Not very impressive. I had hoped for more here. Dark ruby with a black robe. Notes of mineral, saline, and black cherry. Hollow midsection, with ample tannin and moderate acidity. This wine lacked personality or spirit. Like a machine made it. Moderate finish. Serviceable. 88 pts.

I had a little different experience than you did with this wine. I tried it at a couple of tastings about a year ago and found it to be in the 90-92+ range. For the vintage I think this is decent QPR as I picked up some bottles at $38 and a couple mags at $80.

Maybe there's bottle variation? I've had dozens of other '05's that I would rank better than this one. Parker's got it at 90 (his original range was 88-90). Spectator seemed to like it much more and gave it 93 (I think their original prediction/barrel scores were 95+!)

maybe starting to close down a little?

thanks for the notes/comments

quote:

Originally posted by kumazam:
maybe starting to close down a little?

There's not much to be learned by drinking this wine 3 years after the grapes were picked. There will likely be a great deal of bottle variation at this point as various lots are closing down.

quote:

Originally posted by Board-O:
There's not much to be learned by drinking this wine 3 years after the grapes were picked. There will likely be a great deal of bottle variation at this point as various lots are closing down.

i was moreso commenting on the disparity between GlennK's and DRAB's impressions, noting GlennK had the wine almost a year ago

without personal experience with the wine and minimal with the vintage, i wouldnt be surprised if it's starting to shut down a little

Agreed. I'd expect it.

quote:

maybe starting to close down a little?

Quite possibly.

Though I'm a believer that while a wine may not be very expressive at times, it's raw material and structural makeup are never masked, and capable of evaluation at any point. For instance...the '86 Mouton. It's closed, but you can tell it will be great one day. It still has the volume, the weight, the mouthfeel, and the fruit lurking. It's just not ready to disrobe and show what it is capable of. With this wine, I got no feeling at all that this was, or will be a 90+ pt. wine....by my standards at least.

quote:

Very wrong

You are entitled to your opinion. Which we all know, since you exhaust it ad nauseum.

I've yet to have a great wine that didn't give me a good idea as to why it was considered great. Closed or not. Ready or not. If the raw material is there, it cannot be hidden. Sedondary nuances yes. It may not be mature, ready, singing, whatever you want to call it, but it's all there, waiting. And, that can been seen. In fact...you've attested to this with the '75 Petrus recently. Not fully mature, but you know it will fully live up to it when it gets there.

As for this Haut Bages Liberal...I simply seem to side more with what Parker tasted. An 88-90 pt. wine.

quote:

Originally posted by dr.darkrichandbold:

{snip}

As for this Haut Bages Liberal...I simply seem to side more with what Parker tasted. An 88-90 pt. wine.

Help me out here... your initial post says the H-B-L is "not very impressive," yet you give it a score that is somewhere between very good and excellent.

quote:

Originally posted by haggis:

quote:

Originally posted by dr.darkrichandbold:

{snip}

As for this Haut Bages Liberal...I simply seem to side more with what Parker tasted. An 88-90 pt. wine.

Help me out here... your initial post says the H-B-L is "not very impressive," yet you give it a score that is somewhere between very good and excellent.

We have been down this road before, DRAB grades between about 85 - 100 only a 15 point range. if he hits it 97 Parker or Tanzer might hit it around 92. Once you get used to his scale it is easy to follow his TN's.

quote:

Originally posted by Board-O:

quote:

Originally posted by dr.darkrichandbold:
Though I'm a believer that while a wine may not be very expressive at times, it's raw material and structural makeup are never masked

Very wrong

I will have to go with Board-O on this one.

That masking is what defines a closed wine. Anyone who thinks this masking doesn't occur, hasn't had a closed wine or didn't recognize it as one if he or she did.

quote:

Help me out here... your initial post says the H-B-L is "not very impressive," yet you give it a score that is somewhere between very good and excellent.

First, for me 88 pts. is not that impressive, considering I basically think of scores on a 20 pt. scale with anything lower than 80 being undrinkable. I tried the wine having known the WS review of 93 pts. Afterward....I looked at Parker's review. Another reason why I think it's important for people to decide for themselves.

quote:

That masking is what defines a closed wine. Anyone who thinks this masking doesn't occur, hasn't had a closed wine or didn't recognize it as one if he or she did.

I firmly belive that closed wines can never mask structure and raw material. Closed wines can mask things like bouquet, palate perceptions/flavors, and finish.

quote:

I firmly belive that closed wines can never mask structure and raw material. Closed wines can mask things like bouquet, palate perceptions/flavors, and finish.

I'd have to disagree on this as well. I've opened a number of bottles along the way only to find in addition to not showing the fruit or finish, seem to lack the depth and structure tasted early in release. At first I thought this was due to bottle variation but I have come to conclude that the dumb phase really closes off everything at times. While there may have been some bottle variation, I more often find that the wine recovers its character after it has aged appropriately.

Since then, I try to attribute bottle variation only when the bottles are fairly similar ages -- unless it is something obvious like corking or heavy oxidation.

quote:

I'd have to disagree on this as well. I've opened a number of bottles along the way only to find in addition to not showing the fruit or finish, seem to lack the depth and structure tasted early in release. At first I thought this was due to bottle variation but I have come to conclude that the dumb phase really closes off everything at times. While there may have been some bottle variation, I more often find that the wine recovers its character after it has aged appropriately.

I doubt we will ever find concensus here. We'll have to agree to disagree. Thanks for your impressions though. I do believe in the kind of wines you mention. I just think they are the exceptions and not the rule. And, I choose to not cellar wines that sway so dramatically in character. My one exception here relates to Burgundy (where there are plenty of exceptions to the rules. In fact, the exceptions seem to be the rules in Burgundy!)