Do you really think I am not aware of Liber Pater? I have been there several times and have tasted most vintages.
I did not mention them because they make less than 100 cases of wine per year, if they even produce any, as it is not made every year. The wines are not available on the Place de Bordeaux. It is a unique wine and venture, but it is not the same as a commercially made wine.
I have not read this thread as closely as I might so I may be speaking too quickly, but this discussion of whether Bordeaux or Burgundy is better sounds like one I used to have when I was a kid about whether Mickey Mantle or Willie Mays was the better ball player, with all the same kinds of side roads (is the 1855 hierarchy still a price determinant? how much better would Mantle have been if he had been consistently healthy). It is exacerbated by the fact that the Bordeaux enthusiasts are clearly only familiar with Burgundy in a very general way and vice versa. I will admit to being more of a Bordeaux person, mostly because I never took the trouble to learn about Burgundy–which does strike me as objectively harder to learn about. But I think this discussion of which wine is better is a little silly.
From my POV that is not the thrust of this thread. I believe there are two things being discussed:
Where are preferences going (and, to understand that, discuss where they’ve been)
What is driving the change in preferences (and will they change again and, if so, why?)
I don’t think the discussion of the change in preferences went down the path of which is better, but what is leading people to adjust preferences (fashion? Flavor profile changes? A different conceptual framework for thinking through wine? Nothing at all because it was random?)
I have not tasted it as often as you, I did not find it that interesting or even particularly fine. I suppose the grape mix may make it unique, but the quality is not there. There was a little bit of sauvage there that was fun, but a good Cote Rotie is a better version at a slightly better price.
It’s fair to say that that is where the OP started it. It is not what it has sounded like for some time. And, indeed, preferences are by definition about what one prefers. If I had said, what is true, that I drink much more Bordeaux because I never learned about Burgundy, I found Bordeaux easier to learn about and Burgundy seemed always an order of magnitude more expensive (note the word seemed, please), that would not be about what is better. And, indeed, though far more Bordeaux than Burgundy, when I get to taste a great, well-aged Burgundy, it is, well, great. But that is not really how this discussion has gone.
Both players of extraordinary talent, but I think if Mantle had had the benefit of modern sports medicine (and the discipline to maintain fitness as modern athletes do), he would have shattered Ruth’s records. Of course, if Babe Ruth had had all that, too, he probably would have shattered his own records.
Willie Mays was the better player. Yes, Mantle was hurt a lot, but that is the breaks. If you start talking about what would have happened without injuries, you quickly get to the point where you are discussing whether Herb Score or Mark (the Bird) Fidrych were great pitchers.
No, Howard. I know your comment was tongue in cheek, but nobody is saying that one is better than the other. This thread has highlighted the reasons why Burgundy costs so much, but it’s mainly due to people competing for a much more scarce product.
An aspect of this thread which I find a bit curious, is the idea of it being either Bordeaux or Burgundy, this might be true for investing but most of my acquaintances are bordeaux drinkers and find my obsession with burgundy a bit eccentric. Those that were outpriced move towards Spain, Barolo, not so much the traditional stuff and Australia rather than Burgundy. Hungary is very much a niche at the moment, yet the quality of the Cabernet Francs especially is astounding, A.Gere especially…
I see Bordeaux’s problems as being the competition from these regions rather than Burgundy.
So I used the Mantle vs. Mays comparison as an example of a pointless argument comparable to the pointlessness I felt in the Bordeaux vs. Burgundy argument. I did not expect it to be picked up as a thread drift. Go ahead if you wish. But I have no dog in that hunt.
Jancis Robinson recently interviewed a well dressed Christian Seely in Bordeaux, and asked whether he wears his bow tie when he visits his estate in Burgundy.
I honestly suspect this stodgy image of Bordeaux has hurt for the last fifteen years. How many young people want bow tie wine, when they can drink excellent but casual wines?
You miss a lot by focusing on the bow tie. Christian is a really great guy, very charming with a wicked sense of humor. I suspect the bow tie, which is now something of a trademark, began as a joke.
I personally doubt that “Bordeaux’s stodgy image” (assuming that image to be true) is having any impact whatsoever on market trends. That’s simply my gut instinct, nothing more.
I don’t miss a lot, because I have bought and enjoyed quite a bit of Pichon Baron. And I’m sure Christian is a great guy and he came across well in the podcast. I just thought it was funny that Jancis made a point to ask whether the bow tie was a Bordeaux thing for him, or whether he wore it elsewhere. His quick reply was that he generally takes it off when visiting Pomerol.
And that got me thinking about this thread and the image of Bordeaux versus Burgundy, and my mental image of the former as aristocrats and merchants, and the latter being farmers and artisans. I know that mental image is far from the truth, but it’s there. And if I’m a little jaundiced, imagine how some of the kids feel! Especially those not posting to a wine board like this one.