Are Second Growth Wines Generally Inferior in Quality and Price to First Growths? How Does the Concept of 'Super Seconds' Challenge This Notion?

Are Second Growths Really Inferior to First Growths? What's the Deal with Super Seconds?

Hey there! As someone who's enjoyed Bordeaux wines for several years, let me chat with you about this. The Bordeaux wine classification system was established in 1855, primarily based on the châteaux's reputation and prices at the time. The First Growths (Premiers Crus) are the top five, like the famous Lafite and Margaux. The Second Growths (Deuxièmes Crus) come next, with over a dozen châteaux such as Pichon Longueville or Rauzan-Ségla.

Are Second Growths Generally Inferior in Quality and Price?

Not exactly. Traditionally, First Growths are considered the "kings," with ultra-consistent quality and sky-high prices—a good vintage from a First Growth can easily cost thousands or tens of thousands of RMB, or even more. But that doesn’t mean Second Growths are far behind. In my experience, many Second Growths can rival First Growths in certain vintages, even outperforming them in blind tastings (where labels are hidden).

• Quality-wise: First Growths are typically more elegant and balanced, with exceptional terroir (soil and climate) and top-notch winemaking teams. But Second Growths are no slouches! They often offer better value for money, with fuller bodies and richer flavors. Some Second Growths develop complexity after aging that rivals First Growths. For example, I’ve tasted the 2010 Cos d’Estournel (a Second Growth)—its balance and depth were absolutely on par with some First Growths. It really depends on the vintage and the specific château’s performance; not every First Growth is perfect every year.

• Price-wise: Yes, First Growths are much pricier due to brand prestige and scarcity. But Second Growths usually cost only 1/3 to 1/2 of a First Growth, or even less. This makes them far more accessible. If you aren’t made of money, Second Growths deliver high-quality enjoyment without breaking the bank. Overall, it’s not that they’re "generally inferior"—it’s more that their "average level is slightly lower, but the gap isn’t that wide."

How Does the Concept of "Super Seconds" Challenge the Hierarchy?

Super Seconds are exceptionally outstanding Second Growths that often "overtake" First Growths in quality, with prices starting to catch up too. This term was coined later by critics and the market—it’s not an official classification—but it challenges the old 1855 system.

• Origin: Starting in the 1980s, some Second Growths dramatically improved their wine quality through better winemaking techniques and vineyard management. Châteaux like Léoville Las Cases, Palmer, and Montrose are often called Super Seconds. They frequently score 95+ points from critics like Robert Parker, putting them shoulder-to-shoulder with First Growths.

• The Challenge: This concept shows that classifications aren’t set in stone. Super Seconds fetch high prices at auctions, sometimes nearing the lower end of First Growth pricing. For instance, a top vintage of Las Cases can sell for an entry-level First Growth price, yet many consider its quality "quasi-First Growth." This shatters the idea that "a Second Growth is forever a Second Growth," reminding us that a wine’s merit depends more on its current performance than its historical label.

In short, if you’re new to Bordeaux, don’t dive straight into First Growths—try Super Seconds for great value and pleasant surprises. I’d recommend starting with the 2009 or 2016 vintages; the weather was excellent those years, so the wines are fantastic. Feel free to ask about specific châteaux anytime! 🍷