Every time a chateau is demoted, the decision will be challenged with methodology, bias etc. being scrutinized. You can’t get away with the kind of slipshod, self serving crap that has occurred the last few times.
The question is if they did it perfectly, would it be enough to deal with the legal challenges? Or would same clever lawyer always find some excuse for overturning it? In which case, it is useless and despite the good intentions, should be scrapped.
Yeah, I agree, the St E process is political, commercial, and personal, not quality-driven, but this is entirely consistent with the 1855 classification. It isn’t as though a revered panel of 19th century tasters did a rigorous analysis from blind tastings to come up with the Medocean classification. It was then, and the St E classification is now, a strictly mercantile affair.
I thought the 1855 classification was straightforwardly based on price commanded in the marketplace. While this is obviously different from a quality judgment, it is a straightforward quantification. It doesn’t sound as if the St. Em. classification is the same. But my “knowledge” of the 1855 classification is based on a lot of hearsay and I am open to have it corrected by someone more knowledgeable.
The ironic thing about the last classification was the near perfect correlation between Parker scores and standings. This was at a time when Parker’s influence was in serious decline; we knew it but nobody told the genius’ in Saint Emilion. That being said, Parker scores meant elevated prices, so you could justify that particular classification, only to see it disappear once Parker left the building.
I don’t think I fit that description but I’ve read it was price and “reputation,” which may have been the same thing for all practical purposes.
The big difference between the two classifications, (Aside from consumers only caring about one of them) is that with 1855, it was the brand that was classified. IMO, considering that the classification was put together over a two week period in 1855, the majority of the classification still works. Changes to the vineyards are automatically allowed, as long as those changes conform to the AOC laws of the appellation.
In the Saint Emilion classification, there are other variables taken into consideration including the terroir, blind tastings of the wine, and other less important issues, visitor experience, cellars, promotional efforts, etc… Changes to the vineyards are quite difficult to make as they need to be approved in advance. Requested changes might not be granted and the process can take months or years.
And the Saint Emilion Classification are intended to remain current as they are conducted every 10 years.
And with so many subjective criteria, it will always be open to charges of bias or ignorance. Having destroyed one and close to destroying a second, I can not conceive of a meaningful classification that will not be litigated and ultimately fail.
This classification is clearly the Gold Standard and Pavie’s promotion to Premier Grand cru classe A (I had to look up its exact designation) only supports this view.
Would you agree that Chateau Macard should break into the classification? It’s your fave, after all.
It would only be fair if Chateau Macard was elevated a step above Premier Grand Cru classe A…anything less would be an insult .
This explains some of it Bordeaux Classification Pair Face Criminal Charges | Wine-Searcher News & Features
Heading there next. I’ll see what the tone is.
In a similar vein to the de Boüard and Castéga controversy, the President of the Fédération des Grands Vins de Bordeaux was had up for fraud in late June:
Shortly thereafter the Federation voted to re-elect him for a 3-year term!
I think that is rather unhealthy and that the president should have resigned… That he should be re-elected by a large majority (21 of 28 members) does not send out a good message.
Alex R.
Make Bordeaux Great Again.
Victor, thanks for this evening’s belly laugh.
AR