This is an old revision of the document!

Please read first our specific FAQ on how to edit pages!
Important: if you have any question regarding these pages, please check our Contact Info

Welcome to the Oxidized Burgundies Wiki site!

The goal of this wiki is to share information about the premature oxidation of white burgundy wines. The idea for this wiki was submitted by Charles Smith in a discussion thread on the Mark Squires' wine bulletin board on the E-Roberrt Parker website. A lot of background information can be found in a long-running thread on premature oxidation (if you still have access to it).

In practical terms, our aim is to build progressively a list of specific wines / producers / vintages that have displayed this problem. The minimum entry would be to give full information about the wine. More elaborate entries could contain e.g. a ratio of bottles oxidised / bottles opened for a specific wine, or information about yields or winemaking techniques for each producer. Since many people think that corks take a central role in this issue, it might also be worthwile noting whether the cork was bleached and whether there was a light blue tinge where the wine touched the cork.

Please contribute; this board is only valuable if people continue to contribute notes about their experiences; it's really easy! Also, please add your name at the end of each post.

NEWS - -

(November 2017) We tasted the 2007 Chablis on night one of 2007 vintage tasting in 2015. In my summary of the tasting below, I wrote: “We all agreed that the 2007 Chablis notably under-performed versus the early very laudatory reviews which suggested that 2007 is a classic vintage. The wines did not improve over the course of the evening either.” I had purchased quite a stock of 2007 Dauvissat, Raveneau and Fevre in the expectation that they would be wonderful classic chablis. But after our tasting I was so underwhelmed that I resolved to send most of my stock off to auction.

Luckily for me, I never got around to collecting those wines from their various storage locations in order to sell them. What I've discovered over the last six months is that the 2007 grand crus from Dauvissat and Raveneau (along with Dauvissat Forest and Raveneau MDT) have made the unexpected transition from ugly ducklings into graceful swans. Dauvissat Preuses and Forest and Raveneau Valmur and Blanchots are my favorites today, but all of the 2007s I've opened lately have been very enjoyable. I haven't re-tried any of the Fevre Chablis yet but they will be coming home next.


Beginning with the 2007 vintage, several producers have abandoned natural cork and switched to DIAM closures. With the 2014 whites now being released, switching to DIAM closures from natural cork has become a strong trend and there is now a significant amount of the white burgundy market where the bottles have DIAM cork closures.

DIAM closures are considered “technical closures” and are made from agglomerated cork (which is ground into fine pellets, sifted to a uniform consistency and then glued with a food-grade binder.) Champagne corks are made in this way. DIAM has a patented process in which the cork pellets are treated with CO2 under temperature and pressure in order to remove TCA. DIAM has some sort of “guarantee” to the producers against cork taint, the mechanical details of which are unclear to me at this writing. DIAM also claims that its closures provide very tightly controlled long-term oxygen transmission rates which are far more uniform from bottle to bottle than natural cork. There is laboratory data which seems to support this claim.

In Europe DIAM was initially marketing three grades of DIAM corks DIAM-5, DIAM-10 and DIAM-15. Starting with the 2013 vintage, there is a new DIAM-30 model. (It's not clear, but DIAM-15 is apparently no longer in the portfolio.) These numbers correlate with the time period for which the wines are allegedly guaranteed against premature oxidation. (Again the details of this “guarantee” are unclear to me. The guarantee supposedly runs only to the producer/brand owner.) DIAM is offering the corks in two lengths, a standard length and new longer “grand cru” cork.

Domaine William Fevre began bottling a portion of its Chablis (the 1ers) with DIAM in 2007. Starting in 2009, all of the Fevre production except for the grand cru Chablis moved to Diam.

Beginning withe the 2009 vintage, additional producers begin using DIAM closures. Bouchard Pere et Fils (Bouchard and Fevre have common ownership) moved all of their whites to DIAM beginning with the 2009 vintage. Domaine Montille, Deux Montille, and Domaine de Chateau de Puligny Montrachet (all related brands), along with Javillier and Roger Belland have bottled all of their white wines under DIAM starting with the 2009 vintage.

F&L Pillot joined the DiAM parade with the 2010 vintage and Fevre began bottling all of their grand cru Chablis with DIAM corks.

Jadot, Domaine de Bellene (and Roche de Bellene) and Droin (in Chablis) began using DIAM for all of their white wines in the 2011 vintage.

Starting with the 2012 vintage, Olivier Leflaive and Jean-Marc Brocard in Chablis began bottling all of their whites under DIAM closures.

Starting with the 2013 vintage, Lafon, Prieur and Chanson began using DIAM for all of their whites (except, in Lafon's case, the entry level Macon that is sold in Australia, which is bottled under screw cap). Lafon is using DIAM 30
(intended to be used for wines intended for 30 or more years of bottle age). Prieur is using DIAM 10 for the village and premier cru wines and DIAM 30 for the grand crus. Chanson began using the new DIAM 30 on all of Chanson's top wines. Bouchard Pere also immediately started using the new DIAM 30 for all of its whites when they became avaialble.

Starting with the 2014 vintage, Domaine Leflaive is bottling all of their wines with the new DIAM 30 corks. Daniel Dampt is bottling 90% of their production under DIAM. According to Dampt, the remainder are being bottled either under screwcap or natural cork, depending on the importer's preference. There are likely several additional producers in 2014 who have not yet come to my attention.

Both Sauzet and Roulot use DIAM closures on their Bourgogne Blanc wines. Raveneau bottled the 2013 Chablis AOC under DIAM.

Another trend that seems to be occurring among producers that continue to use natural cork is the use of longer corks (with longer bottle necks to insure a tight seal along the full length of the cork) and slightly increasing the diameter of the corks. The standard cork diameter employed in burgundy is 24 mm. Some producers, such as Sauzet, Niellon and Colin-Morey, began using 25 mm diameter corks in the same bottles (starting with the 2010 vintage) as a means of obtaining a tighter seal. This requires both greater compression force to initially seal the bottles and greater extraction force to remove them..


The 12th annual Vintage Assessment and Premox Check dinners were held on March 1 and March 15, 20017. The format was slightly different this year and we tasted 62 wines from the 2009 vintage in two nights. Except for the Chablis, the wines from 2009 far exceeded my initial expectations. When the Cote de Beaune wines were released, I thought most of them were excessively sweet. (I frequently used the descriptor of “7-Up” in my notes). As a result, I cellared very few 2009s. But the Cote de Beaune wines we tasted, for the most part, far exceeded my initial expectations. The level of improvement was even more profound than what we experienced with the 2006 vintage.

The bad news for 2009 was that, in my judgment, 2009 is the least impressive vintage of Chablis that I’ve ever tasted – far worse than the 2007s or the 2005s (but see the post-script above on how well the top 2007 Chablis have turned out at age 10.) The 2009 Chablis were extremely thin and mostly lacking in Chablis character. In my opinion, it’s a vintage of Chablis to avoid. But in contrast to the disappointing Chablis, the flight of Meursault Perrieres was, when considered as a whole, the most consistent flight of Meursault Perrieres, from top to bottom, that we’ve ever had. The wines were uniformly very impressive. The Corton flight, while it had a greater range of variation, was also excellent. The Cortons were bigger bodied and richer than the Meursaults, as you would expect. But they were surprisingly classic in style compared to how sweet and 7-Up like many of the wines tasted like at the time of release. See 2009-Night 1

The second night's dinner consisted of grand cru wines from the five Montrachet grand cru vineyards. The clear vineyard “winner” on night two was Montrachet, where there were zero premox issues and every bottle was excellent. In Bienvenues and Criots, the wines were generally lighter and more dilute. The Chevalier Montrachets, once you excluded the three bottles with obvious defects, were excellent, though not quite as excellent overall as the Montrachets were. The Batards were generally nice wines, but they clearly weren’t as impressive as the Montrachets and Chevaliers in 2009. Continuing the theme from night one, being upslope (i.e. MP, Corton Charlemagne, Montrachet and Chevalier) seems to have made a huge difference in 2009. See 2009-Night 2

Over the two nights,8 of 62 bottles were either advanced or oxidized (12.9%). The 12.9% total incidence is relatively close to the record low incidence of 12.68% for the 2007 vintage and 12.70% for the 2004 vintage. However, the 2009 tastings included nine bottles closed with DIAM, none of which were advanced or oxidized. If you consider only the 53 bottles with conventional cork closings, the advanced or oxidized percentage rises to 15%.


The 11th annual Vintage Assessment and Premox Check Dinners were held on February 9, February 25 and March 8, 2016. This year the vintage was 2008. The first dinner was held on February 9, 2016 and we tasted 29 bottles of the top 2008 Chablis, Meursault, and Corton Charlemagnes, plus one 46 year old Leroy white. See the notes here. 2008 Vintage-Night One The Chablis flight was one of the most impressive in some years. The Meursaults were also outstanding, but overall didn't quite reach the lavel of the 2007 Meursault flights. The Corton Charlemagnes performaed well. There were a few exotic aromas and a couple of wines with obvious botrytis, but overall things seemed pretty impressive.

On February 25, 2016 we tasted 26 bottles of Bienvenue-Batard, Criots-Batard, Batard and Chevalier Montrachet and 3 selected ringers. We experienced significantly more advanced wines and well as much more obvious botrytis signatures in several of the wines. The 2008 Batard flight was one of the least impressive flights of Batard we've ever had at this dinner series. The Bienvenues and Criots flight performed much better and so did the last flight of Chevalier Montrachet with four spectacular wines that really saved the evening. The ringers this year didn't fare as well as the 2007 ringers as a group. See the notes here. 2008 Vintage-Night Two

On March 8, 2016 we held the annual “Mostly Montrachet” dinner at Melisse restaurant in Santa Monica. We tasted a total of 11 Montrachets and the two top Coche-Dury wines, Corton Charlemagne and Meursault Perriees. This night was the worst one from an oxidation persepctive and we also again had some wines that were absolutely reeking of botrytised aromas. A few of these wines were spectacular and a few were very expensive duds. See the notes here. 2008 Vintage-Night 3


(March 19, 2015). It doesn't seem possible, but this year marks the 10th Anniversary of the Vintage Assessment and Premox Check Dinners held in Los Angeles. The notes and results from the initial dinner, held on February 3, 2015, where we tasted 30 bottles of the top 2007 Chablis, Meursault and Corton Charlemagnes, have been posted here. 2007-Night 1 The Meursaults performed fabulously and met or exceeded all of the reviewers' early expectations. We all agreed that the 2007 Chablis notably under-performed versus the early very laudatory reviews which suggested that 2007 is a classic vintage. The wines did not improve over the course of the evening either. The Cortons were generally very good (mostly 93-94 point wines) but they didn't match up to the Meursaults and my scores were generally one to three points lower than the early reviews by Messrs. Meadwos and Tanzer. We had one corked bottle, three advanced bottles and no oxidized bottles. I hope you enjoy the notes and photos.

On March 4, we did our usual hyphenated Montrachet tasting. We tasted 27 bottles including a few French and California ringers thrown in to keep things real. There were some wonderful surprises that blew everybody away, including a California chardonnay that finished as the No. 2 wine of the night, and an astonishingly bad performance for Domaine Leflaive,with both both 2007 Batard and 2007 Chevalier oxidized. Sadly a bunch of emergency tasting in the subsequent few weeks showed a large percentage of the 2007 Leflaives are similarly flawed. You will find the notes here. 2007-Night Two

On March 19, we held our “Mostly Montrachet” dinner at Melisse Restaurant. In my opinion, it was the most remarkable set of Montrachets that we've ever had. This was an evening when nobody could get that silly grin off their face. Wines that haven't starred in the past showed gloriously. The usual top performers were very backward and may eventually be wonderful. If you have bottles of most of these 2007 Montrachets, count yourself very lucky and be sure to enjoy them. You'll find the Night Three notes here. 2007-Night Three and Overall Results

From an overall perspective, the 2007 vintage had the lowest rate of outright oxidation, and depending on whether you use the group votes or my votes to calculate, either the lowest overall rate of either oxidized or advanced or the second lowest rate. But for the the premoxed Leflaive wines, there would be definite cause for celebration.


The ninth annual Vintage Assessment Dinner, this time for the 2006 white burgundy vintage, was held in Los Angeles on March 6, 2014 at Valentino restaurant. This year the tasting was only night, with 28 wines, rather than the usual three nights (and 60+ wines). The 2006s surprised us all and performed much better than we initially thought they would when the vintage was released. Many of the wines were more pleasant than their 2005 counterparts and the combined total of advanced and oxidized wines for 2006 was lower – 20%– than it was for 2005. You'll find the notes here. 2006 Vintage Assessment Dinner


After tasting 65 wines over three nights in February 2013, our Southern California tasting panel found that 2005 is the worst year ever from a premature aging standpoint. While the percentage of oxidized wines was only 6% – the second lowest overall percentage to date, the percentage of advanced 2005 wines was really staggering – 25%. The combined total of advanced and oxidized wines for 2005 (31%) exceeds the total for the 1996s (29%), the 1999s (27%) and 2000s (28%). 2005 is a vintage which is quite sweet, and virtually all are ready to drink now. Only a small handful of wines will reward further aging and our experience suggests that the risk of further aging with most wines is significant. If you own 2005s you need to check out our notes on the 2005s (see 2005-Night 1, 2005-Night 2, 2005-Night 3 and cumulative results) and pop some corks yourself.

General Discussion of the Nature of Premature Oxidation and Its Variance

Please see the General Discussion pages which explain the phenomenon of premature oxidation and discuss the various various theories and evidence regarding the causes of premature oxidation of white burgundies. These pages also include a discussion of the historical performance of the various producers from an oxidation persepctive and a grouping of the producers into five categories based on historical oxidation performance based on the opinions of Editor Don Cornwell.

**Which Producers are Most and Least Affected by Premature Oxidation?**

There is a subtantial variation in the incidence of premature oxidation by producer. Some producers have a very high level of incidence of premature oxidation and a few producers have virtually none. In addition to our comprehensive list of data by producer, the editor (Don Cornwell) breaks the burgundy producers into five different categories based on the incidence of premature oxidation in their wines from the 1995 through 2004 vintages. See Producer Incidence

The Potential Causes of Premature Oxidation

The cause or causes of premature oxidation remain subject to considerable debate but most of the discussion centers upon four different different alleged causes. Click on the links below to see a discussion of the alleged cause in question.

Notes from the annual White Burgundy Vintage Assessment/Oxidation Check Dinners held in Los Angeles

Each February or March for the past six years, the editor (Don Cornwell) has held a comprehensive tasting/oxidation check of a particular white burgundy vintage. The purpose of the tasting is to assess the top wines of the vintage all at the same time from ideal cellar conditions and to check for premature oxidation. The wines are usually tasted at 7.5 years after the vintage date. The wines are tasted and evaluated by a panel of serious burgundy drinkers. You will find a comprehensive tasting notes, premox statistics and comments about the wines tasted by clicking on the links below:

January 25, 2006: 28 wines in a single sitting. You'll find the the notes here: **1996 Vintage Tasting and Oxidation Check**.

February 28, 2007 and March 5, 2007: 44 top premier crus and grand crus tasted over two nights (with notes on three bottles from another tasting a month previously). You''ll find the notes and stats here: **1999 Vintage Tasting and Oxidation Check**

February 5 and 26, 2008: 41 top premier crus and grand crus tasted over two nights. You'll find the notes here: **2000 Vintage Tasting and Oxidation Check** The notes also include a tasting of 16 additional wines, including two 2000 Chablis Clos, four different 2000 Puligny Caillerets and ten 2000 grand crus held on June 18, 2007.

February 4 and 11 and March 10, 2009: 43 top premier cru and grand cru wines (including for the first time some grand cru Chablis) were tasted over three nights. You'll find the notes here: 2001 Vintage Tasting and Oxidation Check

Febuary 4 and 18 and March 4, 2010: 60 top premier cru and grand cru Chablis and Cote de Beaune whites tasted over three nights. You'll find the notes here: 2002 Vintage Tasting and Oxidation Check

February 8 and 23 and March 8, 2011: 66 bottles of the top premier cru and grand cru Chablis, and Cote de Beaune whites tasted over three nights. You'll find the notes here. 1995-2000 Retrospective

February 15 and 28 and March 7, 2012: 63 bottles of the top premier cru and grand cru Chablis and Cote de Beaune whites tasted over three nights. You'll find the notes here: 2004 Vintage Assessment and Oxidation Check Dinners

February 5, 20, and 27 2013: 65 bottles of the top premier cru and grand Chablis and Cote de Beaune whites tasted over three nights. You'll find notes and photographs for each night here: 2005-Night 1, 2005-Night 2, 2005-Night 3 and cumulative results).

March 6, 2014: 28 bottles of the top grand cru and premier cru Chablis and Cote de Beaune wines tasted on a single night. You'll find the notes and photographs here: 2006 Vintage Assessment Dinner

February 3, 2015: 30 bottles of the top premier cru and grand cru Chablis, Meursault and Corton Charlemagnes tasted on night one of a three-night series of dinners. 2007-Night 1

List of producers and wines

Here is a list of producers that might or not be affected by this problem. Each producer has its own page with information about winemaking techniques and a list of wines that have shown to be affected (or not).

The list of producers is also available sorted by appellations.

  • home.1521024814.txt.gz
  • Last modified: 2018/03/14 11:53
  • by toto