Tasted Monday, February 6, 2023 by Collector1855 with 482 views
We met again at Edgar's home - Switzerland's most prolific Bordeaux collector - to see how Figeac progressed and especially improved after the Manoncour family finally got to work after they realized that if they continue to underperform on such a scale they may be downgraded by the St.Emilion Classification. A real shame how complacent they were, sitting on such great terroir. Anyway, water under the bridge! The good news is that starting 2010 the wines got much better and the safest zone to buy Figeac is 2015 onwards. As usual, French wine critic and Bordeaux specialist Jean-Marc Quarin was present as well and led through the evening.
Nose dominated by dark fruit, sour cherry with a distinctive earthy tone. The palate is quite acidic, could benefit from some more fruit but will work as a food wine. The tannins are well melted. better than the 1995 (90pt) next to it which was even more sinewy. Mature, drink up.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
This was a bit bipolar, quite ripe with lovely herbal notes on the one hand but then the mid mouth was in need for some more stuffing.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
The 1995 and 1996 (92pt) were served side by side. Both wines had good aromatics with earthy elements and sour cherry, wet forest floor. The 1995 really would need much more fruit to stem the wood toast and and dry tannins. A pity, this was not such a difficult vintage to master but the Manoncout family seemed to sleep on the switch in that period.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Served next to the 1995/96 duo and had the clear edge. While it is not a home run in 2000 this wine had quite a few things to put on the table. Complex nose with farmyard, forest floor dark fruit. The palate did not have the green streak which I discovered in previous samples. Good fruit core, carried by medium+ tannins. Can be drunk now with a short decant. 95+
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
When I comes to St.Emilion I yet have to taste a good wine in the top 2005 vintage. I remember at the primeur week, my Shanghai friend said to me after we finished the St.Emilion pavillion: "I need a new tongue, everything was so pushed and extracted". Unfortunately tonight this wine was the only one that had oxidative, jammy fruit notes (the 2018 (93pt) was going towards that side as well but stayed fresh). Dense and structured palate. Given the price of this vintage, I would not push my luck with the 2005. You are in much safer territory with the 2015 (95pt) or 2019 (97pt) for example if you like it ripe.
Post a Comment / 1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Report Issue
This was the surprize of the evening. Everybody was stunned to when it was revealed that this was not the 2005 (89pt) but the 2002. Precise nose of cool, blue and red fruit. Elegant palate with good mid mouth core, balanced, long finish. JMQ noted that 2002 had reduced yields by nature and that may have helped Figeac which was notoriously over-cropping in those days.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Muted nose, needed some coaxing. Then showed lovely Figeac notes around sour cherry, earthy elements. The palate is medium- bodied, good aromas but a touch dry on the finish.
Post a Comment / 1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Report Issue
Ripe nose here, forest floor but also jammy elements and a touch of torrefaction or was that rather oak toast. In any case the fruit could not fully carry the structure either as with so many pre-2010 Figeac.
Post a Comment / 1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Report Issue
Here we go. If there was one wine to show the progress than it was this. Not a top vintage but a very good showing. Ripe, but not overripe, fruit with plum, cherry, gingerbread notes. Medium bodied with good palate presence. Medium- finish. Early drinking window. 94-95
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Discrete nose of cloves, red and dark fruit, earthy elements. Light, palate a bit diluted. Not a grand showing but will certainly make a proper food win.
Post a Comment / 2 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Report Issue
The 2009 was shown next to the 2010. This is always interesting as with this vintage (like 1990/1989) it is never clear who will be taking the top spot. Tonight the 2010 (96pt) had the clear edge, showing much more fruit and stuffing on the palate. The 2009 strangely was marked by oak toast and felt quite meager on the palate for the generous vintage. Good tertiary aromas with farmyard. A pity that they were not able to do better in this stellar year. Early drinking window.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
The 2009 was shown next to the 2010. This is always interesting as with this vintage like 1990 vs. 1989 it is never clear who is taking the top spot. Tonight the 2010 had the clear edge, showing much more fruit and stuffing on the palate, while the 2009 (93pt) felt too light and marked by the oak toast. Complex nose here on the 2010 with pine, forest floor, true to the Figeac style, earthy and complex. Young. I would drink this after 2030.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Lots of dark fruit, ripe, almost Californian, plum and prune, vanilla. The 2018 and 2019 were shown in the same flight next to each other. The 2018 was good (94pt), but I found this to be too much in the Napa field vs. Figeac/Bordeaux style, I clearly preferred the 2019 (97pt) which was also very sunny but much more balanced.
Post a Comment / 1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Report Issue
Wow, the 2019 really shot the lights out tonight and for me took the price of the WOTN ahead of the other top showings, 2010/15/16. TN: Exuberant, ripe nose combined with complex aromas of cool blue fruit, black tea, pine, bakery spices. Wonderful palate, excellent fruit, polished tannins and long, fresh finish, true to the Bordeaux/Figeac style. I think the 2019 is the new 1982. For comparison, the 2018 (94pt) next to felt overripe and plump.
Post a Comment / 5 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Report Issue
The 2016 (95+pt) and 2015 (96pt) were a convincing pair today and only outshined by the 2019 (97pt). One can see the progress here. The 2016 had precise fruit, excellent texture, delineated, definitely needs time, best after 2035. The 2015 was more exuberant with riper fruit but in this sample there was not over-ripeness, unlike what we saw in 2018. Quite some tannins to resolve as well but I think this may drink well a few years earlier than the 2016, say at age 15.
Post a Comment / 2 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Report Issue
The 2016 (95+pt) and 2015 (96pt) were a convincing pair today and only outshined by the 2019 (97pt). One can see the progress here. The 2016 had precise fruit, excellent texture, delineated, definitely needs time, best after 2035. The 2015 was more exuberant with riper fruit but in this sample there was not over-ripeness, unlike what we saw in 2018. Quite some tannins to resolve as well but I think this may drink well a few years earlier than the 2016, say at age 15.
Post a Comment / 5 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Report Issue
Palate calibration wine. From MAG. Quite meager with stinging acidity. Not much pleasure
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
This was the apero wine. Nose of cut grass, gooseberry, fresh, bitter grapefruit on the finish. A very good base level SauvBlanc.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Dessert wine after the tasting. Apricots, molasses, good freshness and complexity, but like all sauternes way too sweet for me. Score higher if you like Sauternes.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Dessert wine after the tasting. This was quite maderised, more like an old sweet sherry or Madeira.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
Dessert wine after the tasting. Distinctive rhum pot nose of cooked fruit. Lots of alcoholic heat. Like a brandy. Meh!
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
© 2003-24 CellarTracker! LLC. All rights reserved. "CellarTracker!" is a trademark of CellarTracker! LLC. No part of this website may be used, reproduced or distributed without the prior written permission of CellarTracker! LLC.
1990 Château Figeac 94 Points
France, Bordeaux, Libournais, St. Émilion Grand Cru
Bretty, earthy, farmyard funk, very old school Bordeaux. Light and aromatic, bright acidity, a bit thin for the vintage but the best wine of the flight. A light and classic offering. This had the edge over the 1989 (92pt) next to it. Fully mature. Drink up.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
1985 Château Figeac 91 Points
France, Bordeaux, Libournais, St. Émilion Grand Cru
The nose is dominated from oak smoking, everybody noticed that and it was a pity that a 35 year old wine is still marked by this. Light palate, lots of sour cherry. Rather decent than good. Drink up.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue
1986 Château Figeac Flawed
France, Bordeaux, Libournais, St. Émilion Grand Cru
Unfortunately corked. One faulty bottle out of 20.
Post a Comment / 1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Report Issue
1989 Château Figeac 92 Points
France, Bordeaux, Libournais, St. Émilion Grand Cru
The nose was much more reserved than the 1990 which scored higher (94pt). Structure dominates fruit on the palate. Lovely tertiary aromas, but quite charmless. Decent, but a really modest offering for the monumental 1989 vintage. Fully mature, drink up.
Post a Comment / Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Report Issue