WineSpectator.com    Wine Spectator Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Tasting Notes    TN: 2005 Ch. Monbousquet
Page 1 2 3 4 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
TN: 2005 Ch. Monbousquet
 Login/Join 
Member
posted
I've been a hot/cold fan of the Perse lineup from vintage to vintage, but this is one to satisfy any Bordeaux lover. Delicious wine. Dark black macerated cherry, mocha, toasty oak, sweet wet earth, and cigar and baking spices. Full bodied, deep blood red/black color, and a long finish. This is the best Monbousquet I've had. 95 pts.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: dr.darkrichandbold,


So much wine.....so little time!!!
 
Posts: 7015 | Location: San Francisco | Registered: Jun 20, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
This is a joke, right?


Just one more sip.
 
Posts: 36782 | Location: NY | Registered: Oct 18, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Yes...and you're the only one laughing.


So much wine.....so little time!!!
 
Posts: 7015 | Location: San Francisco | Registered: Jun 20, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Don't bet on that.


Just one more sip.
 
Posts: 36782 | Location: NY | Registered: Oct 18, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Thanks for the notes.


------------------------------
Originally posted by Board-O:
It's truly amazing the amount of meaningless posts you make.

"All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved." Matthew 10:22
 
Posts: 2529 | Location: Illinois | Registered: Jun 29, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by dr.darkrichandbold:
I've been a hot/cold fan of the Perse lineup from vintage to vintage, but this is one to satisfy any Bordeaux lover. Delicious wine. Dark black macerated cherry, mocha, toasty oak, sweet wet earth, and cigar and baking spices. Full bodied, deep blood red/black color, and a long finish. This is the best Monbousquet I've had. 95 pts.


have you've had the 00' monbousquet?

how would you compare?


This is my sig -> www.brownteacup.com
www.wsqwine.com
(Wine distributor)
 
Posts: 12049 | Location: NYC | Registered: Feb 16, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Board-O:
This is a joke, right?
I don't know Board-O. I'm a newby when it comes to wine though I've tasted lots these past few years. But, I've always liked Monbousquet...
 
Posts: 886 | Location: Los Angeles, CA | Registered: Oct 01, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
From what I've read, the Monbousquet is a sleeper from the '05 vintage, and a must buy from a QPR point of view. I bought a couple magnums and will hold for 10 years, but I have high expectations. Thanks for your note.


Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
Posts: 5704 | Registered: Jan 11, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
thanks for the note. i have been hesitant about buying this one, so your review is encouraging.
 
Posts: 672 | Location: Orange County, CA | Registered: Jun 24, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Board-O:
This is a joke, right?


Which part is the joke part, I don't get it?


"No TV and no beer make Homer...something, something"
 
Posts: 2572 | Location: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Apr 07, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
have you've had the 00' monbousquet?


Yes....I like this better. For me the '05 has better balance of tannin and acid, it's less forward, and more likely to age.

Don't get me wrong though...this is still very primary and will need age to bring out secondary character, but I'll be honest, there's nothing to not like about it now too...


So much wine.....so little time!!!
 
Posts: 7015 | Location: San Francisco | Registered: Jun 20, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Which part is the joke part, I don't get it?


Unfortunately, only he gets it.


So much wine.....so little time!!!
 
Posts: 7015 | Location: San Francisco | Registered: Jun 20, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by dr.darkrichandbold:
Don't get me wrong though...this is still very primary and will need age to bring out secondary character, but I'll be honest, there's nothing to not like about it now too...


This is a joke, right? Big Grin Big Grin Big Grin Big Grin

Otherwise, HOW DARE YOU SPLIT AN INFINITIVE?!?!?!?!!!!!

Razz

Great TN, DRAB


"What contemptible scoundrel stole the cork from my lunch?" -- W.C. Fields
 
Posts: 7580 | Registered: Dec 05, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jfont:
I don't know Board-O. I'm a newby when it comes to wine though I've tasted lots these past few years. But, I've always liked Monbousquet...

Jfont, Board-O is referring to the fact that this is an 2005, not that it is Monbousquet.


__________________________
Alta is for skiers!
 
Posts: 2249 | Location: o-HIGH-o | Registered: May 05, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Is this a joke?

Tasting this and not the Pavie or the Pavie Decesse?

Thanks for tasting something that the average people can still buy.
 
Posts: 808 | Location: Puerto Rico | Registered: Nov 21, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Is the joke that there is no way to predict that this is the best Monbousquet that drab has had, or that tasting this early is a waste of a bottle and makes no sense? Or is Board-o suggesting that the characteristics that drab has noted are unlikely to be present?

I understand Board-o's occasional concern about drinking wines too early, but dont the pros taste wines early, give them ratings, rank them in the history of other vintages of the same wines, and make predictions regarding their ageworthiness and expected date range of maturity...and is this not the most practical way to determine whether wines are good/will be good/should be purchased? Pros give such notes while wines are in the barrel, far from maturity.

Further, if we have purchased based in part on the reviews of the pros, is it wrong if we pop some bottles to see if we agree (and if not, sell them/return them to the store)? These things make sense to me (within reason), so I really don't know what Board-o is questioning, which is why I asked. Is it because drab has been popping open cases full of babies recently? Its not like popping an 05 monbousquet is a big waste (I have 6, I might have been tempted to pop one, but reading notes of others will either prevent me from doing so, or possibly lead me to return them all to the LCBO and get 100% of my money back).

I popped a 2004 Solaia and was extremely disappointed...so I will return the other 2 or 3 that I have to the LCBO; glad I tasted it, was absolutely not in line with tasting notes that I have read (in any way), so maybe just from a case/store that did not treat them properly, maybe had problems while in transit from Italy to Toronto, who knows, but it was not great..drank over 3 days, nothing special on day 1, 2, or 3. That lead me to pop a 2004 Ornellaia, which I found to be everything that the Solaia was not, I will keep my other 3 Ornellaia (and let them lie down for a long time) and makes me mad that I returned 2 bottles of it already to purchase something else a while back.

Tasting now is a waste of a bottle, but maybe prevents future disappointment/future wastes of multiple bottles (for those of us that can return the rest of the wine we did not enjoy...would not be easy to wait 10 years and then try to return it) and add to future enjoyment (for those of us that really like something and buy it now for current prices, not easy to buy more 10 years from now, with questionable provenance and highly inflated prices). Maybe this makes more sense for someone living in Ontario, with LCBO prices, and LCBO return policies...who knows.


"No TV and no beer make Homer...something, something"
 
Posts: 2572 | Location: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Apr 07, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Machine...

Let's just say you get it and Board-O doesn't.

It comes down to two things:

1. Trust your own palate for what YOU like.

2. If you're going to cellar wine, make sure you're cellaring something that interests YOU....not Robert Parker, James Suckling, or an egomaniac like Board-O. It's great if they like it too, but at the end of the day they're not the ones in charge of your own cellar.

Pretty simple if you asked me.


So much wine.....so little time!!!
 
Posts: 7015 | Location: San Francisco | Registered: Jun 20, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Drab,
Thanks for the notes. This is one that I was still considering and you may have pushed this consideration further along.


___________________________________________________
It's good to try them young too and then let them age - James ********
Infanticide can be very satisfying - Robert Parker
I drink mine young to avoid disappointments - James Laube
 
Posts: 5244 | Location: Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jun 03, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by dr.darkrichandbold:
Machine...

Let's just say you get it and Board-O doesn't.

It comes down to two things:

1. Trust your own palate for what YOU like.

2. If you're going to cellar wine, make sure you're cellaring something that interests YOU....not Robert Parker, James Suckling, or an egomaniac like Board-O. It's great if they like it too, but at the end of the day they're not the ones in charge of your own cellar.

Pretty simple if you asked me.


I agree with the tasting method and timing because it just makes sense to me, but I don't know if I get it vs. Board-o not getting it, because what I was posting about is that I don't get what Board-o thinks was the problem with your post (seriously, I am not criticizing anyone, this is not tongue-in-cheek, I just don't get what the joke is/what was wrong with your post).

Re. the critics and monbousquet, I have had the 1999, 2000, and 2001 monbo, did not particularly care for the 99 or 01, but loved the 2000 (have only had it twice, at 11 Madison). Lovely powerful aroma, excellent balance (to me), and even though only 8 years old I thought I tasted a few secondary characteristics, but I am no expert on those...but what does shock me is that James Suckling rated this wine 89, very different from Parker's 95 (I would give it 94-95 also). I understand differences in taste preferences etc., but really could not come up with anything in this wine that would justify an 89 point rating.

Geez, the price of this one in Canada kills me...I bought for $85 and $97.97 in the last 8 months from a few sellers (MW Sales, and PJ's)....current price in Canada, where re-selling does not take place: $286 per 750. For the price of a 6-pack in Canada, I could buy 6 from PJ's plus 2 round-trip flights from Toronto to NYC and 2 nights at a well located midtown hotel. Sickening...but probably enough off-topic and enough monbousquet discussion for now.


"No TV and no beer make Homer...something, something"
 
Posts: 2572 | Location: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Apr 07, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by dr.darkrichandbold:
Pretty simple if you asked me.


Understatement of the year.


Just one more sip.
 
Posts: 36782 | Location: NY | Registered: Oct 18, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Board-O:
quote:
Originally posted by dr.darkrichandbold:
Pretty simple if you asked me.


Understatement of the year.


Bah, that still does not answer my question!!!


"No TV and no beer make Homer...something, something"
 
Posts: 2572 | Location: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Apr 07, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Bah, that still does not answer my question!!!


I would not expect an answer that makes sense. His responses are more emotional, hypocritical and retaliatory than sensible.


So much wine.....so little time!!!
 
Posts: 7015 | Location: San Francisco | Registered: Jun 20, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
That from someone who thinks drinking tannic, closed wines is sensible. Roll Eyes Of course, he is the first person to post tasting notes on them.


Just one more sip.
 
Posts: 36782 | Location: NY | Registered: Oct 18, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
It is too bad that I could not time it better to coincide with post 2000 - but oh well - so nice to see that the more things change the more they stay the same. Rather comforting really.
 
Posts: 5942 | Location: South Florida | Registered: Dec 30, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Board-O:
That from someone who thinks drinking tannic, closed wines is sensible. Roll Eyes Of course, he is the first person to post tasting notes on them.


I will admit once again, I love tannin in wine, I remember chewing on grape stems after I finished my grapes when I was a child. I really enjoyed many of the wines that we tried at the 2005 UGC tasting. I could drink them all right now and love them, so I suppose I also love youthful (but balanced) fruit. As for closed wines, I don't really like the term closed, I don't think it makes sense, but I agree that drinking wines in that 'stage' is disappointing...but from what I have read (not from experience, because I have little to none), 'closed' may be more appropriately described as the stage after which youthful expressive fruitiness has disappeared, and before mature secondary characteristics have appeared (vs. there is fruit there today, then the fruit is gone for several years, then the fruit comes back...which seems to be another definition of 'closed'). I would not want to drink a tannic closed wine, but I do like tannic youthful wines, and moderately tannic moderately mature wines...and little/no experience with mature wines...most mature wine that I had was a 1974 Diamond Creek Volcanic Hill Cab...very 'wow' to me, and a few mid-90's bordeaux which were probably too young (but some were enjoyable, a few 95's (les forts, good ole lanessan), but what do I know...though the 96's I had needed more time, or were simply no good (leo poy, les forts, pichon baron I think).

Even with the above sad admissions, can it be said that there is no value in tasting wines young to try to assess whether they fit your tasting preferences or possess the structure that the taster may be looking for before buying more (or before deciding whether to sell his existing stock)? If drab drinks though his entire supply of 05 Monbo in the next year, that would be a different story...but why trust the pros if you can afford to taste yourself? I don't have the experience to know, which is why I want to know what the joke is.


"No TV and no beer make Homer...something, something"
 
Posts: 2572 | Location: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Apr 07, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4  
 

WineSpectator.com    Wine Spectator Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Tasting Notes    TN: 2005 Ch. Monbousquet

© Wine Spectator 2013