The results

Diversity of style and sheer strength of character made for a challenging tasting, yet the grower Champagnes offer real value and interest, says Christelle Guibert

GeoFFroy, Lahaye, LarmanDier-Bernier, Pierre Péters... not names on the tip of our tongues here in the UK, maybe. yet these growers are seen on wine lists of some of the hippest places in new york. ‘Seriously cool people are flying in from Japan and new york for Champagne week in april,’ began Tim hall, continuing: ‘They bow down with their candles lit and their rosaries in their hands when in front of anselme Selosse (see p58) and one or two others. The cultishness is amazing but it hasn’t happened here yet – if it’s ever going to, that is.’

indeed the majority of such top grower Champagne is exported and on allocation, with retail prices higher than the grandes marques, but to date the UK has proved less receptive than other key markets. one reason for this is the power of the grandes marques. Simon Field mW noted: ‘We work with really good small producers, and big houses come in and undercut them, especially in the on-trade. it’s the power of marketing.’

But the cool gang represents only a tiny percentage of the Champagne category as a whole. hall pointed out: ‘Grower Champagnes are not the easiest thing to sell. There are too many merchants who find them, buy them, but then fail to sell them quickly enough.’ Such difficulty may explain why the panel found too many wines lacking freshness. Field commented: ‘There’s a paradox. We were getting wines that only had the bare minimum ageing, yet were missing that autolytic, yeasty charm that only Champagne has.’

When comparing the brut and the low-dosage categories, the panel had mixed views, finding the latter struggling for consistency due to the region’s marginal climate conditions. michael edwards found the brut natures more controlled and without the rasping acidity that marked some of the zéro dosages. ‘i think it’s a new avenue,’ he said. ‘a lot of people, especially experts, feel

that in the past there has been too much masking of the fruit, but i think this is the way winemaking is going in Champagne.’ and Field admitted: ‘it’s a category that everyone loves, but it’s hard to sell.’

in some of the wines, the panel found the oak quite prominent but well-managed. Field felt many were quite vinous: ‘Do you want Champagne, or do you want wine? Do you want fizz or Burgundian texture? many growers are trying to make a wine rather than Champagne.’ edwards recalled a statement from a famous grower – ‘i’m very Burgundian in my attitude to my soils and the way i make wine’ – but according to edwards: ‘it’s true up to a point, but it’s a different terroir and climate, and at the end of the day it’s all about balance and elegance.’

overall the panel found the tasting quite hard work, but in the end they came up with some real winners. The top four were all very good, with one rated exceptional. edwards found this totally justified, as ‘some of the grower Champagnes have the greatest terroirs’.

‘This was a real helter-skelter result, but the tasting met my expectations,’ Field concluded. ‘i was expecting a lot of variety, a lot of different characteristics, and a lot of experimentation, some of which isn’t going to work, obviously. But it’s a positive thing that these Champagnes don’t all taste the same, as in this way they stand apart from the grandes marques.’

With the four top wines all priced at under £40, the panel felt that the best of the grower Champagne category does offer fabulous value for money.

‘A lot of variety, a lot of different characteristics, a lot of experimentation’ Simon Field MW