Paul Masson

9.0

A little too much Brett in this bottle. Or it’s just a root day — 6 days ago

Danny O'Brien

9.2

Raspberry, roses & tar on the nose, grippy tannins and a slight meatiness on the palate. Fruit is present but ever so slightly lacking for me, I wish it translated from the nose to the palate just a touch more. Overall very nice and enjoyable! — 22 days ago

Pooneet K

9.4

Absolutely lovely classic left bank. 2002 was a less heralded year, but this has stood up extremely well. Just getting to secondary now, still a ton of fruit and earth and leather on the nose and palate. Excellent acid and a very long finish. 13% which is appreciated and the seamlessness comes through. Really delicious and a perfect Thanksgiving meal pairing. Opened 5 hours before dinner and decanted for 1.5 hours. Perfect spot. — a month ago

John Jaye

8.9

It probably would have been better a few years ago, but still a good drink. Still some tannins, but they went away as it had time to breathe — 2 months ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.4

2020 vintage. With @Beth Novak . Decanted and tasted after one hour. Medium body. Nose practically leapt out of the glass with plenty to discuss. Flavors a bit more subdued but definitely present. Just enough back-end, tannic presence to hold court. This should be absolute dynamite in 3-5 years. Initial visit a bit over two years ago (9.5) and was more explosive but will cede that to the last impression getting more air time. Said then that this was my fave since the 1991 vintage and sticking by that. 1.2.26. — 2 days ago

M. Christopher Roebuck

9.4

It just clobbers everything.


94 points — a month ago

Jerry Raphael

9.5

I purchased this wine for $60 as a Bordeaux future offering from MacArthur’s in DC, with the hope of opening it when my younger son—born in 1982—was old enough to share it. We finally did just that this Thanksgiving, celebrating both him and the bottle.
The fill was mid-shoulder, but the family was together and it felt like the right moment. I gave it about an hour in the decanter before dinner. Early on it showed blackberries, a touch of veg, lead pencil, cedar notes and a smooth elegant finish. As the evening went on it opened a bit more, gaining some depth.
A few hours later I revisited the small amount I’d saved and found it had dried out some—but that was expected for a 43-year-old First Growth. Ultimately, it was a wonderful experience and a memorable way to share both the wine and the moment with family.
— a month ago

David Dorn

9.5

The kind of wine you never won’t to end… just sensational. What a beautiful expression of Napa and the wine was drinking beautifully with 15 years of age. — 9 days ago

Jerry Raphael

9.5

Well, here we are two years later, back at the same BYOB for New Year’s Eve with the same wine. I figured 35 years was enough—it was time to drink it.
Same treatment as in 2024: opened and decanted, then poured about two hours later. This time the nose offered noticeably more—cedar, a touch of vegetal character, and dark berries. On the palate, dark berries again took the lead. The finish was good, but at the very end it seemed to stop just a bit short but still giving it a 95. At Anthony’s — 4 days ago

Scott@Mister A’s-San Diego

9.1

1989 vintage. Last tasted 3 years ago (9.6). Nice fill. Durand used to open. Cork 95% saturated with extensive bottle rim cleaning involved before pouring. Not decanted. Tight, minty nose throughout along with a decided, lingering zinc note under the tongue at the finish line. Tasted 2 hours after opening. Power but without delineation. Just a consistent, forgettable push. Nothing wrong with the wine...it just needed more air/time and a decant but it wasn't my call. Feel like the zinc flavor would have dissipated/blown off with more time. Good but more memorable for what it wasn't vs what it was. Pity and an entire wasting of what could have been. 11.21.25. — a month ago