Vertical of Pichon Longueville Comtesse de Lalande: Decanter Fine Wine Encounter

December 1, 2011

A fine trio of decades ending in "5" from Pichon Comtesse

Tasted on 19 November in London, at Decanter’s Fine Wine Encounter Master Class. Yet another superb tasting by Decanter. 

Six vintages of Pichon Comtesse de Lalande spanning over 30 years  pleased many a palate in a master class hosted by Sylvie Cazes and Mark Bingley MW.

Participants enjoyed a charming 2007, a seductive 1989, and a series of Pichon vintages ending in “5”, from a rather imposing and not ready to drink 2005 to what Cazes called a “classic Pauillac” 1975, with cigar box aromas and flavors. “A wine for British palates,” remarked Danish wine consultant Kayne Steadman, who preferred more youthful 1995. The tasting offered something for everyone.

In addition to the six Pichons, participants sampled four vintages of Chateau de Pez and a pair of Reserve de la Comtesse, the second wine.

Chateau de Pez 2007, 2006, 1999 and 1998

This was one of only nine chateaux (out of some 500) to be named exceptional in the short-lived 2003 classification of cru bourgeois. Of those nine, four were St Estephes. The 2007 (60% Merlot, 35% Cabernet S, 5% Cabernet F) was OK at first – a touch of phenolic? – but then a tad dilute and somewhat attenuated on the finish. The Petit Verdot was not ripe enough, so none in the mix.

A riper vintage, the 2006 displayed a more “voluminous” nose, and evoked a more substantial and tannic palate; with time in glass, it gets better – and shows promise for the future.

The 1999 displayed a sweeter nose than the previous wines, albeit slight dilution on the palate, if easier to drink than the 1998. Too fragile and not as interesting, this 1999, to me at least.

The 1998 was the better wine of these last two, with more substance on the palate – if a bit of tannic hardness on the finish. Still, some spice and more substance makes the 1998 better for me than the 1999.

Reserve de la Comtesse 2007 and 2003.

The 2007 was very suave on the palate although the nose evoked some under-ripe notions if fresh as well. In any case, it compares well to the de Pez 2007, because the second wine of Pichon is silkier. The 2003 was, well, too 2003 for me. The nose was very marmalade like, and the palate smacked of strawberry jam. Not my style of wine.

Taking careful notes

Six vintages of the Comtesse: 2007, 2005, 1995, 1989, 1985 and 1975. (in bold, I liked; in red, even more; when underlined, the best)

My overall favorite? The 1995. The 1975 also gets lots of credit. The 1989 was a bit problematic: we needed another bottle given an over-horse like aroma in the first sample. The 1985 was somewhat dilute but good. The 2005 far too closed for now, and the 2007 just good.

2007: Having enjoyed the Palmer 2007 just two days before, I can say with confidence that Palmer is better in 2007. But then again, this is Pauillac, even if you are a Comtesse. Perhaps it needs more time. I recall tasting this with the 2008 and 2009 with Gildas d’Ollone and Thomas Do Chi Nam before he was hired by Chateau Margaux. It is an elegant wine, with subtle richness, but now somewhat austere on the finish. Just OK for now…

2005: A controversial wine. I recall not liking it much en primeur, and the from bottle tasting was marginally better. But this time, I found a rather closed yet pleasing cool fruit aspect, with a tight and shy palate, but I felt a fine texture and sensed potential. For now, a question mark. 64% Cabernet Sauvignon, no Petit Verdot.

1995: Here I put a big check on my tasting form. This was cracking good. The Merlots were very successful in this vintage, the Cabernets perhaps a tad tough… But this wine is getting better each time I try it. Sylvie Cazes called it Pichon’s “archetype Pauillac” (whereas the 1996 was “archetype Pichon Comtesse”, certainly softer). The nose exuded hints of truffle and tobacco, with sheer elegance and finesse. The palate was still displaying tannic bite, but overlaid by ultra fine chocolate powder like sweetness, cigar box and plum like spice. Much substance, much going on. Speaking with a Danish wine consultant who has come to these encounters in the past, we wondered if the 1995 will overtake the 1996 with time… In any case, a relative buy, given the crazy pricing for the 2009 and 2010, and also cheaper than the 1996. Wine of the tasting.

Classic - and delicious - claret

1985: Strangely, we went straight to the 1985, instead of tasting the 1989. First bottle displayed band-aid aromas. The second was better. Open knit and elegant. I liked this wine the most, at first, but it lost some verve with time in glass – while the 1995 only gained in prominence. Still, if you have a nice bottle of 1985, you will get much pleasure: charming wine, with tannins completely melted.

1989: A very early harvest. This reminded me of the 1995 but on a faster evolutionary track. Rich and seductive, with the expected charm from a Comtesse, the wine was a real pleasure. But I get the inkling that the 1995 is at once slightly more pure and shows more the result of a slower-ripening season – always a good sign for both complexity and longer term ageing. Third place.

1975: Here my inner Englishman obtained great pleasure. What can one say about classic old Bordeaux, when it is coming from a superb terroir? Amazing? Well, the cigar box aromas seduced me to be sure. But it was not a foursquare aromatic profile: cedar and fine Cuban cigars. The palate was iodine infused freshness, complete with a smooth Cognac like feel on the palate.  This was probably tough as nails back in 1979 or 1980. The tannins have integrated marvelously. And the result is “Hallelujah first class Claret”. Give me more! Second best of the series.