Bourgogne Rouge can be enjoyable and even good, but “great” is stretching things. (Assuming these are “normal” Bourgogne, and not some declassification of grand cru, for example).
In any case, OP has quoted producers where the Bourgogne Rouge probably costs more than many reasonable quality 1er and villages wines, which makes the point of a Bourgogne Rouge a bit redundant.
David…sorry. You are right. Wine-Searcher shows the 2018 at CA$131,slight higher than Syvain Cathiard ( at CA122). The top is Bizot at CA$1505- nearly 5 times of G. Roumier at CA$328.
I have a friend who once claimed that the Bourgogne is one of Truchot’s two best wines (along with CDLR I believe). This is someone who also drank a lot of Jayer Bourgogne when it was cheap. He recently opened up a 1983 Truchot Bourgogne and had very good things to say about it. Like others have said, I think a Bourgogne from the right producer can be great. I think that depends on what you value in a wine, how you assess its different aspects, and how well the producer has put all of those together.
Getting to the key point in your comment. Certainly, Henry Aaron was a greater player than Al Kaline. But, Al Kaline is one of only 32 players in baseball history to get to 3000 hits. 3,000 Hits Club | Baseball Almanac And, he combined that with 399 home runs, which ties him for 58th. Career Leaders & Records for Home Runs | Baseball-Reference.com He was also fabulous fielder. I would put him well beyond excellent.
Interestingly, when I looked at the 3000 hit list, there are actually way fewer duds (simply excellent players?) on that list than on the 400 homer list. I was surprised to see that.
“great” is a word used by US-people almost more often than “and”
… a glass of milk at the right temperature might simply be great …
Yes, a Bourgogne rouge might be “relatively great” against other Bourgognes, some Village wines and even against some (mean produced) 1er Crus … but usually it is lacking eventually in complexity … you may believe it of not but Burgundy is a terroir wine, usually Bourgogne is grown in less good terroir and it will show … I have never tasted a Bourgogne that was better than a 1er Cru (same vintage and producer).
When a Bourgogne is priced into the hundreds of dollars, the market is saying it is pretty damned good wine. Obviously, that doesn’t mean everyone has to like it.
Isn’t it strange that even though Burgundy is regarded as the home of terroir-driven wine, we’re having this conversation? If terroir was everything then the answer to this question would surely be ‘no.’ What paradoxes this narrow strip of wine heaven delivers on a regular basis!
