• dvansteenderen Likes this wine: 94 points

    September 15, 2019 - 90% Cabernet Sauvignon; 8% Merlot and 2% Cabernet Franc. Pretty open and semi-intense nose, structured middle pallet and medium-long finish!

  • ckinv368 Likes this wine: 94 points

    November 27, 2018 - Tasted blind along with three other wines. Tasted in a darkened room, so could not see color, or viscosity. Wine was opened at least one hour prior to tasting, but unsure whether the same was double-decanted.

    This was big, rich, and absolutely delicious. Still very young, with overpowering notes of bacon, blood, green pepper, onion, and light notes of leather and earth. Black fruit as well, but the savory flavors really controlled. So big, I thought this could have been a young Hermitage. Delicious concentrated effort on this one. Hold for another 10 years at least. 94-95 points at this point.

    1 person found this helpful Comments (1)
  • George C ATLANTA Likes this wine: 96 points

    August 25, 2018 - Decanted 1 1/2 hours and then enjoyed for over an hour with steak, quite beautiful and representative of the Mouton terroir, deep garnet color and very substantial mouthfeel, long long finish, super smooth, and old world berries and seriousness. A great wine and drinking beautifully now, no tannins to speak of. Yet the fact that it breathed and we enjoyed over a 2 1/2 hour +window speaks of it's power. It kept evolving and we wished we had another bottle. Drink now and over the next 15 + years.

    1 person found this helpful Comment
  • LiteItOnFire Does not like this wine: 89 points

    July 11, 2018 - Trip of a lifetime- literally Bordeaux right/left and North/south Rhone: (Mouton, Cheval Blanc, Haut Brion, La Mission Haut Brion, Vieux Chateau Certan, Angelus, Pichon Baron, Smith Haut Lafitte, E.Guigal, M.Chapoutier, Château De Beaucastel, Stephane Montez, Jean Michael Stephan).

    Amazing Mouton tour (museums and facilities state of the art, different than Cheval but beautiful layed out) and tasting:
    First label: 2012, 2009, 2005
    Clerc Milon: 2003
    Chateau D’Armailhac: 2011

    Anecdotal comments after the chateau tasting- 2005 & 2009 were some of the best Bordeaux wines I have ever had. Some of the best wines period. Amazing complexity, depth, fruit, mineral- has everything and so much more.

    2012 unfortunately was not even in the same sphere as 2005 and 2009. Dry, herbs, not interesting and missing the great middle and ending one would expect. Not sure how much time would help move this in the right direction.

    Could not emphasize enough to do a tour and tasting there if given the opportunity- homerun.

  • englishman's claret wrote:

    June 23, 2018 - For some reason, this was opened about an hour before but not decanted. So, what can I say? Mouton cassis and the oak may be a bit too toasty, but otherwise who knows? From the balance, fat, and depth it seems like this will end up as a good-but-not-great Mouton vintage, which is a nice success for the years, but we'll see.

    1 person found this helpful Comment
  • Ecbatana wrote: 88 points

    October 17, 2017 - Kinda like meeting your hero only to get a limp, cold and clammy handshake. In short, a let down. Had the bottle at the Chateau after the (enjoyable) tour, so no issues with provenance. Nose had an unspent yeast component to it, playdough maybe. Rich and concentrated for sure, but high extraction alone does not a great bottle make. Vegetal and very un-sweet, empty mid palate and no detectable finish. Very odd tasting experience. Clumsy and closed down perhaps but really question that this is going to transform into something special. Apparent that I was drinking the label and not the liquid. Prices for Bordeaux first growths have gotten out of hand. Will allow the "new" markets for Bordeaux that are more interested in hierarchy and name than quality to have their day.

    2 people found this helpful Comments (3)
  • Mark1npt Likes this wine: 96 points

    September 18, 2017 - Tasted at the Chateau with our group last week. Dark color in the glass, somewhat closed nose yet a significant earth/black fruit component. Multiple layers of complexity, it seemed a shame to open this bottle so early in its life. The '96 from earlier in the week is just beginning to develop into what it will eventually be. I wouldn't come back and open a bottle of this '12 again before probably 2030 at the earliest.

    1 person found this helpful Comment
  • Comte Flaneur wrote: 92 points

    April 28, 2016 - The 2012 Mouton Rothschild was the first wine made in the upgraded chai. It gets a good spin, and I found it to be a loose knit chewy wine with charcoal notes, which again is surprisingly accessible. The conventional wisdom in the room was that it is a better wine that the 2011. I would disagree and would judge both the 2011 Mouton and the 2012 LLC to be superior to this.

  • JulianSkeels Likes this wine: 94 points

    April 24, 2016 - Speaks very quietly, but has typicity and with air shows increasing power persistency. Concentrated fruit but also nicely balanced acidity and the salinity on the finish I seem to enjoy in some vintages of Mouton. Real ageing potential here - and one of most positive surprises of my tasting, better than expected (I seem to think more of this than critics). One of Mouton's best recent 2nd tier vintages for me, behind 2015, but ahead of 2014 and 2008. 94+pts for me.

    1 person found this helpful Comment
  • BenBlu Likes this wine: 95 points

    April 24, 2016 - Mouton Rothschild Vertical

    Matter of Taste Masterclass Verticals of Mouton Rothschild with Philippe Philippe Dallhuin and Neal Martin

    Wines tasted 2005-13 from bottle and 2014 & 2015 barrel samples - all wines were decanted for a couple of hours before the tasting and spent considerable time in glass (between 1-3 hours).

    2005: Initial impression was this was much more developed then I thought. Compared to other 2005 left banks wines I tried recently (Montrose, Poyferre, Grand Puy Lacoste). Some bricking around the edges (visually certainly the most developed of the whole line-up), displaying great creme de cassis, tobacco leaf and cedar. I could have drank a bottle of this wine now the way it showed without thinking it would be a crime. Certainly it should develop nicely -it’s got this lovely acidity that should ensure this will keep going for decades. Very impressive. 97-99

    2006: Tasted after the 05 this came across as fairly closed and had a short finish compared to the previous wine. Visually some bricking around the edges but not as developed looking as 05. I felt it needed a lot of time in bottle and in my book this was nowhere near the 2005 (or some other vintages in this line-up incl 2008 & 2012). Neal Martin liked the graphite and in general RP has in the past rated this wine over the 05. The Group was divided and there was a fair amount of people that had a preference for the 06 vs the 05, some said they found the 06 more approachable. I certainly prefer the Cos d’Estournel 2006 over this which I have had a couple of times. 91-93

    2007: One of the disappointing wines of the vertical. It was weird both on the nose and the palate - on the nose I thought I picked up some distracting glue aromas and on the palate nothing really dominated - there was decent acidity but with a lack of fruit to go with it. All the 2007 I had lately were unimpressive. Same here. Avoid. 86-88

    2008: One of the positive surprises of the tasting. After the 2006 & 07 like a knight in shining armour to lift the drop in quality from going from 05 to 06 to 07. I found this already really enjoyable now. Beautiful cuban cigar on the nose and a long finish with a beautiful vanilla aftertaste. This is a gentle wine, slightly feminine. Pretty, No doubt 2 step up from the 07. Better then 06! 94-96

    2009: Noticeably darker in color then the wine preceding it. Dark crimson / black cherry colour. WOW! This does hit all your taste buds from the first sip. A monument of a wine and you can just say what a privilege to try this (and the 2010). This is destined for perfection. It does make you feel sorry for Philippe and Mouton that Parker rated this 99+ and 99 in his last reviews in 2012 & 2014. I think it would have deserved to be another RP 100er in that vintage. 98-100

    2010: After the 2009 came along the 2010. Another WOW! Almost black in colour (yet again darker then the 09). It does humble you to taste these great two vintages together and it dwarfs all (maybe with the slight exception of 05) all the other wines in this beautiful vertical. The 2010 is surely more classic then the 2009. It has more Pauillac typically. Neal Martin preferred the 2010 over the 2009. So long - pinnacle of Pauillac? This or 09. It’s not for me to say. I’d love to get the chance to taste those two side by side again when they are more developed. Philippe made the analogy that 2009 is the Barbie and 2010 is the Ken. The quality of both wines is such that after a very long decant you could actually be enjoying them already. But of course you would deprive yourself of an even more rewarding experience way further down the line. 2x Bravo! Mouton for 09 & 10.

    2011: Difficult to be up after the 09 & 10. I needed to go back to the 06 first to “re-calibrate” my taste buds and be in a position to try and fairly assess/score this wine. The 2011 was actually quite good I thought and was in a relatively approachable place. Some lovely acidity - the wine was light on its feet. Got some kirsch, some saddle leather. Could actually drink this now. An early drinker, but a good one. Positively surprised. 92-94

    2012: Even better then the 2011. For my money best of the “2nd Tier” (after 05, 09, 10). Just a bit more of everything compared to 2011. Great fruit, forest floor, quite approachable now. Another early but fantastic drinker. Very positively surprised - impressive! 94-96

    2013: Ughhh. Harsh - really vegetal. Hard to decide which is the worse vintage - 2007 or 2013. If this is the best of the 1st growth Medoc wines of the vintage as per RP I will try and never have another bottle of this vintage again. First and last. Avoid! 86-88

    2014/15 Barrel Samples: No scores as I just don’t have enough opinion to opine. Neal Martin likes the 2014 but he thinks the 2015 will be clearly better still.

    Summary: Fantastic event. For my money there is (not surprisingly) one clear top Tier (2009/10 - and then still belonging in Top tier the 2005 with a small distance behind the 2009&10. In terms of today’s drinking it’s the 05, but the 09 & 10 just have SO much potential); followed by Tier II which are vines from lesser vintage which I would consider having again and can recommend (2012, 2008) followed by Tier III which are wines that others will enjoy more then me and which I think are good wines and maybe I just picked them up in a weak spot and maybe am not that qualified to judge at present (2006, 2011) and the Bottom Tier which are wines to absolutely avoid (2007 & 2013) as I would not be happy even paying a fraction of the market price, in fact I just don’t enjoy them at all.

    6 people found this helpful Comments (3)