From jeroboam. Unsurprisingly, fresher than the age would suggest, given the large format. The wine itself is much leaner and less autolytic than some of my more recent memories of Bollinger; the fruit is just starting to show nascent hints of maturation here. This has the expected acidity for 1996 as well; an excellent large-format champagne without a doubt.

Served double blind. Incredibly high oak use, leading to a caramel tone here, but no oaky astringency however. The fruit is very clean and there are almost no signs of any maturation at all -- I ended up guessing this was something like a 2015 Lafon! Proper grand cru weight too.

A very lovely iteration of a chronically underrated tête de cuvée rosé. The red fruit in this wine is very prominent and gives the wine an almost chewy texture. Overall, this is the far better wine than the regular CdC in 2006 and in the last few years since I had this, I think this wine may well have gotten even better. There's just so much more complexity and presence on the palate now.

A very nice MP, even if it comes across as a little oakier than I would like. Surprisingly some good ripeness in the fruit here as well; this doesn't quite have the electricity that I would expect from a 2017; the fruit here has a slightly oily texture.

Served double blind. I thought this was something like a German pinot noir or a post-modern producer of Burgundy, given the extreme amount of crunchy red fruit here. A little stemmy and tart, without the body of a "proper" Burgundy. I did successfully end up guessing that this was from some sort of adjunct appellation.

I think this was better today than when I tasted it from barrel just before the covid pandemic. Without a doubt this is incredibly ripe, but the fruit is so silky, sweet, and seductive that it makes this wine almost too easy to drink. Surprisingly as well, the colour of the fruit is more red than black and this wine was actually lighter than I remember it being. It wasn't too structural at first, but followed the progression of a young nebbiolo in that the tannins seemed to manifest themselves more with air. An incredibly bottle of wine and one of the favourites at the table tonight.

It was perhaps a little unfair to serve this next to the 2018 Hubert Lignier, but this represented a much more mature example. None of the beetroot notes that plague 2006, but the wine is undoubtedly a little bit dirty on the nose. With fine-grained tannins, this wine is still quite structural, and given that the fruit isn't particularly pristine anymore, I wouldn't personally want to age this much longer. I haven't loved what the 2006s have become. While this bottle is in good shape for the vintage, I wouldn't bet on holding it longer.

An absolutely fantastic showing led this to be considered among the top wines of the evening. This is pure 2010 -- the red cherry gives it all away. But this is at the same time showing plenty of structure, both from the acids and some coarse but resolving tannins. The acidity renders this almost refreshing.

I tasted a few 2004 Rousseau a long time ago and when drinking them we had discussed that Rousseau was one of the few producers that wasn't too negatively affected by the awful vintage. Fast forward to today with this in my glass. The nose is distinctly herbal with a slightly brown edge (it seems to be how the green has aged), but on the palate there is a pretty strong kick of pyrazine still. A very light wine, it's sadly very unimpressive for the very high price that it commands. If for some reason you had to drink a 2004 red Burgundy though, you could certainly do worse.

Partially it's the Clair style, but I don't think that the 2008 vintage did this wine any favours in terms of weight. It's a little stemmy, and this wine shows a lot of acid structure as opposed to anything else. It's relatively large-scaled in the scheme of things, and the tannins and acid aren't completely overwhelming the fruit, but it does feel that the wine is moving in that direction.

Handily the best of the Bèze flight, this had an incredibly sweet and black-fruited perfume that was intoxicating. On the palate, there was more of the sweet black fruit and a little black tea as well. A very luscious and textured wine, this felt like it was showing at a peak right now. I would not hesitate to open this if I owned any.

A very odd nose of clover honey, with a slight bit of that on the palate as well. Overall this was quite disappointing for a 1993, and irrationally even more so knowing that this is now Dujac's Chambertin. In any case, this was a somewhat typical old red Burgundy, showing a little rusty, autumnal, and browned, and lacking the life and freshness that I know the wines of this vintage can still have.

Bottled June 25, 2015 and disgorged in September 2019. 0 g/L dosage. I think I probably liked this more given that it was served to act as a palate refresher (needed after a good number of red Burgundies) and it certainly did the job. Surprisingly rich for a zero-dosage wine, this had some mushroom notes that made me think this was meunier (it's pinot noir). However, there is definitely a good amount of lemony acid here, and I think in other contexts I may not have enjoyed this as much. But tonight, it was a welcome addition to our lineup.

A pretty disappointing showing for the vintage. The wine is very structured and doesn't show any of the prettiness of 2010; instead it's bound up in some iron and earth notes and with the fruit somewhat missing in action, this is a bit dull and uninspiring.

Remind me, why do people willingly buy Ponsot? A typically muddy pinot with too many dirty notes. The fruit is browned and dried out, and there is just too much acid for whatever else remains.

Certainly interesting to taste a 50+ year-old villages wine, but it's mostly academic at this point. Not much by way of enjoyment. There's a tart hawthorn note, and this has some other tertiary fruit notes as well, but mostly we're talking old wine acid at this point. Much more drinkable than I thought it would be, but long past its best before date.

This seemed corked to me (not so to most others at the table). More's the shame because this actually seemed to have some good concentration and material here in contrast to the 1971 Jadot.

Served double blind. Pretty clearly red Burgundy, and the very easy-going red fruit made me think this was a very young wine; likely 2017. Not too concentrated on the palate with a bit of dilution, this is very light and (after the reveal) surprisingly light on the oak use. A readily accessible wine to drink now; there's not much more weight for further aging.

A fantastic bottle of Port and far better than any other Nacionals I've had. It poured out easily with very little wastage as all the sediment had actually crusted onto the bottom of the bottle already. The nose is stellar -- perfumed and delicate with some figs and a light caramel note as well. The palate is similarly gorgeous, with a silky texture and tannins that are for all intents and purposes fully resolved. Quite sweet, with a slightly viscous mouthfeel, but plenty of acidity to balance it out. The spirit blends into this wine so well too... easily the best bottle of Port I've ever had.