Well, sort of one, anyway.

I’ve been collecting wine for more than 20 years now, and I’ve heard the repeated complaints–largely from the French–about how Americans only buy wines in the greatest vintages. If we stipulate that greatest means possessing a unique combination of ripe fruit, extreme complexity, intense concentration and the ability to evolve positively over time, I’ll certainly plead guilty to that. Let me explain.

I purchase very little French wine with the idea that I will drink it in its first flush of youth. The occasional Muscadet or Sancerre, Beaujolais-Villages or Côtes du Rhône, maybe a rosé from Provence. If I want big young fruit, I’m more likely to turn to New World wines, and not pay much attention to vintage, as long as it’s recent. After all, in many of these warm-weather regions, the vintage differences are minimal.

On the other hand, most of my French purchases are made with an eye toward the future. Not for investment purposes, because I’ve never sold wine at auction, but for that magical experience of drinking a well cellared old wine at its peak of maturity.  If I want a bottle of Burgundy, Bordeaux or Rhône wine that I’m confident is going to evolve positively for 10, 20, 30 years or more, I need to buy from a top vintage.

How true this is was recently brought home by a tasting of Louis Latour Burgundies at our Westchester offices. Owner Louis-Fabrice Latour visited with small verticals of his company’s Corton-Charlemagne (white) and Château Corton Grancey (red) from 2003-2008 and 2001-2007, respectively. The standout wines of the tasting were the 2005s.

Yes, many of the other vintages produced excellent wines–the house is remarkably consistent with wines from their domaine–but none of them showed the linkage of lusciousness and longevity exhibited by these two stars. The 2008 Corton-Charlemagne, all sinewy acids, will certainly last, the 2006 Corton-Charlemagne is delicious now. Among the reds, the 2006 Château Corton Grancey is a tough, briary bird that should prove to be a survivor, while the 2002 is the next closest thing to the great 2005.

The 2005s are more expensive than their siblings, but if you want to try great grand cru Burgundies with some age on them, these are the closest you can get to sure things.

As you peruse the frenzy of coverage coming out of Bordeaux for the next week or so, consider the quality of the 2009 vintage and why you might buy those wines…

With apologies to Jeff Foxworthy, if you’d prefer drinking a bottle of ’82 Bordeaux today over the half-case of ’84 Bordeaux you drank when the wines were released, you might be a vintage snob.

If you can debate the merits of 1995 versus 1996 on the Left and Right Banks, you might be a vintage snob.

If you’ve purchased lots of Bordeaux from 2000, 2005, skipped the other vintages of this decade and are reading the 2009 reports as fast as they’re published, you might be a vintage snob.

Welcome to my world.

This past Wednesday, I had the pleasure of dining with Tenuta San Guido Technical Director and winemaker Dr. Sebastiano Rosa along with his wife Elena and several other industry professionals and journalists. For those in the business of wine, no matter what area of it, dining with one of the most respected oenologists working in Italy today is like a Rolling Stone writer hanging out with Jimmy Page or Mick Jagger. To be drinking one of the most iconic Tuscan wines of all time with the winemaker, geeking out about the different vintages and nuances found within each bottling, is just the ultimate thrill for any truly passionate wino.

The focus of the dinner was the estate’s shining star, Sassicaia, in addition to the sampling of Tenuta San Guido’s newer additions, Le Difese and Guidalberto. Le Difese and Guidalberto, both more accessibly priced than their older brother, offer an excellent and more immediately consumable alternative for those seeking to touch upon the fame and reputation of the winery. For the sake of space, however, I am going to devote the rest of this blog to the tasting of the Sassicaias.

First, a little background on the wine. Sassicaia is a Tuscan wine produced in the region of Maremma, though the wine actually carries its own D.O.C. of Bolgheri Sassicaia. It is a red blend of 85-90% Cabernet Sauvignon and 10-15% Cabernet Franc (percentages vary depending on vintage). Yields are low (30-32 hectoliters/hectare) to encourage concentration, depth and complexity, and all the fruit is handpicked and destemmed. Ageing takes place in 30% new Allier and Tronçais French oak barrels for 22 – 24 months. The wine is big, bold and masterfully created with cellar ageing almost a requirement for true enjoyment and development of all its intricacies and true potential.

And now, my impressions of the vintages tasted:

2006 – A baby by all standards, showing all the promise and depth of some of the greatest vintages of Sassicaia ever produced. Immensely rich and concentrated with loads of wild black berries, dark plum and herb-focused forest notes on the nose, followed by more developed fruit flavors on the palate with hints of licorice. Full bodied with structured tannins, strong minerality, good acidity and a ridiculously long finish. Sure to be a gem in 20+ years.

2003 – Given the hot vintage, this is a rather ripe smelling Sassicaia with mashed dark fruit and berries prominent on the nose but suggestions of age developing (a bit like brandied blackberries). Moderate weight with medium acidity and flavors of soft black plum, cigar box and leather. Round and lush, this still needs a little bit of time to balance out, though I wonder if the acidity will be enough to do the trick.

2000 – Though it was a less than stellar vintage in general, the 2000 was actually showing superbly that evening and was the surprise of the night. The nose was complex and developed, loaded with dark fruit but supported by accents of tobacco, tanned animal hide, cedar and a kiss of fresh mint. The mouth is like pure silk with smooth tannins, lively acidity and vibrant fruit followed by a long, evolving finish. While it was superb now, it could use some more time in the cellar; try again in a couple of years and gauge from there.

1999 – One of the more herbal samplings of the evening, the ’99 boasted a lot of spice, pepper and plum skins on the nose. The palate was beautifully textured, like velvet, and was quite intense all the way through the finish with lingering flavors of earth and black raspberries. Again, though this isn’t a widely touted vintage, the wine showed nicely and exhibited promise with a couple more years of age.

1996 – A lively and vibrant nose with red plum notes accented by leather, light cedar and herbs. The mouth is round and medium-full with more solid fruit and soft spice on the finish. Moderate acidity, soft tannins and an approachable texture with a lingering but clean finish. Totally drinkable now, though I would recommend holding for another year or so and seeing what your preference is from there.

1989 – Everyone thought this wine was ready to drink now, though I felt that I would have appreciated it a bit more last year. It was definitely the most approachable and, as most would prefer to say, elegant wines of the evening; I felt it was missing a certain touch of oomph, spirit, boldness that is so classically characteristic of the wine, even when properly aged. Lush and soft with cassis, pepper and wild tobacco. So round and creamily textured, it was hard not to enjoy. Drink up NOW.

1985 – For me, the clear star of the evening. Yes, the 2006 was beautiful and showed great promise, but there is very little better than enjoying a fine wine when it is aged just how you personally like it. Sure, some might find it still a bit too young, but I like the clear exhibition of character it still possessed, like a badge of pride for the winery, the grapes and the terroir. Gorgeously concentrated with intense black fruit, licorice, tanned leather, tar, soft earthy cedar, and exotic foresty notes. The mouth is full and powerful with solid acidity and dusty tannins leading in to an extremely long finish. Like I said, some might say hold, but if you have some lying around (as if we could all be so lucky) I’d certainly suggest trying a bottle of it now.

Have you had the pleasure of sampling any Sassicaia? What were your impressions on the wine? How it was drinking? How long you would age? Where were you and who were you with? What special occasion prompted you to splurge on the legendary vino?

Berry-by-berry sorting is one of the big changes at BV.

On September 15, I sat down with Beaulieu Vineyard’s head winemaker, Jeffrey Stambor, for dinner, preceded by a tasting of several vintages of BV’s flagship wine, the Georges de Latour Private Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon. With 2009 marking Stambor’s 20th year at BV, Stambor was able to offer an interesting historical perspective on the wines–one that I hope did not color my perceptions too much. Staying one step ahead of the FTC’s newly released regulations regarding wine blogging, let me make perfectly clear upfront that BV paid for the dinner and provided the wines.

We started with the 1969, a vintage that Stambor says was largely unheralded in its youth. “A vintage that lost its identity sandwiched between ’68 and ’70,” he said. The wine was brick in color at the rim, with nicely developed, complex aromas of cedar, cassis and tobacco. The black currant and vanilla shadings on the palate were nicely complemented by a supple, silky mouthfeel and a long, delicate finish. Seemingly on a plateau at which it will hold another five or more years.

At that time, according to Stambor, “harvest was strictly by the numbers–22-23 brix,” and the wine would have been “undrinkable” for its first 10 years because of its “hard tannins.” Maybe…but the wine sure has aged magnificently. 93 points; drink now-2015, maybe longer.

We next skipped ahead 10 years to the 1979. This was slightly darker garnet in color than the ’69, but still showing brick at the rim. It delivered tobacco and earth aromas and flavors that came across as a bit stern; some meaty, brothy notes added complexity. It’s still firmly tannic and grippy on the finish, but the fruit has faded, so I don’t see any point in holding this wine any longer. 90 points; drink up.

The 1986 we tasted next marked the 50th anniversary vintage of the GdL Cabernet Sauvignon. Still dark ruby at the center, it has faded to brick at the rim. Aromas and flavors of red currants and vanilla; this is rather tart and crisp, and still somewhat astringent on the finish. It gives the impression of being youthful but not evolving in a particularly elegant way–I would choose to drink it over the near term. 87 points; drink now.

Now onto our fourth decade of the tasting, “this is where we start to see a real change in philosophy,” said Stambor. While the earlier vintages we tasted were all aged in American oak, the 1995 was aged in a proportion of French oak, with the malolactic fermentation done in barrel. “There was also a lot more attention paid to viticultural practices,” according to Stambor. At 14 years of age, the 1995 is still very dark, with minimal color change evident at the rim. The aromas are still quite primary, featuring black cherry and vanilla as well as some slightly confected, floral notes. It’s richly textured in the mouth, with still youthful fruit, suggesting that it has some time left. “It’s one of my favorite vintages,” opines Stambor, and it’s hard to disagree. 93 points; drink now-2020.

Jump forward seven more years, and we’re into the 2002. Now, says Stambor, we “start getting into the current style of wines.” The alcohol is at 14.5% (versus 13.5% or lower for the earlier wines we’ve tried); the pH at a rather high 3.85. The color is inky, the aromas slightly lifted and chocolaty. The wine is lush and velvety in the mouth, oozing with chocolate, cassis and plum notes, while lacking any herbal notes whatsoever. Despite the evident concentration and power, it seems to fall off a bit on the finish. 93 points; drink now-2015? I find it difficult to predict how this style of wine will evolve.

On to the current-release 2006, and the reason Stambor is out on the road. This 70th anniversary vintage marks the start of actual barrel-fermentation of some lots and berry-by-berry sorting. Because of its youth, it’s predictably dark, with floral, estery aromas and plenty of vanilla. Like the 2002, it’s richly textured and chocolaty, filled with cassis and plum pudding flavors. 93 points; drink now-2020? The magazine’s California reviewer, Steve Heimoff, recently scored the wine 95 points–you should be able to find his review by consulting our online Buying Guide.

Finally, we took a peak into the future with a barrel sample of the 2008 GdL. The sample was comprised of 40% barrel-fermented fruit, 10% fermented in Taransaud oak vats and 50% fermented in stainless-steel. With the caveat that I almost invariably adore barrel samples, this seemed to be the pick of the litter. The aromas were brighter than the other wines of the decade, and while the tannins seem just as ripe as in the 2002 and 2006, the wine comes across as livelier and much more persistent on the finish than those wines; I’m hopeful that this will mean a longer in-the-bottle evolution. 94-96 points; to be released in 2011.

All in all, it was a fascinating look at how this iconic California Cabernet has changed over the years. Although I am not sure that current vintages will be providing as much pleasure 40 years from now as the 1969 did that night, the strong showing of the 2008 gives me hope that Stambor is on the right track.