Bordeaux is arguably the world’s most famous wine region – known for producing some of the finest wines in existence, with a long history stretching back to the Roman era. But the region is broadly divided in two – the Left and Right Bank. (Terms that you may also hear in reference to Paris, and – less frequently – Chablis.)  The region is defined by its waterways – a forked tongue that snakes southeast from the Atlantic. The Gironde estuary is fed by the Dordogne and Garonne rivers, with the Gironde flowing into the Atlantic. The south-eastern side of the Gironde and Garonne is the Left Bank, while the north-western side of the Gironde and Dordogne is the Right Bank. The section of land that sits between the fork of the Garonne and Dordogne is the intuitively named Entre-Deux-Mers (literally translating as “between two seas”), and is mostly home to more everyday, entry-level wine – although quality has certainly improved here with both climate change and technical advancements (such as Ch. Marjosse).  The Left and Right Banks, however, are where you’ll find Bordeaux’s most illustrious names. While both regions craft exceptional wines, they are extremely different in terms of terroir, the grapes grown, the estates themselves and how the wines are classified.  The Left Bank The Left Bank is the aristocratic and historic home of fine wine in Bordeaux, famous for the 1855 classification of the Médoc, a ranking of the top estates of the region which still stands today, including the fabled First Growths – Ch. Latour, Ch. Lafite Rothschild, Ch. Mouton Rothschild, Ch. Margaux and Ch. Haut-Brion.  It was Bordeaux’s ties to England that saw it rise to prominence – after Eleanor of Aquitaine married Henry Plantagenet in 1152. With Bordeaux under English rule, favourable tax rates saw the industry thrive. But the Médoc was, at that point in time, a marshland not worthy of wine-growing – with the best wines coming from Graves estates like Ch. Haut-Brion (where vines have been grown since at least the early 15th century).  It was only in the mid-17th century that the Dutch drained the marshy Médoc, creating the well-drained gravel soils that are now a haven for Cabernet Sauvignon. It was after this that most of the region’s grandest properties were established.  The aforementioned 1855 classification cemented the Médoc’s place in history, with the wines of Sauternes and Barsac categorised at the same time. The wines of the Graves were classified in 1959, while the Left Bank is also home to the Cru Bourgeois and Cru Artisan classifications.  The Left Bank encompasses, from north to south: the Médoc (which includes the prestigious communes of Saint-Estèphe, Pauillac, Saint-Julien, Margaux, as well as Listrac and Moulis), the Haut-Médoc, Pessac-Léognan and Graves, as well as Barsac and Sauternes. Although the area of course encompasses dry whites and sweets, stylistically “Left Bank” is used mainly in reference to the reds, which represent the vast majority of production.   The soils on this side of the Gironde are dominated by gravel, with the best sites sitting on deep gravels over clay subsoils. The vineyards are more spread out here, with patches of woodland and other agricultural land between the pockets of fine terroir, making distances and journey-times between estates longer. The gentle, barely undulating landscape masks significant differences in the soils, which determine the success of a site, with the mounds divided by streams known locally as “jalles”. Deeper gravel has historically been a significant advantage in the region’s maritime climate, avoiding water-logging and retaining heat that helps to ripen the grapes. Proximity to the Gironde and its moderating influence can also help shield vines from frosts, an increasing threat in the springtime.  Estates can be quite large on the Left Bank – for example, Ch. Cos d’Estournel comprises 100 hectares – allowing for higher production levels, which means the wines tend to be more widely available and can be found more easily on the secondary market, even at the highest quality level. The properties also tend to have picture-perfect châteaux, immaculate architectural displays of the wealth of the region.  Cabernet Sauvignon leads the way in terms of plantings, thriving in those warm gravel soils (and complemented by parcels of Merlot, Cabernet Franc and Petit Verdot, with some limited Malbec and Carménère). The variety produces small berries with thick skins, creating tannic, age-worthy reds.  The wine style varies between commune and estate, but generally speaking the wines of the Left Bank are dominated by graphite, cassis and blackcurrant leaf, full-bodied yet with a more linear structure that Cabernet Sauvignon provides. Historically the wines were austere in youth and needed time in the cellar, but wines today are made to be more approachable so that they have longer drinking windows. With age, the best wines develop beautiful complexity with notes of leather, cedar, tobacco and more.  The Right Bank The most famous wines of the Right Bank come from Saint-Emilion and Pomerol, however it is also home to: the Côtes de Blaye, Côtes de Bourg, Fronsac, Canon-Fronsac, Lalande-de-Pomerol, Côtes de Castillon, Côtes de Francs and the Saint-Emilion satellites – Lussac-Saint-Emilion, Montagne-Saint-Emilion, Saint-Georges-Saint-Emilion and Puisseguin-Saint-Emilion.  Although wine has long been made on the Right Bank, the wines – other than those of Ch. Cheval Blanc – were not known widely until relatively recently. The region’s modern history is tied to one man – the influential critic Robert Parker. He was one of the first to highlight the quality being produced at smaller Right Bank estates in the 1980s and 1990s, and put the wines on the international stage. His penchant for rich, ripe, concentrated styles prompted a wave of producers who did extensive green-harvesting, working with tiny yields, picking late, extracting heavily and ageing in new French oak, a style favoured by the far-reaching and famous consultant Michel Rolland.  Pomerol became home to the “garagistes”, after Jean-Luc Thunevin crafted his first vintage of Valandraud in his garage in 1991. These modern producers, who didn’t come with the land and smart châteaux found on the Left Bank, captured the imagination of consumers, and rapidly became highly sought-after.  Fashions have changed for the most part, and the wines produced today across the Right Bank are significantly more restrained – reflecting the general move toward freshness and aromatic finesse.   Of course, one reason that the wines of the Right Bank were less well-known was the smaller size of estates and therefore smaller volumes being produced – especially in Pomerol. Pétrus, for example, consists of 11.5 hectares, while Ch. Lafleur is a mere 4.5. In Saint-Emilion, Ch. Cheval Blanc and Angélus both have 39 hectares – a more generous vineyard area, but still relatively small in comparison to those in the Médoc. This means that the wines from the top estates are often strictly allocated and can be very hard to secure, with significantly less available on the secondary market.  The area feels very different to the Left Bank, with a more rolling landscape with more nooks and crannies, meaning you often can’t see what lies over the hill. The soils here are also significantly different, dominated by clay and limestone, with some sand and gravel. These soils stay cooler and retain more water, something that can be very helpful in hot, dry seasons (as in 2022). The finest wines come from the limestone plateau at the heart of Saint-Emilion and Pomerol plateau, with its pockets of rare blue clay. Limestone has an additional benefit of retaining freshness and acidity in the wines, with wines from limestone-dominant soils often having low pH.  Plantings are dominated by Merlot and Cabernet Franc (sometimes known locally as Bouchet), rather than Cabernet Sauvignon (which can struggle in the damp soils, although producers are planting a little more of the variety in response to climate change). Many wines from Pomerol are 100% Merlot (with estates such as Vieux Château Certan notable exceptions), while in Saint-Emilion the blends tend to include more Cabernet Franc. Merlot produces larger, thinner-skinned berries, and therefore Right Bank wines are generally softer, plusher, with a rounder texture, softer tannins, often floral with a redder fruit profile (cherry, plum), and can sometimes be exotic in perfume.   Unlike on the Left Bank, most of the wines are not classified formally, however Saint-Emilion introduced its own classification in the 1950s – one that has become a source of controversy.  Beyond Saint-Emilion and Pomerol, the other appellations can produce some fantastic wines, and – given the difficulty with buying additional land within these two illustrious areas – many of the Right Bank’s leading names have estates here (such as Ch. Lafleur’s Grand Village or Perrières, and LEglise-Clinet’s Montlandrie or Les Cruzelles). These can be a great source of value.  It’s worth noting that vintages are sometimes described as “Left Bank” or “Right Bank” years, and it is true that conditions can sometimes favour one side over the other, however the picture is often more complicated and results can vary according to individual estate, as well as commune.  Read more about Bordeaux or browse all Bordeaux listings 

Bordeaux is a fascinating and complex region. It is often divided in two – the Left and Right Bank. Here, we break down the differences between the two Banks – from terroir and grape varieties to the size of the estates and style of the wines

Talking about Bordeaux’s Left and Right Bank: exploring the differences between the regions, wines and estates on either side of the Gironde

Wines of Bordeaux’s Left Bank versus Right Bank

Bordeaux: the Left Bank versus the Right Bank

Bordeaux has several different classification systems. While the Right Bank has only Saint-Emilion’s system (one that is a source of controversy), the Left Bank has a more complex web of rankings.   
The 1855 classification is the gold standard. The most famous and influential of them all, it lists the Left Bank’s very top estates. But beyond this crème de la crème, there are several other systems ranking properties – namely the Graves classification, the Crus Bourgeois and Crus Artisans.  
The Graves classification  
Almost 100 years after the famous 1855 classification, producers in the Graves decided to create their own equivalent. Other than Ch. Haut-Brion, the region’s properties had not been included in the 1855 classification. A draft of the classification was drawn up in 1953, then the official list ratified in 1958, with some changes in 1959.  
The Graves classification is much simpler than the 1855 classification. There is only one tier, with estates declared “Grand Cru Classé de Graves” for white wine, red wine, or both. Sixteen estates in total were defined as the region’s best. Couhins, Couhins-Lurton and Laville Haut-Brion were classified for only their white wines, while Fieuzal, Haut-Bailly, Haut-Brion, La Mission Haut-Brion, Pape-Clément, Smith Haut Lafitte and La Tour Haut-Brion were classified only for their reds.  
Interestingly,. Ch. Haut-Brion is only classified for red, however this is not because its white was not deemed worthy, but because it did not apply for classification, given production of the illustrious wine is so small. It remains one of the region’s highest-rated and most expensive whites. 
Although there have been no changes since 1959, some of the wines are no longer made under the same name. Both part of the Clarence Dillon family, Ch. Laville Haut-Brion is now bottled as Ch. la Mission Haut-Brion Blanc, while fruit from La Tour Haut-Brion is now used for the second wine of La Mission, La Chapelle de la Mission Haut-Brion (read more about the genealogy of the Haut-Brion estates here).  
The Pessac-Léognan appellation was only introduced in 1987, so some of the wines are bottled under this today.  1959 Graves classification  Ch. Bouscaut (red and white)  Ch. Carbonnieux (red and white)  Domaine de Chevalier (red and white)  Ch. Couhins (white only)  Ch. Couhins-Lurton (white only)  Ch. de Fieuzal (red only)  Ch. Haut-Bailly (red only)  Ch. Haut-Brion (red only, also part of the 1855 classification)  Ch. Latour-Martillac (red and white)  Ch. Laville-Haut-Brion (white only, now the white of La Mission Haut-Brion)  Ch. Malartic-Lagravière (red and white)  Ch. La Mission Haut-Brion (red only)  Ch. Olivier (red and white)  Ch. Pape-Clément (red only)  Ch. Smith Haut Lafitte (red only)  Ch. la Tour-Haut-Brion (red only)  The Crus Bourgeois  The term “Cru Bourgeois” has long been used casually, but it was introduced as a formal classification in 1932. There have been many changes to the classification over the years. There were 444 properties in the original group, many of whom used the term on their labels even though the classification was never officially ratified. In 2003, after three years of debate, the classification was updated and split into three tiers (with Cru Bourgeois Supérieur and Exceptionnel added), only to be annulled in 2007, with the term then banned from labels. In 2010, the Cru Bourgeois classification was re-introduced and assigned to wines rather than estates, with their status re-assessed each year, but this too was soon replaced.  
In 2020, a new version of the classification was unveiled, going back to the three tiers of Cru Bourgeois, Cru Bourgeois Supérieur and Cru Bourgeois Exceptionnel. The top rank of “Exceptionnel” includes just 14 estates, with 56 Crus Bourgeois Supérieurs and 179 Crus Bourgeois (adding up to a total 249 properties). The classification is only being assessed every five years, with the next iteration set to be announced in 2025.   
The classification is decided based on the quality and consistency of the wine (assessed via rigorous blind tasting), traceability and authentication, with sustainability encouraged and rewarded. While these wines are not as highly regarded or sought after as those in the 1855 classification, the wines generally offer good value, and all come from the Médoc, Haut-Médoc, Listrac, Moulis, Margaux, Saint-Julien, Pauillac and Saint-Estèphe. Find the full, current classification on the Crus Bourgeois website. 
The Crus Artisans  
The Left Bank also has the Cru Artisan classification, designed to highlight smaller operations where the manager/owner is involved in every stage of production. The term has been used for over 150 years, however its official meaning was introduced in 1989. The classification was launched in its current guise in 2006, open to estates in the Médoc, Haut-Médoc, Listrac, Moulis, Margaux, Saint-Julien, Pauillac and Saint-Estèphe. Generally family-owned, properties must grow their own grapes, then make and sell the wines.  
There were 44 Cru Artisan estates in 2006, but the latest classification (unveiled in 2018) included only 36 – with many addresses sold/absorbed by other producers, some retiring, as well as a handful of new names added. The classification is based on a visit to the estate and blind tasting of its wines. On average, Crus Artisans have just 10 hectares of vines. Find the full current classification on the Crus Artisans website. 
Read more about Bordeaux or browse all Bordeaux listings


While the 1855 classification is the most famous and influential classification on the Left Bank, there are several other classifications in operation today. Here’s everything you need to know about Bordeaux’s Graves classification, the Crus Bourgeois and Crus Artisans 

Looking beyond the 1855 classification in Bordeaux: discover everything you need to know about the 1959 Graves, Cru Bourgeois and Cru Artisan classifications

Graves, Cru Bourgeois and Cru Artisan in Bordeaux

Your guide to Bordeaux’s other classifications: Graves, Cru Bourgeois and Cru Artisan

While Bordeaux’s Left Bank was classified in 1855, the Right Bank didn’t establish an equivalent ranking until the 1950s. There are classifications for the Graves, Sauternes and Barsac, as well as the Médoc across the Gironde, but it is only Saint-Emilion that has been classified on the Right. How does Saint-Emilion’s classification work?  The classification was first established in 1955, dividing the appellation’s properties into three levels of quality based on a scoring system. The top wines are classified as Premier Grand Cru Classé A, followed by those that are Premier Grand Cru Classé B and then the Grand Cru Classé.  From the beginning, the idea was to try and create a more democratic system that rewarded estates’ efforts and avoided complacency. While the 1855 Classification was assigned to the château – essentially the brand, rather than the wine or specific vineyards (meaning properties could expand and shrink, yet their status wouldn’t change), the Saint-Emilion classification is judged both on terroir and the château’s performance. The classification is also reassessed every 10-15 years, with the most recent update in 2022. How are properties in Saint-Emilion classified?  As mentioned, the ranking of estates is based on a scoring system, out of 20.  For the Premiers Grands Crus Classés, the score is based on: a tasting of 15 vintages (representing 30% of the score); the property’s national and international reputation, its promotion and distribution (35%); the quality and consistency of the terroir (30%); and the property’s approach to viticulture, vinification and traceability (5%). To sit within this bracket, estates must earn 16 out of 20, with the best earning Premier Grand Cru Classé A status.  For the Grands Crus Classés, the score is based on: a tasting of 10 vintages (representing 50% of the score); the property’s national and international reputation, its promotion and distribution (20%); the quality and consistency of the terroir (20%); and the property’s approach to viticulture, vinification and traceability (10%). In essence, there is more focus on the tasting and the property’s practices, and less on terroir or its reputation and representation in the market. To achieve Grand Cru Classé status, a property must earn 14 out of the possible 20 points.  Because there is a detailed assessment of the soils, properties can have some but not all of their land classified. For example, Ch. Angélus had only 27 of its 39 hectares deemed worthy of Premier Grand Cru Classé A and Ch. Canon only has 24 of its 34 hectares classified as Premier Grand Cru Classé B. Why is Saint-Emilion’s classification controversial?  While the intention to try and create a classification system that was both dynamic and about the land was noble, it hasn’t quite worked out that way. There is much debate about the different factors that contribute to a property’s score, with the proportion tied to distribution and marketing a particular point of contention. With its constant evolution, this gives more room for controversy – with anyone demoted inevitably disgruntled. All in all, the result is a legal battleground, with accusations of undue influence and more.   The initial classification took three years to finalise, and it has since been re-drawn in 1969, 1986, 1996, 2006, 2012 and 2022. After the 2006 classification, five estates filed lawsuits against their demotion, while the 2012 only brought more cases to the courts.   Ahead of the 2022 classification, most of the Premier Grand Cru Classé A estates left the classification (Ch. Ausone, Ch. Angélus and Ch. Cheval Blanc), leaving just Ch. Pavie in the top rank of the classification, joined by Ch. Figeac in 2022. Read more about the classification’s recent controversies here. What about Saint-Emilion Grand Cru? Saint-Emilion Grand Cru is – confusingly – very different to Saint-Emilion Grand Cru Classé. This isn’t a classification but an appellation – one that has the exact same geographic area as Saint-Emilion AC.  Properties need to apply to be part of the classification but can otherwise make wine under the area’s two appellations – Saint-Emilion AC or Saint-Emilion Grand Cru AC.   “Grand Cru” status is not tied to the quality of the terroir but dictated by yields (a lower maximum of 40hl/ha), a higher minimum potential alcohol and longer minimum ageing requirements (only permitted to be bottled 16 months after harvest), and must be estate-bottled. The idea is that this leads to a higher-quality, richer wine. The current Saint-Emilion classification The latest iteration of the Saint-Emilion classification was announced in 2022, with just two properties sitting at Premier Grand Cru Classé A level and 12 at Premier Grand Cru Classé B, and 63 Grands Crus Classés. Find the full list of estates below. Premier Grand Cru Classé A Ch. Pavie   Ch. Figeac   Premier Grand Cru Classé B   Ch. Beau-Séjour Bécot  Ch. Beauséjour Duffau-Lagarrosse  Ch. Bélair-Monange  Ch. Canon  Ch. Canon-la-Gaffelière  Ch. Larcis Ducasse  Ch. Pavie Macquin  Ch. Troplong Mondot  Ch. TrotteVieille  Ch. Valandraud Clos Fourtet  La Mondotte  Grand Cru Classé Ch. l’Arrosée   Ch. Balestard la Tonnelle  Ch. Barde-Haut  Ch. Bellefont-Belcier  Ch. Bellevue  Ch. Berliquet  Ch. Cadet-Bon  Ch. Cap de Mourlin  Ch. le Chatelet  Ch. Chauvin  Ch. Clos de Sarpe  Ch. la Clotte  Ch. la Commanderie  Ch. Corbin  Ch. Côte de Baleau  Ch. la Couspaude  Ch. Dassault  Ch. Destieux  Ch. la Dominique  Ch. Faugères  Ch. Faurie de Souchard  Ch. de Ferrand  Ch. Fleur Cardinale  Ch. La Fleur Morange Mathilde  Ch. Fombrauge  Ch. Fonplégade  Ch. Fonroque  Ch. Franc Mayne  Ch. Grand Corbin  Ch. Grand Corbin-Despagne  Ch. Grand Mayne  Ch. les Grandes Murailles  Ch. Grand-Pontet  Ch. Guadet  Ch. Haut Sarpe  Clos des Jacobins  Couvent des Jacobins  Ch. Jean Faure  Ch. Laniote  Ch. Larmande  Ch. Laroque  Ch. Laroze Clos la Madeleine   Ch. la Marzelle  Ch. Monbousquet  Ch. Moulin du Cadet  Clos de l’Oratoire  Ch. Pavie Decesse  Ch. Peby Faugères  Ch. Petit Faurie de Soutard  Ch. de Pressac  Ch. le Prieuré  Ch. Quinault l’Enclos  Ch. Ripeau  Ch. Rochebelle  Ch. Saint-Georges-Cote-Pavie  Clos Saint-Martin  Ch. Sansonnet  Ch. la Serre  Ch. Soutard  Ch. Tertre Daugay  Ch. la Tour Figeac  Ch. Villemaurine  Ch. Yon-Figeac   Read more about Bordeaux or browse all Bordeaux listings 

Bordeaux’s Right Bank wasn’t classified in 1855, but Saint-Emilion introduced its equivalent system in 1955, ranking the appellation’s best properties. Here’s everything you need to know about the Saint-Emilion classification, how properties are ranked – and why it’s so controversial

Everything you need to know about the Saint-Emilion classification – the official ranking of this Right Bank appellation’s top wine estates

Your guide to the Saint-Emilion classification

Last year the Chianti Classico governing body of producers (the Consorzio) banned the use of international varieties in wines bearing the top Gran Selezione classification. The decision has caused an outcry among some of the region’s top producers. Many claim that Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot were not only instrumental in raising the quality and consistency of the region but have since become an important part of the region’s identity today. Some producers claim that the Consorzio, in the name of authenticity, is limiting the vigneron’s creativity when instead they should be focusing on upholding quality. As far as appellations in Italy go, Chianti is one of the oldest, dating back to the early 1700s. Quality, even back then, was an important factor for the top producers. Castello di Ama discovered records from 1773 which showed their estate was exporting wines to England and producing wines with exclusively red grapes designed for ageing – something that became a rarity in the region during the 20th century.  With few exceptions, Chianti production up until the 1990s was focused on quantity. Vineyards were mixed, typically with three Sangiovese vines for every white vine, either Malvasia or Trebbiano. “The white grapes were part of the culture here”, says Castello di Ama’s Lorenza Sebasti. “The white and red grapes were made together, to make a wine for everyday – it was part of the meal and needed to be as light as possible. It was safer to drink than water. And it gave you energy.” Under the Chianti appellation, the wines had to include white varieties (Malvasia or Trebbiano) alongside Sangiovese.  With a focus on quantity, the quality of the Sangiovese clones planted at this time was generally poor. As such, Sangiovese struggled to reach full maturity, resulting in aggressive tannins – typically mellowed by the blending of white varieties. From a quality perspective, it was impossible to make a 100% Sangiovese wine of any quality. The 1970s marked the beginning of a fascinating creative and experimental winemaking period in Tuscany. Piero Antinori and Giacomo Tachis were instrumental in replanting programs focused on quality. New clones of Sangiovese would eventually help, but international varieties were an essential component in quickly raising the quality of the region’s wines, as well as their ageing potential – another important attribute of fine wine. As well as working in Bolgheri creating the first Super Tuscan with Sassicaia, Tachis and Antinori produced their first vintage of Tignanello from their top vineyard in Chianti Classico in 1971. This first vintage was made only from red grapes (Sangiovese and other local varieties) and matured in oak barriques (the first wine of the region to be made in such a way).  With mixed results, they went back to the drawing board. After much discussion, and no doubt buoyed by their results at Sassicaia, they believed Cabernet Sauvignon was the solution. It wasn’t until 1975 that they produced the next vintage of Tignanello, this time a blend of 80% Sangiovese and 20% Cabernet Sauvignon – a blend that has remained the same ever since. The addition of Cabernet Sauvignon and maturation in barriques meant it broke the appellation rules and had to be declassified to a table wine. But it was the quality of this wine that spurred a new generation of winemakers that was to reshape the Tuscan landscape. More and more quality-led producers in Chianti Classico started experimenting with different varieties. Lorenza Sebasti describes Castello di Ama at this time as a “workshop of experiments”.  “When we started introducing varieties from France, we did many experiments – Pinot Noir, Chardonnay, Cabernet Franc, Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Sauvignon Blanc… Our greatest success turned out to be Merlot.” Although the Consorzio eventually caught up with these pioneering producers and allowed up to 20% international varieties to be included in Chianti Classico blends, wine made from 100% Sangiovese was still not permitted. As better, lower-yielding Sangiovese clones started to appear, other Chianti Classico producers such as Fontodi, Montevertine and San Giusto a Rentennano broke the rules and started to produce 100% Sangiovese wines – again forcing them to declassify them. It wasn’t until 1996 that the Consorzio allowed Chianti Classico to be made from 100% Sangiovese. For Stefano Carpaneto, Tignanello’s winemaker since 2002, the presence of Cabernet was absolutely fundamental in Tignanello’s success. In the early days, Sangiovese was still lacking consistency and suffered with aggressive tannins if not blended. “Sangiovese was also difficult to manage in vinification and during the élevage in barrels,” he says. For him, the introduction of Cabernet gave balance to the Sangiovese at vinification and provided a tannin structure that allows the wine to age. It also guaranteed consistency year after year, which was paramount if Tignanello was going to compete with other fine wines around the world. At Castello di Ama, Merlot not only became an essential component in their top single-vineyard Chianti Classico wines but was so good in its own right that they created L’Apparita – a 100% Merlot wine that today competes with the finest Merlots in the world. “Merlot in Tuscany has its own personality,” says Sebasti. “The aim was to make a very good Chianti Classico. But the Merlot stood out with its personality, we took it as a gift. It was part of our research, but it was also a discovery.” Sabasti explains how Tuscan Merlot is totally different to the Californian style, or Pomerol. “Somehow,” she says, “it has depth, but is not with fat and remains very vertical.” Tignanello, L’Apparita, Fontodi’s Flaccianello, Percarlo and Le Pergole Torte are some of the region's very top wines, responsible for raising its profile, yet all were forced at one time or another to declassify their wines. The Consorzio has caught up and now allows barrique ageing, 100% Sangiovese and the use of international varieties in Chianti Classico. But at a time when quality has never been higher, they have again been criticised for their recent decision to ban international varieties from the top Chianti Classico Gran Selezione classification. Castello di Ama’s Sebasti is not happy. She is a big believer in what she calls “renaissance thinking” – where quality-led winemaking should be about creativity and discovery, not rules. After all, it was the rulebreakers in Chianti Classico that brought quality to the region. Sebasti recalls how Robert Mondavi who, despite his position of power in Napa, stood up against imposing rules that would restrict young, up-and-coming winemakers to produce wines in a region where it was becoming too expensive to own land. Many other producers wanted to allow only bricks-and-mortar wineries to become members of Napa Valley Vintners, but Mondavi believed this would stifle creativity in the region. Sebasti echoes Mondavi, “We need the energy, the creativity, the new challenge of young winemakers and rulebreakers to continue to make our wines the best.”  Despite Antinori’s reputation largely being built on the success of international varieties, they are in favour of the banning of international varieties in Gran Selezione and voted for the change. “While the international varieties were absolutely necessary to transition the region from quantity to quality, they can now be put to one side,” says Carpaneto. For Carpaneto, the changing of the rules will help create a clearer identity for the region. He believes being able to taste 100% Sangiovese wines from different villages within Chianti Classico will help the critic and consumer compare the differences. “The international varieties can influence the wine too much,” he says. “A variety like Merlot can go over the terroir, it can cover the terroir.”  Sebasti, on the other hand, is yet to be convinced. She understands the allure of making Chianti Classico from 100% Sangiovese. She regularly tastes her own vats of Sangiovese and, while they can be great, for her, the magic touch for her terroir is a soupçon of Merlot added to the Sangiovese that makes her wine better – she is more interested in that than the classification. “They go for monotony,” claims Sebasti. “They say authenticity is 100% Sangiovese and this is historically incorrect […] It is not a political choice, it should be a vigneron’s choice.” If forced, Castello di Ama will leave the appellation.  While Antinori approved the decision for the ban, they have no intention to change the blend of Tignanello, or Solaia for that matter. “We cannot touch the Super Tuscans,” says Carpaneto. Their reputation is bigger than any classification. Regularly compared to the top wines of the world Carpeneto believes they have earned their place in history.  Among these top producers their wines do not need to rely on the classifications, however it is interesting that the top wines in Antinori’s portfolio, for example, are wines that rely on a blend of both Sangiovese and international varieties. In 2002 (a terrible vintage for Sangiovese), Solaia was made entirely from Cabernet Sauvignon. Carpeneto says they would never do this again. “the wine doesn’t taste like Solaia,” he says. “If we had the same vintage conditions again, we just wouldn’t make it.” As at Castello di Ama, it is the special relationship between the international variety and Sangiovese that makes their top wines so special.  Tuscany’s rapid rise in quality could not have happened with Sangiovese alone. It has the international varieties of Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot and Syrah, at least in part, to thank for that. They were instrumental in Tuscany’s transition from an industrial-led wine-producing region to a qualitative one. The decision to ban their inclusion in the Gran Selezione classification will cause ruptures in the appellation – though the region is no stranger to controversy. Each vigneron will need to decide for themselves whether it compromises quality. Either way, the mavericks that have helped build Chianti’s reputation are not likely to let rules get in their way. Browse all Italian wine listings or read more Editorial

Despite a long history of growing native Tuscan varieties, Chianti’s reputation is tied to the Bordeaux varieties. We talk to leading producers about their role in the region – and why the Consorzio is trying to ban them from its top wines

Exploring why the Consorzio is trying to ban Bordeaux varieties after they have been so instrumental to Chianti’s success. 

Chianti Gran Selezione classification in crisis

Looking beyond Sangiovese: Chianti

Bordeaux 2020 was a vigneron’s vintage, a year in which strategic choices were key to success. Here we delve into how each of the main appellations on both the Left and Right Banks fared in this remarkable year.

Delving into how each of the main Bordeaux appellations on both the Left and Right Banks fared in this remarkable 2020 vintage.

Commune-by-commune guide to Bordeaux 2020  

Bordeaux 2020: breaking it down

The world’s fine wine regions famously exist where the climate is just warm enough for grapes to reach ripeness. The ever-warming climate, however, has greatly increased this likelihood, with good-to-great vintages now convincingly outweighing the poorer ones.  Despite this, vintage variation remains an important factor in fine wine and when contrasting 2016, 2017 and 2018 in Piedmont, you see there are still strong variations in climate. The pitfalls of a vintage could arguably be even greater, in that these regions are no longer only concerned by wet, cooler conditions but also by the perils of excessive heat and drought. While hotter conditions can drastically affect yield and quality, the 2017 vintage in Piedmont seems to show that – despite these risks – vines are better at handling the heat. 
Following on from an almost perfect 2016 growing season in Piedmont, 2017 was always going to play second fiddle. The 2017 and 2018 vintages were certainly not as straightforward and – in fact – the two together offer completely contrasting growing seasons which produced totally different results, with 2017 hot and dry, 2018 cool and wet. Despite initial concerns regarding the heat in 2017, the wines – now in bottle – are surprisingly fresh, yet with richly concentrated fruit. Giuseppe Vaira sums it up best: “2017 is a vintage that defies logic.  It was the driest vintage on record and the earliest picking dates of the last five years. Yet, the wines are surprisingly vivid, fresh and still introverted: the opposite of what you would expect from a warm year.” For Giovanni Angeli at Massolino, the 2017s are similar to the 2015s, but with more “energy and freshness”, a pleasant surprise considering the year’s hot, dry conditions. Visiting Piedmont in early 2018, I remember how concerned winemakers were about the past summer. They were shocked by the extreme conditions, registering as the hottest and driest summer since 2003; yet, as Ferruccio Grimaldi and Giovanni Angeli noted, alcohol levels remained normal – particularly for the Nebbiolo.  Grimaldi believes this is because the vines shut down during the hottest period and stopped producing sugar. More surprising was that acidity remained high, something Grimaldi attributes to low levels of malic acid in the grapes. This might sound counter-intuitive, but it is the tartaric acid in grapes that provides freshness, while malic acidity in fact lessens the sense of freshness. For Grimaldi, low malic acidity signifies two things: the grapes reached an excellent degree of ripening, while also retaining healthy levels of tartaric acidity. Grimaldi also noted that, despite the heat in the day, the nights were cooler than other hot vintages – potentially another factor that helped preserve the acidity and freshness in the wines.  Emanuele Baldi from Prunotto pointed out that another possible saviour of the vintage – albeit to the detriment of the year’s yield – was frost. A mild winter prompted early budbreak, meaning vines were significantly advanced when the region was hit by frost. This led to huge losses particularly for the white varieties Moscato and Arneis, but also for lower-lying plots of Nebbiolo, where frost pockets formed.  The fruit that escaped was all from the higher vineyards, sites which naturally preserved more acidity thanks to their altitude. For Vajra, there were three key factors to 2017’s success: the diurnal temperature swing, the lack of rain (which caused a limited intake of potassium and thus better retention of acidity), and a gentle, fresh September which set the stage for Nebbiolo’s tannins to fully ripen. The biggest threat for the season was the lack of water, the risk being that without adequate water the grapes would become shrivelled and overripe. Massolino tried to counter the drought by not trimming the canopy (providing shade) and breaking off superficial roots, forcing the remaining roots to go deeper in search of water.  “We learned a big lesson from this vintage,” says Angeli. “The vines are much more flexible than we imagined.” Moreover, the season highlighted the region’s marl soils important role as a water regulator. “They are like a big sponge that’s able to catch the water during winter and spring, and release it slowly during the rest of the season avoiding stress to the vines,” explains Angeli. The region was blessed again with welcome rain in late August and September, allowing the vines to find equilibrium, completing the full cycle of vegetative growth while also the fruit to ripen fully (both in terms of sugar and phenolic ripeness). While Nebbiolo production was down by around 15 to 25% for some producers (due to the spring frosts and drought), the grapes that survived were beautifully ripe. The 2017 vintage will be remembered for its early harvest, but the results are excellent. “The 2017 Barolo are rich, fresh and fruity wines,” says Grimaldi, “and more ready to drink now compared to 2016 vintage.” Massolino’s Angeli agrees: “The wines already have soft, smooth tannins with a complex and sweet mid-palate.” For Baldi, the wines have fantastic concentration and, more importantly, they are not flabby.  They may not have the structural prowess of the 2016 and will not age as well, but Baldi believes they will drink beautifully over the next 10 to 15 years. Vaira notes the warmth of the year gave the wines “an extra layer of density and mid-palate richness… but what I love about these wines,” he says, “is the quality of the texture and almost a sappy freshness that keeps everything in balance.” Particularly from Vajra’s cooler sites, Giuseppe believes the top 2017s will have sensational ageing potential, especially in comparison to other similarly warm vintages. The 2017 vintage might have been challenging in terms of heat and drought, but such conditions are likely to be more prevalent in the years to come. The good news is that the vines seem to be adapting to these warmer vintages and vignerons are learning how to cope with them – producing some excellent wines that defy logic, remaining remarkably fresh and age-worthy. 
The vintage in brief: Hot and dry conditions – yet the wines have surprising freshness Yields reduced by frost and drought particularly in lower-lying sites Supple tannins that make the wines approachable already Ripe yet fresh wines that offer good medium-term drinking Browse all Barolo or read more Editorial 

With the release of the 2017 Barolos fast approaching, Gavin Smith spoke to some of the region’s leading producers – Giovanni Angeli from Massolino, Giuseppe Vaira from Vajra, Emanuele Baldi from Prunotto and Ferruccio Grimaldi – about the vintage, its extreme conditions and the surprising results

The Barolo 2017 vintage is beyond all expectations. We explore the year that defies logic and the wines are surprisingly vivid, fresh and introverted

Barolo 2017 vintage report 

Barolo 2017: vintage report

Prunotto’s Emanuele Baldi has an encyclopedic knowledge of Barolo. Listening to his stories about the last century in the region is fascinating, providing context to how and why Barolo and the surrounding Piedmontese regions have developed as they have. Perhaps one of the biggest developments over this time was the birth of wines from a single Cru or vineyard.  A trend that Prunotto, along with Vietti, started in the early 1960s, these single-vineyard wines completely transformed how Barolo was sold. Today it is rare for producers not to sell both single-vineyard wines as well as their Barolo “Classico” made from a blend of vineyards and regions. But this trend wasn’t necessarily Prunotto’s intention, believing only certain vineyards had the capacity to produce wines as complex as those of the blended Barolos the region had become famous for. It was Prunotto’s winemaker at the time, Beppe Colla, who came up with the idea, inspired by a trip to Burgundy with both Vietti’s Arturo Bersano and the famous Italian wine journalist, Italian gastronome and intellectual Luigi Veronelli. On discovering the region’s obsession with terroir and single-vineyard designations, they recognised the link between the region’s complex soils and wine - something familiar with certain Barolo Crus, which has a distinct imprint. The concept of the single-vineyard Barolo was born. The transition to producing a single-vineyard Barolo was not such a difficult progression, since back then Barolo producers like Prunotto were based in the city of Alba, rather than the vineyard hamlets themselves. Following the harvest, the grapes were brought to the town square on carts and for many grape growers it was only at this point that they bartered their goods with the town’s wine producers. Winemakers, Baldi told me, would famously bargain for the grapes. They would often complain that the prices were too high and that they should come back tomorrow with a better price, with the grapes already decomposing in the growers’ carts. The growers had little option but to drop their prices before their crop became worthless. Prunotto, along with the likes of Pio Cesare, was one of a handful of prestigious producers happy to pay a premium for the best grapes. With no bargaining, they saved precious time (preserving the quality of the fruit), while also securing the cream of the crop. Because different smallholders brought their separate carts of grapes, it became easy to identify the different qualities depending on the vineyards they came from. Initially, Prunotto found the Bussia grapes stood apart from the rest – which is why it became their – and the region’s – first single-vineyard Barolo (along with Vietti’s Rocche di Castiglione) in the 1961 vintage. But why did the Bussia vineyard stand out, earning a solo bottling? The historic region of Bussia (which today represents Upper Bussia) is a perfect amphitheatre of vineyards, in which different parts of the same vineyard produced grapes with different, complementary characteristics that together create a complex wine when fermented.  Baldi feels that Nebbiolo is typically best when it is a blend of different vineyard sites. Most Barolo vineyards on their own, he thinks, don’t provide the balance, intensity, and complexity of a multi-site blend. “Each of the individual vineyards are like parts of an orchestra,” he explains. Each vineyard adds a layer of complexity, whether it be perfume, tannic structure or a rich mid-palate which, if on its own, would be too simple. “Have you ever listened to hours of music played just by a double bass?” Baldi quips. “But some vineyards in Barolo are an orchestra in themselves.” And this is exactly what he, and Prunotto, feel is true for upper Bussia – an amphitheatre that can produce something truly distinct and complex. For Prunotto it is Bussia’s “grace and balance” that sets it apart. Upper Bussia is situated right in the middle of the two dividing styles of Barolo: to its east are the vineyards of Serralunga, known for their tannic structure and power; to its west are the vineyards of La Morra and Barolo, known for their elegance and florality. Upper Bussia is one of the perfectly situated Crus (similar to Cannubi and Rocche di Castiglione), capturing the best of both these styles.  The estate’s two flagship wines – Barolo Bussia and Barolo Riserva Vigna Colonnello – are both from Upper Bussia. Following the success of their 1961 single-vineyard Bussia, Prunotto went on to produce many other single-vineyard cuvées, including the Crus of Ginestra, Cannubi and Barbaresco’s Rabaja and Montestefano, but the winery always kept going back to Bussia, which has become its spiritual home. That’s also why, upon their arrival at Prunotto back in the late 1980s, the Antinori family immediately focused their attention on the Bussia Cru, purchasing seven hectares in the area. Barolo built its reputation on its blends. More often than not, these multi-vineyard blends are wines of fantastic complexity and balance. Today, however, most Barolo producers’ single-vineyard Cru wines are their most prized (and expensive) wines.  Clearly, top Crus such as Bussia, Falletto, Villero, Monprivato and more have developed a huge following amongst collectors and connoisseurs. Prunotto’s and Vietti’s pioneering leap, introducing the concept of single-vineyard wines to the region, brought a new layer of complexity to drinking Barolo. It’s even prompted cartographers to map out the region in extraordinary detail. While multi-site blended Barolos remain an important benchmark for the wider region, showcasing each producer’s blending skills; the success of the Crus in Barolo has left the drinker with a lifetime of discovery – exploring the many different nuances of each single Cru. Browse all Barolo listings

Prunotto was one of the first Barolo estates to produce a single-vineyard “Cru” wine – kickstarting a trend that has transformed the region. We spoke to Emanuele Baldi to find out what inspired the estate

Prunotto was one of the first Barolo estates to produce a single-vineyard “Cru” wine – kickstarting a trend that has transformed the region. We explore 

The birth of Barolo’s Crus

2019 BOURGOGNE BLANC, DOMAINE DE MONTILLE The specific clones of Chardonnay used in De Montille’s Bourgogne Blanc make it particularly special. Most Bourgogne Blanc is made with higher-yielding clones which have a tendency towards dilution; but De Montille’s Bourgogne Blanc comes from a single site that borders Puligny-Montrachet, planted exclusively with low-yielding clones. This shines through with impressive density on the palate. The wine retains that mineral-edged De Montille style, fleshed out with pear and juicy white melon fruit. 2019 CORTON-CHARLEMAGNE, GRAND CRU, HENRI BOILLOT While not exactly cheap, the Boillot wines still offer great value – competing happily with the likes of Leflaive, Coche-Dury and Ramonet. In 2019, their wines really shine – balancing the concentration of fruit with thrilling acidity. Their Corton-Charlemagne is extraordinary – the power of this site instantly in evidence. The wine is a coil of minerality and citrus, poised and wound tightly. There’s a smokiness to the nose, with a struck-match intensity countered by what feels like a tsunami of fruit – lime, green apple and white peach. Mouth-filling and rich, expansive yet zesty, the acidity drives an astonishingly long finish. Muscular, poised, razor-sharp and full of potential. 2019 CHABLIS, GRAND CRU, LES CLOS, REMOISSENET PÈRE & FILS Remoissenet has friends in high places – and although we can’t say who, one of the region’s most respected and collected producers sources their Chablis. Their wines are – unusually for Chablis – 100% barrel-fermented, producing texturally rich, powerful wine that cleverly never loses its sense of place. In 2019, this opulent style has never suited the vintage better. The nose of Les Clos is very pure with fine, subtle florals. Notes of comice pear, crystallised lemon rind and dried citrus fruit oscillate with the rounded, rich and creamy texture of the wine. The oak is layered over a very pure core of fruit, with a classic sunny Les Clos typicity. On the finish, the wine tightens up nicely and ends with real mineral focus and salinity. Superb. 2019 SANTENAY, BIEVAUX, ALVINA PERNOT The Bievaux vineyard belongs to Alvina’s grandfather Paul Pernot and has long been the family’s favoured site for Pinot Noir. High up on the hill and directly south-facing, the vineyard benefits from ideal sun exposure and cooling diurnal influences, producing a wine with lovely texture and balance. The tannins are fully resolved but the wine has energy and spark too. These 40-year-old vines produced a fantastically juicy, moreish wine in 2019 (at a great price).  2019 CHAMBOLLE-MUSIGNY, DOMAINE HUDELOT-NOËLLAT Charles van Canneyt only made 25 barrels of his village Chambolle this year, versus the normal 40 – which is a particular shame given the quality. It’s a blend of 11 parcels from all around the appellation, to give a true “village” wine. He opted for no punch-downs in 2019, as the skins gave up their colour and tannins so quickly. The resulting wine is surprisingly dark and intense in style, such is the concentration of the year. Nevertheless the wine has a real crunch of red fruit, with amazing acidity and elegant tannins.  2019 GIVRY, PREMIER CRU, CLOS DE LA SERVOISINE, DOMAINE JOBLOT We could have put any of Joblot’s wines in this list – such is the value offered by this superb Givry producer. This south-facing plot is next door to Cellier aux Moines – which Joblot also works with, and tasting the two alongside each other is a treat, with such contrasting styles. This is the brighter of the two, with more lift and perfume on the nose, but the palate reveals darker and more savoury depths. Concentrated bramble fruit is framed by chalky tannins and vibrant acidity. Delicious. 2019 MERCUREY, PREMIER CRU, LE CLOS DU ROY, DOMAINE FAIVELEY The Faiveley family (now in its seventh generation) is today France’s 35th richest family – but it was railway technology, rather than wine, that made their fortune. It means that winemaking for the domaine these days is a purely qualitative affair, with a no-expense-spared approach taken with all their wines. This really is a winwin for the drinker. Being the largest producer in the Cote Chalonnaise, their Mercurey Premier Cru Le Clos du Roy is not only exceptionally made, it is also extremely well-priced. In 2019, this wine has captured the dynamism in the best examples of the vintage, full of energy with lovely crunchy red berry fruit and a sapid salinity on a long finish. Incredible quality for the appellation.  2019 SAVIGNY-LÈS-BEAUNE, PREMIER CRU, LA DOMINODE, DOMAINE JEAN-MARC & HUGUES PAVELOT Hugues Pavelot has crafted a wonderful range in 2019 – toning down extraction given the ripeness, and turning up the whole-bunch to add freshness (with between 15 to 30% on the Premiers Crus). La Dominode was a star of the tasting, however. It manages to effortlessly combine a subtle, chalky grip with a silk-like mouth-feel. The fruit is ripe, smooth and lush but also crunchy and bright – a mouthful of crushed raspberries and blueberries with a burst of redcurrant acidity rushing through the palate. There’s a mineral freshness to this full yet fine wine. Lovely. 2019 VOUGEOT, PREMIER CRU, LES PETITS VOUGEOTS,  DOMAINE HUDELOT-NOËLLAT Charles van Canneyt has 0.5 hectares of this Premier Cru, sandwiched between Clos de la Perrière and Le Clos Blanc. It’s one to watch – and a site that Charles thinks is benefiting from global warming, thanks to its limestone soils. In 2019 the wine is dark, rich and intense but with bright, sweet berry fruit that also has a vibrant crunch to it. Refreshing acidity balances the plush, dark cherry fruit on the palate, while delicate notes of violet florals and black tea fill the finish.  2019 CHEMIN DES MOINES DE VERGY, DOMAINE GROS FRÈRE & SOEUR, VIN DE FRANCE This is only the third vintage of this delicious curiosity from Gros Frère & Soeur. Planted in 2014 and 2015, this plot sits at the top of the Côte, beyond the borders of the Burgundy appellation (hence its Vin de France status) and at high altitude. Overlooking the Grands Crus of Vosne-Romanée, the vines are trained high – with a full 2.5 metres’ worth of canopy to capture as much sunshine as possible at these cool and dizzy heights. The resulting wine is supple, soft and bright, with crunchy sour cherry and redcurrant fruit. Light and fresh, with a long finish of vibrant acidity, it’s a fun addition to the range – and one that will be interesting to follow in the coming years as temperatures continue to rise. 2019 VOLNAY, PREMIER CRU, DOMAINE GEORGES LIGNIER The Lignier family line runs through Benoît Stelhy’s mother’s side, but his father’s side also as vines, with 46 acres in Volnay and 12 in Pommard. They’re old vines and he buys the grapes in, although works closely to manage the vineyards in the same way as his own, with grass cover all year. He picks the fruit himself though with family and friends helping – “It’s a little bit like we go on holiday,” he tells us, travelling down to the Côte de Beaune to harvest, normally on a Sunday morning. His Premier Cru Volnay was a treat to taste – pretty and perfumed, it’s laden with bright, crunchy red berries, but there’s a mineral line that lends finesse. Dainty, fine and truly delicious. 2019 MOREY-SAINT-DENIS, PREMIER CRU, CLOS SORBÉ, DOMAINE HENRI & PHILLIPE JOUAN Philippe Jouan’s wines certainly fly under the radar – and with the current quantities produced, this is unlikely to change anytime soon (with just three hectares in total). However, the little wine produced here is an honest rendition of some exceptional terroir in the Côte de Nuits – and, with the 2019 vintage, the wines have never tasted better. Our pick of the range was his MoreySaint-Denis Premier Cru Clos Sorbé, one of the top Premier Cru sites in Morey. The wine is wonderfully intense with an expressive, complex nose of lavender, rosebush and incense, while the palate is ripe and juicy with sun-kissed wild blackberry and blueberry fruit. 2019 CHAMBOLLE-MUSIGNY, PREMIER CRU, LES CHABIOTS, ALBERT BICHOT Les Chabiots sits above Les Amoureuses – pedigree that seems to escape most people. It’s singing again in 2019, a delicate and fine-boned wine with a nose full of violets. But don’t let its prettiness deceive you, there’s plenty of power to back it up – with a core of raspberry and bright red cherry fruit, supported by a backbone of minerality. The tannins are seamless, the acidity fine and long. Tight and taut, this is outstanding. Browse all Burgundy or explore more Editorial

The wines that really overperformed in the 2019 Burgundy vintage. We think offer the best bang-for-buck this year – from Bourgogne Rouge to Grand Cru Chablis

Exploring 2019 Burgundy that overperformed, including Hugues Pavelot Savigny, De Montille’s Bourgogne Blanc, Corton-Charlemagne Boillot and more

Banfi

2006 Brunello di Montalcino

2010 Brunello di Montalcino

2007 Brunello di Montalcino Poggio alle Mura

2007 Brunello di Montalcino Poggio alle Mura Riserva

2010 Brunello di Montalcino Poggio alle Mura