• talbot61 Likes this wine: 89 points

    June 23, 2020 - Among the Potel 2005s, this is the most advanced -- definitely for drinking sooner rather than later. Nice richness, dark fruits, moderate complexity, eminent drinkability -- but not particularly memorable or transcendent.

    Comment
  • bjlcrucrazy Likes this wine: 89 points

    June 1, 2019 - We enjoyed this with roast chicken but the mistake I made was decanting it. It was good for the first 30 minutes and then the fruit started to fade. It seems hard to guess when to drink these 2005s and I think in many cases the fruit cannot last long enough for the tannins to soften

    Comment
  • Rieslingfan wrote:

    June 23, 2017 - I last tried this wine four years ago, and much has happened since then, all of it positive. Deep and still youthful red fruit has been joined by the initial wave of fallen leaf and damp earth tones that add significant complexity. The finishing tannins are still a bit dry, but there is quite a bit of fruit, so some additional age should be able to round that out. It's not a stunning glass of Burgundy by any stretch, but it is quite satisfying.

    Comment
  • drwine2001 wrote:

    January 30, 2016 - Half bottle. Unyielding deep ruby. Stemmy nose with camphor. Full bodied and meaty. Black fruit, herbs, and substantial tannins which have relaxed over the past several years. Good mouthful, but even out of half bottles, this wine has not traveled that great a distance over the past couple of years, a telling sign for 2005 Burgundy in general.

    1 person found this helpful Comments (7)
  • drwine2001 wrote:

    April 3, 2014 - Half bottle. Even, ruby color. Upon opening, some berry-like fruit, then brambly and some herbs. Medium weight but denser feel, dry, earthy blackberry fruit, high acidity and grainy tannins. This leaves a very dry impression. A mouthful to be sure, but little prospect of ever being light or charming. In short, Morey all the way. I had to chuckle when I read my note from almost 7 years ago and saw how little this has changed over that period of time. Try as you might, you cannot rush these 2005's along.

    Comment
  • Rieslingfan wrote: 84 points

    November 22, 2013 - Deep, dark fruit, but also a notable amount of band-aid and horse sweat. Shows more like a Southern Rhone than Burgundy.

    Comment
  • angryphoton wrote: 86 points

    May 4, 2013 - OK wine, still a bit in a juvenile state, almost like a teenager with pimples. Still a bit closed it only gave a glimpse of what it can be, good potential though and some good flavors, but you just know it is only the surface you are seeing right now.

    Comment
  • PatrickinKW wrote: 91 points

    October 2, 2011 - Originally i was a bit dismissive to drwine's review below but low and behold he nailed it. If I’d tasted this blind I would have been looking to Rhone...
    Deep Ruby, extracted nose showing kirsch, tar, and anise. Big masculine wine with lots going on here with plenty of structure to last to the end of the decade. Too bad I only have one left as it would be interesting to watch over the next 10 yrs.

    Comment
  • magnord wrote:

    September 11, 2007 - Very funky and hard to drink right now. Not rated.

    Comment
  • drwine2001 wrote:

    July 31, 2007 - Pure medium purple, translucent. Apart from the color, if you had first said northern Rhone, I would have believed it due to its reticent blackberry, tar, and licorice aromas. Started out as a burly bruiser with fierce, tart cranberry acidity. Then, as it relaxed, became less compact feeling with a nice thread of minerality, and camphor and subtle brighter fruit tones showed on the nose. Finally, a distinctly briary element (?steminess) and tannins showed through, but the acidity finally calmed down. For a young village wine, this has a lot going on, but if you are seeking elegance, lacy texture, or the red fruit side of Burgundy, this is not the place to find those traits.

    Comment