Burghound Symposium - Richebourg Dinner, with Allen Meadows

The Fine Wine Experience (HK) Ltd Shop D, Hollywood Centre, 85 Queen’s Road West, Sheung Wan, Hong Kong

Office +852 2230 4288/ +852 2803 0753 Email [email protected]

Website: www.finewineexperience.com

In Review…

Review of The Fine Wine Experience Burghound Symposium

- Richebourg Dinner, with Allen Meadows.

Amuse Bouche, Hong Kong, Friday 17th April 2015.

Allen Meadows took the subject of Richebourg as an opportunity to reflect more widely on

what makes Burgundy so great. While it is true that top sites have been known for a long

time, he argued, it is the refinements over many centuries that has extracted the level of

greatness we see today. This he described as the ‘human response’ component of terroir:

the moving of stones from here to there, the building of walls to provide shelter and heat

sinks, the selection of the best plants over many generations, fine-tuning the relationship

between vine and soil. Pinot Noir can be planted on virgin soil of great potential in other

parts of the world, but it takes time to gain these refinements. Through the generations of

growers there is an “accumulation of wisdom”.

To really understand an individual terroir – like Richebourg – he argued, one must look

at multiple growers and multiple vintages. Allen gave a musical analogy. The vineyard is

like a musical composition – the notes are written, but they are then played. They are

interpreted by the hand of the conductor or musician. “Take those four famous notes in

Beethoven’s 5th. Even there there is debate about how to play them.” Richebourg, by

analogy therefore, can smell and taste different depending on the domaine, as each has

their own interpretation.

But there is sufficient consistency in Richebourg to talk about a personality overall… or

perhaps two personalities. Allen spent some time discussing the political element in the

creation in 1936 of the Richebourg “AOC” (Appellation d’Origine Contrôlée). The

Richebourg grand cru AOC combines two ‘lieu dits’: ‘Les Richebourgs’ (the main, square

portion to the south, with La Romanée, and La Romanée-Conti to its south; Les Petits

Monts and Cros Parantoux to its west, and Romanée-St-Vivant to its east), and ‘Les

Veroilles ou Richebourgs’, to the north of Les Richebourgs (with Les Barreux to its west,

Aux Brûlées to its north, and Les Suchots to its east). Before 1936 this lieu dit was called

Les Veroilles sous Richebourgs (Les Veroilles under Richebourgs), but, in what Allen

called “the use of an eraser on two letters”, Etienne Camuzet, administrator and owner,

had this changed to Les Veroilles ou Richebourgs (literally Les Veroilles or Richebourgs),

subtley increasing the status of the Veroilles portion to equal that of Richebourg ‘proper’.

Does that matter at all? The key difference with Veroilles, Allen explained, is that it sits

on a combe, or vale, that funnels in cool air. This can affect ripening – Veroilles often

trailing in ripening development 4, 5, even 10 days later than Les Richebourgs. In

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.finewineexperience.com/




practice this can mean a wine of less richness and greater acidity. It might also mean

higher risk of a weather event forcing harvest too soon, or actual damage. In practice of

course that depends on the vintage – in certain years this might be an advantage to

Veroilles. Secondly, Veroilles has more thin soil, being higher up overall, while Les

Richebourgs has more thick soil, being further down, which might imply more richness

again to Les Richebourgs.

How does that play out in terms of owners? DRC, the largest owner, has parcels in both

terroir, but the other owners have their parcels mostly, or wholly, in one or the other. The

owners in Veroilles are (west to east), Albert Bichot, Méo-Camuzet (with a tiny piece in

Les Richebourgs), Gros Frères et Soeur, A.-F. Gros, Anne Gros, Leroy (though Leroy also

has a small sliver in Les Richebourg). The growers in Les Richebourg are (south to north),

Thibault Liger-Belair, Hudelot-Noellat, Jean Grivot, and Mongeard-Mugneret.

All this to say that the difference between the two pieces might help to explain something

of the style of the various domaines, and Allen suggested we bear that in mind. It is, at

least, something to understand about Richebourg.

That stated, my impression, at this dinner at least, was that the signature stamp of the

various domaines, and the characteristics of each vintage, had more impact on the actual

wine in the glass, than anything I was able to distinguish from a domaine’s plot location

within Richebourg. But it is something I have now tucked away in my mind to consider,

and it seemed worth repeating here.

Allen’s next point was that Richebourg needs long ageing. It is vintage-dependent (2011

and 2007 being recent examples that will show much earlier than usual, and vintages like

2005 and 1999 much later), but around 20-25 years is desirable and 15 is the minimum to

really see the full quality of Richebourg in Allen’s opinion. Too much is drunk too soon,

and therefore not so well understood. Based on potential realized – that is to say,

drinking it when it is really ready – Allen rates Richebourg one of the very top

appellations of Burgundy – even amongst the grands crus.

The final introductory point had to do with the relationship between quality, ownership,

and the effect this can have on the reputation of a vineyard in a practical way. By way of

illustration, he pointed to the Gevrey grand cru Griotte-Chambertin. Everyone who

makes wine in that appellation makes very high quality wine. This wasn’t always true,

but as a consequence, the reputation of Griotte has risen in recent years. All of the owners

of Richebourg, Allen suggested, make very good wine. The second quality point, is that all

the holders (with the exception of Albert Bichot) have sufficiently large holdings – at least

four barrels worth in a normal year – to even out the fermentations and élévage (tending

to and ‘raising’ barrels in the winery).






And the wines?

We covered a good range of growers (some of which were made by the previous generation

– and therefore domaine name – to the current one) and vintages, spanning several

decades. Mostly, here were very very good wines, with one or two that were truly

exceptional. There’s no doubt that Richebourg can hit the heights. At the same time, only

one wine here nudged into that category where the wine becomes something sort of

‘transcendental’. Perhaps my expectations are just too high. 16 wines is too small a

sample of course, and I have had, in the past, Richebourg that had me in raptures (’42

DRC for example). Tonight wasn’t that night, even if it did show the solid base above

which the appellation sits.

The wine that has remained on my mind most is the 1980 from Hudelot-Noellat – truly

ethereal and fine. After that, perhaps the 1995 from Méo-Camuzet, for the way it

exceeded my expectations. ’95 is not a vintage I’m fond of, but there was one of the my

favourite wines of the dinner. The ’93 from Anne Gros was also compelling for its power

and scent – its best years still in front of it. Two further wines deserve special mention –

the 1979 from Drouhin. This was a difficult year in Vosne, with haul-reduced yields, but

this wine showed true grace and elegance in a way that Drouhin do best. And secondly,

the 1986 from Méo, made, according to Allen, by Henri Jayer, it showed how a great

terroir and a great vigneron can combine to produce something very good in a very

average to poor year.

One final point before getting on to the wines – it has always been my feeling that wine

dinners at Amuse Bouche combine all that is important for dinners like these – great

food, great service, and highly professional wine handling. Tonight was no exception. This

is the place to take your best bottles, or order from their very reasonable and well selected

wine list. Just saying.

The first flight was from 2007, a precocious vintage. I often look out for this Burgundy

vintage across the board when ordering off restaurant lists. It might be ‘inferior’ to

vintages like 2005, 2009 and 2010, but it will give you more pleasure today.

2007 Richebourg, Domaine Thibault Liger-Belair

Forward, fragrant, bright and very aromatic, raspberry fruit; elegant, refined red fruit

Richebourg, bright, lively, lovely texture, great underlying minerality, light fine tannin.

Approachable and delicious. Will age well as a delicate refined Richebourg.

92+






2007 Richebourg, Domaine Mongeard-Mugneret

Bright light ruby; low key aromatics compared to Thibault’s, lovely florals, touch of spice

– oak more to the fore now; fine on the palate, slightly darker fruit, real depth of fruit, a

sense of fantail aromatics emerging on the finish. Needs more time than Thibault’s to

show its potential.

91+

1999 Richebourg, Domaine Anne Gros

Fine appearance, some depth of colour still; dark fruit – lovely nose, cherry scent;

intensed, focused and concentrated fruit, tannin, extract, but it remains the right side of

transparent, fine, flowing dark fruit. This is promising, but has ‘99’s typical reserve.

Needs several more years.

93+

1993 Richebourg, Domaine Anne et François Gros (Anne Gros)

Clear, deep colour; complex aromas that take a little coaxing to come out – earthy, rich,

spicy, floral notes – quite nuanced and enthralling – a great nose; gorgeous on the palate,

very scented, floral – roses, plenty of density and extract here – the thick-skinned ’93

character is clear to see here, but this is also very fine and beautifully composed.

Exceptional. Starting to drink very well, at the early end of its drinking window.

95

It is probably worth noting, without putting a full tread mark on the minefield of fully

understanding the Gros family, that Domaine Anne et François Gros, created in 1988,

was a father and daughter team that became Domaine Anne Gros from 1995. It is not to

be confused (though often is) with Anne-Françoise Gros’ (note the “e”) estate, which is

labeled Domaine A.F. Gros. That’s her cousin’s estate. It all got complicated in the 1950s,

with a prodigious output of Gros family offspring. Blame Napoléon. I do. Have a look at

this – it is very useful when confronted with a Gros family label - http://www.anne-

gros.com/en/genealogy.html

1991 Richebourg, Domaine Jean Gros

Dark fruit here – plum, cherry, spice and a touch of earth; this is delicious, great

dimension, fruit, and sous bois complexity. Sweet and savoury elements so well balanced,

it is morish. Drinking well, no rush.

94

1988 Richebourg, Domaine Jean Grivot

Bright fresh appearance; candied fruit on the nose, a touch simple and sweet; candied

cherry, clear, charming, but frankly, what a disappointment for ‘Richebourg’. I would be






content at village level – just. Aromas and flavours are too simple and too sweet. Lacks

length.

88 (but relative to the appellation and vintage, a let down).

1991 Richebourg, Domaine Leroy

Fine colour; spicy, oaky nose, a touch high-toned; delicious, unctuous, concentrated,

bright fruit, melting and layered texture with very fine grippy tannin, a little oolong tea

and earth in the tannins on the finish. Great flavor and length. Once ‘acclimatised’ within

the wine, it is delicious and very interesting, but tasting it side by side with others, the

oak is clearly a bit over the top. There is no denying the immense quality of the fruit

however.

93

1988 Richebourg, Domaine Leroy

Bright, fine-hued and clear; quite earthy, spicy nose; lovely brightness and freshness,

very pure-fruited, refined, with a silky texture, a somewhat obtrusive oak buffer on the

finish brings it all back down to the terrestrial world, bright red fruit / morello cherry at

the end. Delicious.

94

1996 Richebourg, DRC

Mid depth of colour, quite transparent; lovely aroma, very forthcoming, open and

fragrant, spicy, sweet and quite distinctly stemmy; fine on the palate, fresh acidity, really

sous bois and stems on the palate – an inner mouth fragrance of wet bark. There is supple

sweet fruit here too, bright and lively expression, the stems seeming to cut the finish a

little too dry on the finish, but the beguiling fragrance comes back in the aftertaste. Very

lovely, if not fully authoritive DRC Richebourg. Drinking well now.

93

1990 Richebourg, DRC

Fine, very clear, bricked tone, glinting appearance; rich and spicy nose, quite savoury,

ripe and sous bois, with a hint of potpourri coming through; very intense - ‘small berry’

intensity, lovely combination of concentration and flow on the palate, perfumed, very

scented mid-palate, sweet, unctuous texture, effortless, ample texture and ripe flavor. A

little oolong tea in the finish. Delicious, and widely popular amongst the guests at this

dinner. 94

1995 Richebourg, Domaine Méo-Camuzet

Slightly muddy appearance, but sound colour; fine, spicy, low key nose initially, with a

touch of leather; concentrated on the palate, spicy, sous bois, candied fruit, quite floral,

very refined, silky, layered, with a long finish. The more I tasted and went back to this






wine the more I preferred it. Understated, but very complex and fine. Superb. (I liked this

a bit more than the consensus view).

95

1986 Richebourg, Domaine Méo-Camuzet

Mature clear garnet appearance; mature, sweet, attractive nose, touch of almond, earth,

sous bois and red fruit; bright juicy red fruit on the palate, crystalline in expression, then

quite earthy on the finish. Some complexity, but modest overall. Very well made. A touch

of oxidation creeping into the finish. Fairly remarkable for ’86.

90

1979 Richebourg, Joseph Drouhin

Mature garnet, bricked, with an amber rim – a healthy slightly weak appearance; fine

nose, meaty, fragrant, tea notes, lovely, very red fruit with a touch of florals; so elegant

and filigree-fine on the palate, a ‘small’ Richebourg that lacks slightly on the finish, fairly

slender in style, no fat, but this is so refined, pure and elegant, and it is a complete

delight.

93

1978 Richebourg, Remoissenet, magnum (recent release)

Still some depth of colour, garnet, bricked rim, sweet, earthy, spicy, a touch of ‘mulch’

earth and candy; plush, sweet-fruited, bittersweet fruit on the finish, bright with a silky

texture. Still very good fruit vivacity and energy. No rush. Attractive fruit but not

entirely singular and pure in its expression. Good, but one might be entitled to expect

more from Richebourg and 1978.

88

1980 Richebourg, Domaine Hudelot-Noellat

Brilliantly clear, pale, faded brick; fragrant, ‘toasty’ bottle age aromas, grilled nut, red

fruit, sous bois – a combination and expression so attractive it immediately made my

mouth water the instant it put my nose into the glass; silky, elegant, pure, refined,

mature, with real freshness, a longjin tea note in the fine silky tannin. Superb. The kind

of Burgundy we all go chasing but as often as not don’t find. The elusive super fine

Richebourg drinking absolutely perfectly right now. 96

1966 Richebourg, Domaine Charles Noellat

This bottle was well stored, but wasn’t 100% settled at the restaurant despite a couple of

days standing upright in their cellar – some super fine sediment in suspension. It slightly

disturbed the nose and palate flavor and texture, but not enough to disguise a very fine,

lovely old Richebourg. Sweet, earthy nose, a bit of ‘smelly sock’ of the sort you either






accept and even like in old Burgundy (much like connoisseurship of gamey poultry, or

runny cheeses – we homo sapiens can be a little weird), or the very same smell can put

you off the whole thing. I like it. Lovely fruit sweetness still on the palate, enough

plumpness to buffer the texture, citrus rind notes point to the age, candied raspberry and

lots of socky sous bois decayed elements on the finish. Bright acidity pulls along the lovely

lofty buoyant mouthfeel. Long finish. I imagine I would rate a fully settled bottle in the

same condition higher. A pity, but still a real privilege to taste this, and very enjoyable

nonetheless.

92

1955 Richebourg, Jacques Chartenay

We added this mystery magnum at the end, not knowing much about it. It was not part of

the line up, but we threw it in to see what it was like. 1955 was actually a good vintage –

not in the league of ’52, ’53 or ’59, but perhaps next in line.

Some density of colour, full garnet, bricked, with an amber edge; sweet, high-toned nose,

a touch of almond/marzipan, sweet morello and plum fruit and ‘old wood’; sweet attack,

real intensity of good fruit, candied notes, and very ample, bold style, with an unexpected

level of alcohol and glycerin. Actually quite enjoyable as a wine, and reminded me of some

very good bottles of Châteaneuf-du-Pape from the ‘50s. So… not exactly Richebourg, even

if there may have been Richebourg in it. The pinot is there to see, but so too the

Grenache, and whatever else found its way in. The cork was blackened and pasty and old,

so whatever was concocted was likely done at the time, and the ‘sheeting’ style of stained

sediment that coated all of the inside of the bottle is also consistent with very old

powerful southern Rhône. A very decent wine in its own right, but not a true ‘Richebourg

experience’. It is, however, not uncommon to find such concoctions – many were made and

sold under such exalted appellation names in the ‘50s and ‘60s.

87

What to conclude? Well, you might feel, reading this, that I was a bit tough on the DRC

and Leroy wines. These estates do, after all, have the leading reputations. They do, and

they deserve them. In the long average they produce amongst the best wines in Burgundy

– in two very different styles. So, I am not concerned that they were not my favourite

wines this evening. I liked them well enough not to be concerned. Rather, my reflection on

this event was just how much fun it is to search wide and long and keep an open mind.

How else then might we discover how great wines like the ’80 from Hudelot-Noellat are?

It was also a reminder of just what an amazing contribution the Gros family have made

to the appellation over many generations. This dinner, like many before it, reinforced this

view for me.



Documents

Burghound Symposium - Richebourg Dinner, with Allen Meadows