2003 Gruaud-Larose, Second Growth from Saint-Julien, Bordeaux

[DonRocks]

Well, I did something yesterday I hadn't done in probably ten years: bought a second-growth Bordeaux off a retailer's shelf, and drank it that same night.

I've been wary of the 2003 vintage in Europe since the summer of 2003. The was the year of the great European Heat Wave, and in France, elderly residents in nursing homes without air conditioning were actually dying. Incredibly, that Wikipedia article claims that 14,802 heat-related deaths happened just in France, mostly among the elderly (it just does not get that hot in France, so *lots* of people don't have air conditioning, including Magdalena).

Anyway, as you might imagine, grapes all over Europe were bursting with sugars, early ripeness, and deficient acidity. The wine market was promoting 2003 as "another 1959!" but there is *no way* that's going to happen - those are empty promises that will never come true: 2003 is a terrible vintage, continent-wide.

But I was fascinated by the Gruaud-Larose, and the price was j-u-s-t low enough to seduce my intellectual curiosity ($49.99 which is unheard of for a 12-year-old second growth of any stature, or at least "a price unseen by me for quite awhile."). Gruaud-Larose is one of the traditional "Big 3" "Super-Seconds" of Saint-Julien along with Ducru-Beaucaillou and Leoville-Las Cases (although many connoisseurs will squirrel away Leoville-Poyferré while trying to keep it a secret).

The wine was brutally tannic, to the point where I suspect it had been shelved by the retailer (Dominion Wine and Beer in Falls Church) that day, and had been shaken up. There was some powdery sediment at the bottom 1/2-inch of the bottle (which is good), but I also wonder if some of that became suspended as colloidal material in the wine (powdery sediment is extremely bitter, and if you own a red wine that's older than 5-6 years, my personal experience tells me that you need to stand it up for at *least* a day, and for older, bigger wines, sometimes for up to a couple of months. That was not a typo: I said a couple of months).

This was also very plummy, to the point of being somewhat pruney which is exactly what's to be expected in an overripe vintage. These were dark, black-purple fruits in abundance, but the fruit stood in opposition to the tannins, and couldn't overcome them. The 2003 Gruaud-Larose is entering an early phase of maturity, with some bricking around the rim, but still retaining a dark purple inner core - it will last, and slowly fall apart over the next twenty years, instead of integrating (which, for example, the 2005 vintage will do). I also have a couple wine-knowledgeable friends who told me today that they feel Gruaud-Larose fell apart in the mid-1970s due to poor winemaking, but these were off-the-cuff comments, and from what I remember, I've had perfectly fine 82s and 86s.

At $49.99, the wine is both expensive and inexpensive. It's unusually inexpensive for a second-growth Bordeaux, but it also emphasizes that there are so very many better red wines than this for under $50, in other Bordeaux vintages, in other wine-growing regions in France, and certainly in other countries as well.

[mr food]

Interesting. 86GL has always been one of my favorites from that tannic vintage. 

[DonRocks]

Interesting. 86GL has always been one of my favorites from that tannic vintage. 

86 is tannic, but one of the greatest vintages of our lifetimes.

[Mark Slater]

86 is tannic, but one of the greatest vintages of our lifetimes.

The famous Chernobyl vintage.

But I was fascinated by the Gruaud-Larose, and the price was j-u-s-t low enough to seduce my intellectual curiosity ($49.99 which is unheard of for a 12-year-old second growth of any stature, or at least "a price unseen by me for quite awhile."). Gruaud-Larose is one of the traditional "Big 3" "Super-Seconds" of Saint-Julien along with Ducru-Beaucaillou and Leoville-Las Cases (although many connoisseurs will squirrel away Leoville-Poyferré while trying to keep it a secret).

The wine was brutally tannic, to the point where I suspect it had been shelved by the retailer (Dominion Wine and Beer in Falls Church) that day, and had been shaken up. There was some powdery sediment at the bottom 1/2-inch of the bottle (which is good), but I also wonder if some of that became suspended as colloidal material in the wine (powdery sediment is extremely bitter, and if you own a red wine that's older than 5-6 years, my personal experience tells me that you need to stand it up for at *least* a day, and for older, bigger wines, sometimes for up to a couple of months. That was not a typo: I said a couple of months).

When I think of Super Seconds of the Medoc, Pichon Lalande and Cos usually figure into the equation.

2003 was the first year that French authorities allowed acidification of the wines of Bordeaux. Some of the wines today are quite supple and elegant. Some are as un-drinkable as they were when they were released. 2003 was a California vintage, something quite unusual in Bordeaux. I had a 2003 La Mission Haut-Brion last year at Bistrot du Coin for the outrageous price of $149. It was exquisite in every way. Gruaud always seems to have too much brett for my taste.

[mr food]

86 is tannic, but one of the greatest vintages of our lifetimes.

not sure I'm ready to elevate it to that level. I always wonder if the fruit will outlast all the tannins.