Can wines labeled Bourgogne Rouge be great?

I have had a lot of simpler wines from Burgundy that I have liked - Bourgogne Rouge, Chorey-les-Beaune, etc. But, I have now in my life had three reds labeled Bourgogne Rouge that seem better than that. They still don’t have the weight or complexity of wines from better appellations, but in these three cases the wines have enough fruit and balance and even finish to go beyond normal Bourgogne Rouge.

The first of these wines I had many years ago, a 1986 Henri Jayer. The second, I have had a number of times and still have a number of bottles of this - Truchot 2005.

The third, and the reason I started this thread, I drank last night. It was a 2010 from Cecile Tremblay. I have had this wine a few times before, but last night it had finally gotten mature enough that it really sang. Perfect balance, beautiful fruit, but in a slightly simpler Bourgogne Rouge type way. Can a wine like this be considered great without the great complexity. I am still not sure, but boy was it a joy to drink.

I think of this post as being in a sense a comment on the thread about rating wines on a 100 point scale. I am not really sure how to rate a wine like this. Thoughts?

A couple of vintages of the Mugneret-Gibourg Bourgogne have struck me as great. 2009 is the most recent of those. 2014 of all years came close, but didn’t hit the same heights.

Barthod bons batons can be fantastic. Not sure about 04 Leroy

I tasted all the 2009 Mugneret-Gibourg wines at the Domaine. Fantastic. The Bourgogne was indeed better than most village Bourgogne we tasted during the trip. But the difference between the Bourgogne and the Clos Vougeot or the Echezeaux was big. Anyway – this Bourgogne was fantastic and I would be happy to own tons of it. Unfortunately we only could buy a few bottles village, Premier and Grands Crus since demand was strong.

Definitely there is a huge gap from the Bourgogne to the GC bottlings. Due to a weird situation with availability, the only 2009s I was able to buy were Bourgogne and Echezeaux. I have only ever opened one of my 2009 Echezeaux, but it was a total rock star, even at a very young age.

Well – we could not buy a single bottle of the Bourgogne at the Domaine. Sold out.

I have tasted at MG four times and I am not sure I ever tasted the Bourgogne there. All three grand crus, etc., every time, but I am not sure I ever had the Bourgogne there. No question that MG is a great, great producer.

As with many things on this board, we come down to definition. What is “great?” I think “great” is an overused word. Al Kaline is in the Hall of Fame, and he was an excellent player, but not a great player like Henry Aaron. If you asked me about great wines, it would have to be in the top 25 wines I’ve had in my life, not just a wine I really enjoy or want to buy/drink more of. I’ve had a lot of really nice wines in my life, some rated very highly by critics, but most to me were nowhere near “great” wines. I guess you COULD theoretically have a great Bourgogne Rouge…but I never have.

A few years back I was part of a 10 bottle blind burgundy tasting with from top wines from Faiveley, a Roumier Chambolle, Comte Armand CdE.

A lowly 1996 Mongeard-Mugneret Bourgogne was a top wine for many. I had it tied for 3rd place. It can happen occasionally.

I had a bottle of 2002 Denis Bachelet Bourgogne last year that was brilliant. My last bottle of 6, the first 5 were drunk way too young and we’re extraordinarily structured.

Recently I had a bottle of 2010 Simon Bize Bourgogne Les Perrières that was also exceptional.

I had a 2015 Hudelot-Noellat Bourgogne Rouge recently that was fantastic, and drunk too young. Definitely outperformed many villages level wine, and IMO could hang with lower quality 1er’s.

Had a 15 Mortet Bourgogne last night that absolutely was drinking way above it’s level, in fact better then most village level Gevrey’s I’ve had.

Personal definition:

Great=stops me mid sip, and I go “holy s***” is that delicious. Hopefully I don’t then dribble it all over my shirt.

It may not be Hank Aaron or Wayne Gretzky great, but it delivers a great experience.

The answer to me is yes. I love this kind of discussion and thanks Howard for starting this kind of thread again. I love it -

However that being said…please remember the basic. Style is not substance and substance is not style.

Once you settle down on the stye of your prefer producers - then you go for his substance within his portfolio.

AOC exists in Burgundy for many reasons. Normally the producer should craft his Bourgogne for early ( and easier *…drinking and his g-cru…for later ( and occassional ) enjoyment - perhaps with some small exception - for example : the age of the vine in his holdings. .

Then…when to open the bottle for your enjoyment is also the key.

I often do red burgundy tasting from one of prefer producers …with wines from his portfolio in one wine event…at age 5, age 6…and then at age 10.

I have never had a Bourgogne Rouge that I considered great (some really, really good ones) but I am not surprised to hear that others have had that pleasure.

Not sure I am able to quantify if this wine is “great” or not, but I found the 2014 Claude Dugat Bourgogne wonderful and expressive-and I wish I had more. I’ve tried the 2017 version and it doesn’t seem ready to be opened at this point.

David…may I continue :

…and holy, holy…it was so cheap !!

If only that were true…checked the price of Mugneret-Gibourg Bourgogne lately?

Putting aside the subjective issue of “great”. I find that my positive experiences with Bourgogne Blanc are 10x that of Bourgogne Rouge.

So, I guess you don’t mean relative to it’s peers? I can certainly envision a 100 Bourgogne Rouge given that critics rate within class.