20 Vintages of Figeac (1985-2019): All wines tasted blind. A few observations: 1) Compared many other right bank peers, Figeac never fell into the trap of producing very high ripeness/high extraction wines. The low(er) Merlot content plays a role, but the wines clearly speak of a conscious decision of not going there. But in the 2000s the fruit profile is darker and only more recent vintages go back to the beautiful bright red fruit. 2) The hype is real: The level of greatness this winery achieves since the 2015 vintage is stunning. The complexity, delineation, purity and textural depth are miles ahead of what the company produced before. 3) Figeac shows that it is among the 15 best wines produced in Bordeaux today and considering the En Primeur prices, probably only Montrose and Pichon Lalande have an equally good value proposition in this top group. 4) Winner was the 2019 (97pts) with an unmatched purity and depth, ahead of the 2015 (96pts) and a stunning 2018 (96pts) which tells a lot about how well they coped with the hot vintage.
TN: Rather green, herbal nose. On the palate pleasant bright fruit, herbs and minerality but the aromatic balance and the structure with a too pronounced acidity are not that good. Half the room liked it much better (see Collector1855’s note) but I found it one of the weaker showings. But no surprise here as not one 2002 could really convince me to date, either they were too extracted or, like this wine, did not show enough fruit/sweetness. The best ones were Cheval Blanc, Ausone and Haut Bailly at 93pts, with limited love for some other heavyweights: Mouton 91pts, Angelus 91pts, Mission 91 pts, Haut Brion 90pts.
Decanting: Not decanted, no extensive decanting needed.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Chateau Figeac - 35 year vertical tasted blind 1985-2019: 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.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
2002 Bordeaux 20 years on tasting (Fribourg): 2002 Bordeaux 20 years on tasting. Key takeaways: 1/ 31 out of 32 wines were in flawless condition which indicates either luck or less bottle variation in the vintage, 2/ On average still early days with the fruit predominantly primary, 3/ solid hedonistic quality with only few laggards, but also no blow-outs, 4/ structures built on both tannin and acidity, but common mid-palate weakness, 5/ best wines were Valandrau, Palmer and a surprise underdog Lagrange (all 95), 6/ biggest disappointment was a cooked Figeac (87). More comments and full list of wines included in the tasting story.
Tasting note: The aroma profile showed a greenish, herbal character with hay and mint but also a medicinal touch. Fruit of mixed berries. Palate a bit thin and scaled towards tannin. The fruit leaves you with a cooked impression after a while in the glass. At first interesting, but in the end overripe fruit and unripe tannins. A disappointing Figeac.
Decanted 3h before drinking. Very smooth and concentrated with well integrated tannins. Slightly disappointing finish. It's a good time to have this wine now!
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Second and last bottle since 2015 (40€ per bottle in 2010), 3h decant. Made from 35% Cabernet Sauvignon, 35% Cabernet Franc, and 30% Merlot grapes.
Dark purple colour. Cherries and wood on the nose. On palate black cherries and currants, smoked oak, tobacco and leather; all quite dense and concentrated. Long finish.
Perfect drinking window right now in my opinion, which should stay open 5-7 years easily. Not sure if there will be any further improvement though. Liked it a bit better than in 2015.
Parker rated 88 points a few years back and this is one of the very few times my rating is higher than his.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Maybe this has started to come around, given that my assessment is quite different from those before. Fresh and energetic. Good lift and acidity still present. Nose spilling with sour cherries, almost like a BdM. Sweet fine tannins that are starting to resolve. Spicy bite and linger on the finish. There's a sauvage character to this. Give it a couple more years and it should come together nicely.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
So very much disappointing, was like biting into an unripe chestnut shell. Though my company said I was being too harsh, I stand by my point.
Over couple of hours, the wine didn't improve, not what I would expect for 75 Euro. I've had many enjoyable Figeac vintages, this 2002 ranks very low at the bottom.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Better with rosted Lamm than with cheese. Opened 2 Bottles at the same time. One was much better than the other which confirms the fact that: "Il n'y a pas du bon vin, Il n'y a qu'une bonne bouteille."
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Still young and slightly disjointed right now. There's lots of good fruit but it seems hidden behind a wall of tannins. Red fruit, spices, bacon, licorice, and mint. Lacks punch on the palate but has a nice subtle mouthfeel. I'm optimistic that this is going to turn into a nice wine, but this depends on the status of the fruit once the tannins soften. I really like the style of this wine. Definitely recommend waiting a couple of years.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
1 hour decant, another 3 hours to finish the bottle.
Impressive cherry/plum nose; dark red colour, rims are not fading yet. Initially, very dense, also high but pleasant acidity. On the palate, even more cherries, a bit of oak in addition with hints of rubber. Kept building up during all times. Long finish.
Had the 2003 a few weeks back, which was more balanced and complex, despite the extraordinary summer.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Deep plum, slightly dusty looking. Wonderfu nose of cherries, blackcurrrent, blueberry. A whiff of oak and a hint of florality. On the palate, very fresh, bright acidity, good lift. Again, a nice floral note - violets? - cassis, leather, capsicum (cab franc?) pencil shavings. Rich and quite substantial. More elgance than power and a great success for what was a relatively rain-spoilt vntage.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
this wine needs a long decanting for all elements to come together, at least 2 hours, otherwise it comes out a bit light and slightly disjointed, though agreeable from start... it becomes a different and much improved wine with time out of the bottle. red berries will come out to complete the initial herbaceous aromatics. after some initial slight frowning, this is a real nice claret, well done.!
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Better than expected, but still difficult to tell the future evolution. Initial nose lasted only 30mins, but developed complexity over few hours in the glass. Relatively accessable introduction to Figeac and good classic (read: less extracted) expression of St Emilion.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Ooooooh yes!!! I thought a 2002 would be a bit green and tannic but this is seriously drinking wonderfully well right now. Deep colour, but the nose and palate are finesse and elegance personified. Nose of coffee beans, white pepper, liquorice but toned down to a delicate level. In the mouth this is rocking my boat - feathery tannins, light touch, delicate coffee and earth flavours - really good complexity. Medium finish that is like a kiss more than a punch.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Beautiful robe, starting to mature. Comforting and classic nose; currant, cedar, tobacco, a little bit of oak. Just a hint of barnyard. Woody, pepper, plum, a hint of meat on the palate. Well balanced, elegance and complexity rather than strength. A complete wine, although I'd give it more time. Beautiful on opening, it shut down a bit after about 30 minutes.
* * * * but give it a few more years 0 = undrinkable, 1 = poor, 2 = mediocre, 3 = good, 4 = very good, 5 = superb
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
2/11/2023 - Cailles wrote: 90 Points
20 Vintages of Figeac (1985-2019): All wines tasted blind. A few observations: 1) Compared many other right bank peers, Figeac never fell into the trap of producing very high ripeness/high extraction wines. The low(er) Merlot content plays a role, but the wines clearly speak of a conscious decision of not going there. But in the 2000s the fruit profile is darker and only more recent vintages go back to the beautiful bright red fruit. 2) The hype is real: The level of greatness this winery achieves since the 2015 vintage is stunning. The complexity, delineation, purity and textural depth are miles ahead of what the company produced before. 3) Figeac shows that it is among the 15 best wines produced in Bordeaux today and considering the En Primeur prices, probably only Montrose and Pichon Lalande have an equally good value proposition in this top group. 4) Winner was the 2019 (97pts) with an unmatched purity and depth, ahead of the 2015 (96pts) and a stunning 2018 (96pts) which tells a lot about how well they coped with the hot vintage.
TN: Rather green, herbal nose. On the palate pleasant bright fruit, herbs and minerality but the aromatic balance and the structure with a too pronounced acidity are not that good. Half the room liked it much better (see Collector1855’s note) but I found it one of the weaker showings. But no surprise here as not one 2002 could really convince me to date, either they were too extracted or, like this wine, did not show enough fruit/sweetness. The best ones were Cheval Blanc, Ausone and Haut Bailly at 93pts, with limited love for some other heavyweights: Mouton 91pts, Angelus 91pts, Mission 91 pts, Haut Brion 90pts.
Decanting: Not decanted, no extensive decanting needed.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
2/6/2023 - Collector1855 wrote: 95 Points
Chateau Figeac - 35 year vertical tasted blind 1985-2019: 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.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/19/2022 - sphBacchus wrote: 91 Points
Am a big fan of Figeac and have many vintages . This vintage lacks the depth and finish but has the other classic Figeac characteristics .Drink now .
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/3/2022 - sirpat00 wrote: 87 Points
2002 Bordeaux 20 years on tasting (Fribourg): 2002 Bordeaux 20 years on tasting. Key takeaways: 1/ 31 out of 32 wines were in flawless condition which indicates either luck or less bottle variation in the vintage, 2/ On average still early days with the fruit predominantly primary, 3/ solid hedonistic quality with only few laggards, but also no blow-outs, 4/ structures built on both tannin and acidity, but common mid-palate weakness, 5/ best wines were Valandrau, Palmer and a surprise underdog Lagrange (all 95), 6/ biggest disappointment was a cooked Figeac (87). More comments and full list of wines included in the tasting story.
Tasting note:
The aroma profile showed a greenish, herbal character with hay and mint but also a medicinal touch. Fruit of mixed berries. Palate a bit thin and scaled towards tannin. The fruit leaves you with a cooked impression after a while in the glass. At first interesting, but in the end overripe fruit and unripe tannins. A disappointing Figeac.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comments (3)
5/14/2022 - floribo Likes this wine: 92 Points
Decanted 3h before drinking. Very smooth and concentrated with well integrated tannins. Slightly disappointing finish. It's a good time to have this wine now!
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/16/2019 - AWBryce wrote:
Vegetal, red fruits, cedar, slate; lovely red fruits on the palate, long finish with silky tannin. in a great spot
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/28/2018 - -Tim- Likes this wine: 91 Points
Second and last bottle since 2015 (40€ per bottle in 2010), 3h decant. Made from 35% Cabernet Sauvignon, 35% Cabernet Franc, and 30% Merlot grapes.
Dark purple colour. Cherries and wood on the nose. On palate black cherries and currants, smoked oak, tobacco and leather; all quite dense and concentrated. Long finish.
Perfect drinking window right now in my opinion, which should stay open 5-7 years easily. Not sure if there will be any further improvement though. Liked it a bit better than in 2015.
Parker rated 88 points a few years back and this is one of the very few times my rating is higher than his.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
4/29/2017 - matlee89 Likes this wine: 92 Points
Maybe this has started to come around, given that my assessment is quite different from those before. Fresh and energetic. Good lift and acidity still present. Nose spilling with sour cherries, almost like a BdM. Sweet fine tannins that are starting to resolve. Spicy bite and linger on the finish. There's a sauvage character to this. Give it a couple more years and it should come together nicely.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/24/2016 - Mathijs81 Does not like this wine:
So very much disappointing, was like biting into an unripe chestnut shell.
Though my company said I was being too harsh, I stand by my point.
Over couple of hours, the wine didn't improve, not what I would expect for 75 Euro.
I've had many enjoyable Figeac vintages, this 2002 ranks very low at the bottom.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/1/2016 - Willy.Bischofberger wrote:
Better with rosted Lamm than with cheese.
Opened 2 Bottles at the same time. One was much better than the other which confirms the fact that: "Il n'y a pas du bon vin, Il n'y a qu'une bonne bouteille."
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/28/2015 - stgbull Does not like this wine: 88 Points
This vintage is poor.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/12/2015 - DrinkBordeaux wrote: 92 Points
Still young and slightly disjointed right now. There's lots of good fruit but it seems hidden behind a wall of tannins. Red fruit, spices, bacon, licorice, and mint. Lacks punch on the palate but has a nice subtle mouthfeel. I'm optimistic that this is going to turn into a nice wine, but this depends on the status of the fruit once the tannins soften. I really like the style of this wine. Definitely recommend waiting a couple of years.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
5/29/2015 - -Tim- Likes this wine: 90 Points
1 hour decant, another 3 hours to finish the bottle.
Impressive cherry/plum nose; dark red colour, rims are not fading yet. Initially, very dense, also high but pleasant acidity. On the palate, even more cherries, a bit of oak in addition with hints of rubber. Kept building up during all times. Long finish.
Had the 2003 a few weeks back, which was more balanced and complex, despite the extraordinary summer.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/11/2014 - WeinBrunner wrote: 84 Points
What shall i say: ups and downs. First taste was bad. After a while better and at the end again
flat. To old?
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/4/2013 - Leigh Johnson Likes this wine: 91 Points
Deep plum, slightly dusty looking. Wonderfu nose of cherries, blackcurrrent, blueberry. A whiff of oak and a hint of florality. On the palate, very fresh, bright acidity, good lift. Again, a nice floral note - violets? - cassis, leather, capsicum (cab franc?) pencil shavings. Rich and quite substantial. More elgance than power and a great success for what was a relatively rain-spoilt vntage.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/29/2013 - CyroW wrote: 92 Points
this wine needs a long decanting for all elements to come together, at least 2 hours, otherwise it comes out a bit light and slightly disjointed, though agreeable from start... it becomes a different and much improved wine with time out of the bottle. red berries will come out to complete the initial herbaceous aromatics. after some initial slight frowning, this is a real nice claret, well done.!
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/15/2012 - mcases wrote: 91 Points
Very nice wine. Long elegant and subtle.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/2/2010 - JulianSkeels wrote: 91 Points
Better than expected, but still difficult to tell the future evolution. Initial nose lasted only 30mins, but developed complexity over few hours in the glass. Relatively accessable introduction to Figeac and good classic (read: less extracted) expression of St Emilion.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/31/2009 - pjaines wrote:
Ooooooh yes!!! I thought a 2002 would be a bit green and tannic but this is seriously drinking wonderfully well right now. Deep colour, but the nose and palate are finesse and elegance personified. Nose of coffee beans, white pepper, liquorice but toned down to a delicate level. In the mouth this is rocking my boat - feathery tannins, light touch, delicate coffee and earth flavours - really good complexity. Medium finish that is like a kiss more than a punch.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/20/2009 - englishman's claret wrote:
Beautiful robe, starting to mature. Comforting and classic nose; currant, cedar, tobacco, a little bit of oak. Just a hint of barnyard. Woody, pepper, plum, a hint of meat on the palate. Well balanced, elegance and complexity rather than strength. A complete wine, although I'd give it more time. Beautiful on opening, it shut down a bit after about 30 minutes.
* * * * but give it a few more years
0 = undrinkable, 1 = poor, 2 = mediocre, 3 = good, 4 = very good, 5 = superb
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/1/2005 - winefool wrote: 88 Points
Medium full purple. Nice aroma of forest and fruit. Dusty tannin with decent but not great fruit. 1/05
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment