John Malcolm

9.5

An excellent wine. Still fresh and will improve with more time in the cellar. Full-bodied, cassis, blackberries, cherry, cola, and a bit of spice. — 6 days ago

Jack Gyben

9.6

We could not believe this was 1996. Young gorgeous fruit in a wine I tasted blind that I thought might be 2009. Gorgeous… a revelation about what a nearly 30 year old Bordeaux could be! Wow! — 6 months ago

Jeremiah Diaz

9.1

Pale ruby in color; cherries, hibiscus, and black tea on the nose; high acidity; low tannins; tastes like cranberries, pomegranates, red currants, and wet gravel with a long finish. — 8 months ago

Adam Gäfvert

9.1

I have favoured Haut-Brion in blind tastings before, but not this time. This is not the most praised vintage by any means but still. Haut-Brion still comes with some expectations. It’s solid and well made, but fairly closed. There are of course signs of class and aristocracy shining through but too underwhelming at this occasion. — 2 years ago

Austin Hohnke

9.5

First time having the pleasure. Ok, I get it. Unctuous and thicc. Searching every corner of my palate for one more ethereal drop of elixir. Grilled peach and apricot drizzled with vanilla extract. Is that sugar I’m chewing on?
The money though? — a month ago

Andrew Cullimore

9.3

Quite light spices , coffee , sous bois , herbal hints . On the palate this has good density and spicy , menthol , dark coffee stained fruit , some slightly gritty tannin . It comes across as quite ripe but with balanced acidity and quite good menthol tinged length . This was served blind from a half bottle . I was putting this in the 80s and Napa , not Bordeaux! This had to do with the texture and quite ripe , generous fruit profile . Drinking perfectly now , I wouldn’t wait any longer — 6 months ago

Andrew Cullimore

9.2

No formal notes . medium deep ruby , medium bright ruby rim. Quite spicy a little oak noticeable at first . Mixed dark fruits . A bit more round and juicy on the palate , good acidity , slightly grippy but polished tannins . This becomes a bit more restrained and reserved after a while. Served blind , I actually put this as Haut Brion , due to its generous personality, and polished tannins. Overall showed well in the flight was my top wine (though the Cheval Blanc may well be better in absolute terms) . Can be enjoyed now , though has the substance to last a further decade or so, a good showing for the Mouton. — 9 months ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.4

1986 vintage. Tasting like it was nearish the top on the downward slope. Unified palate push. That great old Bordeaux nose. Light-medium body. Ullage appropriate. The feminine characteristics that are the lifeblood of this producer almost completely absent with this bottle. Had this been blind, woulda speculated this to be a 1985-1989 upper-crust St. Julien. All that said, still very very nice. The near-perfect 1989 specimen tasted a little more than a week ago reminded me more of the previous encounters with the 1986 than this encounter with the 1986. — 3 years ago

Jay Kline

9.5

Presented to me double-blind. The wine pours a brilliant, deep ruby color with a transparent core and some rim variation; medium+ viscosity with moderate staining of the tears and faint signs of sediment. On the nose, the wine is developing with a heady perfume of mostly ripe and some tart fruit: mixed brambles, black cherry, purple flowers (lavender?), animale, some pepper, a touch of olive, a touch of leather, some green herbs, fine warm spices and rocky earth. I believe this has seen oak and it’s beautifully balanced and smells expensive. On the palate, the wine is dry with medium+ tannin and medium+ acid. Alcohol is medium+. Confirming the notes from the nose. The finish is long and the texture is grippy. This is delicious.

Initial conclusions: this could be Sangiovese, Pinot Noir, Gamay, a Grenache-based blend or possibly Syrah; from Italy, or France. Immediately after I was presented the glass, I liked this being Sangiovese, however, there was too much new French oak for me to feel comfortable. Besides, the florals were too purple to be Sangiovese anyway (never mind Grenache or Pinot Noir). Then there were the non-fruits: it could be justified by whole cluster Pinot or Gamay…or was this a really impressive Syrah? This wine seemed familiar to me. This could be Chave. I did think this had some age based on color and rim variation. Final conclusion: I’m calling this Syrah, from France, from Northern Rhône, Hermitage, with 20+ years of age, from a decent vintage like 2004. And for the hell if it, I called producer: Jean-Louis Chave. Boom. Bottle No. 3981 — 4 months ago

Jay Kline

9.4

Presented double-blind. The wine pours a light straw color with medium viscosity and no signs of particles or gas. On the nose, the wine is developing with tart and ripe notes of apple, pear, underripe pineapple, lemon curd, nuts and minerals. I felt like there was some deft use of oak. On the palate, the wine is dry with medium+, bordering on high acid. Confirming the notes from the nose. The finish is long and chocked full of minerals. My immediate impression was Bourgogne Blanc and I was having a hard time getting away from it. So I called Chardonnay, from France, Burgundy, Chassagne-Montrachet with 3-5 years of age. Gosh dammit! Margaret River strikes again!!! Blind, I always seem to call these Chablis or some other high quality white Burg. And I adore the Leeuwin Estate Art Series Chardonnays. They always impress me. Drink now through 2036. — 9 months ago