From Pomerol, the previous 6 mentioned are from St-Emilion. Clinet is one of the more famous and expensive Pomerols. That said, I have never been particularly impressed with their wines and have found several to be hard, mean and overly angular. That said, the nose suggested a lot of depth in the mouth, but the wine just didn't deliver. Very closed, but one can just glimpse sweetly fine red berries and kirsch in a deep, dark hole. Where is the power of Pomerol? Clinets are reputedly very long-lived and take long to show well. However, I, personally, wouldn't buy this wine just to find out. There are better, more reasonably priced bets out there.

Ch. Petit-Village - Also from Pomerol. Much more typicity and expressive of terroir and vintage ripeness than Clinet at this point, with Pomerol's hallmark power and push. Excellent balance between power and refinement. Very good stuff indeed!