*Because the width of these tables keeps growing, I’ve had to remove the navigation to the other pages in this section which is usually to the right of this page. So to navigate, click the Burgundy Report logo, or ‘Home Page’ or ‘Discovering Burgundy’ at the top of the page!

Wines from the Côte d’Or:

RED
WINE
00010203**
04
050607080910**
11
121314152016
Average14161714121916151518171417161618(17)
Best1719191816↑2019181919201820191820(19)
Worst101113100814131109141110131313↓14(13)
WHITE
WINE
000102030405060708091011121314152016
Average16151711161715171816171717171816(17)
Best1918191519181820201920191918↓2018(20)
Worst14131408121511131413151314151613(13)

 

  • **2011 reds, like the 2004 reds, you really have to refer to this.
  • *White vintages in red text – ie most of them! – drink-up to minimise oxidation issues. This issue is DEFINITELY not yet fixed. NOTE that if your wines are sealed with DIAM (or similar) then you can justifiably (empirically) have more confidence in the bottles – see here [subscribers]. Also, whilst others have reported issues, I’ve yet to meet an oxidised magnum – going as far back as 2002 in the last 2 years…
    (As always, based on decent producers, because even in good years, the worst are to be avoided!)

Wines from the Chablis:

CHABLIS20122013201420152016
Average17141716(16)
Best20172018(19)
Worst13111413(12)

 

  • You may note that no vintages are marked in red as ‘drink-up’. This reflects my experience of significantly less oxidation in the Chablis that I open – is that down to a little cooler climate or more use of DIAM versus the Côte d’Or? – Who is to say…(?) Still, if you are serious about long-term storing of whites, as above, you need to read this [subscribers]

Wines from the Beaujolais:

BEAUJOLAIS*2012*2013201420152016
Average15141517(**)
Best19161720(**)
Worst12111115(**)

*Not barrel tasted – the scores are based on bottles…
**Report to be published before the end of March 2018.

The ‘versions’ of this page

Version 1.80 – February 2018
Côte d’Or updated based on most recent experiences, and adding the latest (2016) vintage. Scores in bold have changed by one point (in the arrow direction) since the previous version. And, of-course, the addition of tables for both Chablis and Beaujolais.

Version 1.70 – Sept 2017
Version 1.60 – Sept 2016
Version 1.50 – March 2015
Version 1.40 – January 2014
Version 1.30 – December 2012
Version 1.20 – November 2011
Version 1.10 – November 2010
Version 1.00 – January 2010

Vintage Charts… (written in 2010 for version 1.0)

I thought that you didn’t like vintage charts? : It seems like forever that I’ve been telling you that vintage charts are close to useless. The standard approach of a particular number of stars, or marks out of 10 etc., per vintage could never and will never encapsulate the ‘what-ifs’ of burgundy.

Despite that, or maybe in-spite of that(!), it has become a regular theme in my mailbox – okay regular is relative, but it’s a couple of questions or requests every month (eh, DC…?). During the summer, one mail was essentially phrased – ‘but what if you had to?‘ Well I’ve thought about it, and concise is still out of the window, but here is an early ‘work in progress’ shot at a solution.

What about vintages? : You will say that I’m missing a lot of vintages, and that’s true, I’ve restricted myself only to vintages that I’ve tasted from barrel and have continued to follow their development.

And the numbers? : Marked out of 20 – I have decided to give you three; the top one is an average (in my opinion) for the vintage, but alone, and even as an average, that won’t help you get a feel for the vintage – you still need some idea of the gap between the best wines and the disappointing ones, the ‘spread’ if you like – i.e. your relative chance of hitting a good one or a bad one, blind – with those additional two numbers the table is now starting to offer some limited value, but unknown labels will forever remain a game of roulette.

What it doesn’t do? : It doesn’t do a lot; it doesn’t differentiate between Côte de Beaune and Côte de Nuits (or Hautes Côtes or Chablis or Côtes Chalonnaise etc., etc.), it doesn’t differentiate the good producers who failed or excelled in a particular vintage, it also doesn’t tell you that despite the first 4 from 5 white vintages ‘peaking’ at 19/20 possible points (ouch I hate points) that the characters of each are totally different – some may be to your taste, some not. It’s also (at best) a snapshot, as vintages can evolve in unexpected directions – what comes out of a bottle is a moving target – with every update I expect some scores to improve and others to slide…

So do I now believe a vintage chart for burgundy is possible? Well in my heart no – but for those people who counter with ‘anything is better than nothing’, I’ll revisit this every twelve months (or so). If you have some bright ideas to make it better, whilst retaining portability, then do get in touch – none of that NIH syndrome here!

Burgundy Report

Translate »

You are using an outdated browser. Please update your browser to view this website correctly: https://browsehappy.com/;