2015 Château Pontet-Canet
Community Tasting Note
sfwinelover1 Likes this wine:
Sunday, March 12, 2023 - Pontet-Pym Rae Winemaker’s Dinner (Mathilde/K&L SF). This wine brings out 2 conflicting impulses in sfwl: not reviewing wines from tastings/winemaker dinners (too many wines/too little time/too small pours/not enough, or any, chances to see how it pairs/uncertainty about aeration protocols, etc.) vs. wading into discussions where CT friends have come to different conclusions. This wine was additionally interesting since I *loved* the ‘16, am generally but not absolutely skeptical about BDX (a whole other conversation covered in other notes), especially young—and make no mistake, for me this is young. This was the first PC, served with the opening course of a creamy gnocchi (what’s a French bistro doing serving this definitive dish from the Land of my beloved Boot? That’s a different conversation.) after the ‘18 Pym Rae (which I’ve reviewed) and a Roederer 242 (which I haven’t), so my tasting facilities were still quite keen. On the nose and palate, classic and fairly intense Bordelaisian funk, earthy minerality, black cherries, mixed black berries, cassis, black currants, a faint red fruit note, pencil shavings and light notes of tobacco and leather. Medium-medium+ tannins and acidity, already balanced and mostly integrated. VG++ complexity, VG+ persistence and intensity. Ok, so I’m in disagreement with CT friends LioF and csimm: this wine, as it appeared before me, was very much good to go. Per the above, I don’t know the aeration ablutions other than that it had spent “hours” in a decanter, but this was well-balanced, no sharp edges from the moment I first sipped it (it was consumed over 15 minutes or so). The Pontets fascinate relative to the better-liked by me, although ridiculously more expensive, PRs, as all are all over the map, not just in quality, to my palate, but in characteristics. The ‘16, which wasn’t poured but I enjoyed so much 5 months ago, could have easily passed for Napa, with opulent fruit, at least as much as the PRs, and ample power. The fruit is fine here, but this is more what I’d think of classic BDX, with funky-earthy notes at least holding it to a stalemate, producing a more elegant, subtle wine, with the underlying structure working really well with the creaminess of the gnocchi. Even if this wasn’t the ‘16, it was still more vibrant than any of the other 3 PCs: the ‘17 (NR, dead or just balled up), the ‘06 (91-92, kinda boring, what I think of as a fairly typical, indistinct BDX) and the ‘94 (93-94, sophisticated and lovely but slightly past peak). It’s definitely worth opening now if you can cajole it (when was the last time you heard me say open something now that Liof suggests waiting 3-4 years for?) the way my hosts did last night, but if you have multiple bottles, it will certainly be interesting to track over the next 10-15 years (although CT’s 2043 window seems optimistic, for this wine and perhaps for me). At around the $125 I’m seeing this for on WS, this may well be something I’ll pick up. 94-95+
Post a Comment / View sfwinelover1's profile12 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Report Issue (11,326 views)
23 comments have been posted
12 people found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Report Issue (11,326 views)
Comment posted by Mark1npt:
3/13/2023 11:11:00 AM - Nice note, sf! This is one of my PC stash that I've not tried yet. I'd bet with more decant time that Bdx funk would dissipate. I may have to try one soon but it'll break Decanting Queen's heart, yet one more time, drinking it so young........but, I can also see how Liof would like it with more bottle age, too. These are just great quality for the money, I agree with you 100%. Cheers!
Comment posted by sfwinelover1:
3/13/2023 12:33:00 PM - Thanks, Mark. You’d figure, or at least I would, that if the proprietor doesn’t know how long to decant his wine to get it drinking at its best, what hope do the rest of us have (not that that helped with the ‘17, but maybe it’s just the vintage)?
Comment posted by Mark1npt:
3/13/2023 12:54:00 PM - sf, I did 2 separate Vine Vault tasting events in Houston and Austin with Agelvis and our wives back in '21 where they have 9-10 higher end wineries on display, hoping to churn up business.....I was repeatedly shocked at the lack of attempt to get the wines prepped properly for the public to taste. It was a smattering of '16s, 17s, '18s and some not yet released '19s. All at top prices, no markdowns, no discounts, etc. We all consistently found that 38 of 40 wines didn't show well. We quizzed numerous winery reps and were told they only had an hour or two at most to open their bottles. Very few actually decanted them. The most memorable wine of both events was an '05 Seven Stones that their manager Michael McMillan had decanted earlier in the day (I'm assuming at his hotel) and decided to pour for us few lucky followers of that estate. It showed beautifully next to all the underprepared wines on display. I don't remember buying a single bottle of anyone else's wines at either of those events. A very poor way to run a business event such as that. I vowed I'd never attend another and thus far I'm sticking to it.
Comment posted by sfwinelover1:
3/13/2023 1:02:00 PM - One of the cool, though sometimes nerve wracking, aspects of higher end wine consumption of the sort we engage in is that bad storage and/or aeration hygiene can ruin even the best bottles (alas, good storage and good aeration can’t save a bottle that’s crappy to begin with); you probably don’t have to worry about that with a Stella or a Lagunitas. I saw this at my tasting with A_M on Saturday. The Smith bottle drank pretty well out of the chute and stayed fairly constant, but the Bevan was more like accelerant than a $200 wine off the pour but lived up to its billing and price tag with a couple of hours of air. Palates are different and some on the site probably actually prefer that sort of thing, but with some of the more Old World Napa wines that score poorly relative to their more cult counterparts, I do wonder how much of that is a lack of air and a failure to get the best out of the bottle.
Comment posted by Mark1npt:
3/13/2023 8:08:00 PM - sf....most people have no clue as to how to get the best out of the bottle. Myself included, until about 5-7 years ago. It is amazing how much air makes wine change and almost nobody has a clue about that. More wine education needs to take place, but alas, it's not that simple either. most people just want to pnp, like a beer or coke, and drink. Certainly not that simple with the better class of wines that we seem to imbibe here most of the time! 😊😊😊
Comment posted by WineGuyDelMar:
3/13/2023 8:33:00 PM - What was the nose like if any? I find many of these new Modern Style Bordeaux wines initially lacking inBordeaux character. Did you sense this? $125 for this seems reasonable but I wonder why it’s priced so low if it’s truly great? I have no skin in the game but just curious. I know this Producer has made outstanding wines in the past.
Comment posted by sfwinelover1:
3/13/2023 8:47:00 PM - The nose is, for this occasional BDX drinker, super BDX-y, with an earthy funkiness leading the way. If I’d be more likely to place the ‘16 in Napa, there’s no possible way this could be anything other than from the Motherland. I’m honest about my biases. I’m much more likely to find a BDX highly enjoyable if it has a New-er World feel (just as I’m more likely to find a Napa Cab really memorable if it has a more Old World feel). Yet the 2 really transcendent BDX I’ve had since I’ve been on CT have been a ‘90 Montrose and a ‘00 Latour, both of which I’d categorize as pretty classically BDX. Sure, they’re both crazy expensive wines (one was supplied by A_M, the other at a tasting in a BDX wine shop), but they show that it is possible for me to love a truly Old World wine. Both of those are *far* more expensive than PC, and while the ‘16, and even more so, the ‘15, could have upside, I’m not sure that they’ll be going strong at the age of the Latour, let alone the Montrose (the ‘94 was lovely, but felt on the wrong side of its peak). By the way, in case you have better things to do than pore through my musings, the best BDX-feeling wine I had over the weekend was a ‘97 David Arthur Elevation 1147; absolutely beautiful!
Comment posted by WineGuyDelMar:
3/13/2023 8:53:00 PM - I had full cases of the 89 & 90 Montrose and enjoyed every bottle.it always had the amazing “barnyard” nose lacking in many current BDX. I miss the Old School BDX. It is still around but I don’t love modern styled Bordeaux.
Comment posted by sfwinelover1:
3/13/2023 8:56:00 PM - I think you’d find this worth a shot. I’m less sure how you’d feel about the ‘16, especially since I think it’s about $50 more to boot. Cheers!
Comment posted by Mark1npt:
3/13/2023 8:57:00 PM - sf and WG......per your nose question....I haven't tried my '15 PC yet, but I did have the '16 and per one of my big wine buddies here , HMC, he was absolutely enthralled with the nose of it. He's a full on Cali red ho'......but he was transfixed by the nose of the '16 PC I poured for him, almost 2 years ago now.....he still raves about that nose, today. Maybe the '15 doesn't have the same quality? I do believe they are 2 very different vintages, presenting in 2 very different ways.
Comment posted by Mark1npt:
3/13/2023 9:01:00 PM - WG....many amateurs and pros alike, would say that barnyard is a negative and should never be present on a wine when serving to your friends. While I like a little Brett on some wines, I wouldn't want it all the time and not in heavy quantities either. If the wine is prepared properly and given the airtime it needs, all that should blow off and not be present when you're drinking.
Comment posted by sfwinelover1:
3/13/2023 9:18:00 PM - Mark: They weren’t pouring the ‘16, but like HMC, my memory feels clear (it was only about 6 months ago), and the 2 noses were quite distinct. This one was much more Bordelaisian, and in fact, I don’t really remember any funk on the ‘16. The ‘15 has very solid fruit, but it’s pretty classical BDX, at least to this primarily Napa-Tuscan wine lover. Also, per your other comment, since this was just half a glass, consumed over 15 minutes or so, it was hard to make a call on how the funk would integrate. There PCs were fascinating. Even keeping in mind the more significant vintage differences than the ‘16-‘18 Pym Raes—I promise I will eventually write my note on the ‘18 (96+)—these wines were so diverse in both quality and qualities, but the ‘15 was the only one showing notable funk. I do like funk more than you, even if you’re a more BDX guy. 2 favorites are the ‘04 Cain 5 and the ‘09 Domaine Pegau, which aren’t for the faint of heart.
Comment posted by Decanting Queen:
3/13/2023 10:08:00 PM - Hey SF meant to comment on this but it exploded with comments in the meantime. Great note and surprised this one was so ready for you. I would expect this note from Mark 😂
But seriously, I have had some young BDX drink really well (15 Dom de chevalier for example in 2020, 18 Talbot in 2022) And I also agree with you and Mark that many low scores for younger Bdx and old style Napa are from people who pnp. But then I would feel that way, being the DQ
I have one bottle of this and I think I will wait a tad longer, but good to know it can be prepped to drink well
Comment posted by AGELVIS:
3/13/2023 11:30:00 PM - SF, I’m impressed with anyone who can write a longer review than Mark. ;) In all seriousness, I enjoyed it (although I needed a nap in the middle).
Comment posted by Mark1npt:
3/14/2023 4:45:00 AM - DQ....loved your comment as always, but I'm just happy that I have such a wide scope of enjoyment with my palate, in the vast landscape of my wine life! Happy that I don't have to pigeonhole myself into only drinking this wine, not that one......or being able to enjoy nice Bdxs in various stages, not just when they're 'perfectly ready' at age 28!!! I know it kills the server when I pull out a nice cab at the table and proceed to order lobster, but what the hey?
Comment posted by Mark1npt:
3/14/2023 4:48:00 AM - Ag....sf 'routinely' out wordsmiths me on here! Only occasionally, do I approach his numbers. He is much more thorough in his wine coverage than I am, lol.
Comment posted by Mark1npt:
3/14/2023 4:52:00 AM - sf, the PC '16 is def a Bdx in the Napa red drinkers wheelhouse. Def more New World not classical Bdx, no barnyard funk other than right at the pnp for a couple of minutes but then it's a great perfumed/floral nose. The palate is much like the '16 Leo Barton that AG poured for me last year on a visit and much like the '16 Beychevelle is drinking now. Something about that '16 Bdx vintage that was much akin to our own '16 here in Napa, but the '16 PC had the best nose of all of them.......I know the '15 vintage was quite different. I'm going to have to break down and try one of my two bottles of the '15 PC soon. Maybe on one of my visits with DQ or Ag coming up here in the next few months?
Comment posted by sfwinelover1:
3/14/2023 6:58:00 AM - All: I’m wishing I’d gotten specific decanting instructions from Mr. Tesseron, since I’m now slightly nervous that you won’t be able to replicate my experience. Whatever it was, while no one will confuse this with the ‘16, the fruit was certainly present and it was a unanimous WOTY among the PC at our table (I think that there was a pretty even split at the table for preferring the PR, as I did, or this PC). AG, I’ll work on punching up the middle of my notes. And for better or worse, I think that my only rivals for length, and dare I say verbosity, are CT friend (and offline friend) csimm and a guy going by H.I.T.S. By Don.
Comment posted by Mark1npt:
3/14/2023 7:14:00 AM - No worries, sf! You gotta go with the flow, with these things and every bottle can behave a little differently anyway just like my last two of the '10 Poyferre......we won't hold you to it as what worked last month may not work 2 months from now, either.
Comment posted by sfwinelover1:
3/14/2023 7:54:00 AM - M: And just so that you don’t think that I believe that *all* BDX are open, see my comment about the ‘17 above and for numerous wines at our 10/22 BDX tasting. It’s certainly producer to producer, vintage to vintage, and per your comment on the ‘10 LP, even bottle to bottle.
Comment posted by Mark1npt:
3/14/2023 10:40:00 AM - Couldn't agree more, sf!
Comment posted by Decanting Queen:
3/14/2023 11:35:00 AM - Mark I agree it is great that you have a wide enjoyment range for wine. I do too, just not quite as wide;-)
And SF keep the long reviews coming. They make my day. I don’t know that HITS person, I guess we don’t drink the same wines
Comment posted by sfwinelover1:
3/14/2023 1:15:00 PM - Thanks, DQ. As long as the keys stay affixed on my IPad and the internet connection keeps working, you can count on it.