VINTAGES

Question 1

BORDEAUX

Answer 1

5 star vintages

2010: perfect, long dry summer, more tannin and freshness
2009: voluptuous, ripe hot dry summer with cool nights
2005: perfect weather, long dry summer
2000: mythical, high temps, extra sun
1990: tropical summer
1989: hot and dry summer, early harvest
1982: opulent, tropical endless summer
1961: legendary, perfect summer, no rain
1947: tropical july and august
1945: dream summer

bad vintages
2011: not bad, but upside down, hot spring, cool summer
2007: light, cold and wet summer, worst of decade
1991-1993: bad years, wet, cool, thin wines

1983: good, less opulent than ‘82; less stuffing means most are past peaked; standout year for margaux

Question 2

CHAMPAGNE

Answer 2

2012: Exceptional, though low yields (frost, disease, hail); perfect August
2004: Both quality and quantity; structured, exceed expectations
2002: Magnificent. Near perfect vintage. Ageworthy
1996: Maybe best ever? Ripe flavor with high acid.
1995: Not as ripe as ‘96; more austere and balanced
1989:
1988
1985

bad vintages:

2010: Tough. Dry conditions slowed grape develop., torrential August rain led to disease
2007: Disappointing. Murkey. Chard better than Pinots.
2005: Lackluster. Variable conditions and lower acid.
2001: Poor vintage. Rot. Under ripeness. Wet and Gloomy

Question 3

BURGUNDY RED

Answer 3

2010: High acid. Very good quality in CdN. Volume down 1/3
2009: Dry, warm, no hail. Lower acid and ripe tannins, very drinkable in youth
2005: Exceptional, though wines might need time in btl.
1990: Majestic, rich and fragrant.
1989: Not as instense as ‘90, but nearly matches it

bad vintages

2011: Disappointing. Rot and uneven weather. ‘10 safer
2008. Accursed. Coulure, mildew, hail = low yield/qual., high acid
2007: Damp, rotten PN grapes caused for strict selection
2000: Difficult. Rain and Rot. Better in CdN. Soft and easy
1994: Yields ballooned after rains. Notoriously variable.
1992: Rain at wrong time. Soft wines

1983: Torrid summer. Mixed bag. Some brilliant, most tainted by rot.

Question 4

BURGUNDY WHITE

Answer 4

2010: Higher acid vs. ‘09, but still small, ripe crop
2009: Good, healthy, quality grapes. Warm, high yields. On par w/ ‘05
2008: high acid, fresh wines, some spectacular.
2007: Crisper than ‘05 and ‘06, rainy summer, dry August
2006: Poor summer, good Sept. Early maturing and fleshy
2005: Concentrated, age worthy, very promising
2004: Classicist year, angular high acid wines
2002: Good quality. Good quantity.
2000: Very ripe (too ripe?) w/ good acid. Great Chablis and Maconnais
1999: Slightly crisper than ‘00, but best may last longer

bad vintages

2011: tricky vintage, chaptalisation needed, low ripeness
1998: Disaster, everything went wrong

Question 5

PIEMONTE

Answer 5

2010: cool and wet, very structured, high acid high tannin
2007: hail, but dry year; low yield, high quality
2006: better in Barolo (vs. Barb.), cool summer led to Indian summer
2004: few extremes, very promising and well-balanced
2001: Excellent, quality and quantity, voluptuous, ripe, power
2000: Very good, heatwave in Aug-Sept., ripeness & acid
1999: Very good, recalls ‘97 voluptuousness
1998: More structure than ‘97, fine and elegant
1997: Record ripeness levels, hot, low acid
1996: Superb
1990: Colossal power and big aromas, exciting, age worthy
1989: Superb Barolo

bad vintages

2002: Disaster, hail, rot, cool weather, under ripe grapes
1992: Big harvest/quantity, but low power and weight
1991: Small crop, light-mid body, early drinking wines

Question 6

TUSCANY

Answer 6

2010: Cooler than usual, but great balance/structure, especially Montalcino
2007: Tremendous, high alcohol, good acid and ripeness
2006: Steady, long season. Very promising; could be legend.
2004: Perfect, Italy’s equivalent to France’s ‘05
1999: Exceptionally good. More finesse/less mass vs. ‘97. Warm summer
1997: Hot summer, ripe grapes, luscious, could use acid
1994: Dry cool harvest, rich and structured, best since ‘90
1990: Hot year, low yields; really good wines, esp. Montalcino

bad vintages

2003: Heatwave; generally wines unbalanced, not as bad as ‘02
2002: Disaster year, terrible. Wet summer, rotten, under ripe grapes

Question 7

RIOJA/RIBERA DEL DUERO

Answer 7

2010: Exceptional Ribera, no excessive weather. Good Rioja, better than ‘09
2009: Very hot, but rains rescued and relieved vines. Very good quality.
2004: Very good, hot summer, esp. Rioja. Ageworthy.
2001: Spring frost lowered crop, but superior, fine wines

bad vintages
2002: Disaster, cold spring, nasty, wet summer, low quality and low quantity