I have one bottle of the '96 Calon Segur in a spilt. Who thinks this is ready to go now?

mdriver, I went to a tasting at the Wine Club of 6 96 Bordeaux's vs 6 2000 Bordeaux's a few weeks ago. As a result I'm selling all my 96 Bordeaux's. As a group they were not doing well. Colors far passed their ages, acidity was out of whack and fruit more mature than I'd expect. These wine were not 'shut down', they were disjointed and over acidic with green notes and mature flavors. 96 Margaux, which I think is a Parker 100 point, I gave 93 and was by far the best of the group. I gave Cos an 88??? as my sample was effected by chucks of sediment.

I'd say give it a shot now, but that's my mostly uniformed opinion.

Hmmm...can't say I'm at all happy to hear that. Although, I must say your experience is bit inconsistent with my most recent taste of the '96 vintage - a Clos du Marquis. I have about 2 mixed cases of '96 Bdx that I was hoping would be around for a while.

I haven't really followed it because I rarely read the Squires board but I understand that Parker and Suckling (Laube?? someone at W.S. anyway) are butting heads over the 96 vintage. Suckling has said they are overrated and not coming around well, Parker is sticking by his ratings. Anyway that's hersay, I'm sure many more here know more about whatever is the dispute. But from my tasting the 96's were a big disapointment. and the line up included Cos, Margaux, V.C. and LLC., some big hitters with big Parker and WS scores and Margaux was the only one I had over 90 points.

mdriver- unless you have plenty of 750's, i would not touch the 96 calon segur. it would be a waste. based on weather conditions and previous similar vintages, the 96 vintage is going to need plenty of time.

suckling and parker have been battling over the 95 and 96 vintage for years. they both agree on the quality of the right bank wines ( neither scores the 96's high ), although suckling rates the 95 right banks higher. their differences are over the left bank wines, specifically pauillac, st. estephe and st. julian. parker believes the 96's are of classic quality, while suckling believes the 95's are of classic quality. interestingly, both believe the other vintage is still of excellent quality.

i have had a couple of 95's in the last few years and found none of them compelling or even close. i have only had the 96 lynch bages recently and found the nose wonderful, but the palate in need of time. it was not over acidic. i am trying my best to keep my hands off my 96's as i believe this vintage is made up of wines that need time.

tilly-is it possible that some of the wines you tasted were damaged? your descriptions sound like wines that have accelerated the aging curve and that does not make sense for the type of vintage 1996 was on the left bank. also, many other tasting notes for 96's in general describe wines that are nowhere near being ready.

ojeffso2, I can't speak for provance, they were opened by the Wine Club in Santa Clara. Although it's possible all six bottles came from the same source, I think it's unlikely. I was suprised how poorly the wines showed, but do qualify it's the only 96's I've tasted in the last 2 years.

Off topic and only meant to clarify a common misconception. After all this is in the "Learning" thread and as a "wine geek" I know you would want this info.

A "split" is not the same as a "half" bottle. A half-bottle is 375ml (or half of the standard 750ml bottle. A split is only 187ml and is used mostly for Champagne.

Now that, I did not know. Thanks, david.

I recently had a 96 Beychevelle- While not in the league of LLC and Margaux, it was a solid 90 point wine with classic left bank character and probably a good 5-10 years left. Based on that, I am very hopeful for the bigger names.

They need a name for 375s then. 'Spilt' sounds like an OK name but if it ain't it ain't. So what'll it be?