The Torrid 2003s

“A Tale of Two 2003s,” “It Was The Best Of Times, It Was The Worst Of Times,” or even “Much Ado About Nothing”: All these silly titles flashed through my mind as I thought about how to begin to tell the tale of this vintage that will go down in infamy. In truth, the torridly hot vintage of 2003 in Europe has turned out quite as some critics predicted, ie pick carefully, some great wines and not to all tastes. However I must admit that before I began to actually drink the wines at dinner and with friends in normal wine drinking settings and in formal tastings, I had already adopted a skeptical attitude, imagining the worst about what would certainly define a “new world” style as a benchmark for years to come.

Happily, I’ve come to enjoy the style of 2003s and I thought it a good time to comment on some bottles and tastings that I’ve enjoyed so as to share my experience and even to help sort it out for myself. I’ve mainly been drinking Bordeaux ‘03s but have also encountered some interesting Barolos and Chiantis.

Naturally, there was a ton of press and speculation about the 2003 Bordeaux crackling through the wine world by the time I managed to try one, which was in 2005. I was staying at the Hotel Winston in Amsterdam on holiday, and they had a 2003 petite chateaux on hand, the only wine that they had. But they had dozens of cases in a side room that I apparently stumbled into, so apparently they staff thought highly of it. Pity I didn’t write down the name, but there were other matters at hand. The wine was quite drinkable, delightful even, although it was somewhat sweet and monolithic. I thought, ‘Gee – I’m looking forward to more of these.’

My next major brush with ’03 Bordeaux came at a Zachy’s tasting where almost all of the top Pessac-Leognon estates were represented, including Pape Clement. No, no Haut-Brion. Whaaaa! There were about ten or twelve wines with their winemakers dutifully pouring, and the telltale bitter, roasted flavors of ’03 first started to make an appearance. Very tannic, and not showing a lot of charm in general, although the last wine on the line was spectacular – Pape Clement. I bought a bottle of 2002 Smith Haut-Lafitte from the lovely Florence Cathiard, mainly because she and everyone else as well said that it was drinking well then. It was and I’m now a big fan.

In 2006 I organized a Margaux tasting with my main wine group, Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts, and I was salivating at the thought of trying the highly rated and resurgent Chateau Lascombes. This wine also had a roasted, bitter component but was undoubtedly still young and tannic and showed promise. It had a strong mineral component and was quite complex. I later tried a bottle of the cru bourgeois La Bernadotte which was highly rated in the vintage and found some similarities that I liked. For less than the price of the Lascombes .750 I was able to purchase a magnum. It was less complex however and more modern in style.

Speaking of cru bourgeois, let’s talk a bit about an area of Bordeaux where I regularly tread. Having gone ga-ga over the little known St. Estephe Chateau Clauzet in the 2000 vintage, I was very anxious to try it when I saw it mentioned as a future on PJ Wine’s website. I waited and bought three bottles at the release price which was the same as the futures, about $18, the same as I paid for the 2000. However the style was completely different. Where the ’00 Clauzet was sumptuous yet balanced and complex and seemingly having at least 10 years in front of it, the ’03 version was much more jammy and modern, a bit like a Cali cab. The wine also evolved rapidly over two years under non-perfect conditions, with the middle bottle showing the best. The last bottle showed the most Bordeaux-like, including coffee and earth on the nose but seemed to be in need of drinking up.

I recently had the chance to drink the highly touted ’03 Potensac with dinner. I’m sure you could have seen my eyes light up from twenty paces as I greeted my friend at the door and saw the bottle in his hand. I loved Potensac in 2001, a velvety, full bodied wine with dark tones and charm to spare. The ‘03 was highly enjoyable, with sweet fruit and an elegant mouthfeel, an excellent compliment to a steak dinner. However it was not showing much in the way of minerality or some of the other characteristics that set Bordeaux apart from most of the world’s cab-based wines. And at $25 to the ‘01’s sale price of $14, it’s not exactly a bargain anymore.

Speaking of 2001, I had the pleasure of sharing another St. Estephe, Chateau de Pez with some friends over dinner, and was struck by the serious earthy qualities and lip-smacking dryness and just over-all chunky, masculine style of the wine. A bottle of de Pez ’03 that I tried early on was quite disappointing, with a very California style in evidence, jammy and sweet. And I thought St. Estephe was supposed to lead in ’03?

A bottle of the Margaux cru bourgeois La Gurgue was much better, although similarly sweet and jammy. The nose of oak and currants was seductive but still a bit Napa, and nothing like the reserved, complex typicity that I experienced with the 2000 version. It was totally enjoyable with an authentic Polish goulash, however, and I must add that this class of ’03 wines is often highly easy to drink, as evidenced by my steady re-ordering of Vrai Canon Bouche, a perfect mid-week or non-geek wine from Canon-Fronsac. A little less weight and finish than its higher pedigreed siblings but much dryer and with more blueberry fruit and a subtle minerality. Excellent for an under $15 bottle of Bordeaux.

But man does not live by Bordeaux alone – what about the rest of the world? What about Burgundy? I’ve had little chance to try many red or white Burgs from ’03, but did manage to snag a bottle of a favorite of mine in ’02, the sleeper value Chassagne-Montrachet Rouge Villages wine by the famed Ramonet house. Super balanced with incense and beautiful strawberry fruit and texture in ’02, the ’03 version was a crowd-pleasing, fat and seductive fruit bomb. My friend immediately went out and tracked down a half case. Somewhat flabby but altogether charming, it didn’t seem like it would last and I was right: My initial source sold out before I could re-order a single bottle!

Earlier this year I had the wonderful experience of attending an Italian tasting at Zachy’s where five top Piedmont producers were hawking their wares. While the ’04 Barbarescos showed tremendous promise, the atypically light colored ’03 Barolos that were on hand showed a sexy and sumptuous drinkability that was quite alluring. Hardly for purists or traditionalists, I was won over by these wines and vowed to look for more in the future.

As that future arrived in the form of 2003s from another favorite wine region of mine, Chianti, the specter of the torrid Summer of 2003 again reared its head in the form of lush, atypical wines, although wines not without charm. For comparison I offer the Monsanto Chianti Classico Riserva, an excellent quality bargain in ’01 and ’03. While the ’01 had it all in elegance, minerality, complexity and food-worthy acidity, the ’03 was a fat, somewhat jammy but immensely pleasing wine that reminded me of a cross between an Aussie Shiraz and Chianti. The points that were awarded to these wines in the WA could hardly be more illustrative: The ’01 Monsanto drew a rave review but only 88 points, while the ’03 version received a whopping 91.

Ultimately, I can’t make a definitive case one way or the other for the 2003 vintage, as I haven’t tried any of the top wines. But from the perspective or everyday wine drinking with some moderate treats thrown in, I’d say it looks like an appealing, drink now vintage, although not for traditionalists. One way of looking at it is, if these 2003s can stay in the running with the wines I’ve chosen to compare them to, they certainly can’t be all bad. However, there aren’t any obvious cases where the ’03 surpassed its older and more classically perfect reflection.