I have a bottle of this in my cellar.
1) Is it most likely vinegar by now?

2) Is it worth anything?

Dog

Robert Klute wrote:
> On 24 Dec 2004 10:23:37 -0800, "Dr. Dog" >
> wrote:
>
> >I have a bottle of this in my cellar.
> >1) Is it most likely vinegar by now?
> >
> >2) Is it worth anything?
>
> It still should be good, if it has been cellared properly. It is
> getting old, so I wouldn't let it breathe before tasting, it will
fade
> quickly.
>
> I have seen it being rated all over the map. Parker doesn't like it,
> but then again I only listen to Parker if I want a BIG wine. It's
> estimated value at auction is also all over from ~$100 to ~$400.


Many thanks. I had thought, though, that 1970 was a good year for
claret. Was I mistaken?

Dog

On 24 Dec 2004 10:23:37 -0800, "Dr. Dog" >
wrote:

>I have a bottle of this in my cellar.
>1) Is it most likely vinegar by now?
>
>2) Is it worth anything?

It still should be good, if it has been cellared properly. It is
getting old, so I wouldn't let it breathe before tasting, it will fade
quickly.

I have seen it being rated all over the map. Parker doesn't like it,
but then again I only listen to Parker if I want a BIG wine. It's
estimated value at auction is also all over from ~$100 to ~$400.

On 24 Dec 2004 11:09:02 -0800, "Dr. Dog" >
wrote:

>
>Many thanks. I had thought, though, that 1970 was a good year for
>claret. Was I mistaken?
>

I was. Chateau Margaux, however, was having problems at that time.
"Coasting on its reputation" is a term that has been used. You
generally get words like understated, elegant, graceful being applied to
vintages produced during this period (60s - 70s). It wasn't until
Robert Parker that anyone would openly disparage a Premier Cru. In the
late 70s the ownership changed and the house re-established its
reputation.

There is a little bit on it in wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%E2teau_Margaux

On 24 Dec 2004 11:09:02 -0800, "Dr. Dog" >
wrote:

>
>Many thanks. I had thought, though, that 1970 was a good year for
>claret. Was I mistaken?
>

I was. Chateau Margaux, however, was having problems at that time.
"Coasting on its reputation" is a term that has been used. You
generally get words like understated, elegant, graceful being applied to
vintages produced during this period (60s - 70s). It wasn't until
Robert Parker that anyone would openly disparage a Premier Cru. In the
late 70s the ownership changed and the house re-established its
reputation.

There is a little bit on it in wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%E2teau_Margaux

On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 09:07:45 GMT, Robert Klute > wrote:

>On 24 Dec 2004 11:09:02 -0800, "Dr. Dog" >
>wrote:
>
>>
>>Many thanks. I had thought, though, that 1970 was a good year for
>>claret. Was I mistaken?
>>
>
>I was.
Correction "'It' was a very good year".

I tried the '83, and this bottle was the best wine I have ever tasted.
Period. I hope yours is just as good.

wrote:
> I tried the '83, and this bottle was the best wine I have ever
tasted.
> Period. I hope yours is just as good.

Many thanks for your good wishes. In fact, I'm a little afraid to open
it! (Will I be appreciative enough, with a relatively unschooled
palate?)

Dog

I am in no way a wine person - my wife won a dinner at ANY restaurant
in the country with no limit. They had the Margaux at $700 a bottle so
I got one, and it was so fragrant it just knocked both myself and my
wife out (metaphorically). I have never had anything like it, but then
I only ever spend around $10-30 on a bottle max.

Good luck!

Dean

> wrote:
>I am in no way a wine person - my wife won a dinner at ANY restaurant
>in the country with no limit. They had the Margaux at $700 a bottle so
>I got one, and it was so fragrant it just knocked both myself and my
>wife out (metaphorically). I have never had anything like it, but then
>I only ever spend around $10-30 on a bottle max.

I googled up "1970 margaux" and the prices and qualities are
all over the place.

--Blair
"It's a risk worth taking."