Pale colour, good fine mousse. Very light and dry with excellent clean lines. Some wood on the palate with an undertow of hedgerow flowers. Not noticeably aged, plenty of acidity to give it some zip. A stony finish.
All round excellent champagne, no rush. 93ish.
2002 Bollinger Grand Annee
Forum rules
Anything but Port, this includes all non-Port fortified wines even if they call themselves Port. There is a search facility for this part of the forum.
Anything but Port, this includes all non-Port fortified wines even if they call themselves Port. There is a search facility for this part of the forum.
-
- Cockburn’s Special Reserve
- Posts: 41
- Joined: 23:26 Wed 04 Dec 2013
- Location: Southampton, UK
Re: 2002 Bollinger Grand Annee
There was even more acidity -- too much for my taste -- until about 2013. Then the acidity integrated, the wine came on song, and my family drank the rest of the case.LGTrotter wrote:Pale colour, good fine mousse. Very light and dry with excellent clean lines. Some wood on the palate with an undertow of hedgerow flowers. Not noticeably aged, plenty of acidity to give it some zip. A stony finish.
Sigh.
I don't have enough experience to assign scores out of 100, but that sounds about right ... though of the 2002 Champagnes I like Dom Perignon most.LGTrotter wrote:All round excellent champagne, no rush. 93ish.
John
- Alex Bridgeman
- Graham’s 1948
- Posts: 14896
- Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
- Location: Berkshire, UK
Re: 2002 Bollinger Grand Annee
Presumably this was drunk whilst at the cinema watching Absolutely Fabulous.
Top Ports in 2023: Taylor 1896 Colheita, b. 2021. A perfect Port.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
-
- Dalva Golden White Colheita 1952
- Posts: 3707
- Joined: 17:45 Fri 19 Oct 2012
- Location: Somerset, UK
Re: 2002 Bollinger Grand Annee
Shame, as I think this has more to offer. I may have to get some more if I can find it reasonably priced. Mine too was drunk with family (rather than at AbFab).John Owlett wrote:There was even more acidity -- too much for my taste -- until about 2013. Then the acidity integrated, the wine came on song, and my family drank the rest of the case.LGTrotter wrote:Pale colour, good fine mousse. Very light and dry with excellent clean lines. Some wood on the palate with an undertow of hedgerow flowers. Not noticeably aged, plenty of acidity to give it some zip. A stony finish.
Sigh.
My numerical scores are pretty rudimentary, just an indication that I thought it a few notches up from a very good wine but not quite at the amazing level.John Owlett wrote:I don't have enough experience to assign scores out of 100, but that sounds about right ... though of the 2002 Champagnes I like Dom Perignon most.LGTrotter wrote:All round excellent champagne, no rush. 93ish.
John
The Dom is, I would concur, a masterpiece. And that too is starting to wake up and shake a leg. Try it, if you can fight off the family long enough to get a taste!