It doesn’t matter if you are classified third, fourth or fifth in the classification.

[Musigny 151]

Few people know or care. I had to think hard to know which one Lagrange, Malescot, Issan etc were, and then realized that it made no difference if it is third or fifth growth. Market will decide.

You can definitely argue that being classified a first growth and to some extent a second has some impact, but there is no difference between third and fourth (or fifth).

[Nicklasss]

Will we see some Médoc Crus Classés go out of the classification like the Saint Émilion wines? After all, if it doesn't make sense to them or the market... why stay in it?

[Nicklasss]

Premier je fus, Second je fus, non classé je suis maintenant, Mouton ne change.

[Dionysus]

You can definitely argue that being classified a first growth and to some extent a second has some impact, but there is no difference between third and fourth (or fifth).

Hmmm...I think most people would know if they had to pay €300 for a Palmer vs €40 for La Lague.

If you strip out Palmer & Calon Segur from the 3rd Growths, Beychevelle & Duhart-Milon from the 4th, and Lynch Bages & Pontet-Canet from the 5th, well then yes, I'd agree...it's much of a muchness...but how many exceptions does one need?

[Dionysus]

Interestingly, if you remove the above 6 wines, the average 2020 release price for the 3rd G's is €47, €45 for the 4th, and €44 for the 5th. So indeed, much of a muchness.

[Musigny 151]

You can definitely argue that being classified a first growth and to some extent a second has some impact, but there is no difference between third and fourth (or fifth).

Hmmm...I think most people would know if they had to pay €300 for a Palmer vs €40 for La Lague.

Yes the market determines price; nobody pays extra just because it is a third growth not a fifth.

[jckba]

I drink wines, not classifications so I wholeheartedly agree with the premise of this thread.

[AlexR]

Hi Guys,

I have a more nuanced take on this subject, which reminds me of the belief expessed here that it doesn't matter whether a Saint Emilion grand cru is classified or not.

Sure, there are plenty of consumers who see no difference, or don't know the 1855 classification by heart as many of us do.

But let us not forget that John Doe/Joe Bloggs is very different from the people on this forum. And he is likely to look up a pricey French wine's standing on some website, or in some book, and be very much influenced by it.
By the same token, don't you honestly think that the average consumer has the knee-jerk reaction of expecting that a premier cru Burgundy should be both better and worth more than a village wine?

I remember the bitterness about Pontet Caneet's classification status expressed by Alfred Tesseron at the amazing lunch he hosted for BWE.
Yes, estates can free themselves of this *to some extent*, but the 1855 classification is a monument, warts and all .
I'm the first person glad to discount this, especially at blind tastings, but the classfication is a reference point that cannnot be discounted, a historic yardstick respected, with provisos, around the world.
Is it relevant? Hell yes! Should it be taken with a grain of salt? Ditto!
Like the Bible, like the US constitution, etc.

In other words, one must be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. With so many châteaux in Bordeaux, having a reference point serves a very useful purpose. And I would much, much rather have the 1855 classification as one than a Neal Martin, a Robert Parker, or a Michel Bettane.
Despite some obvious flaws.

Best regards,
Alex R.

[Comte Flaneur]

Both Mark and Alex make good valid points which comes back to what I always say in these discussions - and we have chewed over this several times over the years on here - that the 1855 classification has stood the test of time remarkably well and as Alex suggests is a monument which should be respected, warts and all.

But Mark’s point is a pretty good one once you correct for the glaring anomalies. Even for estates like Sociando Mallet which are not even classified. For example La Lagune could easily be a 5th growth, not a third growth…

If there was to be an overhaul of the classification I think a good case could be made for not promoting any estates to first growth status but having a more elite - not much bigger - second growth class of 7-8 estates which would include estates like Palmer, LLC, Montrose, the Pichons and Lynch.

And in the third bucket you would then have estates like Gruaud Larose, Rauzan Segla etc, which would be a clear step up from the 4ths which would be a clearer step up from the 5ths than currently.

[DavidG]

It depends on perspective. The classification remains relevant to many, and promotion will support an increase in pricing.

The classification is irrelevant to me personally. Price and quality matter much more to me than classification.

[Musigny 151]

Both Mark and Alex make good valid points which comes back to what I always say in these discussions - and we have chewed over this several times over the years on here - that the 1855 classification has stood the test of time remarkably well and as Alex suggests is a monument which should be respected, warts and all.

But Mark’s point is a pretty good one once you correct for the glaring anomalies. Even for estates like Sociando Mallet which are not even classified. For example La Lagune could easily be a 5th growth, not a third growth…

If there was to be an overhaul of the classification I think a good case could be made for not promoting any estates to first growth status but having a more elite - not much bigger - second growth class of 7-8 estates which would include estates like Palmer, LLC, Montrose, the Pichons and Lynch.

And in the third bucket you would then have estates like Gruaud Larose, Rauzan Segla etc, which would be a clear step up from the 4ths which would be a clearer step up from the 5ths than currently.

I like the idea of seconds, but that would ossify the first growths, and Mouton probably belongs in the second group (yes I know, the original classification got it right ) and LMHB belongs in the first.

[SF Ed]

I'm with Musigny here. Classification beyond firsts and maybe super seconds doesn't matter much.

SF Ed

[Claudius2]

Ed
Largely agree though such ratings are arguably more important in Asia. The market here has way less real experience with wines of not just Bordeaux that they still rely on the 1855 classification to a greater degree than the western markets.

One driver of the high price of Lafite in particular and the first growths in general is Asian snobbishness. The growth of the Chinese market in the 90s onward and other Asian markets more recently pushed up Bordeaux prices and in more recent years, Burgundy prices - and very rapidly to my annoyance.

It is also worth noting that Beychevelle is liked over here due to the label. I like the wine by the way but Asians are the ultimate label drinkers and even worse, the top wines are often given as gifts and left to decay in stuffy offices.

[Ambrose]

Have you seen the ‘red obsession’ documentary?

[DavidG]

That’s a great point, Ed. The Bordeaux-buying “public” in general doesn’t put much of a premium on classification beyond firsts and some seconds.

[AlexR]

I’m not really in agreement about the commercial impact of the 1855 classification at 3rd, 4th, and 5th growth level.
While this may be inconsequential to some BWEers, I think you’ll find that the market does indeed rank prices loosely based on where châteaux fit into the classification, even though I’m first to admit that the likes of Lynch Bages or Pontet Canet or Palmer fall outside this.
I’m sorry, I have no statistical proof to back up this assertion (figures are notoriously difficult to obtain for the great growths which are, to some extent, outside appellation laws), but I have countless times seen people In shops and restaurants refer to the classification before making a purchasing decision, in much the same way as they consult a vintage chart.
Battle-hardened Bordeaux lovers may take a different approach, and are familiar with individual châteaux’ track records. But what of the average consumer???

In a different vein, I do not believe that any Médoc château lists its actual classification on the label, limiting the wording to “grand cru classé”.
Things are not the same in Saint Emilion, where several châteaux put “premier cru classé”. However, I don’t think any of these have “A” or “B” alongside.

I can remember being gobsmacked by the words “Premier Grand Cru Classé A” chiselled onto the pediment of Gérard Perse’s new cellars at Pavie. What incredible hubris when, as we all know, the classification in Saint Emilion is revised every ten years (or so)! What would Perse do if he were demoted – cover up the A somehow?
By the way, it should be only a few short weeks before the next Saint Emilion classification is published, undoubtedly causing another merry-go-round of controversy, recrimination, shrugging of shoulders, and court cases…

In Bordeaux, classifications matter.

Best regards,
Alex R.

[Dionysus]

In a different vein, I do not believe that any Médoc château lists its actual classification on the label, limiting the wording to “grand cru classé”.
Things are not the same in Saint Emilion, where several châteaux put “premier cru classé”. However, I don’t think any of these have “A” or “B” alongside.

I can remember being gobsmacked by the words “Premier Grand Cru Classé A” chiselled onto the pediment of Gérard Perse’s new cellars at Pavie. What incredible hubris when, as we all know, the classification in Saint Emilion is revised every ten years (or so)! What would Perse do if he were demoted – cover up the A somehow?

A quick google image search reveals that all four of the "A" Saint Emilion "Premier Cru Classé" included "A" on their labels at one point or another. In the Medoc, I've seen "Premier Grand Cru Classé" (i.e. Margaux)...Montrose (plus others) did have "Second Grand Grand Cru Classé En 1855" but have since dropped "Second" to read "Grand Grand Cru Classé Du Medoc En 1855". I've never seen a 3rd, 4th, or 5th growth use their classification ranking, and instead always use the more generic "Grand Cru Classé". Being chiselled onto the pediment at Pavie doesn't surprise me in the slightest however. You say hubris, I'd say extreme arrogance.

While this may be inconsequential to some BWEers, I think you’ll find that the market does indeed rank prices loosely based on where châteaux fit into the classification, even though I’m first to admit that the likes of Lynch Bages or Pontet Canet or Palmer fall outside this.

Many will argue that the market will decide, and hence price is the best guide to quality...Once the above three outliers are removed, pus possibly Calon Segur, it's much of a muchness price wise between 3rd/4th and 5th growth. So outside of the 1st and 2nd growths, the rest could be lumped in together. I'll do some analysis on this later and see what I come up with.

[Dionysus]

Have you seen the ‘red obsession’ documentary?

No Ambrose, is it worth a watch? That's the one that Russell Crowe narrates?

[Musigny 151]

In a different vein, I do not believe that any Médoc château lists its actual classification on the label, limiting the wording to “grand cru classé”.
Things are not the same in Saint Emilion, where several châteaux put “premier cru classé”. However, I don’t think any of these have “A” or “B” alongside.

I can remember being gobsmacked by the words “Premier Grand Cru Classé A” chiselled onto the pediment of Gérard Perse’s new cellars at Pavie. What incredible hubris when, as we all know, the classification in Saint Emilion is revised every ten years (or so)! What would Perse do if he were demoted – cover up the A somehow?

A quick google image search reveals that all four of the "A" Saint Emilion "Premier Cru Classé" included "A" on their labels at one point or another. In the Medoc, I've seen "Premier Grand Cru Classé" (i.e. Margaux)...Montrose (plus others) did have "Second Grand Grand Cru Classé En 1855" but have since dropped "Second" to read "Grand Grand Cru Classé Du Medoc En 1855". I've never seen a 3rd, 4th, or 5th growth use their classification ranking, and instead always use the more generic "Grand Cru Classé". Being chiselled onto the pediment at Pavie doesn't surprise me in the slightest however. You say hubris, I'd say extreme arrogance.

While this may be inconsequential to some BWEers, I think you’ll find that the market does indeed rank prices loosely based on where châteaux fit into the classification, even though I’m first to admit that the likes of Lynch Bages or Pontet Canet or Palmer fall outside this.

Many will argue that the market will decide, and hence price is the best guide to quality...Once the above three outliers are removed, pus possibly Calon Segur, it's much of a muchness price wise between 3rd/4th and 5th growth. So outside of the 1st and 2nd growths, the rest could be lumped in together. I'll do some analysis on this later and see what I come up with.

That would suggest that some wines are doomed to stay within a small layer of pricing, irrespective of changes in quality. But Pontet Canet, Rauzan Segla, and Calon Segur have seen an increase in price way beyond their peers, as they have made better wines. I am not sure I like the improvements at Beychevelle, but the market does, or it may be the Chinese like the dragon on the label. Not just the Medoc, other examples would include Carmes HB, Canon and VCC. There is transparency in Bordeaux which was unknown forty years ago, and prices reflect quality more than classification.

[AlexR]

Conor,

Thanks for pointing out that I was laboring under a false impression with regard to the "A" on Saint-Emilion labels.
My frame of reference is obviously outdated. It never used to be that way. I don't know when they started.
Of course, Cheval Blanc and Angléus have now withdrawn from the classification altogether.

Second grand cru classé would be a mistake in French if it ever did appear on a label for the following reason.
"Second" is only used when there are just two of something. For more than that, "deuxièime" is used.
https://www.lalanguefrancaise.com/ortho ... difference
That's why, for instance, it's "second vin" and not "deuxième vin" in French (although this gets tricky when some estates also make a third wine...).
Therefore I am very puzzled that any château would put "second grand cru classé".
Did you find a photo?

I wish you luck in your analysis of 3rd, 4th, and 5th growth prices. Such studies are remarkably tricky and unreliable. I don't know to what extent auction house prices and people like LivEx actually reflect reality.

Best regards,
Alex R.

[Dionysus]

Did you find a photo?

Thought it was strange myself to be honest...don't think I've seen other examples other than Montrose. It's dropped off of more recent vintages.

[stefan]

Interesting what you say about "second" versus "deuxiéme", Alex. On the Lascombes website, the estate proudly exclaims

Second Grand Cru Classé Margaux
Premier dans tous les esprits!

Go figure....

[AlexR]

And then, of course, there's the famous - and somewhat arrogant - motto of Mouton Rothschild when they were promoted starting with the 1973 vintage :

Premier je suis
Second je fus
Mouton ne change

or,

I am a first growth
I was a second
(But) Mouton does not change.

Alex R.

[Tom In DC]

Didn't Mouton have a similar motto while the Baron was campaigning for promotion, along the lines of "First they will not let me be, Second I am not, Mouton does not change?"

[AlexR]

Yes, the moto prior to 1973 was:

Premier ne puis
second ne daigne
Mouton suis

whose meaning is pretty close to what you wrote:

I cannot be a first
I do not deign to be a second
I am Mouton

When you visit Mouton, they make sure to point out that the first growths are listed in alphabetical order, and that Mouton should *not* be taken to be the last of the firsts!

I have heard a lot of criticism of Mouton over the years. My own experience is that when all pistons are firing, i.e. in a great vintage (for Mouton) - remember the 86 tasting in New York, Tom? - there is no better wine, but that the estate has a rather uneven performance.

AR

[Musigny 151]

For me the chateaux making the greatest single bottles of Medoc are
Latour,
Mouton,
Palmer,
Lafite,
Pichon Lalande
and then Margaux.

[JimHow]

I am almost always thrilled when I drink a Mouton.

[AKR]

Battle Hymn of The Lower Classifications

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjxugyZ ... ticRecords

[Musigny 151]

This excruciating video
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sv3x8YEblpw

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.

[JimHow]

Dude is high on drugs.

[stefan]

Hilarious; even more funny than The Sucker.

[Chateau Vin]

This excruciating video
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sv3x8YEblpw

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.

Gassies above Mouton...

I think he made this video after his wife hit him in the head with a sauce pan, and he got discombobulated...

[JimHow]

And he speaks so authoritatively, like the pope… or the computer in 2001….

[DavidG]

At least he got Haut Brion right.

[esl]

Second grand cru classé would be a mistake in French if it ever did appear on a label for the following reason.
"Second" is only used when there are just two of something. For more than that, "deuxièime" is used.
https://www.lalanguefrancaise.com/ortho ... difference
That's why, for instance, it's "second vin" and not "deuxième vin" in French (although this gets tricky when some estates also make a third wine...).
Therefore I am very puzzled that any château would put "second grand cru classé".
Did you find a photo?

Yes, Rauzan-Gassies is still doing it as of 2020. I have seen photos of some older vintages of theirs that use "deuxièime grand cru classé" Sorry in advance if it's not ok to bring up older threads.

photo found on CT.

[JimHow]

I haven't had a Rauzan Gassies in years, what is the state of quality of the wines?
Seems to me the Orlando Bobbys had it in the last year or two.