Yesterday, Robert Parker (www.erobertparker.com, subscription required -- and recommended) published his comprehensive overview of the 2009 Bordeaux vintage.  It is a hell of a report. No less than 21 wines are rated with the potential for a perfect 100 point score, the highest number by far in his 32 year history of reviewing Bordeaux. Parker does go on to say that the 09 vintage is not as consistent as 2005, but will have higher highs.  This is a point many have expressed after tasting in Bordeaux.  The top names are truly spectacular, and a joy to taste even at this early age.  And the Right Bank has more over-heated, over-extracted Merlot-based wines that need careful culling to find the great gems. Even though many who have already tasted & reported on the wines have similar results, its still a joy to read and re-experience the tasting, particularly with Parker's command of comparative vintages & samples. That is worth the subscription. Even though I tasted the same samples and have lots of overlap with respect to favorites & preferences, it is this bigger context that adds so much value.

Here are 9 Points to Ponder about Parker’s BDX09 Report

2. Grade inflation?  Looking at the sheer number of potentially perfect scores in 2009  - 21 wines! - versus actual perfection achieved in other great years (table), it looks like it.  But frankly so many of the wines in the Medoc were outstanding. I wasn’t in Bordeaux before 2007, so like most, I can only imagine how it must have been to taste the barrel samples of these earlier great vintages.

3. O-Tannin-Bomb:   Where are the tannins? The 2005 barrel sample notes from Parker were full of references for "hard tannins" "drying tannins", "very tannic". In 09 however, even though the tannic indices are even higher, the fruit and concentration was so deep, the tannins were rarely a foreground issue. This is his perspective and I would say my own tasting bore this out on the Left Bank wines in particular. Perhaps alcohol also masked this?

4. Immortal wines?  Parker gives many of the best wines drinking windows literally from 0-100 years. This is both the earliest drinking and longest lived great vintage ever! Another paradox found in the wine. I don't doubt it but I can't explain it. Still, it must be said that Margaux was spectacular to sample, ditto Lafite, Lafleur, Haut Brion. Like Pavarotti hitting the high C’s from the crib.  If they really can hold this plateau for 100 years, hey, all the new people on the planet will have something to look forward to next century!

5. Parker Weather Radar: There may not be "Parker Barrels" but he sure had "Parker weather!" He was there during a great stretch, whereas most of the tastings between Mar 25-April 7 contended with major storms, low pressure, and cool/damp weather. I rarely took off my coat and wore only one short sleeve shirt for the 3 weeks I was there!  If Parker is to be believed on this point, this is apparently a bigger factor than I would have guessed, or hoped. My entire two days of CRD and Right Bank tasting was terrible weather. Does this account for my even more conservative view of St Emilion and some Pomerols? Are wines weather wimps?  Really?  Who knew?

6. Consensus Building:   Leaving aside most of the top wines, which everyone including fellow bloggers like Izak Litwar (www.GreatBordeauxWines.com) and Panos Kakaviatos (www.ConnectionsToWine.com)  agreed the FG's and big names were all incredible stud wines, it's more interesting to look at the next level in the Grand Crus. Some of my Blind winners from UGC tastings were also endorsed by Parker with big scores: Clos Fortet, Canon, Cantenac Brown, Gruaud Larose, Lynch Bages. And Pontet Canet.  My note was very succinct:  “Complete”.  And it is a potential 100pt wine for Parker, too.

7. Variances: Chateau Dauzac (Margaux) was a blind winner for me, for Parker not so much. And I didn't think La Mission, another Parker Perfect candidate, was close to on par with the awesome Haut-Brion. And with all due respect to the discussion about Vieux Chateau Certan, it's impossible for me to accept that that Chateau Lafleur (94-97) has less potential than VCC (96-99) in 2009.

8. Misses: I missed tasting a few big Pomerols - Clinet, L'Eglise Clinet and L'Evangile, each which is a potential 100 pt wine. And apparently he missed, or ignored, all the Bordeaux Blancs.  One glaring omission:  Where is the wine tasting note for Chateau Figeac?  This one came up spades for me in two separate blinds.  At first I thought this was an oversight, but now I see that Parker has not reviewed Figeac since 2006.  I have no clue as to why a top Right Bank wine is omitted 3 years running.  Must be more to this story!

9. Regrets: None whatsoever about buying 2008, particularly Pomerol. That vintage is a spectacular bargain.  Last year, I spent considerable pixels extolling the virtues of Right Bank Merlot, and it is gratifying to know that these wines continue to compare extremely well against the 2009 peer collection.  Parker said that 2008 is better than 2001, 2002, 2004, 2006, and 2007, and not far off 05 and 09.  And likewise, if the 09's are indeed priced to the moon, I will have no regrets about passing on them as Futures, and will wait for them to hit the shelves.  That said, a few wines will be irresistible and should not be missed.

Overall:  Great report. I had my doubts about the subscription since a major fallout last summer that saw several long time contributors literally banned from the message board.  And, I'm not pleased with the Great Purge that coincided with the release of this Bordeaux report yesterday -- the message board is now completely members-only.  But that aside, this is a very good report on this great and paradoxical vintage, it reads true, and very entertaining.

Here’s Neal in front of the Eglise St Michel in Bordeaux, shopping for more clothes at the day market.  You can tell he’s humble. He had to sleep on my couch one night between shifts in Pomerol!

AND... AND.... HAPPY BIRTHDAY MOM!

No wine has ever aged so gracefully! 

I love you!