1998 Bordeaux en primeur Part I: 
Buying the wines in Spring 99 by reading the Wine Critics 

Buying Bordeaux en primeur (i.e."futures") is very tricky nowadays.

A decade or so ago it used to be that wines would arrive after bottling, we would taste them, find out what we liked and then buy what we liked. What the Press wrote was treated as a guide and a recommendation not as a final deciding factor. Even though that should still be the ideal way to do it, it is, unfortunately, no longer that easy. If the wines are written up with very high scores they become very expensive very quickly and even disappear from the market (snapped up by hordes of speculators). Still, rather than relying on just one or two, I look if there is a consensus of opinion among people whose palates I generally rely on. A chateau's previous track record is also extremely important to me.

A very important key to the quality of the wines is the weather conditions at harvest, and, of course, during the growing season. Almost every wine writer gives this in great detail . And it is worth spending a few minutes reading about it since it gives clues as to how weather conditions were affecting the grapes in different parts of the region.

As early as December of 1998 during my (annual) trip to Bordeaux I kept hearing how good the merlot grape was in this vintage. I actually heard one of the first growth producers on the right bank ecstatically praising, not his 1998 (he was modest) but that of another first growth on the right bank!

The first detailed report, after the blending was completed in March, came much earlier than in the previous years. It came not through the usual print media but on the Internet- from Jim Suckling of the Wine Spectator. A cyber-war seemed to be in the making. Sure enough the right bank was singled out along with Graves as having produced outstanding and even extraordinary wines. A few -very few - from the left bank made the grade in his report.

Soon Tanzer's and other reports started coming. Those that were repeatedly mentioned as extraordinary were: Cheval Blanc, Haut Brion and Petrus. Parker's came out quite enthusiastically for the same regions except, surprisingly, without giving Cheval Blanc as high a score as almost everybody else had given.

A gentleman from Paris whose palate I admire greatly came out with the results of a comprehensive tasting he did with his group. In the category of " fabuleuse " ( i.e. "the best of the best") there were three wines: Cheval Blanc, Haut Brion and Lafite. "Lafite ?" I asked him " and and no Petrus or any Pomerols ?". He said the merlot grape, which is the predominant grape in Pomerols, was extremely "hard" in this vintage. Since almost every single write-up had repeatedly used words like "very tough" and "very tannic" in describing the wines in this vintage, his statement was, therefore, not inconsistent with what others had said.

That did not stop me from buying the top Pomerols, however!

But it was interesting that a wine from the left bank, Lafite, made the top grade at least in that list. It indicated that perhaps the wines in this region may not be as bad as were made out to be.

As I read more and more about the vintage and heard different people's comments it struck me that 1998 sounded remarkably like the1975 which was also repeatedly described as tough.

There was an enormous hype, I recall, when 1975 was first released -"a vintage of the century" some said, "another 1961" and so on. This was actually my very first year in dealing with "futures" as I was just getting into wine. Neophyte as I was, I was appalled, after I tasted the wines, at how far off the mark most of the wine writers were. Since then I take vintage predictions from wine writers with a certain "grain of salt". I wondered if the same was happening in1998.

Even though 1975 was by no means extraordinary across the board in all the areas of Bordeaux, as the critics claimed at the time, there were, as it turned out, many very good to great wines, particularly at Haut Brion and La Mission Haut Brion; at Petrus, Trotanoy, Lafleur and Figeac; and interestingly, also at Lafite.

Not too long ago I pulled out from my cellar 5 different Pomerols from 1975-Latour A Pomerol, Lafleur Petrus, La Conseillante, Trotanoy and Petrus- and served them to my goup which meets once every month and served them blind, as is customary with the group. I, of course, knew the vintage and the wines but only the sommelier knew the order in which they were served.

There was one wine which was extremely intriguing to me because it was very round, totally integrated, with an extraordinary sweetness. I kept saying " I sure would like to know which wine this is " because it was so different and exotic. I guessed it as Lafleur Petrus because it often shows similar characteristics. It turned out to be Petrus! And the wine I thought was, for sure, Petrus because it was dark, very tannic with quite an amazing length turned out to be Trotanoy ! The other three Pomerols did not show as well, being somewhat angular and unbalanced.

Incidentally, not one person could guess the wines as Pomerols. Neither could have I if I hadn't known the wines beforehand. The closest some came, after a few helpful hints from me, was Graves. Out of character as these 1975 Pomerols seemed to be, there were definitely some extraordinary wines. Will 1998 be similar ?

No two vintages are alike, of course. And even if the weather conditions had been identical, the situation in Bordeaux is much different today than in 1975. The wine-making techniques and the whole process of making severe selections has changed the entire landscape for the better. My hunch, without actually tasting the wines, was that 1998 will be better than 1975.

According to some critics this vintage was distinguished as having produced a number of "Sexy St. Emilion" . As I read their descriptions-and I much prefer reading the descriptions than looking at the raw scores- the wines sounded like they were highly extracted, showing impressively when tasted young but without much of a track record. Many of my friends have bought these wines, so I will have plenty of opportunity in the future to see whether they are anything like what they are hyped up to be.

Speaking of St. Emilion, I was particularly glad to notice that Tanzer wrote well about 1998 Chateau Figeac. This wine, if you taste it from 1929 all way to the 90's, as I have, will impress you by its unbroken thread of finesse and balance that one looks for in great wines.

Figeac often needs patience because it is a slow developer but it more than makes up in the long run. The 1929 which I had with my friends (we call ourselves "Figeac Fanatics") two years ago was still marvelous. A 1949 I had recently at a tasting was outstanding. I can go on and on. Needless to say, I always make sure I get this wine whenever the vintage is good in St. Emilion.

I was delighted to read how good Vieux Chateau Certan (VCC) is in 1998. It was one of the most reliable and extraordinary Pomerols in the 40s and 50s (particularly 1945,47,48,49) but has had ups and downs since then. It looks like it is back to its old form.

And the prices for the 1998 ? Absolutely crazy! In fairness to all the major wine writers, this vintage was never hyped up to any major extent but, amazingly, it acquired a momentum of its own so much so that the wines that had respectable ratings were going up literally 20% a month. Fortunately, I was "on top" of the situation from the beginning so I was able to acquire wines at their first release prices which were (relatively speaking!) fair.

I will have a much better idea about the wines after I go to Bordeaux in December when I will have my own report (see Part II).