Vino Joe

9.3

Tight as a drum at open. Loosened to trampoline tension after 2 hours. Finally was loose after 4. Spicy and hefty. More inward. A sophisticated mix and quite good but as with most Leoville Las Cases it needs to sit longer for the next iteration. — 4 days ago

Rick Phillips

9.6

After 35 years I was not expecting much. Especially when the cork disintegrated on opening. Aureated on decanting and was happily surprised. After about 20 minutes opened to dark chocolate, leather but so smooth. The last glass was pure delight. Howell Mountain at its best! — 17 days ago

with Letha

Jay Kline

9.1

Opened earlier in the day and double-decanted to be served several hours later. The 1966 pours a pale garnet color with a transparent core. This is red fruit heavy and sanguine with ferrous earth, leather, and old wood. The tannins are firm still. An almost evergreen St-Estèphe that’s iron clad and tough as nails. Better than good but at nearly 60 years old, will it ever relax? Hard to say. It would likely survive another 60 years but it’s hard to imagine it evolving a lot considering where we’re at today. So...drink now, I guess? — a month ago

Doug Powers

9.3

[En magnum] This was aerated for 3 hours, and is still currently quite closed and structured, works great with the UCD Meat Lab rib roast, but needs a fair amount of cellaring to soften. — 8 days ago

with Monique and Jim

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.5

2002 vintage. Last tasted 10.06.22 (9.4). Similar "gliding along" impressions with feminine characteristics. This bottle (nice fill, cork and decent sed) was a goody. Decanted and tasted after 5 mins, 30 mins and 2 hours. Bit more structure evident after two hours open as to be a different, yet fantastic, wine. Funny how some of these underwhelming, less than aggro wines can take on another life of their own, on their terms, by gently removing all doubt. Still another 5-7 years-easy. 11.21.24. — a month ago

Shay A

9.5

After missing a ‘70s and ‘80s Heitz vertical many years ago, I vowed to seek out a bottle as all the comments from the tasting were astoundingly positive. My last bottle of Heitz Martha’s was the ‘01 (which was great) a few years ago, but at 46yrs, this was quite the experience.

The ‘78 has a bit of a legendary status, so expectations were high. Upon opening, the cork was in good shape (sigh of relief) and the color was unbelievably dark ruby with some bricking (another sigh of relief). The singular signature menthol/eucalyptus began to fill the glass, alongside aromatics of red berry fruits, espresso, some sort of sweet brown sugar/caramel note, and a savory-graphite type note too. Beautifully elegant on the palate with more red fruit, herbs (bay leaf?), and even some pipe tobacco (subdued, not in your face), but it sports the classical old Napa cab profile that is pure. Spectacular wine, and I could simply smell the wine all day…the aromatics were so powerful the entire time.

Open in bottle for three hours and powered through the entire time. Wish I had another so I could have the same experience! — a month ago

Arnold Ha

9.5

Took 2 hours to open. Hints of mummified cheese on the nose. Incredible gravitas. — 3 days ago

with Melody

Jay Kline

9.4

Opened and double-decanted several hours prior to service; enjoyed over the course of three hours. The 1996 pours a deep garnet color with a near opaque core. On the nose, the wine is developing and loaded with currants, pencil lead, earth and soft baking spices. On the palate, the wine is dry with medium+ tannin and medium+ acid. Confirming the notes from the nose. The finish is long and super grippy; slightly bitter and earthy. A lovely, classic expression of Bordeaux and drinking well in its prime. Drink now through 2046. — 13 days ago

A. R.

9.1

Just don’t open this yet folks. Took about 4 hours in a decanter to open up at all. Very classic dusty and graphite nose. Powerful red fruit and tannins. Good mid palate. Good acid. Very long finish. QPR not great. Needs min 10 years to calm down. — a month ago

Jay Kline

9.8

Forty-plus years on, people still talk about the greatness of the 1982 vintage in Bordeaux. There are multiple factors that contribute to this and it’s fair to say that Robert Parker’s reaction played a major role in the early popularity; certainly in the States. While some may say that 1982 was merely a “good” vintage by today’s standards, I think history has proven it to be empirically special; there was just so much quality from top to bottom. And yet, even with the high praise of the vintage, the tone shifts to hushed whispers when the 1982 Mouton gets mentioned. Up until that point, the Chateau had sort of underachieved after receiving its unprecedented promotion in 1973. But in 1982, a year full of great wine, they created a legend and firmly cemented their First Growth status. Today, I’m pleased to report the plaudits for the ’82 are all warranted.

Opened and double-decanted earlier in the day. The ’82 Mouton pours a deep garnet color with a near opaque core with some sediment; almost youthful when compared to many of the other older wines poured on the night. On the nose, the wine is developing still; loaded with cassis, black berries, leaf tobacco, leather, and fine baking spices. On the palate, the wine is dry with fabulous structure. Confirming the notes from the nose. The finish is long and full of power. A stunning wine and well in its prime…a window I expect will remain open for a longtime to come. Drink now with bacchanalian abandon and through 2082. — 17 days ago