Past its prime but I rather enjoyed it though most people did not... Whispers of spice from a fading beauty.

From magnum, vibrant and taut, mineral backbone with a touch of yeast. Undoubtedly great Champagne but young, at least in magnum. Absolutely recommended.

From magnum, this was good juice and I felt like I kept expecting it to get over the hump and wow me - but it never did. A solid 1er performance, albeit not the best this producer nor vineyard can produce. I can’t ascribe this to youth either, this seemed to be what it is. Generally I’m gaga for 2010 white Burg, but it seems like PYCM didn’t make the most of this vintage from various experiences I’ve had. Splitting hairs here, it’s like the hyped movie that can only disappoint after hearing 50 friends rave.

Magnum. Corked and maybe something else? Totally undrinkable. ����

Backup bottle, served right after 10 PYCM Meursault Geneverieres and a remarkable number of people preferred this. I have no pride of authorship here, just brought the bottle. I thought it was the best showing yet, but more of an equal but different than the PYCM. To its credit it had more intensity despite being Villages. We went round and round on wines tonight, my only conclusion is this: don’t judge Boisson-Vadot young, give it time as these are juuust starting to show their potential.

I’m in love. Served in magnum, this wine was the essence of purity and beguiling, beautiful Burgundy. Serious competition tonight and it was tops. Pure, pure, pure ����

From magnum. Dark color, ample fruit but still seemed past prime. A good wine, but not a proper Montrachet performance.

Served in magnum. Absolutely astounding and beguiling and sexy. This presented great spice, tannins totally integrated, loooong finish. And it held/improved all night long. This was the highest order of Burgundy tonight, deserving a place next to DRC, Rousseau, etc.

Magic!

Damned funky, and not in a good way. Color and fill were brilliant, cork so so. The fruit and spice were there, it just had this ugly funk to it that never subsided.

Funky past P-Funk, should have been so great and it felt like we were soooo close. This bottle kept us on pins and needles, and let us down in the end.

From magnum, the nose seemed so dirty next to the 90 Arnoux RSV. On its own started to come around a bit, showing some spice but seriously it was like the band that came on after James Brown.

In time, picked up steam, but seemed foursquare. I wanted to love this, I love Meo and 90 and Clos Vougeot. Not a bad bottle by any stretch just never met my admittedly high hopes.

Served blind I guessed 02, it had a nose of ripe fruit and a touch of sauvage but the palate was drying albeit serious and brooding. The reveal made sense but this was controversial. To my taste this is a superstar, the kind of wine would love to have a case and follow along for years.

Served blind and I guessed Gevrey but I had no clue about it being Ponsot nor 1990. Some said Rousseau and I wasn’t feeling it. Anyway this was an excellent showing. My recollection from another bottle 7ish years ago was that it was dirty and not close to a re-buy — wrong!! Structured and balanced and a lot of room to run. I’ll venture to guess the bottle we had tonight was as good as it gets, save for any bottles still at the Domaine. I am intrigued!

This struck me as dense but not complex, too young given the vintage and the magnum format, but I didn't sense greatness coming in time. To be fair, I have never been as impressed by CSJ as many of my Burgundy drinking friends, and it's been quite a long time since I've had any wine from this producer.

Ripe and flamboyant and had me asking myself why drink Burgundy if it tastes like California? To be fair, this is 05. Let me emphasize: OOOO FIIIIVE

Served blind the guesses were comically all over the map. Speaks to the lack of terroir which is due to the youthfulness, the producer, or some combination thereof.

I may be too harsh on this, it followed some absolutely stellar and classic Burgundy. I suspect we won't really know what this wine is about for at least a decade.

Served blind and I immediately had my best guess. I was wrong but damn close: I guessed 05 Montille Malconsorts Christianne. That wine has the same gingerbread spice leaping out, and at the reveal I realized how very different this bottle was showing than last time I’d had it — because it was very, very cold. None of the nuance showing at this super low temperature.

As it warmed up started to come around but I’m wondering if these have a glacial lifecycle and the days of open and gorgeous accessibility are past it?

Even coming around slowly, it’s awesome. If you’re opening a bottle be prepared for a wine that may be precocious or guarded. But either way it’s legit.

Served blind I guessed 06, surprised on the reveal none of the excesses of 03. But still young. This is certainly one of the more interesting 03’s and will likely be a benchmark for the vintage. Minerality is the most remarkable aspect of this wine at this stage.

From magnum, this was glorious upon first pour. I’ve had a lot of Ramonet 08 and I drunk the last of my 750’s about 2 years ago because I felt they were fading. This magnum was ����

More precise and accurate than I’ve had from a Ramonet 08 in a long time. It’s just so damn good. Crystalline purity with depth on the finish. Majestic.