Doug Powers

9.3

This wine seems finally mature, with tannins fully resolved, but still showing a firm backbone and structure, fresh acidity, very good balance, lingering finish, always a good wine for me. Funny anecdote about Sociando-Mallet, at least in the 1980s they used the worst “glue” on their labels, so about 1/3 of them fall off — as long as the bottles are in OWCs, not a big deal, but this is one where the label did fall off. 🤔🤷 — 18 days ago

with Jim

Vino Joe

9.3

It was more subdued than I expected. I tend to like the Merlot heavy Bordeaux but this one was still a bit muted. Perhaps it needs more time even though it’s well in its recommended range. Dark and heavy. Solid but left me underwhelmed. Decanted. Better after an hour. — 8 days ago

Andrew McIntyre

9.2

Impressive showing...maybe needs 1-2 years for a more rounded enjoyment but this was already very pleasant. — 8 days ago

Sándor Jaguar

9.0

Lots of pepper up front — 5 days ago

with Sydne, John and 22 others

Jay Kline

9.3

Presented to me, double-blind. The wine pours a deep garnet color with an opaque core; medium viscosity with moderate staining of the tears, and some signs of light sediment. On the nose, the wine is vinous with a mix of ripe and desiccated, mostly dark fruits: cassis, black cherry, plum, mixed brambles, old leather, pipe tobacco, pencil shavings, and fine baking spices. On the palate, the wine is dry with medium+ tannin (that is mostly integrated) and medium+ acid. Confirming the notes from the nose. The finish is long.

Initial conclusions: this could be a Cabernet-based Bordeaux blend, Tempranillo (or based blend) or Grenache-based blend from France, Spain or the United States. I feel like this leans more towards its fruit than its structure, even though it is a fairly well balanced wine in both regards. As a result, I am calling this a Cabernet-based Bordeaux blend from the United States, California, Napa Valley, Howell Mountain from a producer like Dunn, 2006. Shiiiiiit. To be honest, I’m not terribly surprised since this is Cos and from a warm vintage no less. Drinking well now and should through 2050+. — 3 days ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.2

1988 vintage. Good fill, good cork. Opened with a Durand and decanted. Tasted after two hours. Those initial, futile attempts at being masculine but ultimately feminine. Exemplary stuffing with enough of an outline to carry this wine another 5-6 years in this stead. Light-medium body with a decently traceable finish. Better than expected. 12.25.25. — 13 days ago

Ed Chin

9.3

Vintage be damned. Could it have more tannin, sure, but everything was in harmony and easy to enjoy. — 6 days ago

Ericsson

9.9

The nose is profoundly layered and regal: cedar chest, humid tobacco, graphite, and dried rose petals, unfolding slowly into red currant, black tea, sandalwood, and the faintest whisper of truffle and old parchment. It’s not about intensity; it’s about dimension…

On the palate, it is seamless and sovereign. Red and black fruits are fully resolved into essence rather than flavor; currant, cherry skin, a touch of plum; all wrapped in polished leather and earth. The tannins have dissolved into silk, the acidity remains statuesque, and the finish lingers with a calm, noble persistence that feels endless rather than long.

Chateau Margaux at its absolute summit: complete, composed, and eternal; power expressed through grace, and grace sharpened by the patience of time. Do drink now. — 11 days ago

Paul K

9.3

I know, I’m here too early, but I bought 3 cases for a steal. I’m excited to see the evolution over next 25 years and I can have more than a bottle a year so no scolding required! 😉 looking forward to the education. Makes you think though. I’m about done buying Bordeaux futures. Too long to wait, store, and 20-25 years is starting to look blurry in the telescope. Now it’s on to auctions and buying wines that are ready. — 8 days ago

Diana Cohen

9.0

Had at chez fifi . Cherry forward, but light and not to complex in flavor profile. It’s ok — 25 days ago