Bordeaux is incredibly varied – with hugely different styles of wine produced across its appellations. Here, we run through everything you really need to know about each of the main subregions – and the best estates in each  

Explore Bordeaux, subregions, their wines and top estates – in Saint-Estephe, Pauillac, Saint-Julien, Margaux, Graves, Pessac-Leognan, Pomerol, Saint-Emilion 

Your guide to Bordeaux’s subregions, wines and top producers

Your guide to Bordeaux’s subregions   

The 2019 vintage in Montalcino has been hotly anticipated – following on from two trickier years, 2017 and 2018 (although we found the latter to offer some very elegant wines), it’s a year that seemed set to receive critical acclaim to match the lauded 2016.  A wet winter replenished water reserves, with a damp spring and warm, dry summer. There were no serious extremes in the conditions, with rain showers arriving in September allowing for a harvest of juicy berries, with little disease pressure, from the middle of the month, finishing in early October. It delivered both quality and quantity, and from what we’ve tasted the wines are extremely impressive – combining power and elegance, offering approachable yet clearly age-worthy styles with effortless balance.  Vinous – Antonio Galloni  For Antonio Galloni, one of the defining features of the 2019 vintage is its consistency: “The entire region excelled, from southwest to east and northeast to west. Frankly stated, finding a 2019 that doesn’t show remarkable balance, vivid fruit and freshness is a difficult task,” he writes.   The stress-free growing season produced wines of “utter harmony”, “a blending of power and elegance in a way seldom seen”. He explains that many producers describe the wines as “crunchy”, something he feels is apt, and compares the wines to the 2016s, but with more energy and the aforementioned crunchy tannins. “This is a vintage of radiance and appeal,” he says of 2019, a vintage with wines that are aromatically expressive, offer sense of place and typicity – often earning descriptors such as “classic, racy, cool-toned, crunchy and sleek”, as well as being built for the cellar (maturing over the next 10-15 years or more). It is, he writes, “the vintage we’ve all been waiting for”.  He emphasises that it isn’t just the 2019s that are so enticing, but that the “high-energy and fruit-forward” 2021 Rossos that make for “an embarrassment of riches” with the current releases. The 2021 Rossos offer “charming, wildly aromatic, drink-me-now personalities” – and are, he says “an excellent choice for collectors”, he suggests, providing “open drinking windows and gobs of pleasure” while the 2019s mature in the cellar.  Antonio Galloni’s top 2019s: Canalicchio di Sopra Vigna La Casaccia, Il Marroneto Madonna delle Grazie, Le Potazzine, Pian dell’Orino Bassolino di Sopra, Valdicava Vigna Montosoli, Mastrojanni Vigna Schiena d’Asino, Canalicchio di Sopra Vigna Montosoli, Baricci, Le Ragnaie Casanovina Montosoli, Argiano Vigna del Suolo, Altesino Vigna Montosoli  Explore Antonio Galloni’s full report, notes and scores on Vinous (subscribers only)   Wine Advocate – Monica Larner  “Now is the time to take a closer look at this storied Tuscan appellation,” advises Monica Larner – who is clearly excited by the quality of the 2019 vintage in Montalcino.   For Larner, 2019 offers “good balance between acidity, concentration and tannins” – with the latter more elegant than those of the 2018s. The wines are concentrated and weighty, yet balanced and elegant, and therefore remind her of 2007 or 2015. As other critics note, the wines are likely to be approachable in youth yet have the acidity and structure to age. The season was “uniformly easy” in both the vineyard and winery, and she highlights the large number of wines scoring between 97 and 99 points.  While both Kerin O’Keefe and Antonio Galloni feel 2019 has the edge on 2016, Larner believes that “2016 remains superior in my view in terms of elegance and longevity”, although 2019 “ranks close”. For her, one of the reasons the vintage feels so significant is that it marks the beginning of what she perceives as a “new wave” for Montalcino, with a group of producers pushing quality forward, inspired by Burgundy and Barolo to make wines with “vibrant flavors, light and energy”.  Monica Larner’s top 2019s: Le Ragnaie V. V., Il Marroneto Madonna delle Grazie, Poggio di Sotto, Giodo, Salicutti Teatro, La Ragnaie Passo del Lume Spento, Canalicchio di Sopra Vigna Montosoli, Castello Romitorio Filo di Seta, Casanova di Neri Giovanni Neri, Ciacci Piccolomini d’Aragona Pianrosso, Pieve Santa Restituta Sugarille  Explore Monica Larner’s full report, notes and scores on the Wine Advocate (subscribers only)  Kerin O’Keefe  You may not be familiar with the name Kerin O’Keefe, but she is one of the leading Italian wine critics. She was the Italian Editor for Wine Enthusiast for almost a decade, before she set up her own platform, however she is perhaps best known for her most recent book, Barolo and Barbaresco: The King and Queen of Italian Wine, and also wrote a book on Brunello di Montalcino in 2012.  For O’Keefe, the 2019 vintage is clearly an excellent year for Montalcino. “I’ve never tasted so many drop-dead-gorgeous young Brunellos from a single vintage,” she writes. It “has definitely lived up to its lofty reputation” and “the 2019s are overall even better than the 2016s”, she says. The wines combine “intensity, exuberance and great fruit as well as balance”, with many estates making their best wines ever. The growing season was “ideal”, and most 2019s offer “vital energy and refined tannins that allow the wines to showcase their [terroir]”.  Of course, while “it’s hard to find any defects with the 2019s”, there are of course some “more densely concentrated wines with generous alcohol levels”. Most, however, are “incredibly fragrant”, “full-bodied”, with “great energy” and “taut but refined tannins”, with the best combining body and finesse. She anticipates the wines ageing beautifully over the next 20 or so years.  Kerin O’Keefe’s top 2019s: Conti Constanti, L’Aietta, Le Chiuse, Ciacci Piccolomini d’Aragona Pianrosso, Gianni Brunelli, Canalicchio di Sopra, Gorelli, La Gerla, Lisini, Mastrojanni Vigna Loreto, Podere Le Ripi Cielo d’Ulisse, Salicutti Sorgente, Talenti Piero, Ciacci Piccolomini d’Aragona  Explore Kerin O’Keefe’s full report, notes and scores on her site (subscribers only)  jancisrobinson.com – Walter Speller  The comparison between 2016 and 2019 continues in Walter Speller’s report and he highlights how divided producers are on which is better. All agree, however, that 2019 provided a growing season without extremes – something “which has become the definition of a great year”.  He draws comparisons between 2004 (which offered quantity and quality), as well as 2015. “I’m not entirely convinced 2019 has the same pedigree as 2016,” Speller writes. While there are some outstanding wines, he feels there are wines with stubborn tannins – and he doesn’t find it as consistent as other critics, but rather confirms that the best producers make fantastic wines year in, year out. He emphasises, as well, that quality is determined by producer rather than location in the region.   Walter Speller’s top 2019s: Il Marroneto Madonna delle Grazie, Canalicchio di Sopra Montosoli, Conti Constanti, Le Chiuse, Canalicchio di Sopra, Pieve Santa Restituta Sugarille, Le Ragnaie Casanovina Montosoli, Capanna, San Polino Helichrysum, Le Ragnaie V. V., Sesti, Fuligni  Explore Walter Speller’s full report, notes and scores on jancisrobinson.com (subscribers only)   James Suckling  James Suckling remarks that, as a growing season, 2019 was “a throwback to the late 1990s”, echoing other critics in saying that producers found it an easy year with no major challenges in the vineyard and winery. “I loved them,” he writes of the wines, enjoying a “crunchy and pure fruit character” in many. His two 100-point wines (Casanova di Neri Giovanni Neri and Valdicava Vigna Montosoli) have “incredible clarity of fruit and fine tannins as well as a transparency that takes them to their unique soils and locations on the hillsides surrounding Montalcino”.  Suckling also highlights how there is decreasing emphasis on new barriques, with old oak and larger casks increasingly favoured by producers in the region, as well as a growing number of single-site wines.  While he notes that producers compare the year to 2010, 2015 and 2016 (or some combination of those years), for him they are closest to 2004, 1997 or 1998 – having a “neoclassical character” thanks to their “agility and harmony”, and recommends giving them three to five years in bottle “to come into their own”. Whichever year you compare it to, however, Suckling is clear that “2019 is definitely a vintage to buy”.  James Suckling’s top 2019s: Casanova di Neri Giovanni Neri, Valdicava Vigna Montosoli, Giodo, Siro Pacenti Vecchie Vigne, Argiano Vigna del Suolo, Cerbaia, Fuligni, Tenuta Luce  Explore James Suckling’s full report, notes and scores on his site (subscribers only)  Jeb Dunnuck – Audrey Frick The latest report to be released on Montalcino is courtesy of Audrey Frick, Jeb Dunnuck’s Italian correspondent. She reports that 2019 wines are “exceptional and offer consistent greatness across the region”. She compares the wines to those of 2015 for their depth and concentration, 2016 for the vibrancy and tension, and 2010, saying that they offer “outstanding freshness, incredible balance of richness, and a great deal of complexity”. No matter your tastes, there is, she says “something for everyone regardless of style”. The easy growing season, with no major heat spikes or challenges, has resulted in a vintage that is defined by its “completeness” and advises “collectors are going to want to snatch up top bottles from across the region”. She highlights Poggio di Sotto and Il Marroneto Madonna delle Grazie in particular, identifying them as two, contrasting wines that “highlight the incredible potential of this vintage”. Audrey Frick’s top 2019s: Il Marroneto Madonna delle Grazie, Canalicchio di Sopra Vigna La Casaccia, Casanova di Neri Giovanni Neri, Gianni Brunelli, Giodo, Le Chiuse, Le Ragnaie V. V., Pieve Santa Restituta Rennina, Poggio di Sotto, Val di Suga Poggio al Granchio Explore Audrey Frick's full report, notes and scores on the Jeb Dunnuck site (subscribers only) Browse all current listings of 2019 Brunello di Montalcino or read more Editorial 

Following on the heels of 2017 and 2018, the 2019 vintage seems like a blessing for Montalcino – a year to rival 2016. As the Brunello di Montalcinos from the year are released, we provide a round-up of what the top critics are saying about the vintage – as well as their top-scoring wines

The leading critics’ views on 2019 Brunello di Montalcino as well as their top-scoring wines: Antonio Galloni, Monica Larner, Kerin O’Keefe and Walter Speller

Brunello di Montalcino 2019 – critics’ round-up 

Brunello di Montalcino 2019: what the critics are saying

Until I joined Vinfolio, the US arm of our business, I hadn’t heard of Ch. Belle-Brise. But I rapidly fell in love with this little-known, yet much-loved Pomerol property. Our retrospective was to be held at three-star Michelin SingleThread in Healdsburg (Sonoma County, California), and examine 23 vintages of Belle-Brise, from 2020 all the way back to 1993. As proprietor Henri-Bruno de Coincy unfortunately couldn’t make it to our event, I was tasked with hosting on his behalf, and gave him a call to learn more about what he feels are the most important details to share about his property. (My degree in French, which was instrumental in my becoming a sommelier, proved to be quite useful. While M de Coincy speaks four languages, English is not one of them.) During our conversation, I confirmed the embarrassment of riches as far as what sets Belle Brise apart from its illustrious neighbours. Located in the southwestern corner of the already diminutive Pomerol appellation, Belle-Brise consists of only two hectares (around five acres) of vines. Planted to 80% Merlot and 20% Cabernet Franc, the vines average 70 years in age, with some 110 years old. The vines are farmed biodynamically, using horses to complete the necessary labour in the vineyard. While the subsoils have a mix of clay and sand, they also possess the famous crasse de fer – the iron-rich sand that is said to impart the aroma of truffles, a facet which only reveals itself as the wine ages. M de Coincy refers to Belle-Brise as his “jardin” (indeed, while the family spends much of their time in Armagnac, the house at the heart of the vineyard is very much their second home) and takes great pride in the fact that everything can be harvested by hand in a single day. 
Wine has been made at Belle-Brise since the 18th century, but the property did not see its first commercial release until 1991, after M de Coincy acquired the estate, with the wine sold only to family and friends before that date. If you are familiar with your Bordeaux vintages, you will know that 1991, ’92, and ’93 were all extremely difficult harvests. While not the auspicious start he may have hoped for, it did offer an opportunity to explore the vineyard and learn how to best care for it. Today the winemaking is identical from year to year, with the vintage – and site – speaking loudest. The wines are fermented in concrete before being placed in a third new, a third second-use and a third third-use 400-litre barrels, the traditional size used for Armagnac, rather than the more conventional 225-litre Bordeaux barrique. The Coincy family has been making Armagnac for 32 generations and over 700 years, so the exact size is not arbitrary, but the decision to use larger barrels is also deliberate – reducing the impact of the wood on the final wine. While the story of the château and the history of the De Coincys are both compelling, I must return to what is most important to keep in mind when tasting Belle-Brise: elegance and finesse. Serving Pomerol with kaiseki-influenced Japanese cuisine (as at SingleThread) may not be the obvious choice, however the delicacy of the wines ensured that the harmony of the dishes was kept intact, leading to many unexpected moments of delight. Unsurprisingly, exceptional vintages were beautifully cohesive and balanced, however, it was the less well-respected vintages (2011, 2004, 2002, 2018 and 2008, among others) that truly showed how attention to detail and care can surmount challenges that nature may present. While we were not able to taste every vintage of Belle-Brise (with the tiny volumes produced, the family simply doesn’t have stocks of everything), this retrospective tasting was one of the largest ever presented. The favourite vintage among guests on the night was 2011, a vintage which also came up in my conversation with M de Coincy, as it has been chosen as the “desert island” of wine professionals and aficionados many times before. The most interesting flight for me came later in the meal, with the 2004, ’03, and ’02 grouped together. These vintages all presented different challenges during the growing season. The 2002 saw extreme rain in many parts of France, with heavy downpours affecting flowering and fruit set. The 2003 saw a summer with extreme heat, which taught many lessons that were applied in 2022. Lastly, the 2004 had a larger harvest on the whole, but the vintage is often forgotten, left in 2005’s long shadow. In the glass, however, the 2002 was pure and bright, with the 2003 showing its suntan but still refined, and the 2004 had a concentration and depth that was remarkable (especially as the wines were all around two decades old).  Regardless of vintage, elegance and finesse were constant throughout the entire evening, reminding me of a concept I learned in one of my French philosophy classes at university. If my memory serves me correctly, Michel de Montaigne proposed in his Essais the concept of a “forme maîtrise” or master form when referring to the evolution of a person as they age, and as something that cannot be easily defined in simple terms. While I am now much different than I was at age five, 15, 25, etc, there is still a governing sense of self (or possibly a single thread) that connects the person writing this to the child I once was. As we continued to taste through the vintages of Belle Brise, this forme maîtrise kept asserting itself, via the performance of the wine in the glass, reminding me of the “garden” where these wines were made. As many of the variables seen at other châteaux (differing blends, oak regimes, etc) remain constant at Belle-Brise year after year, one can focus on the vintage and its effect on the wine in the glass. This results in a singular experience, when one can truly feel the sense of place that only certain wines can offer. Explore all current listings of Ch. Belle-Brise or discover more about our experiences.

Earlier this month, we hosted a dinner celebrating Ch. Belle-Brise, exploring this Pomerol estate via 23 vintages back to 1993. Here, Scott Turnbull MS – Director of Private Clients at our US arm, Vinfolio – considers the event and the golden thread that connects each vintage of this special wine

Master Sommelier Scott Turnbull dives into what defines Ch. Belle-Brise, the special Pomerol estate, via a rare vertical tasting of vintages back to 1993

Ch. Belle-Brise – the walled garden of Pomerol

Ch. Belle-Brise: discovering the walled garden of Pomerol

Burgundy is a mecca for lovers of fine Chardonnay and Pinot Noir, but, with its litany of producers and vineyards, it can be a tricky region to get to grips with. Here we offer an essential guide to the region – breaking down everything from how vineyards are classified to producers to look out for

Discover everything you need to know about Burgundy: from vineyards and producers to the difference between négociant and domaine or what a Grand Cru is

FINE+RARE: Your essential guide to Burgundy wine

Your essential guide to Burgundy

Bordeaux has several different classification systems. While the Right Bank has only Saint-Emilion’s system (one that is a source of controversy), the Left Bank has a more complex web of rankings.   
The 1855 classification is the gold standard. The most famous and influential of them all, it lists the Left Bank’s very top estates. But beyond this crème de la crème, there are several other systems ranking properties – namely the Graves classification, the Crus Bourgeois and Crus Artisans.  
The Graves classification  
Almost 100 years after the famous 1855 classification, producers in the Graves decided to create their own equivalent. Other than Ch. Haut-Brion, the region’s properties had not been included in the 1855 classification. A draft of the classification was drawn up in 1953, then the official list ratified in 1958, with some changes in 1959.  
The Graves classification is much simpler than the 1855 classification. There is only one tier, with estates declared “Grand Cru Classé de Graves” for white wine, red wine, or both. Sixteen estates in total were defined as the region’s best. Couhins, Couhins-Lurton and Laville Haut-Brion were classified for only their white wines, while Fieuzal, Haut-Bailly, Haut-Brion, La Mission Haut-Brion, Pape-Clément, Smith Haut Lafitte and La Tour Haut-Brion were classified only for their reds.  
Interestingly,. Ch. Haut-Brion is only classified for red, however this is not because its white was not deemed worthy, but because it did not apply for classification, given production of the illustrious wine is so small. It remains one of the region’s highest-rated and most expensive whites. 
Although there have been no changes since 1959, some of the wines are no longer made under the same name. Both part of the Clarence Dillon family, Ch. Laville Haut-Brion is now bottled as Ch. la Mission Haut-Brion Blanc, while fruit from La Tour Haut-Brion is now used for the second wine of La Mission, La Chapelle de la Mission Haut-Brion (read more about the genealogy of the Haut-Brion estates here).  
The Pessac-Léognan appellation was only introduced in 1987, so some of the wines are bottled under this today.  1959 Graves classification  Ch. Bouscaut (red and white)  Ch. Carbonnieux (red and white)  Domaine de Chevalier (red and white)  Ch. Couhins (white only)  Ch. Couhins-Lurton (white only)  Ch. de Fieuzal (red only)  Ch. Haut-Bailly (red only)  Ch. Haut-Brion (red only, also part of the 1855 classification)  Ch. Latour-Martillac (red and white)  Ch. Laville-Haut-Brion (white only, now the white of La Mission Haut-Brion)  Ch. Malartic-Lagravière (red and white)  Ch. La Mission Haut-Brion (red only)  Ch. Olivier (red and white)  Ch. Pape-Clément (red only)  Ch. Smith Haut Lafitte (red only)  Ch. la Tour-Haut-Brion (red only)  The Crus Bourgeois  The term “Cru Bourgeois” has long been used casually, but it was introduced as a formal classification in 1932. There have been many changes to the classification over the years. There were 444 properties in the original group, many of whom used the term on their labels even though the classification was never officially ratified. In 2003, after three years of debate, the classification was updated and split into three tiers (with Cru Bourgeois Supérieur and Exceptionnel added), only to be annulled in 2007, with the term then banned from labels. In 2010, the Cru Bourgeois classification was re-introduced and assigned to wines rather than estates, with their status re-assessed each year, but this too was soon replaced.  
In 2020, a new version of the classification was unveiled, going back to the three tiers of Cru Bourgeois, Cru Bourgeois Supérieur and Cru Bourgeois Exceptionnel. The top rank of “Exceptionnel” includes just 14 estates, with 56 Crus Bourgeois Supérieurs and 179 Crus Bourgeois (adding up to a total 249 properties). The classification is only being assessed every five years, with the next iteration set to be announced in 2025.   
The classification is decided based on the quality and consistency of the wine (assessed via rigorous blind tasting), traceability and authentication, with sustainability encouraged and rewarded. While these wines are not as highly regarded or sought after as those in the 1855 classification, the wines generally offer good value, and all come from the Médoc, Haut-Médoc, Listrac, Moulis, Margaux, Saint-Julien, Pauillac and Saint-Estèphe. Find the full, current classification on the Crus Bourgeois website. 
The Crus Artisans  
The Left Bank also has the Cru Artisan classification, designed to highlight smaller operations where the manager/owner is involved in every stage of production. The term has been used for over 150 years, however its official meaning was introduced in 1989. The classification was launched in its current guise in 2006, open to estates in the Médoc, Haut-Médoc, Listrac, Moulis, Margaux, Saint-Julien, Pauillac and Saint-Estèphe. Generally family-owned, properties must grow their own grapes, then make and sell the wines.  
There were 44 Cru Artisan estates in 2006, but the latest classification (unveiled in 2018) included only 36 – with many addresses sold/absorbed by other producers, some retiring, as well as a handful of new names added. The classification is based on a visit to the estate and blind tasting of its wines. On average, Crus Artisans have just 10 hectares of vines. Find the full current classification on the Crus Artisans website. 
Read more about Bordeaux or browse all Bordeaux listings


While the 1855 classification is the most famous and influential classification on the Left Bank, there are several other classifications in operation today. Here’s everything you need to know about Bordeaux’s Graves classification, the Crus Bourgeois and Crus Artisans 

Looking beyond the 1855 classification in Bordeaux: discover everything you need to know about the 1959 Graves, Cru Bourgeois and Cru Artisan classifications

Graves, Cru Bourgeois and Cru Artisan in Bordeaux

Your guide to Bordeaux’s other classifications: Graves, Cru Bourgeois and Cru Artisan

When the Bordeaux Chamber of Commerce ranked Bordeaux’s leading estates by price for the Exposition Universelle in Paris in 1855, I doubt they anticipated we’d still be using it over 150 years later. Napoleon III had asked the team to put together an exhibition for the world fair, and the Chamber of Commerce neatly passed the buck to the region’s courtiers or brokers, asking them to create a list of the region’s best wines, broken into five tiers. They did so in just two weeks, basing the list almost exclusively on price.  The original classification ranked 58 properties, from First to Fifth Growth, or Premier to Cinquième Cru Classé (with Cru Classé literally translating as “classed/classified growth”). At the very top of this quality pyramid was Ch. Lafite, deemed the “premier des premiers” of the time. The properties were almost exclusively in the Médoc, with Ch. Haut-Brion in Pessac-Léognan the one exception.  It is often said that there has only been one change since the 1855 classification’s creation, however that’s not quite true. Ch. Cantemerle was added in 1856 (having been left out of the original ranking by accident). Ch. Pichon split in two, the Léoville estate into three and Batailley was also divided – but two properties also merged (Pouget and Pouget Lassale), while Dubignon was absorbed entirely by other addresses. Interestingly, Ch. Gloria consists exclusively of vineyards that were classified originally, although the château wasn’t classified in 1855.   The most significant change, and the one most often mentioned, was in 1973 when Ch. Mouton Rothschild was upgraded to First Growth status. The property had only just been acquired by the Rothschild family in the 1850s, so was intially ranked as a Second Growth but Baron Philippe de Rothschild made it is life mission to get it officially recognised as one of the Left Bank’s five leading addresses. For years the property’s labels had read “Premier ne puis, second ne daigne, Mouton suis” (“First I cannot be, second I do not deign to be, Mouton I am”), which was changed to “Premier je suis, second je fus, Mouton ne change” (“First I am, second I was, Mouton doesn’t change”) after the Baron’s bid was successful, and the estate’s premiership was legally recognised.  There are 61 estates in today’s classification, with five First Growths, 14 Second Growths, 14 Third Growths, 10 Fourth Growths and 18 Fifth Growths. Unlike in Saint-Emilion’s classification, a property is free to buy and sell vineyards, with their expansion or contraction not impacting their classed growth status.  Although the classification has never been reviewed, it remains largely (and surprisingly) accurate – the premium price associated with higher status and quality seemingly providing sufficient incentive for producers, and the market effectively deciding on a property’s status.  Today there is also an unofficial group known as the “super seconds” – estates that are thought to produce wines that are as good as those of the First Growths. This includes Pichon Baron, Pichon Comtesse, Lynch-Bages, Léoville Las Cases, Léoville Barton, Ducru-Beaucaillou, Cos d’Estournel, Montrose, Palmer, Pontet-Canet and La Mission Haut-Brion.  While we tend to consider only the red wines of the northern Gironde in reference to the 1855 classification, the sweet whites of Sauternes and Barsac were also ranked. The wines were only put into two classes, with 21 estates included. Nine estates were deemed worthy of First Growth status, 11 as Second Growths, with Ch. d’Yquem earning its own special category as “Premier Cru Supérieur”.  As with the red classification, the number of estates has grown as they have divided over the years (such as the Doisy estates), with one disappearing entirely (Pexoto – its vineyards are now part of Ch. Rabaud-Promis). There have otherwise been no changes.  The sweet wine classification is of little consequence today, however the estates collectively represent 45% of the surface area of Sauternes and Barsac, and produce 30% of the area’s wines today.  Beyond the 1855 classification, the Left Bank also has its Crus Bourgeois and Crus Artisan, as well as the 1959 Graves classification (read more about these here). The Right Bank still only has the Saint-Emilion classification – one that has caused enough controversy to put Pomerol off doing anything similar. None, however, have come close to having the influence of the 1855 classification – a remarkable ranking that has defined Bordeaux for generations, and was arguably instrumental in its success as a fine wine region.  Find a full break-down of the classifications below, read more about Bordeaux or browse all Bordeaux listings The 1855 classification Premiers Crus Classés or First Growths Ch. Lafite-Rothschild  Ch. Latour  Ch. Margaux  Ch. Mouton Rothschild (upgraded in 1973)  Ch. Haut-Brion Deuxièmes Crus Classés or Second Growths  Ch. Rauzan-Ségla  Ch. Rauzan-Gassies  Ch. Léoville Las Cases  Ch. Léoville-Poyferré  Ch. Léoville Barton  Ch. Durfort-Vivens  Ch. Gruaud Larose  Ch. Lascombes  Ch. Brane-Cantenac  Ch. Pichon Baron  Ch. Pichon Longueville Comtesse de Lalande  Ch. Ducru-Beaucaillou  Cos d’Estournel  Ch. Montrose Troisièmes Crus Classés or Third Growths Ch. Kirwan  Ch. d’Issan  Ch. Lagrange  Ch. Langoa Barton  Ch. Giscours  Ch. Malescot Saint-Exupéry  Ch. Boyd-Cantenac  Ch. Cantenac Brown  Ch. Palmer  Ch. la Lagune  Ch. Desmirail  Calon Ségur  Ch. Ferrière  Ch. Marquis d’Alesme  Quatrièmes Crus Classés or Fourth Growths Ch. Saint-Pierre  Ch. Talbot  Ch. Branaire-Ducru  Ch. Duhart-Milon  Ch. Pouget  Ch. la Tour Carnet  Ch. Lafon-Rochet  Ch. Beychevelle  Ch. Prieuré-Lichine  Ch. Marquis de Terme  Cinquièmes Crus Classés or Fifth Growths Ch. Pontet-Canet  Ch. Batailley  Ch. Haut-Batailley  Ch. Grand-Puy-Lacoste  Ch. Grand-Puy Ducasse  Ch. Lynch-Bages  Ch. Lynch-Moussas  Ch. Dauzac  Ch. d’Armailhac  Ch. du Tertre  Ch. Haut-Bages Libéral  Ch. Pédesclaux  Ch. Belgrave  Ch. de Camensac  Ch. Cos Labory  Ch. Clerc Milon  Ch. Croizet-Bages  Ch. Cantemerle The unofficial Super Seconds Cos d’Estournel  Ducru-Beaucaillou  La Mission Haut-Brion.  Léoville Barton  Léoville Las Cases  Lynch-Bages  Montrose  Palmer  Pichon Baron  Pichon Comtesse  Pontet-Canet  The 1855 Sauternes and Barsac classification Premier Cru Supérieur Ch. d’Yquem Premier Cru Ch. la Tour Blanche  Ch. Lafaurie-Peyraguey  Clos Haut-Peyraguey  Ch. de Rayne Vigneau  Ch. Suduiraut  Ch. Coutet  Ch. Climens  Ch. Guiraud  Ch. Rieussec  Ch. Rabaud-Promis  Ch. Sigalas Rabaud  Deuxièmes Crus Ch. de Myrat  Ch. Doisy Daëne  Ch. Doisy-Dubroca  Ch. Doisy-Védrines  Ch. d’Arche  Ch. Filhot  Ch. Broustet  Ch. Nairac  Ch. Caillou  Ch. Suau  Ch. de Malle  Ch. Romer du Hayot  Ch. Romer  Ch. Lamothe   Ch. Lamothe-Guignard 

The 1855 classification of Bordeaux’s top châteaux remains as important today as when it was first created in the 19th century. Here’s everything you need to know about the famous ranking

Everything you need to know about the 1855 classification in Bordeaux – the historic ranking of the Left Bank’s top wine estates

Your guide to Bordeaux’s 1855 classification

Your guide to the 1855 classification

While Bordeaux’s Left Bank was classified in 1855, the Right Bank didn’t establish an equivalent ranking until the 1950s. There are classifications for the Graves, Sauternes and Barsac, as well as the Médoc across the Gironde, but it is only Saint-Emilion that has been classified on the Right. How does Saint-Emilion’s classification work?  The classification was first established in 1955, dividing the appellation’s properties into three levels of quality based on a scoring system. The top wines are classified as Premier Grand Cru Classé A, followed by those that are Premier Grand Cru Classé B and then the Grand Cru Classé.  From the beginning, the idea was to try and create a more democratic system that rewarded estates’ efforts and avoided complacency. While the 1855 Classification was assigned to the château – essentially the brand, rather than the wine or specific vineyards (meaning properties could expand and shrink, yet their status wouldn’t change), the Saint-Emilion classification is judged both on terroir and the château’s performance. The classification is also reassessed every 10-15 years, with the most recent update in 2022. How are properties in Saint-Emilion classified?  As mentioned, the ranking of estates is based on a scoring system, out of 20.  For the Premiers Grands Crus Classés, the score is based on: a tasting of 15 vintages (representing 30% of the score); the property’s national and international reputation, its promotion and distribution (35%); the quality and consistency of the terroir (30%); and the property’s approach to viticulture, vinification and traceability (5%). To sit within this bracket, estates must earn 16 out of 20, with the best earning Premier Grand Cru Classé A status.  For the Grands Crus Classés, the score is based on: a tasting of 10 vintages (representing 50% of the score); the property’s national and international reputation, its promotion and distribution (20%); the quality and consistency of the terroir (20%); and the property’s approach to viticulture, vinification and traceability (10%). In essence, there is more focus on the tasting and the property’s practices, and less on terroir or its reputation and representation in the market. To achieve Grand Cru Classé status, a property must earn 14 out of the possible 20 points.  Because there is a detailed assessment of the soils, properties can have some but not all of their land classified. For example, Ch. Angélus had only 27 of its 39 hectares deemed worthy of Premier Grand Cru Classé A and Ch. Canon only has 24 of its 34 hectares classified as Premier Grand Cru Classé B. Why is Saint-Emilion’s classification controversial?  While the intention to try and create a classification system that was both dynamic and about the land was noble, it hasn’t quite worked out that way. There is much debate about the different factors that contribute to a property’s score, with the proportion tied to distribution and marketing a particular point of contention. With its constant evolution, this gives more room for controversy – with anyone demoted inevitably disgruntled. All in all, the result is a legal battleground, with accusations of undue influence and more.   The initial classification took three years to finalise, and it has since been re-drawn in 1969, 1986, 1996, 2006, 2012 and 2022. After the 2006 classification, five estates filed lawsuits against their demotion, while the 2012 only brought more cases to the courts.   Ahead of the 2022 classification, most of the Premier Grand Cru Classé A estates left the classification (Ch. Ausone, Ch. Angélus and Ch. Cheval Blanc), leaving just Ch. Pavie in the top rank of the classification, joined by Ch. Figeac in 2022. Read more about the classification’s recent controversies here. What about Saint-Emilion Grand Cru? Saint-Emilion Grand Cru is – confusingly – very different to Saint-Emilion Grand Cru Classé. This isn’t a classification but an appellation – one that has the exact same geographic area as Saint-Emilion AC.  Properties need to apply to be part of the classification but can otherwise make wine under the area’s two appellations – Saint-Emilion AC or Saint-Emilion Grand Cru AC.   “Grand Cru” status is not tied to the quality of the terroir but dictated by yields (a lower maximum of 40hl/ha), a higher minimum potential alcohol and longer minimum ageing requirements (only permitted to be bottled 16 months after harvest), and must be estate-bottled. The idea is that this leads to a higher-quality, richer wine. The current Saint-Emilion classification The latest iteration of the Saint-Emilion classification was announced in 2022, with just two properties sitting at Premier Grand Cru Classé A level and 12 at Premier Grand Cru Classé B, and 63 Grands Crus Classés. Find the full list of estates below. Premier Grand Cru Classé A Ch. Pavie   Ch. Figeac   Premier Grand Cru Classé B   Ch. Beau-Séjour Bécot  Ch. Beauséjour Duffau-Lagarrosse  Ch. Bélair-Monange  Ch. Canon  Ch. Canon-la-Gaffelière  Ch. Larcis Ducasse  Ch. Pavie Macquin  Ch. Troplong Mondot  Ch. TrotteVieille  Ch. Valandraud Clos Fourtet  La Mondotte  Grand Cru Classé Ch. l’Arrosée   Ch. Balestard la Tonnelle  Ch. Barde-Haut  Ch. Bellefont-Belcier  Ch. Bellevue  Ch. Berliquet  Ch. Cadet-Bon  Ch. Cap de Mourlin  Ch. le Chatelet  Ch. Chauvin  Ch. Clos de Sarpe  Ch. la Clotte  Ch. la Commanderie  Ch. Corbin  Ch. Côte de Baleau  Ch. la Couspaude  Ch. Dassault  Ch. Destieux  Ch. la Dominique  Ch. Faugères  Ch. Faurie de Souchard  Ch. de Ferrand  Ch. Fleur Cardinale  Ch. La Fleur Morange Mathilde  Ch. Fombrauge  Ch. Fonplégade  Ch. Fonroque  Ch. Franc Mayne  Ch. Grand Corbin  Ch. Grand Corbin-Despagne  Ch. Grand Mayne  Ch. les Grandes Murailles  Ch. Grand-Pontet  Ch. Guadet  Ch. Haut Sarpe  Clos des Jacobins  Couvent des Jacobins  Ch. Jean Faure  Ch. Laniote  Ch. Larmande  Ch. Laroque  Ch. Laroze Clos la Madeleine   Ch. la Marzelle  Ch. Monbousquet  Ch. Moulin du Cadet  Clos de l’Oratoire  Ch. Pavie Decesse  Ch. Peby Faugères  Ch. Petit Faurie de Soutard  Ch. de Pressac  Ch. le Prieuré  Ch. Quinault l’Enclos  Ch. Ripeau  Ch. Rochebelle  Ch. Saint-Georges-Cote-Pavie  Clos Saint-Martin  Ch. Sansonnet  Ch. la Serre  Ch. Soutard  Ch. Tertre Daugay  Ch. la Tour Figeac  Ch. Villemaurine  Ch. Yon-Figeac   Read more about Bordeaux or browse all Bordeaux listings 

Bordeaux’s Right Bank wasn’t classified in 1855, but Saint-Emilion introduced its equivalent system in 1955, ranking the appellation’s best properties. Here’s everything you need to know about the Saint-Emilion classification, how properties are ranked – and why it’s so controversial

Everything you need to know about the Saint-Emilion classification – the official ranking of this Right Bank appellation’s top wine estates

Your guide to the Saint-Emilion classification

BURGUNDY 2021: THE GROWING SEASON After three warm years, 2021 marked a return to the sort of weather traditionally associated with Burgundy – and all its challenges.  The winter was warm and wet – “too warm”, Frédéric Weber at Bouchard told us. He remembers finishing pruning in just a t-shirt in March. The vines started growing enthusiastically, with early budbreak, only to be struck by a cold spell at the beginning of April – as frost struck the whole of France. The nights of 6th, 7th and 8th April were devastating, especially 7th. Temperatures dropped to -8˚C in places – temperatures at which candles, helicopters and wine machines could offer little help.  
Images of the Côte de Beaune littered with a milky way of candles filled social media, and vignerons could do little but pray. For the early-budding Chardonnay, 80% losses were normal, with some producers in Chablis losing everything. The humid conditions, with snow falling, made matters worse – unusually this combination means that lower-lying village sites were less impacted than the Grands Crus (higher up-slope, where more snow fell). Indeed, if producers had lit candles (or “bougies”), the warmth melted the snow, which then froze and the buds were burnt by the morning sun – cruel retribution for trying to protect their livelihood. This severe, black frost (“le gel advectif”, as Florence Heresztyn explained) was savage – caused by a mass of cold air from Siberia. Chardonnay (and therefore especially the Côte de Beaune) was impacted more, as were any earlier-ripening Pinot Noir sites, such as Cazetiers or Combe au Moine. Candles can normally only increase the temperature by 2˚C, however some producers noted how a collective effort could make a difference – with a high-density of candles concentrated on an area. Erwan Faiveley had installed electric wires in their Bâtard-Montrachet and Bienvenue-Bâtard-Montrachet, as used previously in Chablis, which saved their crop in these plots, but other parcels were devastated. As Thibault Gagey of Louis Jadot noted, late pruning could help; one of their long-term growers in Bâtard-Montrachet pruned late and got a better crop, but the damage was still significant. David Duband reported how he also had issues in April with caterpillars which munched on the nascent buds. He had to hire five additional workers for a week to battle their hungry attack. The cold weather continued, with May cold and cloudy. Flowering at Bouchard began on 16th June, in wet and mild conditions that were perfect for oidium (powdery mildew) and downy mildew. Because the weather was so wet, mud prevented tractor access and at Bouchard they hired more people to spray by hand – a luxury not everyone could afford. Producers across the region spent their weekends during the summer spraying their vines when they could, with the disease pressure a particular challenge to anyone working organically or biodynamically. Edouard Confuron estimated he had sprayed four or five times more than in a normal year. There was some localised hail, with a storm in June causing damage in the north of Gevrey-Chambertin, especially in Les Champeaux, said Pierre Duroché and Olivier Bernstein.  
With the wet and cooler conditions, deleafing was important to open up the canopy, reducing disease pressure and exposing the fruit to much-needed sunshine. At Olivier Bernstein, Richard Séguin explained how they deleafed the fruiting zone and kept just one or two bunches per vine, removing any green bunches that remained at mid-véraison.  September saved the vintage, with warm, sunny and mostly dry conditions. With the tiny volumes, this was enough to ripen the fruit – Jacques Devauges at Domaine des Lambrays described it as Mother Nature evening the score, making up for what she’d taken in April.  Harvest dates varied quite significantly – starting from 10th September through to early October. Rain fell on 19th and 20th September, and producers were often divided between picking before and after this date. Generally producers started with Pinot Noir, then moved onto the Chardonnay, and dates were around a month later than in 2020. Jean-Marie Fourrier felt it was important to wait for phenolic maturity – which only arrived after the rain, and Erwan Faiveley argued that it was essential to wait for the dilution from the rain to pass before picking. Given the low yields, the harvest was often shorter – simply because there wasn’t much fruit.  Selection was essential – making a small crop even smaller – but there was some beautiful fruit of both colours. Yields varied, with losses between 50 and 80% – and some parcels (especially of Chardonnay) were blended together due to the tiny volumes at play. BURGUNDY 2021: THE WHITE WINES 
There’s no doubt amongst producers – or tasters – that this is an excellent vintage for Chardonnay. Production levels are laughable – with often the lowest yields they’ve ever seen, at a mere 20% of their normal crop – but the quality goes some small way to making up for the loss. The small crop (reduced by the harsh April frost) had a long season to slowly ripen, developing intense levels of concentration, yet – with cooler conditions than 2018, 2019 or 2020 – retaining amazing freshness and acidity. With the wet summer, disease was an issue: Erwan Faiveley described oidium as “exploding” on the Chardonnay (with levels not seen since 2004). Extensive sorting was essential. He also felt it was necessary to fine with bentonite after pressing to ensure the must was clean; similarly at Bouchard, Frédéric Weber didn’t use the very first free-run and inoculated fermentations this year to ensure they ran smoothly. Others, such as Philippe Abadie at Alvina Pernot and Paul Pernot, emphasised how important it was not to over-press. Most wines were chaptalised this year, often just to bring up 0.5%, with the final alcohol levels sitting between 12.5 and 13.5%.  Guillaume Boillot at Henri Boillot – who has produced a stunning range of wines – describes the whites as “salin”, having “belle matière”. Vibrant and pure, these are tightly wound with cool, white-fleshed fruit character, sometimes with tropical richness, often a mineral, saline thread and piercing acidity.  Due to the tiny volumes produced, oak usage varies this year. Boillot used none, but others have slightly more in the blend – feeling it didn’t need the freshness added by components aged in stainless steel. For Jadot, it was the first year that they used exclusively foudres, the larger barrels reducing the flavour impact of oak on the wine. Erwan Faiveley believes that tasting the whites, you can feel “the struggle in them”, that the vines suffered. Tasting through the exceptional Grands Crus he’s produced, however, it’s hard to see this – and perhaps he’s biased by the challenges of working the vines and crafting the wines in 2021. Comparisons are hard for such a unique year, but 2014 and 2017 were common themes, largely due to the high acidity, quality and ageing potential. Philippe Abadie and Alvina Pernot described it as “classic bourguignon”, while Thibault Gagey at Louis Jadot compared the year to 2011 or 2013, although feels the wines are better than those of the latter vintage. Faiveley points to 2007 – a vintage that has never shut down or, for him, disappointed; for Boillot they’re closest to 2016, but more precise. At Bouchard, Weber is so excited by their potential that he plans to keep them in barrel longer – possibly bottling in July 2023. These are really exciting wines – with a vibrancy and energy that is compelling. The cool and mineral classicism here, with great fruit concentration and balance, should age beautifully. 
Read our full report on Chablis 2021

 BURGUNDY 2021: THE RED WINES 
While there is a clear consensus on the 2021 whites, the reds are more varied in the vintage – but much better than we initially thought. The wines have clearly benefited from additional time in barrel, and most addresses have crafted a flight of elegant, pale-coloured and light-bodied Pinot Noirs. Although there are a few, rare examples of dilute or overly lean wines, this is in the main a return to “old school” Burgundy, with wines of perfume rather than power. The volumes are more generous than for the Chardonnay, but still measly, mostly sitting between 30 and 50% of a normal year’s yield. 
Frédéric Weber at Bouchard felt there were two styles of Pinot Noir in 2021: those from plots not damaged by frost, with normal yields but grapes with thin, fragile skins, prone to grey rot. The fruit from frost-hit sites, meanwhile, came with lower yields, thicker skins and less disease – for the latter he preferred to harvest later, with their higher tannin levels.  
Jean-Marie Fourrier noted that the picking date for Pinot Noir was key, worrying that anyone harvesting before the rain on 19th/20th was playing a risky game when it came to phenolic maturity and might have unripe tannins and vegetal notes.  
In general, Florence Heresztyn of Heresztyn-Mazzini felt it was a vintage, like 2012 or 2013, where producers needed to be attentive and precise at every stage – from the vineyard to winery. Sorting was essential and almost every producer chaptalised – largely used to prolong the alcohol fermentation rather than with the sole purpose of increasing the alcohol level. 

 Beyond this, tactics in the winery were varied – with vignerons often taking opposite approaches. Some producers, such as Bouchard, opted for more whole-bunch fermentation. Winemaker Frédéric Weber explained that the stems were so beautiful that he was happy to include 30-50% on average; the potassium also helped reduce the acidity of the wines, giving – he felt – a better expression of the year. 
The opposite was true of many, including Benoît Stehly at Georges Lignier and Hugues Pavelot. At Olivier Bernstein, the team used 30-40%, much less than in a warmer vintage, as they didn’t feel additional freshness was required, nor were the stems sufficiently lignified; similarly Heresztyn-Mazzini used 30-60% rather than 50-100% to avoid any greenness. While Jean-Marie Fourrier de-stems everything, in 2019 and 2020 he added the stems back into ferments for freshness, but didn’t feel it was necessary in 2021. 
When it came to extraction, the approach was similarly broad. Some felt it was a year to be more delicate, others thought it was a year that required more work to extract the colour and tannin that was in the grapes.  
Maxime Cheurlin at Domaine Georges Noëllat used a warmer – and therefore shorter – fermentation (sustaining 33-34˚C, versus 31˚C normally) to build the mid-palate of the wines. Charles van Canneyt had to buy smaller tanks for the miniscule yields, but the tiny tanks therefore fermented more quickly and he was careful to keep maceration short to avoid risking over-extraction. Similarly, Olivier Bernstein was keen to keep the fermentation short, with a five-day cold soak to extract colour and aromatics, then just 13 additional days on skins before the must was pressed – the fermentation finishing off the skins. 
By contrast, Fourrier opted for more extraction to get everything possible from the fruit. Guillaume Boillot echoed this view, with an additional week of skin contact. He used just pumping over rather than punching down to focus on fruit and aromatics rather than tannin; but at Faiveley, Erwan used more punching down than pumping over. 
Some producers highlighted that the grapes had high levels of malic acid (which has been notably low in recent, solar vintages), meaning that malolactic fermentation had a significant impact on the wines. Both Benoît Stehly and Charles van Canneyt noted how they were verging on severe at first, but after malolactic were open and fruity – totally changing in style. On paper, the pH is quite high for some wines (up to 3.7) – yet there is plenty of freshness, the lighter body and lower alcohol (mostly 13-13.5%) perhaps balancing it out.  
For élevage, some winemakers feel the wines need longer or shorter élevage, or different types of oak, with more or less new or different toasting. Nicolas Potel at Domaine and Maison Roche de Bellene feels that the crunchy character of the Pinot Noir will only be enhanced by a longer maturation in barrel (planning for 24 months versus the normal 12). Boillot opted for no new oak (as for his whites), feeling it would mark the fruit too much; while Maxime Cheurlin used less new oak but higher toast levels to add further complexity – and plans to bottle the wines earlier.  For Domaine Joblot, they felt that more new oak helped round out the lighter wines, using 50% new. At Domaine des Lambrays, Jacques Devauges favoured a slow, gentle toast – a "chauffe blonde" that gives the scent of freshly baked bread. Indeed, Devauges feels the wines have been improving significantly in barrel, offering more concentration and aromatics with each month that passes – something that reminds him of the 2010 vintage. 




Frédéric Weber at Bouchard describes 2021 as “charming”, comparing the wines to those of 2017, with good terroir definition and balance at 13-13.5% – more in line with what used to be “normal” for the region.  Thibault Gagey at Jadot pointed to 2004, 2013 or 2017 as possible similar vintages, but finds it hard to compare – it’s old school but approachable. Marion Raphet added 2014 into the mix, and although the wines are incredibly open now, wonders if they might shut down in bottle. For her, however, it is a year where, “On retrouve la typicité” (they rediscovered Burgundy’s typicity). The team at Tortochot pointed to 2011 or 2001, while Erwan Faiveley looked to 2007 and Florence Heresztyn noted the growing season was reminiscent of 2016.  
Maxime Chuerlin looks further back, feeling it has a similar equilibrium, colour and density to the outstanding 1991 vintage – in no doubt that the balance of the wines will allow them to age. While it’s easy to assume that these paler Burgundies might not be the longest-lived, almost every producer anticipates that 2021 will surprise everyone with its ageability – especially for the top wines. 
Almost every single grower we spoke to used a different approach for the 2021 vintage – but almost all have succeeded, producing vibrant, open and pretty Pinot Noir. It is a year in which careful vignerons could craft exceptional wines that were both light-bodied, yet persistent – with a purity and intensity that is surprising, along with captivating aromatics. As Nicole Lamarche said, “You can have both lightness and concentration.” It is, overall, a year that has surpassed expectations – one that was transformed by producers’ dedication, work in the vineyard, and modern technology and know-how in the winery.
 BURGUNDY 2021 IN BRIEF An extremely challenging growing season, with April frost and high disease pressure over the summer Yields were drastically reduced by between 50 and 80%  The whites are superb – concentrated, high-acid with minerality and cooler fruit tones The reds are a little more varied, but the best are elegant, charming, pale and light-bodied – yet with impressive intensity and freshness A handful of wines are a little dilute or lean, but all the best vignerons crafted superb wines Alcohol levels are more traditional for the region, mostly between 12 and 13%, with little above 13.5% The best wines of both colours will age well, but the reds in particular will be approachable in their youth Producers used different approaches to handle the year’s challenges The most common vintage comparisons are to 2014 and 2017, but include a wide range of other years 

Over two separate trips, our team delved into the 2021 vintage – visiting, tasting with and talking to a wide range of producers up and down the Côte d’Or. The vintage was complicated – but Burgundy’s vignerons have crafted some exceptional wines. We dig into everything you need to know

Everything you need to know about Burgundy 2021: our report on the growing season, how the region’s best winemakers handled it and what the wines are like

Pride Mountain

Please wait

Pride Mountain

Filter

Please wait

Related articles