Le blog du Grand Jury

In an e-mail I got recently from a German merchant specilalized on Burgundy I read that Claude Bourguignon - a well known specialist pedology and microbiology of agricultural soil - meant that Perse "destroyed" the terroir of Pavie since he and his team decided to remove the soil in some parcels of the vineyard and to replace it. Based on the information of this merchant an article with the same content could be read in the RVF (cf. http://gje.mabulle.com/index.php/2008/03/21/127485 ). Futhermore this merchant mentioned the GJE in his letter and the good results Pavie always gets from the GJE. Between the lines it was obvious that still the myth exists Pavie is a shallow dazzler and due to its power it dominates more elegant wines. Well - since I tasted several times with the GJE I have my own opinion.

First of all there are two groups of wine experts. The first group is very interested in every detail of winemaking. The soil, the microclimate, the yeasts, the insects who are living in the vineyards, the lab analyses etc. The second group of people doesn't care too much what happens in the vineyards and in the cellars. Instead this they focus very much on what is finally in the glass. In the end wine is made for having fun. My experience is: The absolute majority of people doesn't care verymuch for scientific analysis. Probably 90% of the wine drinking community only asks: Is this wine worth the money, do I like it, is it really interesting, complex, long in mouth etc. I admit: this is roughly what I ask if I have to taste a wine blind. In the moment you have a given wine on your palate, it's not really interesting how it's made. What counts is the quality you feel right in this moment. Does it help anyone to know wheter a wine that doesn't perform well is made with care on every detail? No! If the wine doesn't convince a taster no explanation will make it better.

Pavie is a wine which has prooven that it can convince a large group of wine experts in blind tastings. If they come from the United States or Europe. If they are more in love with Bordeaux or with Burgundy. If they are professional critics like Michel Bettane or Robert Parker or wine lovers like me. I mean - if Monsieur Bourguignon is right than it should be impossible to produce a wine like Pavie on a destroyed terroir. Even experts like Jancis Robinson who hated Pavie at barrel tastings loved the 2001 in a recent blind tasting. What arguments are left if things like these happen? Especially the 2001 Pavie I tasted together with the Grand Jury (I was a guest) is anything else as a blockbuster with jammy fruit. This wine is great IMO. It was great when very young, it is great today and I guess great in 10 years from now. What should be wrong with this beauty? O.k. - life is full of surprises. If Pavie 2001 should fall apart within the next few years, that would come as a very big surprise.

I like to add: It is interesting to talk to winemakers. And it is helpful for everyone interested in wine to know what happens during the winemaking process. But honestly: The better the wine, the fewer words are neccessary. The modern era Pavie is a very impressive Bordeaux, IMO. I have tasted every wine made between 1998 and 2004 from this terroir. I like them all, with the exception of the 2003: I don't like the slightly overripe elements this wine has IMO. All the other Pavies are among the best Bordeaux of today - not only for me, but also almost for every wine lover.

I admit: When people read tasting results, some have the idea that wines which aren't among the top ten are not worth drinking or buying. That is an abolute misunderstanding. I do have (and taste) a lot of wines with no top ranking in my cellar. They are cheaper but not that much worse. They are often accessible earlier. And sometimes they are a surprise for my guests. I love the moments when I serve a rather unknown wine blind and people guess a famous Grand Cru. An example from a few days ago: I served a 1999 Les Carmes Haut Brion blind and almost everybody was sure that this must be a middle aged Haut Brion. Nedless to say: the more moments I have like this, the more I am sceptical about this terroir stories and that the First Growth Bordeaux are absolutely better than any other Médoc/Graves/Margaux etc. This is an academic sight often prooven beeing very doubtful in blind tastings.