What an incredible treat to drink these three wines next to each other. The Grand Puy Lacoste 1990 opens its spectacle with an overwhelmingly beautiful display of intensity and harmony of otherworldly and abundantly ripe fruit. That is a lot of superlatives and yes: it is as if you were dropped from space onto a heavenly meadow at its peak of summer. Clearly more masculine that the Palmer 1989 next to it, with some seasoned-leather quality, the rich fruit all meshed together in a feast for the palate. More blatant ambition to please thru impact compared to the more feminine sophisticated Palmer. The Lacoste has a very subtle bitterness in the aftertaste that is rather typical for Pauillac. In my humble opinion the best Grand Puy Lacoste I have ever tasted (and I drank this wine more than a dozen times). Frankly the 1982 is no competition here, nor are the 2000 or 2005. The 1990 is a class of its own. Fully mature now and at it (loooong) peak
And if you think that is spectacular: try the Palmer 1989, which was next. I was eagerly waiting to see whether that, seriously, could surpass the Grand Puy Lacoste 1990, and...... yes, it did. On top of all the beauty of the Lacoste, the Palmer adds a tantalizing dimension of jaw gum stimulating but ever so subtle acidity, like minerality submerged in red and black fruit of , comparable to a combination of pomegranate & papaya. It is even more complex, more subtle and for that matter even more magical. It’s aftertaste lasts more than a minute and is still sticking to my palate as we speak many minutes later. One of the most beautiful Margaux ever.