The Auswine Forum

<b>1983 Domaine Leflaive Puligny-Montrachet</b>
Light gold but with stunning clarity. Bouquet of freshly squeezed lemons, hint of botrytis, apricots, ripe pineapples. Long and full. Palate is excellent. Second day opened after even further. Very nice primary and secondary fruit, with refreshing acidity throughout. Very good length. Little oak noticeable. Quite elegant too with good balance.
<b>Very Good 17.0 / 20</b>

<b>1983 Domaine Leflaive Clavoillon Puligny-Montrachet</b>
Light gold with again exceptional clarity. Bouquet is even lovelier – minerally and steely with no residual sweetness. Refined. The palate is seamless and balanced. Excellent length. A meticulous blend of primary and secondary characters with a smidgin of subtle vanilla oak. Slightly more concentrated than the aforesaid wine. Lots of life left in this one but top drinking now.
<b>Very Good 17.5 / 20</b>

<b>1985 Domaine Louis Latour Corton Charlemagne.</b>
Light gold with excellent colour and clarity. Nose is restrained and slightly unyielding. With time, subtle hints of lychee, honey, nuts and cashews, vanilla essence emerged. A complete antithesis to the overt bulldozer tropical Aussie style and all the better for it. Much more demanding intellectually and really quite lovable. The palate quality shines though. Excellent balance, almost exceptional but for the very slightly excess acidity on the end. Integration of fruit (reserved, not too developed), acid, oak and 13% alcohol is textbook stuff. Still quite youthful fruit with crisp lemon hues. With over 24 hours in an open standing glass, it hardly deteriorated.
<b>Excellent 18.0 / 20</b>

Baby Chickpea wrote:<b>1983 Domaine Leflaive Puligny-Montrachet</b>
Light gold but with stunning clarity. Bouquet of freshly squeezed lemons, hint of botrytis, apricots, ripe pineapples. Long and full. Palate is excellent. Second day opened after even further. Very nice primary and secondary fruit, with refreshing acidity throughout. Very good length. Little oak noticeable. Quite elegant too with good balance.
<b>Very Good 17.0 / 20</b>

<b>1983 Domaine Leflaive Clavoillon Puligny-Montrachet</b>
Light gold with again exceptional clarity. Bouquet is even lovelier – minerally and steely with no residual sweetness. Refined. The palate is seamless and balanced. Excellent length. A meticulous blend of primary and secondary characters with a smidgin of subtle vanilla oak. Slightly more concentrated than the aforesaid wine. Lots of life left in this one but top drinking now.
<b>Very Good 17.5 / 20</b>

<b>1985 Domaine Louis Latour Corton Charlemagne.</b>
Light gold with excellent colour and clarity. Nose is restrained and slightly unyielding. With time, subtle hints of lychee, honey, nuts and cashews, vanilla essence emerged. A complete antithesis to the overt bulldozer tropical Aussie style and all the better for it. Much more demanding intellectually and really quite lovable. The palate quality shines though. Excellent balance, almost exceptional but for the very slightly excess acidity on the end. Integration of fruit (reserved, not too developed), acid, oak and 13% alcohol is textbook stuff. Still quite youthful fruit with crisp lemon hues. With over 24 hours in an open standing glass, it hardly deteriorated.
<b>Excellent 18.0 / 20</b>

Danny

Thanks, I don't ever get to try most of these wines, but your notes are excellent.

Gavin Trott wrote:
Danny

Thanks, I don't ever get to try most of these wines, but your notes are excellent.

how would you know though if you have not tried the wines?

Anonymous wrote:

Gavin Trott wrote:
Danny

Thanks, I don't ever get to try most of these wines, but your notes are excellent.

how would you know though if you have not tried the wines?

How would I know if he writes excellent notes?

its easy, he writes excellent notes.

Would my note for the same wine be the same, probably not.

What's your point though?