Ran across this video on YouTube and curious what you all think. I don’t have enough first hand experience to critique it myself, though it runs counter to opinions I’ve read here on the board and elsewhere.
Makes very little sense to me.
Well there are fifteen minutes I will not get back.
It was like watching a car crash in slow motion, starting with the Cos which was the screech and skid. Impact was the Mouton and the jaws of life extraction was Lafite. In between were more minor moments of agony, Dufort, more excruciating the Pichon Lalande, and the shard of pain realizing that Cos was “better” than Montrose, Pichon and Ducru.
Pathetic, I only continued to watch because I was in the middle of exercising and my occasional growls of disbelief probably made the cardio more effective.
Did anyone figure out the purpose of E category in this video?
Yet another problem with this video…
On another note, I’m a bit disappointed by the lack of responses to this thread. I was genuinely curious what people thought of it, especially since the video producer seems to have broad experience in wine, but his opinions run counter to a lot of what I’ve read on this board.
Basically William’s comment closed the thread so there was no need for any further discussion.
Also: not interested in watching videos. Especially ones that long. If you could’ve written a small synopsis of what was said, things might’ve been different.
I did not watch the video. But that the 1855 classification does not reflect the situation today is pretty clear. I guess almost any Bordeaux lover with some experience will agree. But the last thing we need is a further price increase for wines like Pichon Lalande etc. which are first class but not first in the old classification.
Read this thread. it is a few years old (and so would be inaccurate as things change for a few estates) but this thread will give you more information. Traditional vs. Modern Bordeaux? - WINE TALK - WineBerserkers
Fair enough. Synopsis; a guy makes a video “reclassifying” the first and second growths. Similar exercises have been done many times, but I was surprised by this one. He put a “Superior” category on top, and then A, B, C, D in descending order after that. This is what he came up with:
Superior: Cos d’Estournel, Latour, Haut Brion, Margaux
A: Durfort Vivens, Ducru Beaucaillou, Montrose, the 3 Leovilles
B: Larose, the 2 Pichons, Rauzan Segla, Lafite
C: Brane Cantenac, Lascombes, Rauzan Gassies
Thanks, Howard. Yes, I’ve seen this thread. I thought this video was worth bringing up, just because it is so different than other stuff I’ve read on this board (a la the thread you linked to).
I am not sure whether the article was ignorance or trolling. I suspect the latter.
While I am a firm believer in the fact that all opinions are by definition subjective, I cannot believe these opinions can possibly be sincere. The insincerity really came across when he so gleefully made Mouton a fourth.
I’m happy I didn’t watch the video!