Michael,
>
> Caution: I was talking about that specific cask tasting week in
> April 2002. I had bought some LTC en primeur (at 16.09 euros, VAT
> and delivery included), but haven't tasted it yet.

I can purchase it at 22 euros VAT included, and I pick the wine at the shop
;-)
>
> It's highly probable that there are better wines, but then they
> simply did not show as good as LTC on that specific occasion. I
> just looked up my TNs, Léoville Barton scored 84: "Cardboardy,
> although good structure", very much looks like a sub-par cask
> sample, so your comment makes very much sense.

I do not have a great experience with Leoville Barton but I think I read
somewhere that their wines are usually very tight while in cask and in
their youth. However, I found the 2001 truly an excellent wine.
>
> In my experience, even if clarets taste "international",
> "parkerized", "Michel Rolland vinified" (which happens to be the
> case with post-2000 LTC) in their youth, these oak influenced
> aromas tend to disappear with due bottle age.

>
> All this supports my theory that after 20 years in bottle it's
> more or less irrelevant whether the wine had been vinified in new
> oak, old oak, stainless steel or concrete vats. While being very
> important in its youth, the differences totally edge out with
> time, imho.

That is interesting. I tend to drink wines too young, specially wines that
are new for me. When do you think I should drink my remaining bottles of
LTC 2001?

Best,

S.