Roger C Bohmrich, MW - Managing Partner, Millesima USA

Following humbly in the large shadow cast by the already fabled 2005 vintage, 2006 was destined to be perceived as inferior regardless of its true quality. Some buyers avoided the April primeur tastings in Bordeaux, having already judged 2006 as deficient based on reports of the uneven weather during the growing season. In so doing, they have missed a year of many wonderful surprises, some of which attain a very high level indeed. In the context of recent vintages, it is challenging to place 2006 firmly at one standard given the irregularity within and across communes and districts. That said, the best 2006's on both banks have more dimension, depth and sheer interest than, say, the 2004's. Overall, as Robert Parker has written, 2006 has produced "many fine wines" and is "superior to 2004" (and thus should command higher prices than 2004 based solely on intrinsic quality). The 2006's also surpass 2002 and avoid the exaggerated if voluptuous ripeness of 2003. We can say that the very top 2006's are great wines with exceptional concentration and precision, and they will have a very long life in the bottle. 

The 2006 growing season was hotter and drier than average, with hot weather in June and July followed by a wetter, cooler August. Temperatures took off once more in the first part of September, with storms mid-month, and rot threatened in many districts. Early-ripening white varieties and Merlot were favored as a rule while the Cabernets presented a greater challenge to attain physiological maturity. While in years not long past vagaries such as these would have defined vintage outcome, today estates reduce yields and control rot by crop thinning, promote ripening by leaf plucking, and sort diligently after picking. The very top properties eliminate those parcels or lots which are unsuitable from the grand vin, sometimes severely as in 2006. In other words, it is no longer possible to focus solely on weather patterns to draw definitive conclusions about vintage quality - a practice that is, however, still too prevalent. Only by tasting wines such as the 2006's can we come to a reliable understanding of vintage quality and assess how well individual properties performed (on a preliminary basis, as always, based on barrel samples).

Overall, the Right Bank was perhaps the most consistently successful in 2006 despite difficulties with ripeness for Cabernet Franc.  Pomerol was the year's single best appellation (together with Lalande de Pomerol, which certainly merits attention from smart shoppers), having made wines with generosity, warmth and attractive red fruit scents. In St Emilion, the successes are medium-bodied, attractively fleshy wines while others struggle with green, harsh tannins - a question of polyphenolic maturities and selection. On the Left Bank, Pessac-Leognan stands out for its excellent, finely balanced whites and for many very attractive, focused reds. As far as the Medoc is concerned (Margaux, St Julien, Pauillac, St Estephe, Haut-Médoc...), there is significant variability and those wines that show hard tannins, pointing out the need for careful buying.  This should not detract, however, from the many promising wines which have cool, fresh fruit and real intensity and definition. The very top performers exhibit noble purity and backward, tightly wound palates hiding impressive concentration; in other words, they are true Medoc wines in a classic mold (and not New World look-alikes)  that will require - and certainly reward - lengthy cellaring. In sum, an informed amateur can find many good to excellent wines in the 2006 vintage by relying on the advice of the most dependable critics, or by consulting knowledgeable, trustworthy professionals who have tasted a sufficient number of wines from barrel.