Saint-Emilion has been hitting the headlines. And not in the way it would like to. In July, just after the region’s châteaux submitted applications for the 2022 classification, two of the region’s four Premier Cru Classé A estates – Chx Cheval Blanc and Ausone – announced that they would be withdrawing from the classification system. This week sees a dispute over the 2012 classification enter the courts – with accusations that the results were fixed. The Médoc’s leading names were ranked in 1855 – with but one change (Ch. Mouton Rothschild's promotion) in 1973. The classification was uncomplicated, with no fussing over terroir, tastings or winemaking talent; it was based purely on price. It’s hard to believe that it remains relevant today – but, while of course there are properties that stand out, it’s more or less accepted, and reflective. Across the river in Saint-Emilion, they wanted something different. Something fairer. A system that flexed with an estate’s waxing and waning. The ambition was – and is – laudable. The reality, well… The classification is overseen by the Institut National des Appellations d’Origine (INAO) – the body responsible for France’s appellation system. The concept was mooted in the 1950s, with the first list published in 1955. The idea was that it would be re-drawn every 10 years – both to be more democratic and provide an incentive for long-term quality. Unlike the Left Bank’s system, it would assess terroir and include a tasting of the wines. The aim was, and is – as a spokesperson for the INAO told me, to help consumers distinguish between the region’s many properties and help “maintain a level of excellence”. The classification is based on a scoring system out of 20, with the breakdown of scores different to qualify for Grand Cru Classé (requiring a minimum 14 points) versus Premier Grand Cru Classé (requiring a minimum 16). In 2012, the possible points for Premier Grand Cru Classé were broken down thus: 30% based on the quality of the wine – with a tasting of 15 vintages; 30% on the estate’s terroir; 35% on the property’s renown (both national and international), promotion and distribution; and the remaining 5% on viticulture, vinification and traceability. Even the first, 1955 list was disputed, changed just three years later, then again two months later, before settling on 63 Grands Crus Classés and 12 of the elite Premiers Grands Crus Classés. The very best of this latter group were named “Premier Grand Cru Classé A” (the rest Premier Grand Cru Classé B) – with just two making the cut, Chx Ausone and Cheval Blanc. Since 1958 the region’s wines have been re-classified regularly – if not quite on the 10-year cycle forecast, in 1969, 1986, 1996, 2006 and then 2012. But there has always been an undercurrent of discontent. In 2006, five properties filed lawsuits and the ruling was declared invalid, with the 1996 classification reinstated. For the 2012 classification, the INAO seemed determined to clean things up. The tastings and site inspections were, for the first time, outsourced by the INAO, with wine professionals from other regions (Burgundy, the Rhône, Champagne, the Loire and Provence) roped in – including Marcel Guigal and Robert Drouhin. A company called Qualisud was to handle the tastings, while Bureau Veritas would take on visiting the estates. These independent authorities would, they thought, make it indisputable. The result was two new Premiers Grands Crus Classés A estates – with Chx Angélus and Pavie; while Larcis Ducasse, La Mondotte, Pavie Macquin, Troplong Mondot and Valandraud all promoted to Premier Grand Cru Classé B, and significant changes to the Grands Crus Classés (with a new total of 64 estates). But of course that wasn’t the end of it. Enter Chx Corbin-Michotte, Croque-Michotte and La Tour du Pin Figeac. The latter two had applied for and hoped to be promoted to Grand Cru Classé, while Corbin-Michotte was demoted in the 2012 rankings. They argue that the decision against them was “incomprehensible”, challenging the criteria for classification and insisting that two individuals – Hubert de Boüard (of Ch. Angélus) and Philippe Castéja (of Ch. TrotteVieille) – had “undue influence” with their roles within the INAO. It’s alleged that de Boüard was “present at all stages of the process elaborating the 2012 classification” (with it implied he influenced the ranking not only of Angélus but seven properties for which he consulted), while Castéja “pulled strings” to guarantee TrotteVieille’s Premier Grand Cru Classé status. The case went to administrative court, however the plaintiffs lost in 2015. They appealed, but lost again in 2019. And now they’re taking it to the criminal courts, with jail time and a fine of up to €500,000 on the cards for the accused. When I asked Frédéric Castéja – Philippe’s son and General Director of Borie Manoux – about the accusations, he told me: “I can only tell you that the Attorney General has dropped all accusations against [my father] and stated that he was not concerned at all with this so-called ‘influence’.” “When it comes to a public ranking, the level of controversy is as high as the stakes,” the INAO told me. It’s unsurprising, perhaps, given the impact the classification can have on an estate’s bottom line. After their promotion in 2012, Chx Pavie and Angélus saw instant price hikes: 2012 Angélus was released at 30% more than the 2011 en primeur, while Pavie went up 58%. That’s big bucks. And beyond the actual wine, it’s the land prices that really rocket. It wasn’t just these three (relatively minor) properties that seemed dissatisfied. Rumour has it that each year, the Médoc’s First Growths, Cheval Blanc, Ausone and Pétrus (“the group of nine”) all meet to taste the latest vintage. After Pavie and Angélus became newly minted First Growths, the group reportedly preferred to restrict the group to the original set. And in 2012 Ch. Ausone quietly removed the classification from its labels – a hint at what was to come. Eric Morain – one of the lawyers representing the three disgruntled estates – has commented that the classification has become “a system that sells the brand and no longer the grape”. La Revue du Vin de France’s 2021 Man of the Year, the attorney is a specialist in the world of wine and has earned a reputation for standing up for the little guys. He was instrumental in establishing the Syndicat de Défense des Vins Naturels (which introduced the Vin Méthode Nature trademark last year – a formal definition for natural wine in France), and has defended several wronged natural wine producers, such as Olivier Cousin and Alexandre Bain. Morain’s latest crusade, however, is against two goliaths – with connections and deep pockets. “The classification was thought out and developed and judged by people who had a direct interest. The rules were not the same for everyone,” Morain said on email to me. De Boüard and Castéja should have recused themselves, he argues. For Chx Corbin-Michotte, Croque-Michotte and La Tour du Pin Figeac (“They aren’t notable, just winegrowers who do their job well,” Morain says), this isn’t about money. They just want someone to admit they were wronged, unfairly excluded from the ranking. “Will they be convicted?” Bordeaux expert Jane Anson pondered, “I would imagine not, but I guess we will all have to wait and see...” For her, the drama is an unnecessary distraction “from the excellence of the wines and the entire classification”. In the meantime, the process for the 2022 classification has been rumbling on, with applications submitted this summer. Some changes have been made, again trying to make the classification – once and for all – watertight. Independent third party Bureau Veritas is now in charge of both tastings and site inspections, and the weighting of the tasting element has been increased for the Premiers Grands Crus Classés (bringing it in line with the weighting for the Grands Crus Classés) – worth 50% of the score (previously 30%) – while the portion for a property’s terroir has been reduced to just 10% (previously 30%). The puzzle is why the criteria remain different for a Premier Grand Cru Classé versus a Grand Cru Classé – something for which I haven’t been able to find an answer. Given estates need to score 17 for the heralded Premier Grand Cru Classé A, 16 for Premier Grand Cru Classé B and 14 for Grand Cru Classé, why make things even more complicated and declare that, for example in 2022, the quality of terroir has more significance for a Grand Cru Classé than a Premier Grand Cru Classé estate (20% versus 10% for the latter)? To make it into the upper echelons of the Premiers Grands Crus Classés, reputation is considered key – and this is a sticking point for many. While reputation, promotion and distribution represents 20% for the Grands Crus Classés, it stands for 35% of a property’s score for Premier Grand Cru Classé status. Including elements such as wine tourism, social media, PR and the accessibility of an estate, it has prompted remarks that the size of a winery’s car park has more relevance than the quality of its soils. The INAO emphasises that the criteria are very similar to those of the original classification in the 1950s. Reputation has always been included, they argue – they are simply adapting this to the modern day. Either way, it’s a minor element, they assure me – with, for example, social media representing just 0.3 points, or 1.5% of the final score, while wine tourism makes up a mere 1%. This hasn’t soothed the worries of the region’s two original Premiers Grands Crus Classés A properties, Ausone and Cheval Blanc. News broke soon after applications for the classification closed on June 30th that the prestigious estates had not submitted anything. When I spoke to both estates ahead of en primeur (April this year), the responses were interesting. Pierre-Olivier Clouet, Technical Director at Ch. Cheval Blanc, noted it was “a touchy question” before he continued. “We believe it’s quite difficult in 2021 to classify the wine like in 1855. This is not the same period this is not the same price per hectare, it is not the same price per bottle… Producing an outstanding wine is difficult on paper,” he said. “We don’t produce wine for the critics, for the classification – we make wine for the wine lover. Premier Grand Cru Classé A, Premier Grand Cru Classé B, Grand Cru Classé… we are Cheval Blanc, that’s it.” When I enquired whether he felt a wine’s distribution should have as much weighting as its terroir, he shrugged and smiled: “The answer is in the question.” Pauline Vauthier of Ch. Ausone was less willing to broach the topic, not wanting to be embroiled in the debate. “What counts is the quality of the product,” she said – making very clear that that is where the estate’s focus lies. “There are many classifications and they’re difficult for the public to understand. Ausone prefers to communicate about the quality of its wine.” She added: “[The 2012 classification] created much controversy, and that will certainly be the case with 2022.” When the news broke in July that both estates were withdrawing (along with sibling estates, La Clotte and Quinault l’Enclos), Pierre Lurton (Director of Ch. Cheval Blanc) and Clouet told Terre de Vins that there wasn’t enough emphasis on “the terroir, the wine, the history”. Edouard Vauthier (Ch. Ausone) explained, “Since 2012, some criteria added are not linked into the wine itself anymore. Some people apply for the classification for economic reasons more than quality and the respect of the terroir.” He highlighted that many of their customers hadn’t even noticed that “Premier Grand Cru Classé A” was no longer on the label. Indeed, why would they? Interestingly, these estates agree with Eric Morain on this. For Morain, the tasting component should represent much more – and as long as it counts for so little, “the classification will mean nothing”. The two behemoths are their own brands – brands that are much stronger than that of Saint-Emilion Premier Grand Cru Classé A. The loser, sadly, is set to be the classification itself, and its top-tier properties – which will no longer benefit from Cheval Blanc and Ausone’s halo effect. Of course, the INAO was keen to emphasise that – whether classified or not – the two estates would always be closely associated with the region, and that there were plenty of other estates that eagerly submitted applications. “Ausone and Cheval Blanc have always been driving forces behind the appellation and I hope will remain so,” Frédéric Castéja told me. “The risk is that at the next occasion other top estates (meaning other First Growths) do the same, then if too many leading estates leave, the classification is meaningless.” Morain – unsurprisingly given his campaign against the classification – is damning about its fate. Ausone and Cheval Blanc’s departure is, for him, “a symptom of a system on its last legs”. So is the 2022 ranking set to be the Saint-Emilion classification’s swansong? Perhaps – the more important question is maybe if it matters. “Saint-Emilion has so many châteaux (by far the most of any of the prestigious appellations) that there is a definite benefit to have some way of distinguishing the best wines,” Jane Anson said. “I fully agree with the principles, in fact think the idea of a renewable classification is very much consumer-driven and provides an incentive to estates to keep investing etc, but I think it has become unworkable.” And that is the problem – the theory is excellent, but how can it be put into practice? While the classification sounds helpful in principle, for most people, I suspect it isn’t. There’s too much confusion with Grand Cru, Grand Cru Classé and Premier Grand Cru Classé A or B. Unlike the Médoc’s straightforward numbering of First to Fifth Growth, it is not – to the uninitiated – immediately clear which is meant to be better than the other. Price and branding of an individual estate will be the more important differentiator. Talking to other producers in the region, few have answers – and few wish to champion the system’s survival. I asked Noëmie Durantou Reilhac – of Denis Durantou estates – whether she’d ever wish to see something similar in Pomerol. The answer was a firm no (“definitely”). “What really saddens me is seeing some plots in Saint-Emilion Grand Cru that are truly devastated,” she tells me. When I ask Nicolas Glumineau at Pichon Comtesse in Pauillac – a producer with a little distance – about his thoughts on it, he’s quick to quip: “That’s why we have an 1855 [classification] that we never move.” More seriously, he thinks the decade cycle is problematic. “I have this feeling that one classification every 10 years is probably too fast, too frequent. Probably 25 years – one generation could be enough.” Of course applying for the classification is voluntary – and not everyone does. Ch. Tertre Rôteboeuf, notably, has never played the game – despite the high quality of its wines. (The property is also renowned for handling its own distribution, outside the négociant system.) Ch. Haut-Brion owner Prince Robert of Luxembourg recently highlighted a benefit to being outside the classification – announcing his plans to expand Quintus with vineyards from the recently bought Ch. Grand Pontet. And this really gets to the point of what could make the Saint-Emilion classification work. As Anson said to me, “Saint-Emilion is the only classification in Bordeaux that includes the notion of terroir (and in fact taste) and that is also linked to a specific piece of land.” A classified property can’t automatically include new vineyards – unlike estates on the Left Bank. The classification is admirable in many ways – but how can you really quantify excellence? Is it ever really possible to pin down the true quality of a wine, or estate, with such exactitude? Is the picture not more nebulous than points can ever paint? “All classifications are correct as long as all players clearly know the rules,” Frédéric Castéja noted. “One must remember that classifications are always the picture of the past, but of course confirm the potential of the estate.” For Saint-Emilion, even the past feels in flux – discussed and debated. What the future holds is hard to say – but, for now, we’ll wait to see what’s in store for the class of 2022. Read more about Editorial  Since this article was published, Hubert de Boüard was found guilty of having undue influence in the 2012 Saint-Emilion classification. He was fined €40,000 and has not appealed the charge. Two properties, Ch. Croix de Labrie and Ch. Tour Saint-Christophe, are taking the INAO to court over their applications for the 2022 classification. In January 2022, Ch. Angélus announced it too was leaving the Saint-Emilion classification, stating the system had become a "vecteur d'antagonisme et d'instabilité". This leaves Ch. Pavie as the only remaining Premier Grand Cru Classé A estate. September 2022: the new classification has been unveiled, with Ch. Figeac promoted to Premier Grand Cru Classé A, alongside Ch. Pavie.

Saint-Emilion’s classification is in crisis – embroiled in court cases and controversy. But why? And does it matter? Sophie Thorpe investigates

Saint-Emilion’s classification is in crisis after leading names abandoned the system. We talk to Ausone, Cheval Blanc, Angelus and more about the controversy

Investigating Saint-Emilion's classification

Class act: Saint-Emilion

From January 2021, the Bordeaux and Bordeaux Supérieur appellations permit the use of several new varieties – Touriga Nacional, Marselan, Castets and Arinarnoa, as well as two white grapes, Alvarinho and Liliorila, the theory being they’ll help shield the region from the ever-growing threat of global warming. As the region heats up, or more importantly dries up, some of the Bordeaux mainstay varieties are suffering from rising alcohol levels, disease and water stress. The new varieties all possess properties that counter climate change – natural high acidities, resistance to mildew and later budburst to offset the risk of spring frosts. While the recent changes only affect wines under the more basic Bordeaux appellations, are they paving the way for a wider relaxation in the region’s rules? And does that mean the flavour profile and identity of Bordeaux’s top châteaux are about to change? For Pierre-Olivier Clouet at Ch. Cheval Blanc there is concern over the potential of the varietal blend (encépagement) changing. “We believe that the encépagement is part of the DNA and the identity of the estate,” says Clouet. “Planting some Touriga Nacional, Grenache, Syrah at Cheval Blanc… it seems ridiculous.” While plenty of winemakers up and down the Médoc are dismissive of the idea, the warming climate is not selective – and even the top terroirs are going to be affected. The 2020 vintage was the hottest on record when you look at the temperatures throughout the 12-month period. The summer was also one of the driest, with not a single drop of rain in some regions for over three months. Pomerol, according to Omri Ram of Ch. Lafleur, is into its fifth consecutive year of drought and these weather patterns are becoming the norm in the region. Clearly some terroirs are better prepared for climate change than others. The clay soils of Saint-Estèphe and the limestone bedrock of Saint-Emilion, for instance, survived 2020’s drought virtually unscathed. These water-retaining soils are adept at locking in moisture and slowly releasing it through the drier months. But the deep gravel soils of the Left Bank are putting vines in real danger during long periods of drought. Lorraine Watrin from Ch. Montrose outlined the huge difficulties faced at their other Saint-Estèphe estate Ch. Tronquoy-Lalande, where (unlike Montrose) the estate’s gravel soils go down a staggering 10 metres. The drainage is so good on these soils that when there is no rain, the vines really suffer. Montrose is more fortunate, having just 1.5 metres of gravel sitting on a bed of moisture-retaining clay. But ongoing droughts are going to pose real problems for deeper gravel vineyards in the future – and solutions need to be found. Despite the obvious threat of drought, speaking with top estates on the Left Bank, they remain fairly comfortable about their future, even though their best soils are on raised gravel beds. The reason why? Cabernet Sauvignon. As temperatures have increased and the level of rainfall has dropped, Cabernet Sauvignon has proved its mettle. The vine is incredibly resistant to disease and its long ripening cycle has seen the variety thrive in the longer, more intense summers. Nicolas Glumineau from Ch. Pichon Comtesse is a big fan of Cabernet Sauvignon and has continued to increase its role in his wines’ make-up over the last decade. “Even if the temperature increases, Cabernet Sauvignon will still be very adaptive to the Left Bank,” he says. In their 2020, the wine consisted of 77% Cabernet Sauvignon with a further 7% Cabernet Franc, Merlot representing just 17% of the blend. Glumineau is not alone, in fact amongst all the producers I spoke to, there was little to no concern over Cabernet Sauvignon’s future and its dominance in their blends in the long term. Being such a large wine-growing region and with plenty of investment, Bordeaux is a hotbed for change, but Ducru-Beaucaillou's Bruno Borie thinks the addition of new varieties is premature. He reminds us that Bordeaux is one of the more moderate climates in Europe. It wasn’t that long ago his father was forced to plant more Merlot to avoid having to chaptalise the wines (add sugar to the must) because the Cabernet Sauvignon wasn’t ripe enough. “Without being arrogant and with all sincerity, we benefit from having Cabernet Sauvignon riper much more often than in the past,” he says. “Bordeaux is the northern limit for ripening the grape and here there is no need to replace it.”  Merlot’s future is perhaps a little less assured on the Left Bank, as Borie admits – but he believes the alternative to Merlot is likely to be already permitted varieties, rather than new ones. “Petit Verdot and Cabernet Franc should keep us going another 50 to 70 years at least,” he says. Asked why not just switch to 100% Cabernet Sauvignon, Borie believes that however hot or dry it gets, the low-lying, clay riverbed vineyards would never ripen Cabernet. Despite concerns for Merlot’s future, grown in the right places the variety continues to thrive on the Left Bank. Just look at its success in 2020, a very hot vintage. Rainfall at just the right time helped retard alcohol levels in the Merlot. For those whose cooler Cabernet Sauvignon parcels didn’t fully mature, their Merlot replaced it and played a more significant role in the blend and saved the vintage. The grape is still fulfilling its role as the balancing variety in today’s Bordeaux blend. Despite Cabernet Sauvignon’s and Merlot’s impressive performances of late, plenty of experiments are going on, even at the very top estates. Ch. Lafite-Rothschild is already trialling massal selection of their own vines and new varieties including Touriga Nacional, Marselan and Malbec. For the moment it is too early for Lafite to draw any conclusions, but they’re keeping an open mind.  While the major estates aren’t switching up the blend yet, producers are looking at peripheral Bordeaux varieties as potential alternatives. On paper, Malbec seems a good option. Before phylloxera, Malbec was the most planted variety in Bordeaux, but never really made a comeback after the outbreak. But seeing Malbec’s success in the hotter, drier mountain valleys of Argentina, could it rise back to prominence with global warming? Nicolas Audebert – winemaker at Rauzan-Ségla and previously at Cheval des Andes in Mendoza – is not so sure. Malbec in French literally means ‘”bad beak” or “bad nose”, thanks to the negative reputation the variety had in Bordeaux, even when more dominant in the blend. “Prior to phylloxera, Malbec was used as a ‘filler‘ grape,” Audebert says, “used to balance out problems in the vineyard – namely providing more colour and ripeness to the wine.” Audebert compares it to Pinot Meunier in Champagne, whose role is similar. “Pinot Meunier is less sensitive to frost, so it is planted in the more frost-prevalent lower slopes, rather than the best terroirs. It never had the chance to reach the potential of Chardonnay or Pinot Noir. Malbec suffered the same issue.” Audebert has planted Malbec at Ch. Berliquet in Saint-Emilion. He believes Malbec on clay could be extremely interesting and is keen to see how it works in the blend. But Malbec has its problems: it’s very sensitive to coulure (flowers not developing into berries, therefore producing lower yields), as well as mildew. Of the Bordeaux varieties, it responded the least well to grafting – hence why it wasn’t replanted widely in Bordeaux after phylloxera. Audebert reminds us that Argentina didn’t have these problems: “Low humidity in Mendoza meant mildew was not a problem in spring and there was no grafting, as the region used flood irrigation to battle phylloxera.” Since these remain challenges for the variety in Bordeaux, he doesn’t see it becoming more dominant in the future. Many wineries up and down the Médoc are lowering the proportion of Merlot in their blends, opting instead for more Cabernet Franc. “Blending just 5% of Cabernet Franc in with Merlot can be an effective method of lowering the alcohol, as well as adding freshness,” says John Kolasa (ex Director of Ch. Canon ). “It is something Pétrus did with the 2019 vintage. Look at the success of Ch. Figeac in 2019 – a third Cabernet Franc, a third Merlot and a third Cabernet Sauvignon. This is a big increase of Cabernet Franc in the blend and is performing better in the warming climate.” There aren’t many wineries in Bordeaux not increasing the Cabernet Franc plantings in their vineyards, given its improved performance in a warming climate. Pichon Comtesse, L’Eglise Clinet and of course long-term believers Cheval Blanc and Lafleur are all confident of the variety’s future and its growing role in the Bordeaux blend, both on the Left and Right Bank. Petit Verdot is another late ripening variety that thrives in the hotter, drier conditions. Could this peripheral variety become a star performer in Bordeaux’s future? Unlike Cabernet Franc it has yet to become more prominent in blends, often because just a small amount can dominate the structure and flavour of the wine and overpowers the more nuanced characters of Cabernet. Nicolas Glumineau is unsure that the variety is a saving grace, however. “I have some difficulties with Petit Verdot, it is a very tricky grape to grow… it’s very fragile – to wind, to rain, to many things and finally you just can’t pick it absolutely ripe every year.” While the new appellation rules allow new varieties, is changing the blend really the best solution to the ongoing issues of global warming? Ch. Margaux’s Philippe Bascaules certainly doesn’t think so. For him, changing the grape varieties is far too extreme when there are other, more subtle changes that, he believes, would be much more effective. “Currently we are at 10,000 vines per hectare but we don’t have to be,” he says. “Changing the row orientation would also have good results. Good for changing the effect of sunburn on the grapes.” Ch Pontet Canet's Justine Tesseron is another advocate of making alterations in the vineyard, not changing varieties. She is happy with how the Cabernet performs on her gravel soils and feels that there’s simply no need to experiment with other grapes. For Tesseron, the way in which the vines are farmed is more important: “A biodynamic vineyard is better placed to cope with the extremes. We treat individual vines based on their individual needs – it is all about the small details.”  Pierre-Olivier Clouet at Cheval Blanc sees a change in varieties as a last resort. He and his team have long been thinking about how to tackle global warming. “We are sure that the answer is in the vineyard management,” he says. They are looking at rootstocks, the size of the canopy, the yield (“If we want to preserve freshness, it’s better to have a little more yield”), cover crops, ploughing or no-till farming and how polyculture can help. Clouet is another Bordeaux vigneron who sees the problems – but also plenty of potential answers. They experiment a lot at their other property, Ch. Quinault l’Enclos. “We try to always be very open minded,” he says. But he is clear also that “We should never forget who we are.”  Bordeaux is awash with a mix of cautious optimism, as well as open-minded experimentation. For the time being, it doesn’t look – at least amongst the more prestigious classified estates – like they will be adding new varieties to the blend any time soon. Until alternative approaches in viticultural and vinification fail, Bordeaux’s varietal DNA looks safe. Read more about Bordeaux or explore more Editorial

Climate change poses a serious threat to wine-growers around the world. Bordeaux has just allowed the use of new grape varieties to help its producers cope with the increasingly hot, dry conditions – but what does this mean for the region’s identity? We talk to the top winemakers about the future

Cheval Blanc, Margaux, Lafleur, Lafite, Ducru-Beaucaillou and more on climate change in Bordeaux

Is climate change threatening the Bordeaux blend?

It’s no secret that Scotch whisky is dominated by two giants – Diageo and Pernod Ricard, who represent 60% of the market, with three other big players taking the next 20%. That leaves a mere 20% for those who have the wallets and mettle to fight over the rest – but that’s an increasing number of people. There are currently over 30 single malt distilleries at some stage of opening.  “I think it’s a bit of a worry to be honest,” Mark Reynier, Renegade Spirits founder and CEO, says. Reynier has been behind three of the most talked-about distillery projects in the past 20 years – the resurrection of Islay powerhouse Bruichladdich in 2000, the renovation of a former Diageo brewery into Irish single malt distillery Waterford in 2015 and the construction of Renegade rum distillery in Grenada from scratch in 2020. All three have a dogged focus on terroir and have not been without their struggles. “Superficially it does look easy - but it sure as hell isn’t,” he says. “With Bruichladdich we almost went bust twice. With the best will in the world and two-distillery experience I got it wrong with Renegade and almost went bust last September.”  In Reynier’s view, many of those opening distilleries are driven by romantic ideas and the desire to make a quick buck – from landowners looking to monetise estates to “crooks” who “promise fortunes to be made”. Few, however, have the knowledge, business nous or money to back up their ambitions.  Wolfcraig – a new distillery in Stirling – is one of the industry’s most interesting projects, largely thanks to the experience of the team involved. While neither of the founders Jamie Lunn or John Moore had worked in whisky before (coming, respectively, from construction and finance), Jamie Lunn’s father is former Whyte & Mackay chairman and chief executive Michael Lunn – and happened to be eager for a new project. It hasn’t been plain sailing though: the team had a false start with an ill-fated attempt to take a controlling stake of an existing distillery. Downhearted but not defeated, they made the decision to go it alone. Moore and Lunn have assembled a first-rate team with over 200 years’ experience. Master Blender Richard Paterson OBE was the most recent addition to the roster – which Jamie Lunn affectionately refers to as “the Harlem globetrotters of whisky” – including Dr Alan Rutherford OBE (former Production Director at Diageo, Master of the Quaich and previous President of the Malt Distillers Association of Scotland), Ian Macmillan (a Master Distiller, also a Master of the Quaich and a member of the Worshipful Company of Distillers) and Iain Lochhead (former UK Bacardi Operations Director, and another Master of the Quaich). But even with a team of such pedigree, it hasn’t been easy. “It was three and a half years of pain,” Moore says. Every decision has been driven by an unwavering mission to produce a truly special liquid, considerable industry experience and business acumen. Stirling, for example, was chosen not just for its infrastructure, but its accessibility – within an hour’s drive of 70% of the Scottish population. The team ensured they were fully funded and have consciously built a brand – and decided on the style of spirit they’ll be making – before physically breaking ground. “Out of all the new whisky distilleries,” Moore says, “very few of them are designing their own unique spirit and they have not put any thought into why they have a particular shape of still.” Wolfcraig, by contrast, is having their still handmade by Forsyths, with a distinctive double-ball design to produce a more muscular, full-bodied spirit. It’s not just new players and mavericks behind the trend though, with some of whisky’s most historic names being given a new lease of life. Halewood International, for example, is bringing malt whisky distilling back to the heart of the Scottish drinks industry in the Port of Leith, Edinburgh, for the first time in 100 years with the John Crabbie Distillery.  Today, the name John Crabbie might be synonymous with ginger wine, but he was an independent bottler, single malt producer and recognised blender in the 19th century. For the team here, creating something new brings great freedom. “One of the key parts of our distillery is its versatility,” Global Dark Spirits Manager Andy Wallace says. “Because of the type of distillery we have, we can change our new make spirit and we can be very adaptable. That flexibility, put in the hands of somebody who knows what they are doing, like our Master Blender Dr Kirstie McCallum – a chemist with an excellent palate – and we’re going to experiment.”   Experimentation with different casks is high on the agenda. In addition to PX and Oloroso casks, the team is looking at how Manzanilla might work and playing around with other wine cask finishes.   Prior to joining Halewood, Wallace spent six years at William Grant & Sons, the home of Balvenie and Glenfiddich since 1887. “They are beautiful, incredible distilleries in a beautiful part of the world,” Wallace says, “but they come with their own inherent limitations… some people will see them as being a bit aspirational and not for them.” In his view, building something from scratch – even with a history like Crabbie’s – means they don’t have to produce a certain type of product. “What we want to do is bring new people into the category and allow people to drink differently,” he explains. Free from the burden of a legacy, a new distillery can be more agile. This can, however, be a catch-22. In a quest to stand apart, rather than play the old boys at their centuries-perfected game, innovation – if not managed in a considered, well-financed, way – can end in tears. “A lot of people have got rather carried away with the romance and [they] don’t really understand the consequences and the costs, and the durability that you need,” Mark Reynier explains.  “And above all you need a unique proposition. Just to be another distillery isn’t enough. The distilling bit is the easy bit. I think this is what’s going to be the downfall for a lot of people. The maturation and the time and cost is the crunch. And then you have got to bring it to market.” Wallace agrees. “You must have a long-term plan for selling your product because you have got a several-year timeline before you can launch anything in the first place,” he says. “One of the big challenges for whisky companies is predicting demand. If you have to predict how much 12-year-old product you’re going to sell on day one, that is a really difficult challenge.”   This was one of the many reasons Wolfcraig was determined to be fully funded from the get-go. “A lot of new whisky distilleries are just living hand-to-mouth and raising money year-on-year and that is emotionally draining,” Moore says. “But, also more importantly, it takes time away from the business when you are constantly fundraising.” It’s no small amount of money required, either. While you might be able to start a gin distillery with £50,000, whisky is a different beast. “Even the small craft distilleries, you’re talking several million pounds to set up,” Moore explains. “Our overall investment will be close on £20million… So, it’s not something you go into lightly.” “Running a distillery is an expensive business,” Reynier adds. “Just when you most need the revenue to get into the market, that is when you are least likely to have it. You are building in a lag period. You have created this brand over a decade, but you don’t actually have enough stock maturing to satisfy the sales that you have created or are creating. So, you have got to plan forward.” Waterford is a distillation of everything Reynier got wrong at Bruichladdich and everything he felt he wasn’t able to do because of a “lack of resource, lack of desire perhaps, tradition getting in the way, and the lack of logistics”. “We had a war chest because we knew that to do it properly, we had to be able to insulate ourselves financially to be able to buy ourselves the time to do it properly, with proper, premium-quality barley, single-farm distillations for uniqueness and for complexity,” Reynier explains. “Practised at Bruichladdich, perfected here.” Ultimately, once you get past the business and branding, it’s the quality of the liquid that will sort the wheat from the chaff. “We need to achieve the same core things any distillery does,” Wallace says. “We want to make genuinely brilliant drams that people will enjoy in years to come.” Browse all Scotch whisky or read more Editorial 

As demand for single malt whisky continues to soar, the number of distilleries – big and small – preparing to fling open their doors increases at a bullish rate. Holly Motion talks to a few of the industry’s newest names to see if everything is as rosy as it seems

Investigating the sharp rise in the number of single malt whisky distilleries with Waterford, Wolfcraig and John Crabbie. 

Distilling dreams

“C’est quoi, traditionnel, aujourd’hui?” Marion Raphet half-jokes as we talk about the 2019 vintage, tasting her family’s bottlings at Domaine Gérard Raphet. Since 2011, it feels like Burgundy’s vignerons have been on a rollercoaster: with hail (2012, 2013, 2014 and 2016), heatwaves (2018, 2012), frost (2016 and 2017 for Chablis) and even the influx of Drosophila suzukii – an Asian fruit fly – after a particularly mild winter (2014). While global warming is nothing new to farmers – in Burgundy or elsewhere, 2019 feels like it marks a shift, with the threat of climate change suddenly all the more tangible. The year was full of extremes, from an unusual hard frost in April to a hot, dry season that really challenged vines – and growers. But in a region where tradition reigns supreme, where the way in which producers farm their vines and make their wines is passed down from generation to generation, evolution is now imperative – and, as Mickaël Haratyk of Domaine Joblot lamented, “Some producers don’t change.”  Harvest dates have gradually been creeping back, and – as Frédéric Weber at Bouchard explained – “It’s more and more difficult to pick a good date.” In 2020, Burgundy saw some of the earliest harvest dates on record – often extremely similar to those of 2003. Joseph Colin pointed out, however, that August harvests aren’t new – in 1553 producers started picking in Meursault on 14th August. He argues that the region has always had periods of warm weather that lasted 20 to 30 years; it’s a cycle. The question, however, is how long the cycle lasts – and whether growers or the vines can make great wine with fruit that is picked on 1st August. Haratyk echoed this sentiment, noting that harvests today are a month earlier than 25 years ago; with that pace of climate change, it’s hard to imagine what things will be like in another 25 years’ time.  The focus for growers used to be on getting enough sugar ripeness, with chaptalisation almost rote in decades of yore, but now it’s about retaining balance in the wines. The decision of when to pick is driven by acidity levels, to retain the essential freshness and elegance that defines fine Burgundy as we know it. At Joblot, there was a time when 11.5% potential alcohol equated to fruit that was ready for picking; now it is naturally never less than 14%. They know they’ll have the necessary sugars and maturity (with phenolic ripeness achieved easily), the challenge is to make sure nature’s generosity is off-set by the requisite acidity. But what else are the region’s vignerons doing to adapt to a new, warmer Burgundy? In the vineyard, producers can look at how they manage between the rows: ploughing is increasingly avoided, as it releases valuable moisture from the soils. The use of cover crops is another consideration; while they can help avoid erosion and preserve top soil on slopes, they also present a rival for precious nutrients and water. Growers can delay pruning, which in turn can delay budburst, helping to limit the impact of frost on the vines. Something that many producers emphasise is the importance of a thicker, taller and leafier canopy. While once vines would have been trimmed neatly, and leaves stripped to allow the sun to reach the grapes and aid ripening, today producers are limiting this work, wanting to shield grapes from the heat and limit their exposure. Charles van Canneyt, for example, still trims his vines, but lets them grow higher than he used to, and doesn’t leaf-strip at all. At Joblot, they work with a thicker canopy these days, and let the lateral shoots – that previously they’d have trimmed – grow freely. However, a thicker canopy brings its own potential problems, as Philippe Jouan noted, explaining that oidium (powdery mildew) is now the biggest issue in the vineyard. A thicker canopy means less airflow, creating a more humid environment within the canopy and therefore disease pressure. Many producers believe that mature vines are key – their deeper root systems able to reach water reserves, and with age are thought to gain a natural stability, enabling them to withstand more extreme temperatures. Marion Raphet (Domaine Gérard Raphet) explained how her old vines were so much more resistant to the rising temperatures; noting that even in a year as hot as 2020, the old vines were still green when we visited in mid-October. But some producers have seen old vines struggle in the dry conditions of 2019 and 2020. Benoît Stelhy at Georges Lignier, a proud proponent of permanent grass grown between his vines, saw his old vines seriously impacted by water stress, with the resulting yields so unviably low that they have made him seriously question the way he is working. He is now wondering if perhaps having intra-row grass cover is more important in young vineyards, where their natural vigour needs to be countered by competition. In the winery, there are plenty of benefits to the riper fruit: there’s no need for chaptalisation, and it is in general easier to extract colour, tannin and flavour. However, that same ripeness and the associated lower acidity levels, can pose problems. As Chantal Tortochot explained this year, above 13% alcohol, natural yeasts can struggle – meaning that we may see more commercial yeast (which can guarantee wines ferment to dryness) in use.  The higher pH of these musts also increases the risks of bacterial spoilage, hence producers need to be particularly careful handling them – with hygiene, temperature control and/or the careful use of sulphur of increasing importance. Benoît Stelhy described how he is trying to recreate the cold of yesteryear’s winters; he cools his wines before putting them into barrel, therefore delaying the onset of malolactic fermentation (as the region’s cool temperatures would naturally have done after an October harvest). By doing so, he can avoid adding sulphites at this stage, feeling the wines can therefore benefit more from micro-oxygenation in barrel, before malolactic fermentation takes place when the wines naturally warm up in the spring. But these measures will only work in the short-term; as the region warms further, producers need to start looking further ahead. Re-planting vineyards with rootstocks better suited to today’s climate is likely to be necessary (not to mention considering other issues posed by current rootstock selections). “The vines that are in their prime today,” William Kelley explains, “were planted with a view to early ripening in a marginal climate; in much warmer conditions, the choices of rootstock and vine genetics made in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s – even by producers aspiring to high quality – are close to the opposite of what’s required today.” Such a shift, of course, takes time – with the need to leave vineyards fallow between re-planting for several years, and a minimum three-year wait for vines to produce fruit, or longer for fruit of serious quality. Experimental plantings of Syrah and Malbec in the region feel a little ahead of the curve, but there will certainly be a need to adapt clonal selections. The rise in the popularity of Aligoté – frost-resistant, early-ripening and high-acid – is no coincidence, and some suggest that it could be a solution for retaining freshness in the region’s whites. Small percentages of Aligoté and Pinot Blanc were once planted amongst the Chardonnay in even the grandest of Crus, and it’s something William Kelley would like to see make a comeback, feeling it “would help white Burgundies retain the tension and acidity we prize so highly”. As the mercury rises, we’re already seeing a shift in the sites that thrive. Until now, many of the sites considered the “best” are mid-slope with good exposure and drainage, basking in the sun, often with relatively little topsoil; increasingly this simply isn’t what is needed in the climate. “The big winners are places such as the Hautes-Côtes,” Kelley explains, “which are today enjoying a climate that’s very similar to what the Côte de Beaune and Côte de Nuits experienced in the 1990s.” Gros Frère & Soeur has even planted a plot of Pinot Noir at the very top of the Côte, beyond the limits of the Burgundy appellation, at altitudes that would once have been impossible.  Plots that were once unviable now are, and sites previously deemed “lesser” for their cool, marginal temperatures are being favoured. Similarly, sites with deeper, more clay-rich soils, with greater waterholding capacity, are becoming more desirable with drier conditions. As Benoît Stelhy noted in 2019 and 2020, Clos Saint-Denis with its poor soils struggled more than, say, Clos de la Roche. Alvina Pernot noted that two of her parcels either on the edge of or in the middle of forested areas (Meursault Premier Cru La Pièce sous le Bois and Puligny-Montrachet Premier Cru Clos de la Garenne) are shielded from the sun, preserving acidity and freshness in the wines. The long-term viability of some sites, however, is hanging in the balance. Producers are increasingly aware of the threat that climate change poses. As Charles van Canneyt explained, at the moment they are only seeing the benefits – with riper fruit and more concentrated musts – but they’ll need to learn how to handle, and battle, the negatives too. While the future might be uncertain, producers are slowly but surely adapting. As Benoît Stelhy noted when discussing the benefits of organics, it’ll do for now – but does it give an answer for tomorrow? “We have to go further,” he said, a sense of urgency in his voice. It’s a call to arms, and one that producers will have to follow. For now at least, the wines are arguably better than ever; let’s hope that will long be the case.  Browse all Burgundy or explore more Editorial 

The 2020 vintage was the third in a trio of hot years for Burgundy, the region’s producers fast becoming used to what is the new norm. Here Sophie Thorpe looks at how global warming is impacting the Côte d ’Or and what the region’s vignerons are doing to cope with their shifting climate

Exploring how global warming is impacting Burgundian winemaking in Côte d ’Or and what the region’s vignerons are doing to cope with their shifting climate

Dealing with climate change in Burgundy vineyards

Adapt or die: dealing with climate change in Burgundy

At the time of the latest vintage release from Burgundy, it is always the year’s conditions that dominate debate. But is it really the most important factor when it comes to identifying what wine to buy? The best winemakers reliably produce magnificent wines year in, year out. The variation in vintage for these wines is fun and nuanced, rather than the death knell over the success or failure of a vintage. Unless the vintage is a complete disaster, which these days is rarely the case, vintage conditions are not the greatest indicator of the success or failure of a producer’s wines. More important are the techniques vignerons adopt, which in turn affect the style and balance of their wines. All viticulture and winemaking is a multitude of decisions, hundreds possibly thousands of them that collectively combine to produce the wine of that vintage. While modest vignerons might say the wines make themselves, and the best often aim to interfere as little as possible, even choosing not to do something is a conscious decision that requires serious experience and know-how. Burgundy of all places involves plenty of winemaking decisions that greatly affect the final outcome in bottle – particularly with the red wines. The fragile Pinot Noir is hugely susceptible to affectation during the winemaking process. The wines are certainly less
manipulated today than they were in the past. Nightmarish stories of copious amounts of fertiliser and insecticide polluting the soils, along with formulaic additions of sugar at fermentation are fortunately no longer normal practice with top producers today. In the recent past, red Burgundy also had to deal with over-extraction during fermentation and high levels of new oak in élevage, that arguably had the biggest effect on the flavour profile of Pinot in the 1990s and 2000s. But today, with extractions kept pretty minimal and oak – for the most part – more deftly used, Burgundian Pinot Noir is very much in an era of
transparency. Today, distinct winemaking techniques, like whether or not the winemaker incorporates whole bunches into the fermentation, determine distinct styles in red Burgundy. From the likes of Domaine de la Romanée-Conti and Leroy – who use high proportions of whole-bunch in their fermentations, to Rousseau and Fourrier at the other end of the scale de-stemming everything: to whole-bunch ferment or not is a decision that splits Burgundy’s top winemakers right down the middle. Both decisions are attempts at authenticity. For the vignerons who completely de-stem their wines, it is the purity of fruit that best transmits the terroir expression of the vineyard. Any incorporation of the stems only detracts from the fruit clarity and flavour – a flavour determined by its terroir. This philosophy is difficult to deny and, when tasting fully de-stemmed wines, they do tend to be most consistent in character and certainly transmit the nuances of a vineyard. For the “whole-bunchers”, the authenticity lies in it being the traditional method, arguing that whole-bunch fermentation was how all wine was made prior to the invention of the de-stemmer in the mid-20th century. While this isn’t strictly true, whole-bunch fermentation
was certainly normal practice and is how wine has been made for millennia. True terroir expression for them is not just the berries, but the stems too; it is both the stems and the berries together that offer the true blueprint of the terroir of a site. In the middle sits a growing majority of producers who see the advantage of both methods, without the need to sit in either camp. Partial whole-bunch fermentation adds something interesting to the blend without overpowering the purity of the fruit. These wines can therefore be both complex and terroir transparent, while not being at either extreme – representing a preference for balance over anything else.  Today many vignerons remain wary of having too many stems in the blend and its negative effect on acidity. Chantal Tortochot currently opts for around 20 to 25% whole-bunch during fermentation depending on the vintage. Too much, she believes, will have a detrimental effect on the freshness of the wine, because the stems introduce three important elements to the wine: water, potassium and mineral salts. Her biggest concern lies with the potassium, which – when mixed with the tartaric acid of the wine – precipitates into potassium carbonate crystals that then drop out of the wine, reducing the overall level of acidity in the wine. However, the countering effect of using whole-bunches in the fermentation is that the mineral salts provide a salinity and sapidity to the wine which actually makes the mouth water, accentuating the sense of freshness in the wine, even if the acidity is lower. Two therefore contrasting examples of the effects of whole bunch: does it make the wine more refreshing or less? On tasting the latest vintages on release, it has become apparent that while not always the case, wines made with a high proportion of whole-bunch tend to be less consistent when tasted in their youth. Not only can the wine aromas be dominated by stemmy notes, the wines can often be shut down. Again, this is not necessarily down to the quantity of whole-bunch, but it does seem to be a recurring trend when tasting wines that have a high proportion of whole-bunch. David Duband, a great believer in whole-bunch, accepts that in their youth the advantages of incorporating whole-cluster fermentation is less obvious, but after about eight years in bottle, he believes this method produces wines of higher complexity than those from the same appellation that have been completely de-stemmed: “They have some extra life on the palate,” he explains.  Having evolved from a winemaking philosophy which saw him de-stem all his fruit prior to 2006, he recognises the difference between the two approaches better than most. Others are less convinced. Charles van Canneyt of Domaine Hudelot-Noëllat has experimented using whole-bunch over the years but personally never found it added anything positive to his wines and remains a strong advocate of de-stemming all his grapes prior to fermentation. If anything, he believes partial whole-bunch fermentation can add flavour complexity to simpler, earlier-drinking wines that lack the natural depth of fruit. Philippe Jouan believes that the decision on whether or not to use whole-bunch should depend on the vintage. For him, in sunny vintages, the stemmy, “sauvage” flavours you get from whole-bunch fermentation are not in keeping with the vintage style: “It contests too much with the sunny fruit flavours,” he says. He will therefore only use stems in cooler vintages. Florence Heresztyn-Mazzini at Domaine Heresztyn-Mazzini has the opposite approach. She believes the warmer, riper the vintage, the better the stems are lignified; therefore, rather than adding greenness to the wines, they bring complementary flavour complexity.  For Olivier Bernstein – who incorporates 50% whole-bunch into his wines – it brings aromatic complexity, structure, and expression. For him, “The delicacy of the impact of whole-bunch on the final flavour is all to do with the quality of the fruit.” And this does seem to be an important point: when done well, whole-bunch fermentation is not something that is always obvious. The aromatic complexity is so integrated with the fruit, the perfume of Pinot still dominates both the nose and palate. 

Whichever philosophy a vigneron chooses, there is healthy debate in Burgundy today over whether or not to use whole-bunch fermentation. It is just an extra nuance, adding another layer of intrigue to this fascinating fine wine region. The success of each of these different
approaches shows there is no right answer, but it does make you wonder whether winemaking styles should be playing more of a role when deciding which Burgundies to buy – and whether vintage is as important as we traditionally believe it to be.   De-stemmed versus whole-bunch wine-making: 2019 CHAMBOLLE-MUSIGNY, PREMIER CRU, LES CHARMES, REMOISSENET PÈRE & FILS Remoissenet has a very particular style – one that is all about achieving great purity, and with 100% de-stemmed fruit. They have no qualms about harvesting late, often being some of the last to pick, believing what they lose in quantity through evaporation, they gain in quality through natural concentration. The fruit is de-stemmed, with an extended cold soak and fermentation in open-top vats at cool temperatures.  This approach has given their 2019 Chambolle Les Charmes a textbook enticing floral lift, with additional redcurrant coulis and lavender notes. There is a lovely freshness to the palate, with crisp red berry and red cherry fruit. It’s concentrated, yet so vivid and bright in the mouth – as is typical of the appellation. There’s a sappiness and dark chocolate note on the finish, the latter from the oak (50% new) which needs time for further integration, but this wine has great balance and a good amount of dense, textural extract. It will be beautiful at maturity in 10 years and beyond. 2019 MOREY-SAINT-DENIS, PREMIER CRU, LES MILLANDES, DOMAINE HERESZTYN-MAZZINI This is really quite a contrast to the Remoissenet. Not only are the appellations completely different, but so is the winemaking. In 2019 Heresztyn-Mazzini’s Millandes is 100% whole-bunch fermented. The nose is full of wild flowers, earthy soil and light stemmy notes. There is a wonderful “small berry” concentration in the fruit on the palate (black cherry, blackberry) but there are also lots of crunchy mineral rock notes and a salty tang.  The tannins build on the palate, austere and incredibly structural; this is tannic Pinot Noir. The complexity in flavour, structure and aromas (no doubt increased by the effects of the whole-bunch fermentation) requires some time to fully integrate. Highly complex and concentrated, it will be fascinating to taste this again in 10 years' time, especially next to Remoissenet's Charmes. Discover Burgundy

Each year we focus on the new vintages released from Burgundy, Bordeaux and elsewhere. In an era when truly bad vintages are a thing of the past, Gavin Smith wonders whether in fact it's the hand of the winemaker that reigns supreme.

In an era when truly bad wine vintages are a thing of the past, Gavin Smith wonders whether in fact it's the hand of the winemaker that reigns supreme.

Doisy Dubroca

Please wait