You are currently viewing the International Edition. You can also switch to the Hong Kong Edition.
Friday 24 October 2014

2010 offers fewer potential 100-pointers than 09

5th May, 2011 by Rupert Millar - This article is over multiple pages: 1 2

Wine critic Robert Parker released his notes and provisional points for the 2010 vintage this week and a brief scan over some of the bigger names reveals that those with the potential for 100-points are much scarcer than in 2009.

parker.jpgParker said of the vintage: “It is an inescapable truth that 2010 has produced another year of compelling Bordeaux that will go down as a prodigious vintage alongside 2009.

“Take your pick – this news is either tragic or mythical, but I have tasted enough wines from 2005, 2009 and 2010 to realise that these may be the three greatest Bordeaux vintages I have tasted in my career.”

He awarded 10 châteaux a potential 100-points, including four of the five first growths. However, a number of 2009’s high-rollers were not among them.

These included Chåteau Margaux (now on 96-98); last year’s controversial addition Cos d’Estournel (95-97); Léoville Las Cases (95-98); Léoville Poyferré (95-98); Clinet (95-98); L’Evangile (96-98); Angélus (94-96+) and Pavie (95-98+) to name but a few.

His exclusion of Chåteau Margaux in the very top ranks is apparently at odds with the opinion of a great many of the trade, according to Liv-ex’s blog report.

On the other hand two of the first growths, Haut Brion and Mouton Rothschild, threw off their ratings of 96 in 2009 and have risen into the 98-100 bracket with the likes of Lafite, Latour and Pétrus – whose ratings didn’t budge.

Parker continued his analysis of the two years, saying: “2009 will always be the more “fun” vintage because of its more sumptuous, fruit-forward, lower acid wines with soaring aromatics.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

If that's interesting, how about these?