From the dammaged label stock- and because I was bored last night. I broke two bones in my foot yesterday (very minor)and wasn't allowed to do anything last night- I hate being immobile!!

Colour: Still red but very dark heading towards black, very vibrant with hints of bricking (but very minor.)
Nose: Initially soft spiced notes of aniseed, but this developed into powerful cherry, earthy chocolate (savoury I guess) and hints of plum, pepper (very light) and confectionary (also very light.) Still quite young on the nose although the savoury characters developed further as the wine was consumed over the evening.
Palate: Acids and tannins intergrated well on the palate creating a fusion of textures. The flavours played in and out of this making a very harmonious wine that lingered fro a long time after the wine had disappeared down the gullet. The finish was outstanding.
Overall: A yeah yum!!! Texture, power, concentration and elegance- 98 points on the Jeremy scale.

EDIT: Confused colour with another tasting note- its very dark.

I had this last July along with the 1990 Chave and 1978 Chave during one course of a fantastic meal. This wine was just huge. It attacked the palate with lots of pepper and dark fruits. This wine needs another 5 to 10 years. The 90 Chave much the same but a bit lighter and more ready to drink. The 78 Chave was drinking fantastic. I'd recommend one to anyone who like Rhones.

I decanted for about three hours before drinking and I would say it was well intergrated needing more on the five year side than the ten year- but hey each to their own....

Interesting that I found the peppery notes to be receding, whereas they were overt in your expirience.

La Chapelle needs a lot of time. The 1978, 1979, 1982, and 1985 are drinking well now, though the 1985 may still be improving. According to Parker, this wine hasn't been as successful in the last ten years as it has been in the past.

Board-O, as you know, we had the '88 fairly recently and it was nowhere near ready to drink. Still quite tannic and closed, but you could see the potential.

jb

board-o-if you remember, we recently had the 1991 version of this wine. a certain person told us it was the best la chapelle of the 90's. even better than the 1990. you would not know from that night.

The 91 sold for around $50 at auction not too long ago...

Thats really interesting.
Has anyone here had the 91 in comparison to the 90?
If the 91 was even as good as the 90 I'll be out looking for bottles.

In all honesty though I found it youthful, but not brashfully young. The fruit was starting to head towards those savoury-cedary/aniseed cinamon I often pick with older NR's. Maybe an example of bottle variation but I wouldn't think so. John Hancock was the man who organised a case of this for me. He did vintage work from 1988-94 at Jabolett, and I'm sure it was stored properly before I recieved it....

Boardo,
Yeah but I was bored with broken bones- we're allowed to sin now and again ain't we?

From what I remember the 91 wasnt that great...Wouldnt pay more than $50 for it....

tt-from i remember, the 91 was a high 80's wine. i would not pay $50 for the wine.

So we agree

91 scored 88 points according to RP.
Livingston (an Englishman so take your scoring into account- more savoury etc..) 4.5 stars (95+).