Vertical of Canon vs Beasejour Duffau Lagarrosse (Fribourg): Vertical of Beausejour Duffau Lagarrosse vs Canon vs selected pirates 2005-2020. Main takeaways : i/ Canon trumps Beausejour overall, especially in more recent ones. ii/ Canon tends to be lighter-footed, more delicate while Beausejour is typically more extracted and ripe. iii/ St Emillion clearly struggles with the hotter vintages a few years on with 2005 the low-light, already exhibiting beef juice elements. iv/ best wines were Canon 2015 (95), 2019 and 2020 (94 each). Summary of wines and scores included in the tasting story.
Tasting note: Extracted fruit of red berries, but with floral top notes providing a certain lightness. Mineral base and spice notes of oregano. The palate then unexpectedly juicy, even if the tannin had a drying feature to them. Otherwise acceptable follow-through.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Very dark red color. PNP, drank a glass over 2 hours. Starting out with some volatility, but settling in over an hour. There was a seeming hole in the mid palate, a little vacuolar actually, still there was black cherry that got a bit juicier over an hour or more; firm tannins that also slightly loosened, minerals and black licorice. I'm not sure that this has a lot of upside.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
St. Emilion night (Chicago, IL): A little foursquare, but drinking very well for a 2005. This doesn't have the intense structure that so many others have, and there's a resolved, plummy, juiciness here. Not too complex or layered, but with a lot of those nice fruit layers on the palate making this readily accessible at such a young age.
2 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Professional reviews have copyrights and you can view them here for your personal use only as private content. To view pro reviews you must either subscribe to a pre-integrated publication or manually enter reviews below. Learn more.
(Chateau Beausejour Duffau Crand Cru) #1; COLOR-dark; NOSE-beautiful nose; really pretty raspberry meets cranberry and cherry; dynamic red fruit here; a little bark as well which I like; PALATE-the wine is like Evander Holyfield in that it's "the Real Deal"; this wine is SPECTACULAR and has brought on a lot of weight with the age; this is staggering; there's a gorgeous hint of eucalyptus mint on the mid-palate; black pepper; it's almost like eating a steak -- there's a juiciness and a heaviness; great fruit -- great plum, cherry and raspberry coming through; this is frickin'' AWESOME; this wine is elegant, perfectly balanced, rich, delicious; I don't understand how anyone can drink this and not like it; this has class (like Lauren Bacall); this is PHENOMENAL and what Bordeaux is all about; so balanced; I love it; SPECTACULAR; RP-91; GV-95+
NOTE: Some content is property of JebDunnuck.com and JancisRobinson.com and Winedoctor and Vinous and Wine Library TV.
3/26/2024 - Collector1855 wrote: 87 Points
Canon vs. Duffau-Lagarrosse 2009-2020 tasted blind (Fribourg): Rich, ripe nose, lots of dry extract here as well, a touch overripe fruit intermixed with cranberries. Quite harsh and sour on the finish.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/25/2024 - sirpat00 wrote: 89 Points
Vertical of Canon vs Beasejour Duffau Lagarrosse (Fribourg): Vertical of Beausejour Duffau Lagarrosse vs Canon vs selected pirates 2005-2020. Main takeaways : i/ Canon trumps Beausejour overall, especially in more recent ones. ii/ Canon tends to be lighter-footed, more delicate while Beausejour is typically more extracted and ripe. iii/ St Emillion clearly struggles with the hotter vintages a few years on with 2005 the low-light, already exhibiting beef juice elements. iv/ best wines were Canon 2015 (95), 2019 and 2020 (94 each). Summary of wines and scores included in the tasting story.
Tasting note:
Extracted fruit of red berries, but with floral top notes providing a certain lightness. Mineral base and spice notes of oregano. The palate then unexpectedly juicy, even if the tannin had a drying feature to them. Otherwise acceptable follow-through.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
11/4/2023 - sfqwino wrote: 90 Points
Good nose and quite delicious. A little short on the mid palate and finish though. Would hv been great otherwise.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/3/2023 - rocknroller wrote: 90 Points
Very dark red color. PNP, drank a glass over 2 hours. Starting out with some volatility, but settling in over an hour. There was a seeming hole in the mid palate, a little vacuolar actually, still there was black cherry that got a bit juicier over an hour or more; firm tannins that also slightly loosened, minerals and black licorice. I'm not sure that this has a lot of upside.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/14/2023 - acyso wrote: 90 Points
St. Emilion night (Chicago, IL): A little foursquare, but drinking very well for a 2005. This doesn't have the intense structure that so many others have, and there's a resolved, plummy, juiciness here. Not too complex or layered, but with a lot of those nice fruit layers on the palate making this readily accessible at such a young age.
2 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment