When I first heard of this cuvee I dismissed it because it was a straight Chardonnay and at that time I had no great interest in wines of this spec. Nevertheless I had bought it and several years later I managed to get a bottle of the 1988 and drank it in 2005. The one resting in my cellar was a 1996, sublime vintage, so a year later I was expecting a return of the greatness I experienced with 1988. 1988 was divine, lush, soft, elegant, no sign of age, ripe but not too big, mousse just perfection and seductive like a nice blonde. So invariably my expectations rocketed and the 96 was chilled and in the summer of 06 I opened a bottle only to notice the difference between the two vintages. Unlike 88 the 96 was robust, rich, opulent and strangely almost explosive. Very citrus driven, with hints of limes and minerality. The minerality was present in the 88 but in character it was far more seductive and just downright happy whereas the 96 was like a shocking slap in the face. Then I tasted the 2000 and I found it similar to the 96 but the last bottle I tasted the 02 I was back on the ride of seductive elegance, soft tickling of fragrant citrus and jolly enthusiasm of happiness and carelessness....so how can anyone ever have a favourite Champagne I ask?