Château Pétrus
During many years of taking part in "blind horizontal" tastings (tasting several wines from the same vintage without knowing which wine is which) of most major vintages I have given Pétrus my highest points of all Pomerols in most tastings – not because it is the most powerful wine but because it is the most complex and fascinating of them all.
No doubt about it, Pétrus is deep coloured, powerful and concentrated, but it also has the complexity, balance and ability to age to make it a truly great wine.
I am personally not a great fan of wines made predominately from the Merlot grape, they often tend to be flabby, alcoholic and boring, lacking the backbone and complexity of a Cabernet Sauvignon based wine. The secret of Pétrus being so different is, apart from the perfection in the care in the vineyards and the cellar, in its unique soil. It is lying on a "buttonhole" of clay almost exclusive to Pétrus in Pomerol. Underneath this is a layer of hard iron rich soil. This brings an elegance that with age reminds me of a top Pauillac in character coupled with the soft fruit and voluptiousness of a Cheval Blanc.
Drinking Pétrus can be an unforgetable experience and I have been fortunate to taste most of its great vintages. I often gets asked by winelovers who would like to taste Pétrus about my advice. The first advice is to always pick a good or, if financially possible, a great vintage. If tasting a poor vintage the wine will be better than most others from this vintage but will not show you what Pétrus really is about. My second advice is to get a wine that is at least 10 to 15 years old as a very young wine is often unapproachable and its taste dominated by oak and tannins. Pétrus may be impressive when young but it ages fantastically well and will need longer to reach its optimum than any other right bank wine.
Vintages:
Pre-war vintages are very rare and variable in quality.
Up to 1961 it was common for Pétrus to sell part of its harvest to a number of négociants who would bottle the wines themselves. As a rule these bottlings can be very good, often as good as the château bottlings – in particular the bottlings from van-der-Meulen.
1924 – deep colour, very good nose and jammy fruit with some tannin on the palate. From a doublemagnum at a Rodenstock event.
1928 – A magnum from Hardy Rodenstock was amazing with sweet fruit. Another bottle with a pale colour and very lightweight was ageing badly. Reading Penning-Rowsells and Peppercorns description of the 1928 being very pale and weak already decades ago leading me to have doubts about the magnum.
1929 – deep colour, very sweet – almost sickly sweet. Fake?
1934 – very good with concentrated fruit. Touch of eucalyptus on the nose. Very good and youthful. Out of an imperial at a Rodenstock event.
1943 – an oxidised and tired bottle.
1945 - a very impressive deep coloured wine, very concentrated and powerful. A Cuvelier bottling getting a bit old and lacking the class oft he château bottling.
1947 - one of the greatest legends of Bordeaux. I have had the great fortune to drink this a large number of times and it has always been extremely impressive. The van der Meulen bottling is as good as the château bottling. Great concentration of fruit with a distinct sweetness on the palate. Later tastings have shown less power and an almost burgundian sweetness and elegance. Beware of a large number of fakes.
1948 – one bottle ageing and tannic. Another very, very good. An unknown negociant bottling was too sweet and tarty.
1949 – the château bottling is a marvellous and lovely wine. A curious 1949 in a burgundy bottle was ageing badly. Another in 2004 was fantastic. A van-der-Meulen bottling was quite closed.
1950 – very good, tar and truffles on the nose, soft tannins. A brilliant van-den-Hove bottling.
1952 – a beautiful, sweet charming wine.
1953 – sweet and delicate. Ageing a bit now.
1955 – one corked bottle.
1959 – is spectacularly good and I have drunk it more than a dozen times over the last couple of years. Very good bottlings from the château as well as from van-der-Velde and Lafitte of Bruxelles. Still reserves for another 20 years.
1961 - another legendary Pétrus vintage. Very rare and extremely good. Beware of a large number of fakes.
1962 – elegant and quite young out of a jeroboam in 1992.
1964 – a great wine showing how good the 1964 vintage was on the right bank. Tasted several times – always fantastic.
1966 - good and elegant, if not as opulent as other vintages.
1967 - still very good. The wine of the vintage.
1970 – a wine with good concentration of lovely sweet fruit. Very good.
1971 – this is my personal favourite Pétrus. Not the most powerful one but with such class and style!
1973 - lacking charm. Drink up. Good in a magnum.
1975 – wonderful nose. Great concentration and a bit exotic. None of the hard 1975 tanninns.
1978 – a bit dull.
1979 – very good for the vintage. Quite tannic finish.
1980 - surprisingly good for the vintage.
1981 - quite good, but not really spectacular.
1982 - has a great reputation and is one of the most expensive vintages of Pétrus. I have never been that impressed – certainly very good but not great. Lacking a bit of backbone and class for me.
1983 - quite good but not really a great wine. Plummy. Mature.
1985 - a beautiful, sweet and elegant wine.
1986 – sweet fruit, charming and quite long. Good for the challenging vintage.
1988 – a very good wine. It has taken longer to open up than the’89 and’90 but is very impressive now.
1989 and 1990 are stunningly spectacular wines and millionaires will have fun comparing them over the next decades. Tasting them blind at ten years of age I gave them both 19,5 points out of 20 and now wonder why I was so mean.
1989 – a very great wine, slightly roasted in character. Wonderful now but will last for ages.
1990 – similar to the 1989. Maybe a bit softer. Perfection.
1993 - soft fruit. Very good now.
1994 – very good. More Médoc than Pomerol in style. Bit tannic.
1995 - a very good Pétrus and one of the wines of the vintage.
1996 – quite closed and powerful.
1997 – spicy fruit. Charming. Tannins a touch unripe.
1998 - a great wine. Very good now but will need time to reach ist potential.
1999 – deep colour, touch cedary and licquerice. Soft tannins. Long. Very good.
2000 - a brooding giant. Great concentration and soft tannins. Long. Fabulous future.
2001 – a very good wine. Sweet fruit and good balance. Good now.
2002 – good to drink now. Quite charming. None of the green tannins so typical oft he vintage.
2005 – very good and with soft tannins. Can be enjoyed already.
2007 – sweet and lovely to drink now.
2010 – similar to the 2000. Gigantic and long.