document_title: South African wine

question_text: variety of white grape grown in south africa

text: South African wine

text: History[edit]

text: The roots of the South African wine industry can be traced to the explorations of the Dutch East India Company, which established a supply station in what is now Cape Town. A Dutch surgeon, Jan van Riebeeck, was assigned the task of managing the station and planting vineyards to produce wines and grapes. This was intended to ward off scurvy amongst sailors during their voyages along the spice route to India and the East. The first harvest and crushing took place in 1659, seven years after the landing in 1652. The man succeeding Van Riebeeck as governor of the Cape of Good Hope, Simon van der Stel, sought to improve the quality of viticulture in the region. In 1685, he purchased a large 750 hectares (1,900 acres) estate just outside Cape Town, establishing the Constantia wine estate. After Van der Stel's death, the estate fell into disrepair, but was revived in 1778 when it was purchased by Hendrik Cloete.[2]

text: Many growers gave up on winemaking, and instead chose to plant orchards and alfalfa fields to feed the growing ostrich feather industry. The growers that did replant with grapevines chose high-yielding grape varieties such as Cinsaut. By the early 1900s, more than 80 million vines had been replanted, creating a wine lake. Some producers would pour unsaleable wine into local rivers and streams. The imbalance between supply and demand that caused depressed prices prompted the South African government to fund the formation of the Koöperatieve Wijnbouwers Vereniging van Zuid-Afrika Bpkt (KWV) in 1918. Started as a co-operative, the KWV soon grew in power and prominence eventually setting policies and prices for the entire South African wine industry. To deal with the wine glut, the KWV restricted yields and set minimum prices that encouraged the production of brandy and fortified wines.[2]

text: For much of the 20th century, the South African wine industry received minimal international attention. Its isolation was exacerbated by the boycotts of South African products in protest against the country's system of Apartheid. It was not until the late 1980s and 1990s when Apartheid was ended, and the world's export market opened up, that South African wines began to experience a renaissance. Many producers in South Africa quickly adopted new viticultural and winemaking technologies. The presence of flying winemakers from abroad brought international influences and focus on well-known varieties such as Shiraz, Cabernet Sauvignon and Chardonnay. The reorganisation of the powerful KWV co-operative into a private business sparked further innovation and improvement in quality. Vineyard owners and wineries who had previously relied on the price-fixing structure that bought their excess grapes for distillation were forced to become more competitive by shifting their focus to the production of quality wine. In 1990, less than 30% of all the grapes harvested were used for wine production meant for the consumer market with the remaining 70% being discarded, distilled into brandy, or sold as table grapes and juice. By 2003, the numbers had been reversed with more than 70% of the grapes harvested that year reaching the consumer market as wine.[2]

text: Climate and geography[edit]

text: South Africa is located at the tip of the African continent with most wine regions located near the coastal influences of the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. These regions have a mostly Mediterranean climate that is marked by intense sunlight and dry heat. Winters tend to be cold and wet with potential snowfall at higher elevations. The threat of springtime frost is rare with most wine regions seeing a warm growing season between November and April. The majority of annual precipitation occurs in the winter months and ranges from 250 millimetres (9.84 in) in the semi-desert-like region of Klein Karoo to 1,500 millimetres (59.06 in) near the Worcester Mountains.[2] Regions closer to the coast, or in the rain shadow of inland mountain chains like the Drakenstein, Hottentots Holland and Langeberg, will have more rain than areas further inland. In many South African wine regions irrigation is essential to viticulture. The Benguela current from Antarctica brings cool air off the south Atlantic coast that allows the mean temperatures of the area to be lower than regions of comparable latitude.[3] A strong wind current, known as the Cape Doctor, brings gale force winds to the wine regions in the Cape which have the positive benefit of limiting the risk of various mildew and fungal grape disease as well as tempering humidity, but can also damage grapevines that are not protected.[2]

text: During the harvest months of February and March, the average daily temperatures in many South African wine regions is 23 °C (73 °F) with spikes up to 40 °C (104 °F) not uncommon in the warm inland river valleys around the Breede, Olifants and Orange Rivers. On the Winkler scale, the majority of South African wine regions would be classified as Region III locations with heat summation and degree days similar to the California wine region of Oakville in Napa Valley. Warmer regions such as Klein Karoo and Douglas fall into Region IV (similar to Tuscany) and Region V (similar to Perth in Western Australia) respectively. New plantings are the focus in cooler climate sites in the Elgin and Walker Bay regions which are characterised as Region II with temperatures closer to the Burgundy and Piedmont.[2]

text: The wine regions of South Africa are spread out over the Western and Northern Cape regions, covering 500 kilometres (310 mi) west to east and 680 kilometres (420 mi) north-south. Within this wide expanse is a vast range of macroclimate and vineyard soil types influenced by the unique geography of the area which includes several inland mountain chains and valleys. Within the Stellenbosch region alone, there are more than 50 unique soil types. In general, the soils of South Africa tend to retain moisture and drain well, having a significant proportion of clay (often at least 25% of the composition) with low pH levels around 4. The pH levels of the soils are often adjusted with lime and calcium treatment. Other soil types found in South Africa include granite and sandstone in Constantia, shale in Elgin and arenaceous shale in Walker Bay.[2] Near the river valleys, the soils are particularly lime rich with a high proportion of sand and shale.[4]

text: Wine of Origin[edit]

text: Drafted in 1973, the "Wine of Origin" (WO) programme legislates how wine regions of South Africa are defined and can appear on wine labels. While some aspects of the WO are taken from the French Appellation d'Origine Contrôlée (AOC) system, the WO is concerned primarily with accuracy in labelling and does not place any additional regulations on wine regions such as permitted varieties, trellising methods, irrigation and crop yields. Wine regions under the WO system fall under one of four categories - the largest and most generic are geographical units (such as the Western Cape region) which include the smaller, but still largely defined regions (such as Overberg), followed by districts (like Walker Bay) and then finally wards (such as Elgin). The Eastern Cape province is South Africa's most recent wine region. While geographical units, regions and districts are largely defined by political boundaries - wards are the level of origin designation that is most defined by unique terroir characteristics.[2]

text: Wine regions[edit]

text: As of 2003, South Africa was 17th in terms of area planted with vines, with the country owning 1.5% of the world's grape vineyards with 110,000 hectares (270,000 acres). Yearly production among South Africa's wine regions is usually around 10 million hL (264 million US gallons) which regularly puts the country among the top ten wine producing countries in the world. The majority of wine production in South Africa takes place in the Cape, particularly the south-west corner near the coastal region. The historical heart of South African wine has been the area near the Cape Peninsula and modern-day Cape Town. This area is still of prominence in the industry being home to the major wine regions of Constantia, Stellenbosch and Paarl. Today, wine is grown throughout the Western Cape and in parts of the Northern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal and Eastern Cape regions. The river regions along the Breede Valley, Olifants and Orange Rivers are among the warmest areas and are often the location of bulk wine production and distillation. The cooler climate regions east of Cape Town along the Indian Ocean coast, such as Walker Bay and Elgin, have seen vast expansion and development in recent years as producers experiment with cool climate varietals and wine styles.[2]

text: Below are some notable Wine of Origins districts.[2]

text: Constantia[edit]

text: The Constantia Valley is located south of Cape Town on the Cape Peninsula that juts out into the Atlantic Ocean. Because of its location, the region receives oceanic influences on each side that create a cooling effect contributing to a long, slow ripening period in the summer where average daily temperatures fall between 18–19 °C (64–66 °F). Winters are often moderate and mild but wet with annual precipitation usually over 1,000 millimetres (39.37 in). The soil of the region is composed primarily of Table Mountain sandstone with high concentrations of loam and granite.[2] The area grows a wide range of grapes with Sauvignon blanc being particularly noted.[3] The area is now home to 11 wine farms (Andrews, 2017). It is the oldest wine-growing region in the country, with the farm Groot Constantia being the oldest wine estate.[5]:77

text: Stellenbosch[edit]

text: The Stellenbosch district is the second oldest wine region in South Africa, after Constantia, and is responsible for around 14% of the country's annual wine production. First planted in 1679, Stellenbosch is located 45 kilometres (28 mi) east of Cape Town. The region is surrounded by the Helderberg, Simonsberg and Stellenbosch Mountains and receives some climatic influences from nearby False Bay. The bay tempers the climate and keeps average temperatures during the summer growing season to around 20 °C (68 °F), just slightly warmer than Bordeaux. Vineyard soil types range from decomposed granite on the hillside near the mountains to sandy, alluvial loam in the valleys near the rivers.[2]

text: The seven wards of Stellenbosch-Banghoek, Bottelary, Devon Valley, Jonkershoek Valley, Papegaaiberg, Polkadraai Hills and Simonsberg-Stellenbosch - are well known for their red wine production that demonstrate terroir distinction - particularly Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Pinotage and Shiraz.[2] Simonsberg was the first wine ward to gain individual distinction. White wine production centres on Chardonnay and Sauvignon blanc which are often blended together. The western reaches of Stellenbosch, such as Bottelary and near Elsenburg also include a sizeable portion of Chenin blanc plantings in areas rich in light, sandy soils.[3]

text: Paarl[edit]

text: For most of the 20th century, Paarl was for all practical purposes the heart of the South African wine industry. It was the home of the KWV as well as the annual Nederburg Wine Auction where the reputation of a vintage or an estate could be established. Gradually, the focus shifted southwards to Stellenbosch where Stellenbosch University gained a more prominent role in the South African wine industry with its viticulture and winemaking programmes. The transfer of power from the KWV to a private business further shifted the focus away from Paarl. However, the terroir driven wines of its wards, the Franschhoek Valley and Wellington, have revitalised interest in the area in recent years.[3]

text: The fortified wine produced in Paarl and nearby Tulbagh can be designated with the unique WO of Boberg relating to its proximity to the Berg River.[4]

text: Franschhoek Valley[edit]

text: The Franschhoek Valley was founded by Huguenot settlers who brought with them from their native France their traditions and winemaking expertise. The ward includes some higher elevation vineyard sites which can produce full flavoured white wines with noticeable acidity levels.[3]

text: Franschhoek will soon be South Africa's first wine region to form a classification system (Appellation Grand Prestige) for its wines, with Semillon, Chardonnay and Cabernet Sauvignon being identified as the area's most tried-and-trusted grapes over a number of decades.

text: Breede River Valley[edit]

text: The Breede River Valley, located east of the Drakenstein Mountains, is a warm climate region that can be very dry and arid in some places.[4] The river itself provides easy access to irrigation which makes bulk wine production of high yield varieties commonplace. The Robertson district is located closest to the river along alluvial soils and the occasional calcium-rich outcrop of land. The average annual precipitation is generally below 400 millimetres (15.75 in), making irrigation essential. Temperatures during the summer growing season are normally around 22 °C (72 °F). The Bonnievale ward is the most notable sub-region of Robertson, noted for its Chardonnay and Shiraz wines.[2]

text: The Worcester district is responsible for more wine than any other wine region in the country with one fifth to one quarter of the entire South African yearly wine production coming from this area.[3] Located just beyond Du Toit's Peak in the Breede River Valley, Worcester includes a broad fertile plain that relies on irrigation due to its dry, arid climate. The area's large and numerous co-operatives produce sizeable amounts of fortified wine as well as Muscadel and Hanepoot based dessert wines. In recent years, the Slanghoek ward and the Breedekloof district have been successful growing botrytised and dry Sauvignon blanc wines. The Worcester district is home to nearly half of all the Semillon, and a third of Ruby Cabernet, planted in South Africa with sizeable plantings of Colombard and Chenin blanc.[2]

text: Overberg[edit]

text: The cool climate Overberg region has been the site of the most recent interest and development in the South African wine industry, particularly with increased plantings of Chardonnay and Pinot noir. The entire area received very little attention until the late 20th century and was not even classified in 1973 within the original Wine of Origins programme.[3] The maritime climate of Walker Bay and the cool, higher elevation vineyards of Elgin located east of Cape Town, have had success producing these varietals as well as Sauvignon blanc.[2]

text: Other notable regions[edit]

text: The Klein Karoo region (meaning Little Karoo) has a semi-desert climate and was known mostly for sheep and ostrich farming. The region stretches from Montagu in the west to the village of De Rust in the east. In Calitzdorp warm temperatures are moderated by sea breezes that start in the late afternoon, and cool night time temperatures.[4] Wine production in the area is largely centred on fortified "port-style" wine and Muscadels.[2]

text: The Atlantic influenced West Coast region includes the wine making areas of Durbanville, Olifants River, Piketberg and Swartland. While this region was known historically for its large, bulk wine production, in recent years, producers have focused on premium wine production such as plantings of Sauvignon blanc in the Groenekloof area near Darling and Pinotage in unirrigated farmland of the Swartland.[3] In the Olifants River region, Chenin blanc and Colombard are popular. The area is also home to South Africa's biggest single co-operative winery – the Vredendal Co-operative.[2]

text: The Northern Cape wine regions located along the Orange River include the hottest wine producing areas in South Africa. Wine production here was slow to take root, delayed to the 1960s when better irrigation and temperature control fermentation technology became available. Today, the area is responsible for nearly 12% of all the wine produced in South Africa - mostly by large co-operatives for bulk wine production.[2] The Hartswater region, located 80 kilometres (50 mi) north of Kimberley, is South Africa's northernmost wine region.[4]

text: KwaZulu-Natal was designated as a Geographical Unit in 2005 and is one of South Africa's most recent wine regions. The first wine estate in this region was The Stables Wine Estate, and the region's first Wine of Origin wine was released by Tiny and Judy van Niekerk in July 2006. The Stables Wine Estate went bankrupt in 2012.[6] Current cultivars doing well in the growing wine region of KwaZulu-Natal are: Sauvignon Blanc, Pinotage, Pinot Noir and Chardonnay. With mild summer temperatures, the region boasts South Africa's coolest vineyards.

text: The Eastern Cape followed soon after through the pioneering efforts of Ronnie and Janet Vehorn. In 2009, Harrison Hope Wine Estate was registered as the first wine estate in the Eastern Cape province of South Africa. The estate made history again with its 2009 Merlot becoming the first certified estate wine ever produced in the Eastern Cape region. Situated in the Amatola Mountains, this area enjoys high temperatures in summer with little to no humidity. Unfortunately, late frost, hail, summer rainfall, and duiker make for some of the harshest conditions for wine grapes. Grapes grown in this region include: Chardonnay, Merlot, Petit Verdot, Pinotage, Sauvingnon Blanc and Shiraz.

text: Other notable wards[edit]

text: The Ruiterbosch ward, located southwest of the Klein Karoo around Mossel Bay, has a generally cool climate influenced primarily by the Indian Ocean. The area is planted largely with Riesling, Sauvignon blanc and Pinot noir.[2] The Cederberg located east of the southern reaches of the Olifants rivers includes some of the highest elevated vineyards in South Africa, planted at altitudes more than 1,000 metres (3,300 ft).[4]

text: Viticulture[edit]

text: Historically vineyards in South Africa were planted with untrellised bush vines planted 1.2 metres (3 ft 11 in) apart at a density of 7,000 vines per hectare (2,800 vines per acre). Following the phylloxera devastation, the focus of viticulture in South Africa was more on quantity rather than quality. Vineyards were planted with high yield varieties, widely spaced to facilitate the use of mechanical harvesting. In the late 20th century, more producers began to focus on quality wine production and adopted modern viticultural practices. Vines were planted to an average density of 3,300 per hectare (1,300 per acre) and pruned to keep yields down to 49–56 hl/ha (2.8–3.2 tons/acre). The most common form of trellising found in South Africa is the vertical hedge row system that uses a split cordon supported on a wire kept around 750 millimetres (2.46 ft) off the ground. The grapevine leaves are trained upright on separate wires that allow plenty of sunshine to reach the grapes, but provide enough coverage to keep them from being sunburned. The vines are usually pruned to allow four to five spurs each with two to three buds (potential grape clusters) per cordon.[2] Heat is also a concern come harvest time with some wineries harvesting only at night in the cooler temperatures under floodlights.[4]

text: The lack of precipitation in many wine regions make irrigation a necessity. Sprinkler and drip irrigation systems are used to provide anywhere from 200–700 millimetres (7.9–27.6 in) of extra water a year. Modern winemakers are developing new techniques and an understanding of the role that water stress plays in the development of quality wine grape production. Producers who do not irrigate will sometimes use the phrase "dryland" or "dry farmed" on their wine labels as a marketing angle. Besides irrigation, an important concern for vineyard owners is the threat of vineyard pests such as mealy bugs[2] and baboons.[7] To combat these hazards, some vineyard owners will utilise Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programmes such as the importation of ladybugs, a natural predator of mealy bugs.[2]

text: While ocean winds keep some fungus and mildew threats at bay, downy mildew and powdery mildew (known regionally as "white rust") can pose an occasional threat during the wet winter season. Near harvest time, botrytis can also appear, being a hazard or a welcome visitor depending on whether or not botrytised wine production is the goal. Another threat is diseased and virus-infected rootstock.[3] After the phylloxera devastation, vineyards in South Africa were replanted with American rootstock (nowadays most commonly 99 Richter, 110 Richter and 101-14 Mgt). Some of these imported rootstocks were infected with various virus such as corky bark, fanleaf and leafroll, which soon spread to other vineyards. These virus-infected vines have a shortened lifespan and difficulties with photosynthesis, which can lead to poor ripening of phenolic compounds in the grape and low quality wine. Since the 1980s, efforts have been undertaken by the South African wine industry to quarantine and promote healthy virus-free vineyards. Additionally, work has been undertaken in clonal research to identify which grape varieties grow best in which climate and wine region.[2]

text: Vine Improvement Programme[edit]

text: Following the end of Apartheid and the opening of export markets, the South African wine industry had a substantial learning curve to overcome in order to be competitive on the world's wine market. The Vine Improvement Programme (VIP) was established to bring modern viticultural understanding to the industry. The first phase launched in the late 20th century focused on virus-free and yield controlling rootstock as well as clonal research. The second phase, which is ongoing, focuses on matching up various combinations of grape varieties, clones and rootstock to specific terroir that can produce quality wine. Over the last 20+ years, the work of the VIP has brought the South African wine industry to the forefront of viticultural advances.[4]

text: Winemaking and wines[edit]

text: The winemaking traditions of South Africa often represent a hybridisation of Old World wine making and the new. Since the end of Apartheid, many producers have been working on producing more "international" styles of wine that can succeed on the world market. Flying winemakers from France, Spain and California have brought new techniques and styles to South Africa. In the 1980s, the use of oak barrels for fermentation and ageing became popular. The use of chaptalisation is illegal in South Africa as the country's warm climate makes attaining sufficient sugar and alcohol levels for wine production non-problematic. Winemakers more often have problems with low acidity levels which require supplementation with additional acids like tartaric acid.[2]

text: Today the focus of the South African wine industry is on increasing the quality of wine production - particularly with the more exportable and fashionable red grape varieties. Traditionally, South African red wines had a reputation for being coarse in texture with rustic flavours. The Afrikaans word dikvoet used to describe these wines meant literally "thick foot". In the vineyards, growers focused on yield control for better ripeness, while winemakers used modern techniques to create softer, fleshier wines.[3] Temperature control fermentation as well as controlled malolactic fermentation were more widely used as well as less dependency on filtration as a means of stabilisation.[2]

text: Cape port-style wine[edit]

text: The South African wine industry has a long history of fortified wine production producing wines known colloquially as "Cape port" (though the term "Port" is protected by the European Union and refers only to the wines from the Douro region of Portugal). These wines are made from a variety of grapes, such as Shiraz and Pinotage, as well as Portuguese varieties like Tinta Barroca, Touriga Nacional, Souzão and Fernão Pires. The minimum alcohol level for these wines must be 16.5–22%. The many styles of "Cape port" closely parallel their Portuguese counterparts and include:[4]

text:
Cape White port - Can be made from any white grape varieties (such as Chenin blanc, Colombard or Fernão Pires) except for Muscats. Required to be aged in wood barrels for at least six months.
Cape Ruby port - Usually a blend of several fruity, full bodied wines that have been aged for at least six months in wood for each wine and at least a year total for the entire blend.
Cape Tawny port - A blend that has been aged in wood long enough to acquire a tawny colour with a smooth, slightly nutty flavour. Blending Ruby and White ports to create Tawny port is prohibited.
Cape Late Bottled Vintage (LBV) port - A wine composed of grapes harvested in a single vintage that is aged at least two years in oak and three to six years total before being bottled. South Africa wine laws require that the term "Late Bottled Vintage" or "LBV" appear on the wine label along with the vintage and bottling year.
Cape Vintage port - A wine composed of grapes harvested in a single vintage, aged in wood and released with the words "Vintage Port" and the vintage year on the label.
Cape Vintage Reserve port - A wine produced in a vintage year recognised by the South African wine industry or trade publications as being of exceptional quality. The wine must be aged for at least one year in oak and sold exclusively in glass wine bottles. The words "Vintage Reserve Port" and vintage date must appear on the wine label.

text: Other fortified and dessert wines[edit]

text: In addition to port-style wine, South African wine makers also produce "sherry-style" wines produced in a solera system and a unique vin de liqueur made from Muscat known as Jerepigo (or Jerepiko). With Jerepigo, the brandy is added to the must prior to fermentation, which leaves the wine with a residual sugar (RS) level of at least 160 grams per litre. South Africa's long history of late harvest dessert wines include the modern-day Edel Laat-oes wines infected with noble rot (known locally as Edelkeur) and containing at least 50 grams of residual sugar per litre. Wine labelled simply as Laat-oes is from grapes harvested late, but not infected with botrytis. These wines must have an alcohol content of at least 10% and residual sugar levels between 10–30 grams per litre. Wines above 30 grams RS may be called Spesiale Laat-oes or "special late harvest" which may imply that some grapes infected with botrytis were used.[4]

text: Sparkling wines[edit]

text: Sparkling wines in South Africa are produced with both the Charmat and the traditional "Champagne Method". The first champagne method wines produced in South Africa came from the Simonsig estate (in Stellenbosch) in 1971. To distinguish South African sparkling wines (and to comply with European Union regulations protecting the term "Champagne" and champenois), wines made in this traditional bottled fermented method are labelled as Methode Cap Classique (or MCC). These wines have been traditionally made using Sauvignon blanc and Chenin blanc, but in recent years have seen more of the traditional "Champagne grapes" of Chardonnay, Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier being used. Red sparkling wine made from Pinotage can also be found.[4]

text: Labeling laws[edit]

text: South African labelling law focuses largely on geographical origins, falling under the purview of the Wine of Origin legislation. Single vineyard designated wine can be produced, provided the vineyard is registered with the government and all grapes used in the production of the wine were grown in that vineyard. While the term "estate" no longer qualifies as a designation of geographic origins, wineries can still label "estate wines" provided all the grapes were grown, and the wine was vinified and bottled on the same property. The South African Wine & Spirit Board operates a voluntary programme that allows South African wines to be "certified" for quality and accuracy in labelling. Under this certification process, vintage dated wine must be composed of at least 85% grapes that were harvested that vintage year. Varietal wines must also be composed of at least 85% of the listed varietal. Blends, such as a Cabernet Sauvignon and Pinotage blend, can have both varietals listed on the label provided the two wines were vinified separately. A wine that has been "co-fermented", with both grapes crushed and vinified together such as a Shiraz-Viognier, cannot list both varietals. As of 2006, about 35% of Cape wineries participated in this voluntary programme.[2]

text: Grape varieties[edit]

text:
Grape
Vineyards[8]

Chenin Blanc

18.2%

Cabernet Sauvignon

11.3%

Colombard

12.0%

Shiraz

10.5%

Sauvignon Blanc

9.4%

Chardonnay

8.0%

Pinotage

7.5%

Merlot

6.0%

text: Grape varieties in South Africa are known as cultivar, with many common international varieties developing local synonyms that still have a strong tradition of use.[2] These include: Chenin blanc (Steen), Riesling (until recently known locally as Weisser Riesling),[9] Crouchen (known as Cape Riesling), Palomino (the grape of the Spanish wine Sherry known locally as "White French"), Trebbiano (Ugni Blanc), Sémillon (Groendruif) and Muscat of Alexandria (Hanepoot).[10] However, wines that are often exported overseas will usually have the more internationally recognised name appear on the wine label. In 2015, SAWIS (South African Wine Information and Systems) reported that the country had 100,146 hectares of vineyards, with about 55% planted with white varieties.[8] Chenin blanc has long been the most widely planted variety, still accounting for over 18% of all grape area planted in South Africa as of 2015, though it is slowly decreasing in overall share of vineyard area. In the 1980s and 1990s, interest in international varieties saw increase in plantings of Chardonnay and Sauvignon blanc. Other white grape varieties with significant plantings include Colombard (also spelled locally as Colombar), Cape Riesling, Gewürztraminer, Hanepoot, Muscat Blanc à Petits Grains, Riesling and Sémillon. Both red and white mutants of Muscat Blanc à Petits Grains as well as Chenel and Weldra, two Chenin blanc-Ugni blanc crossings, are used for brandy distillation and fortified wine production.[2]

text: From the 1990s, plantings of red grape varieties rose steadily. In the late 1990s, less than 18% of all the grapes grown in South Africa were red. By 2009 that number had risen to 44%. For most of the 20th century, the high yielding Cinsaut was the most widely planted red grape variety, but the shift in focus to quality wine production has seen plantings of the grape steadily decline to where it represented just 2% of all South Africa vineyards in 2009.[9] In its place, Cabernet Sauvignon, Shiraz and Pinotage have risen to prominence with Cabernet Sauvignon being the most widely grown red grape variety covering 12% of all plantings in 2009. Other red grape varieties found in South Africa include: Carignan, Gamay (often made in the style of Beaujolais wine with carbonic maceration), Grenache, Petit Verdot, Cabernet Franc, Pontac, Ruby Cabernet, Tinta Barroca and Zinfandel.[2]

text: There is a wide range of lesser known groups that are used to feed the country's still robust distilled spirits and fortified wine industry. These grapes usually produce bland, neutral wine that lends itself well to blending and distillation but is rarely seen as varietal bottlings. These include: Belies, False Pedro, Kanaän, Raisin blanc, Sultana and Servan.[2]

text: Pinotage[edit]

text: Pinotage, a crossing of Pinot noir and Cinsaut, has seen its plantings rise and fall due to the current fashion of the South African wine industry. Today, it is the second most widely planted red grape variety in South Africa.[3] While there are supporters who want to make the grape South Africa's signature variety, critics of the grape note that hardly any other wine region in the world has planted this variety due to its flaws.[4] In the early 1990s, as Apartheid ended and the world's wine market was opening up, winemakers in South Africa ignored Pinotage in favour of more internationally recognised varieties like Shiraz and Cabernet Sauvignon. Towards the end of the 20th century, the grape's fortunes began to turn, and by 1997 it commanded higher prices than any other South African grape. It is a required component (30–70%) in "Cape blends". Here it is made into the full range of styles, from easy-drinking quaffing wine and rosé to barrel-aged wine intended for cellaring. It is also made into a fortified "port-style", and even a red sparkling wine. The grape can be very dependent on the style of winemaking, with well made examples having the potential to produce deep coloured, fruity wines that can be accessible early as well as age.[11] However, critics of the variety believe that the variety's flaws - green vegetal flavours and tannins, and susceptibility to developing banana and nail polish acetate aromas - are present in far more examples of Pinotage that reach the consumer market.[4] Pinotage reached its zenith in 2001, covering 7.3% of the total vineyard area,[12] but this has since decreased to 6%.[9]

text: Important organisations[edit]

text: The South African wine industry has been led by many powerful organisations in both the private sector and through governmental agencies. Unlike other New World wine regions, the South African wine industry is largely influenced by several large co-operatives.[3] The Koöperatieve Wijnbouwers Vereniging van Zuid-Afrika Bpkt (KWV) was a co-operative first created through the funding and encouragement of the South African government as a force to stabilise and grow the South African wine industry. As the KWV is now a privately owned winemaking co-operative, some of its regulatory responsibilities have fallen to other organisations such as the South African Wine & Spirit Board. The Wine & Spirit Board runs the voluntary certification programme that allows South African wines to be "certified" for quality and accuracy in labelling. In addition to being subject to various labelling guidelines, wines are blind tasted by a panel of experts for quality, and are put through an analytic test for faults. Like the vintage and varietal labelling guidelines, these tests are voluntary, but wines that are not submitted for testing are liable for random testing for health requirements.[2]

text: The Wine & Spirits board also operates the South African Wine Industry Trust (SAWIT) and provides funding for the marketing and development of SAWIT. Established in 1999 by a joint agreement between the South African government and the KWV, which put forth 369 million rand ($46 million US$), SAWIS works to promote the export market for South African wines abroad, and the development of new technologies and education. Additionally, SAWIS works with the Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) programme to promote the black community's involvement in the South African wine industry - including ownership opportunities for vineyards and wineries.[2]

text: South African wine competitions[edit]

text: Wine competitions are held to assess whether a wine is of good quality and whether it is true to its character. In 2014, more than 20 wine competitions were held in South Africa, many of them concentrating on specific styles or varietals. The only South African wine competition acknowledged as a truly international wine concours is the annual Michelangelo International Wine & Spirits Awards, founded in 1997. The first Michelangelo Liqueur Awards were held in 2014 as part of the wine awards. Only accredited wine judges, wine makers and sommeliers from Europe, USA, Australia and Asia are invited to judge the approximately 1700 South African wines and spirits entered by producers in the Michelangelo International Wine & Spirits Awards (www.michelangeloawards.com). Another South African wine competition, the national Veritas award, was started in 1990. The Top 100 South African Wine Competition is a newer example of a local wine competition.[13]


document_title: The Bad Batch

question_text: where was the movie the bad batch filmed

root

text: The Bad Batch

text: Plot[edit]

text: A young woman named Arlen (Suki Waterhouse) is tattooed and dropped inside a fenced-in area outside of Texas. A sign declares that the area is considered property outside of the U.S. and that American laws no longer apply. Shortly after, Arlen is attacked by two women in a golf cart. When she wakes, she is chained up and realizes she has been captured by cannibals who remove first her arm, then her leg. Arlen eventually covers herself in feces, causing one of the cannibals to untie her so she can be washed, using this moment to attack and kill the woman and escape, on only a skateboard. She is picked up in the desert by the Hermit (Jim Carrey) who takes her to a makeshift town named Comfort where she is cared for and given a prosthetic leg.

tag: p

text: Five months later, a mostly healed Arlen heads out to the desert, where she sees a golf cart similar to the one she was picked up in at the start of the film. She finds a mother and daughter scavenging among waste. Realizing they are cannibals, Arlen shoots the mother. She takes the daughter back with her to Comfort but is spotted by the Hermit. While there she goes to a rave held by The Dream (Keanu Reeves) the cult like-leader of Comfort. Meanwhile, Miami Man, the father of the child she took, notices his daughter missing. The Hermit, in exchange for a portrait, tells Miami Man to "Find Comfort." Arlen drops acid at the rave and wanders out into the desert. There she is discovered by Miami Man and, upon meeting, by a death threat, he has her go to Comfort to locate his child.

text: Arlen and Miami Man grow closer on their journey to Comfort. He reveals that he was put into the lawless territory because he was an illegal immigrant from Cuba. Arlen is rescued from him by a man from Comfort who shoots and wounds Miami Man and returns Arlen to Comfort. Feeling guilty she begins to look for Miami Man's daughter. She eventually finds her living amongst The Dream's harem. Arlen goes to The Dream who explains that Comfort runs on drugs. When Arlen offers to become one of his harem girls he accepts her offer, but Arlen secretly removes her prosthetic where she is hiding a gun, holds one of the pregnant members of the harem hostage, and manages to extract Miami Man's daughter. She heads out of Comfort in a golf cart.

text: Meanwhile, Miami Man, who has been rescued by the Hermit, heads to Comfort to search for his daughter. Arlen and Miami Man meet, and she returns his daughter to him revealing she wants to stay with him. Miami Man does not send Arlen away. Instead, he kills his daughter's pet rabbit, and the three sit down outside a campfire eating the food they have.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Suki Waterhouse as Arlen
Jason Momoa as Miami Man
Keanu Reeves as the Dream
Jim Carrey as the Hermit
Yolonda Ross as Maria
Giovanni Ribisi as Bobby
Jayda Fink as Honey
Diego Luna as Jimmy
Cory Roberts as the Bridgeman
E.R. Ruiz as Lone Man

tag: ul

text: Production[edit]

text: In January 2015, Ana Lily Amirpour was announced to be directing the film, while Megan Ellison would produce under her Annapurna Pictures banner, and Danny Gabai and Sina Sayyah will produce under their Vice Films banner.[6] In March 2015, Keanu Reeves, Jim Carrey, Jason Momoa, Suki Waterhouse, and Diego Luna joined the film.[7]

text: Filming[edit]

text: Principal photography on the film began on April 8, 2015 in Los Angeles.[8] Film was also shot in Niland and Bombay Beach, California.[9]

text: Release[edit]

text: The film had its world premiere at the Venice Film Festival on September 6, 2016.[10] Shortly after, Netflix and Screen Media Films acquired SVOD and theatrical distribution rights to the film, respectively.[11][12] However, Neon later acquired distribution rights to the film.[13] The film also screened at the Toronto International Film Festival on September 8, 2016.[14][15] It was released in a limited release on June 23, 2017[16] and was made available on Digital HD from Amazon Video and iTunes on June 22, 2017. The Bad Batch DVD and Blu-ray released on September 19, 2017.[17]

text: Critical reception[edit]

text: On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 42% based on 77 reviews, with a weighted average of 5.7/10. The site's critical consensus reads: "The Bad Batch has its moments, but it's too thinly written and self-indulgent to justify its length or compensate for its slow narrative drift."[18] On Metacritic, the film has a score of 61 out of 100, based on 25 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".[19]

text: Guy Lodge of Variety gave the film a negative review, writing that "though there's much to savor in the pic's lavishly distressed visuals and soundscape, its narrative feels increasingly stretched and desultory."[20] Lee Marshall of Screen International also gave the film a negative review, concluding that "the story runs out of steam – with a full ninety minutes still to go."[21] David Rooney of The Hollywood Reporter concluded that "the movie is overlong and not without draggy patches, but it's sustained enough to keep you watching."[22]


document_title: Bears–Packers rivalry

question_text: when was the last time chicago bears beat green bay packers

text: Bears–Packers rivalry

text: Notable games and moments[edit]

text:
Bears 20, Packers 0 (November 27, 1921) – The two organizations played for the first time in 1921 at Chicago, when the Bears were nicknamed the Chicago Staleys. Bears' Gaylord "Pete" Stinchcomb scored the game's first touchdown on a 45-yard run. The Bears shut out the Packers 20-0 in their first meeting, and the rivalry was born. A year later, the Staleys changed their team name to the Bears.
Bears 3, Packers 0 (November 23, 1924) – The Bears–Packers rivalry can be credited for the first ever ejection of players for fighting during an NFL game. The Bears' Frank Hanny and Packers' Tillie Voss were ejected before the end of the first half as verbal exchanges led to punches being thrown. Two years later, Hanny was ejected once again in a game versus Green Bay.[2]
Packers 7, Bears 0 (September 28, 1930) – The Packers shut out the Bears for the fifth consecutive game in this contest which is the longest such streak in the series. The streak began in 1928 when the Packers defeated the Bears 6–0 on December 9 of that season.[3] In 1929 the Packers shut out the Bears three times, 23–0, 14–0, and 25–0 en route to their first NFL championship.[4][5] On November 9, the Bears finally scored on the Packers although they came up short in the final score 13–12.[6] The Packers won their second consecutive NFL title that season.[7]
Packers 16, Bears 14 (November 2, 1941) – The Bears came into the game undefeated and seemingly invincible. Over their first five games, they defeated their rivals by an unprecedented 157 points.[8] However, the Packers upset them in this game which was the Bears lone defeat that season. The Associated Press wrote of the game that the "Chicago Bears myth is broken".[9] Chicago fans made accusations that the game had been fixed,[10] and it was suggested that the Packers had employed a "secret" defensive scheme.[11] The Packers had built a 16–0 lead through the first three quarters of play before the Bears mounted a comeback in the fourth quarter coming up just short of a win.[12]
Bears 33, Packers 14 (December 14, 1941) – In the first playoff meeting between the two rivals, the Bears defeated the Packers 33–14 in a one-game-playoff to determine the Western Division championship. After the Packers, the Bears defeated the New York Giants en route to their fourth NFL Championship. Until the 2010 post-season, this remained the only playoff meeting between the teams.
Bears 52, Packers 31 (November 6, 1955) – The Bears and Packers played the highest-scoring game of their series at Soldier Field in the 1955 season. The Bears created a huge 45-3 lead, but the Packers were able to score 28 points in the fourth quarter; by the game's end, the Bears beat the Packers 52-31, with the two teams combining for 83 points. This was also the last game against that George Halas coached the Bears in against the Packers until 1958 due to a temporary break from coaching.

text:
Packers 31, Bears 28 (November 12, 1961) – The Packers built up an impressive 31-7 lead in the game, but the Bears made a furious comeback with three unanswered touchdowns to make the score 31-28. Still, the Packers were able to win the game; they would go on to win the NFL championship that year against the New York Giants.
Packers 49, Bears 0 (September 30, 1962) – Vince Lombardi's Packers shutout George Halas' Bears, 49–0 at City Stadium, the Packers largest margin of victory in the rivalry. The team repeated that score against the Eagles six weeks later on Nov 11, 1962. The games remain a Packers team record for most points in a shutout victory. After again defeating the Bears later in the season, this time by a score of 38–7, the Packers won their 8th NFL championship. Motivated by the two humiliating losses to the Packers, Halas spent the off-season focusing on beating the Packers. In 1963, the Bears handed the Packers their only two losses, and won their 8th NFL championship.
Bears 26, Packers 7 (November 17, 1963) – The Bears and Packers, both with 8-1 records, met at Wrigley Field to play for first place in the Western Conference. Chicago, behind a dominant defense, got a 26-0 lead and held on to win 26-7, completing a sweep of the Packers in the 1963 season. The Bears finished the season with an NFL championship victory again the New York Giants.
Packers 23, Bears 12 (September 13, 1964) – Remembered as the "Free Kick Game" because the Packers invoked the surprising "Fair catch kick rule", which allows for a place or drop kick field goal attempt from the spot of a fair catch. Elijah Pitts fair caught a Bears punt on the Bears' 48-yard-line just before the end of the first half. Packers' coach Vince Lombardi opted to attempt a free kick. Confusion ensued as neither team had ever so much as even practiced a free kick. The Packers lined up at the line of scrimmage with Bart Starr holding for Paul Hornung. Hornung made the 52-yard field goal as the first half ended. The Packers stunned all in attendance with the kick, and won the game 23–12.
Bears 13, Packers 10 (November 3, 1968) – The Bears got their revenge on the Packers, beating them 13–10 on a fair catch free kick by Mac Percival at the 43-yard line after a Packers punt with :26 left in the game. Percival kicked a game-winner the week before against the Minnesota Vikings.[13]
Bears 2, Packers 0 (August 7, 1971) – Although it was only an exhibition — Dan Devine's first as head coach of the Packers – it will long be remembered as an exercise in futility. The Bears won when 6-foot-7 quarterback Frank Patrick of the Packers, who had been drafted as a tight end the year before and miscast as a quarterback, faded back to pass in the third quarter beyond the end line at Milwaukee's County Stadium for a safety and the only score of the game.

text:
Packers 12, Bears 6 (September 7, 1980) – With the score tied 6–6 and the game in overtime, Packers kicker Chester Marcol was called in to attempt a game-winning field goal. The Bears' Alan Page managed to break through and block the field goal, with the football hitting his helmet. The ball rebounded to Marcol, and, carrying the ball, he crossed the goal line to score the winning touchdown for the Packers.
Bears 61, Packers 7[14] (December 7, 1980) – In the game, the Bears scored eight offensive touchdowns. After the Packers had suffered the second-most lopsided defeat in their history, Bart Starr charged across the field to confront Bears coach Neill Armstrong. Starr was upset because Bears defensive coordinator Buddy Ryan had the Bears blitzing from all angles in the fourth quarter, even after the Packers inserted backup quarterback David Whitehurst with the score 48-7.[15] "Bart Starr was upset," Armstrong said after the game. "He did the talking and I did the listening. He said he'd rather not hear what I had to say, something to that effect, and he left." Two years later, Bill Tobin, the Bears' vice president of player personnel at the time, revealed that he had been instructed by general manager Jim Finks during the off-season to study film and decode the Packers' signal system for relaying plays to the quarterback. Tobin, who had been in the Packers' front office during the Devine years, had been fired by Starr in 1975 as part of a wholesale housecleaning. "I went at it like a tiger does good meat," Tobin said at the time. "We wanted 100 points," defensive end Dan Hampton said. "It couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of pricks."
Bears 23, Packers 7 (October 21, 1985) – The world was introduced to rookie defensive lineman William "The Refrigerator" Perry on Monday Night Football.[16] In goal line situations, Bears head coach Mike Ditka used Perry, who weighed roughly 300 lbs. in the fullback position. Twice, Perry led the way for Bears legend Walter Payton on two- and one-yard touchdown runs. In the second quarter, "the Fridge" was given the ball and plunged into the end zone for one of the heaviest touchdowns in NFL history. The Bears won 23–7, and "The Fridge" was born.
Bears 16, Packers 10 (November 10, 1985) – Before the game, the Packers placed horse manure in the Bears locker room.[16] Two weeks after the Monday Night Game, tempers reached a boiling point in the rivalry. Packers cornerback Mark Lee was ejected after he and Bears running back Walter Payton went flying over a bench in the first quarter.[17] A few minutes later, Packers safety Ken Stills was flagged for leveling Matt Suhey, Payton's backfield mate, well after the whistle.
Bears 12, Packers 10 (November 23, 1986) – In Week 12 of the 1986 season Green Bay defensive tackle Charles Martin wore a towel with a hit list of specific Bears numbers written on it, such as No. 34 Walter Payton, No. 9 Jim McMahon, and others.[18] Following a McMahon interception Martin came up from behind and body slammed him to the turf,[17] separating McMahon's shoulder, ending the quarterback's season. Martin was suspended for two games, at the time the longest suspension in NFL history.[19]
Packers 14, Bears 13* (November 5, 1989) – This became known as the "Instant Replay Game".[20] Packers quarterback Don Majkowski led the Packers to a comeback with an apparent game-winning touchdown pass to wide receiver Sterling Sharpe. The play was called a touchdown, but line judge Jim Quirk had called a penalty on Majkowski for being beyond the line of scrimmage when he threw the pass. A nervous and tense crowd at Lambeau Field waited as the call went up to the instant replay official. Several minutes later, the call came down and the touchdown was awarded as recorded by instant replay, providing the Packers their first victory over the Bears since 1984. This led to a change in the "illegal forward pass" rule which defined when to consider a passer past the line of scrimmage.[citation needed] The rule used to be judged by the position of the ball instead of the passer's feet. Bears coach Mike Ditka ordered that an asterisk be placed next to the result in all team publications.

text:
Packers 33, Bears 6 (October 31, 1994) – Playing with a severely bruised hip in a driving rainstorm at Soldier Field on Halloween Night, Brett Favre rushes for a career-high 58 yards – including a 36-yard touchdown in the second quarter when he leaped over a Bears defender.[21] After the game Favre said "Maybe Gale Sayers (who had his number retired that night along with Dick Butkus) got excited about that one".[22] With a win in that game, Green Bay began a ten-game winning streak against the Bears as Favre was considered a "Bear-killer"[23] by members of the Chicago Bears media and fans alike.[24] This game marked the beginning of two streaks in the series. The Packers won ten consecutive games in the series (the longest between the two clubs) and also eleven consecutive away games – a streak that did not end until the 2005 season.[25]
Packers 27, Bears 24 (September 11, 1995) – Brett Favre throws a 99-yard touchdown pass to Robert Brooks – one of only 13 times in NFL history a 99-yard TD pass has ever been completed.[21] Green Bay stormed to a 27–7 lead and had 431 yards on offense compared to Chicago's 243, Although Chicago scored 17 unanswered at the end, they came up just short as time expired. The game was featured nationally on Monday Night Football.[26]
Packers 35, Bears 28 (November 12, 1995) – Coming into this much-anticipated matchup, first place in the NFC Central division was on the line. A victory would give the Packers the same record as the Bears (6–4) and would mean a series sweep, giving Green Bay the head-to-head tie-breaker should the teams be tied at season's end. Brett Favre had a badly sprained ankle, which kept his status for the game uncertain. He had not been able to practice all week until the Friday prior to the game. Not only did Favre start, but he had his best game of the season up to that point. He completed 25 of 33 passes for 336 yards and a career-high five touchdowns. Bears QB Erik Kramer also had a solid game, going 23 of 38 for 318 yards, two touchdowns, and one interception. The teams combined for 800 yards of offense. The game was not decided until Kramer threw an incomplete pass in the Packers' end zone on the final play of the game.[27]
Packers 24, Bears 23 (October 12, 1997) – In one of the more back-and-forth contests in the rivalry, the Bears got off to a 10–0 lead thanks in part to a rushing touchdown by Raymont Harris in the first quarter before the Packers came back to take a 14–10 halftime lead due to a rushing score by Dorsey Levens. In the third quarter, Erik Kramer ran for a three-yard touchdown to put the Bears back in front, 17–14. However, in the waning seconds of the third quarter, Brett Favre connected with Mark Chmura for a touchdown. The Packers led, 21–17, then extended their lead to 24–17. The Bears marched down the field and scored when Kramer connected with Chris Penn with less than two minutes left. In an "all-or-nothing" maneuver, the Bears went for a two-point conversion. The pass fell incomplete, essentially preserving the win for the Packers.[28]
Bears 14, Packers 13 (November 7, 1999) – In their first game since the passing of running back Walter Payton, the Bears defeated the Packers for the first time since 1993 on a blocked field goal by defensive tackle Bryan Robinson. This game was also the game where Brett Favre surpassed Ron Jaworski's record for most consecutive starts by a quarterback.

text:
Packers 34, Bears 21 (October 7, 2002) – This Monday night contest at Memorial Stadium in Champaign, Illinois, was the only Bears home game in the entire series that was played outside of Chicago. Brett Favre threw an 85-yard TD pass to Driver in the first quarter—the second longest of his career to that point (both against the Bears). At the time, Soldier Field was undergoing a major renovation; the renovated stadium would later reopen in 2003 between the Bears and Packers.[29]
Bears 26, Packers 0 (September 10, 2006) – In the opening week of the season, the Bears handed Brett Favre his first shutout in his 16-year career, winning 26–0 in Green Bay. The Bears' offense, criticized for being conservative, opened the game with a 49-yard touchdown pass from Rex Grossman to Bernard Berrian. This also marked the first game in which the Bears' Devin Hester returned a punt for a touchdown.[30]
Bears 20, Packers 17 (December 22, 2008) – The coldest game in recorded Bears history featured a temperature at kickoff of 2 degrees and −13 degrees with wind chill. The Packers traveled to Soldier Field on a Monday night, where a victory against the Bears would have ended their playoff hopes. The Bears had to rally from a 14–3 score at the half. The Bears were able to score after a turnover on a Packers punt return. The Packers were on the verge of finishing a game-winning drive when Mason Crosby's field goal attempt was blocked by Alex Brown, pushing the game to overtime. The Bears took the first possession in overtime and won the game on a 38-yard field goal by Robbie Gould.

text:
Bears 20, Packers 17 (September 27, 2010) – The 2-0 Packers traveled to Chicago for an early season showdown with the 2-0 Bears for the NFC North lead. The Bears wore throwback 1940s jerseys to honor the Monsters of the Midway. They also honored former Bear George Blanda, who died Monday, with a moment of silence before the game.[31] Aaron Rodgers threw a 7-yard touchdown pass to Greg Jennings to open the scoring in the first quarter. Mason Crosby made it 10-0 with 4:45 left in the second quarter, but Jay Cutler drove the Bears down and connected with Greg Olsen for a touchdown with 31 seconds left. Late in the 3rd quarter, Julius Peppers blocked a 37-yard field goal attempt by Mason Crosby to keep it 10-7 Packers. Devin Hester then opened the 4th quarter with a 62-yard punt return for a touchdown to make it 14-10 Bears. It was the 12th time Hester had returned a kickoff or punt for a touchdown and the first since Dec. 30, 2007. Aaron Rodgers led the Packers on a drive that resulted in him getting into the end zone on a 3-yard scamper to make it 17-14. However, the Packers were left to regret a sloppy performance, as they recorded a team record 18 penalties. The Bears took advantage, with Robbie Gould kicking a field goal with 4:03 left and then 0:08 left to claim a 20-17 victory.
Packers 10, Bears 3 (January 3, 2011) – The 9-6 Packers hosted the 11-4 Bears in a must-win game in order to enter the playoffs. The Bears had the main goal of keeping their archrival out of the playoffs. With both teams coming off of high scoring victories (the Packers beat the Giants 45-17 and the Bears beat the Jets 38-34), a shoot-out was anticipated. However, the frozen tundra yielded a defensive battle. The first quarter was scoreless. In the second quarter, Robbie Gould kicked a 30-yard field goal to make it 3-0 Bears. It wasn't until late in the 3rd quarter that Mason Crosby kicked a 23-yard field goal to make it 3-3. With 2:50 left in the 4th quarter though, Aaron Rodgers hit tight end Lee for a 1-yard touchdown pass to make it 10-3. Jay Cutler was 21 of 39 for 168 yards, no touchdowns and 2 interceptions. Aaron Rodgers was 19 of 28 for 229 yards, with one touchdown and no interceptions. Erik Walden had a superb game for the Packers. The linebacker registered 11 tackles and 3 sacks.[32]
Packers 21, Bears 14 (January 23, 2011, NFC Championship Game) – This was the first time the two teams had met in the playoffs since 1941. The Green Bay Packers started off strong with an early 14–0 lead on an Aaron Rodgers rushing TD. Bears' quarterback, Jay Cutler, was injured late in the second quarter, and was unable to continue. After Bears' quarterback Todd Collins proved ineffective, going 0 for 4 on two drives, the Bears brought in Caleb Hanie, who scored a touchdown to make it 14–7. On the very next Bears drive, however, Hanie would be intercepted by B. J. Raji, who took it to the endzone to make it 21–7 late in the game. The Bears would answer with another TD. With one more drive to tie the game, Hanie threw his second interception, this time to Sam Shields to end the game and send Green Bay to the Super Bowl.[33] The Packers went on to win Super Bowl XLV over the Pittsburgh Steelers, becoming the NFC's first sixth-seeded team (and second wild card team) to win the Super Bowl.[34]
Bears 27, Packers 20 (November 4, 2013) – Heading into this Monday Night match-up at Lambeau Field, Bears' quarterback Jay Cutler was benched with a groin injury. Thus, Josh McCown, the backup quarterback of the Bears who had played in Lambeau against the Packers on Christmas Day in 2011, played in Cutler's stead. In the first drive of the game, Packers' quarterback Aaron Rodgers was sacked by Shea McClellin, which fractured Rodgers' left collarbone and sent him out of the game. McCown threw for 272 yards and two touchdowns, and no interceptions. Seneca Wallace, the backup quarterback for the Packers, threw for 114 yards and no touchdowns, with one interception. The Bears won the game 27-20 to end a six-game skid to the Packers and beat them for the first time in Lambeau Field since 2007. Aaron Rodgers would be out for 7 weeks, eventually returning in Week 17 against the Bears for the NFC North title.
Packers 33, Bears 28 (December 29, 2013) – In a game with the NFC North Championship and the No. 4 seed in the playoffs on the line, the Packers faced off against the Bears with quarterback Aaron Rodgers in his first start since their last meeting in early November, the game in which he was injured. The game was notable for a Rodgers fumble to touchdown that occurred when most players from both teams believed the play to be an incomplete pass. The game also showcased an offensive shootout in the second half, including Bears quarterback Jay Cutler throwing for two touchdowns. However, the Packers ended their last drive converting on 4th down three times, most notably in a long 4th and 8 completion to Randall Cobb for a touchdown that would win the game and deliver Green Bay its 3rd consecutive NFC North title. The loss meant the Bears missed the playoffs for a third straight year, while the Packers made their fifth consecutive trip to the playoffs.
Packers 55, Bears 14 (November 9, 2014) – Aaron Rodgers tied an NFL record with 6 touchdown passes in the first half in a blowout win for the Packers, the most lopsided win over the Bears for the Packers since 1962 and their highest point total in a game since 1945. The Packers scored more points in this game than in any other in the rivalry. Bears' kickoff returner Chris Williams tied an NFL record with 10 kickoff returns in a game, one of which went for a 101-yard touchdown.
Bears 17, Packers 13 (November 26, 2015) – On the night of Brett Favre's jersey retirement, the Bears met the Packers at Lambeau Field for a Thanksgiving match-up. With a 4-6 record and having lost to the Packers earlier in the year, Chicago entered the game as huge underdogs. While the Bears' offense stalled in the first quarter, the Packers took a 7-point lead on a touchdown pass from Aaron Rodgers to Eddie Lacy. In the second quarter, the Bears scored two touchdowns, while the Packers settled for two field goals, making the score 14-13 at halftime. The Bears scored one more field goal in the fourth quarter while their defense pitched a second half shutout, including a goal line stand in the game's final seconds. The game marked the first and only win for Jay Cutler as a Bears quarterback in Lambeau Field, as well as his first win against the Packers since 2010.
Packers 30, Bears 27 (December 18, 2016) – With Green Bay one game down in the all time head to head series, and needing a win to move within a game of the division lead, the Packers entered Soldier Field during one of the coldest Chicago Bears games on record. With both teams tied at halftime 10–10, Green Bay surged to a 27-10 advantage in the third quarter, before the Chicago Bears made a run of their own in the fourth quarter to bring them within 3 points, and in striking distance of the Green Bay end zone. Green Bay held the Bears to a field goal after a goal-line stand. During the Packers' ensuing possession, quarterback Aaron Rodgers completed a 60-yard pass to Jordy Nelson which led to a Packers field goal as time expired.
Packers 35, Bears 14 (September 28, 2017) – The Packers took advantage of two early Bear turnovers, scoring two early touchdowns within 1 minute of game time in the first quarter. After a 47-minute delay due to lightning in the 2nd quarter, the Packers continued their dominance of the Bears, causing four total Bear turnovers and Aaron Rodgers throwing 4 touchdown passes in a 35-14 win. The win gave the Packers a 95-94-6 edge in the overall rivalry, the first time the Packers had the winning advantage in the rivalry since 1933. The game included a vicious helmet-to-helmet hit from Bears' Danny Trevathan on Packers' Davante Adams, which knocked Adams out and caused a small skirmish between the Bears and Packers players. Trevathan received a two-game suspension that was later reduced to one game after an appeal.
Packers 23, Bears 16 (November 12, 2017) – On a gray and rainy day at Soldier Field, the Green Bay Packers came to town without Aaron Rodgers, who had suffered a broken collarbone several weeks earlier. Thus, this was the first game in the rivalry since 1991 that didn't have Rodgers or Brett Favre at the starting quarterback position. Led by back-up quarterback Brett Hundley, the Packers struck first with an 11 play, 70 yard drive, and a 40 yard field goal by Mason Crosby. The Bears answered with an 8 play, 53 yard drive, capped by a 45 yard Conor Barth field goal. In the second quarter, the Packers made it 10-3 when Ty Montgomery burst up the middle on a 37 yard run. With 8:09 left in the first half, Bears quarterback Mitchell Trubisky hit Benny Cunningham on a short screen pass that he turned upfield for 23 yards. Cunningham tried to score on the play but was ruled out of bounds at the 2-yard line. However, John Fox opted to challenge, believing it was a touchdown. Instead, officials said Cunningham lost control of the football before it made contact with the pylon, and referee Tony Corrente ruled the play a touchback and awarded the ball to Green Bay at the 20-yard line.[35] Later on, Conor Barth made a 44 yard field goal to end the half at 10-6. In the third quarter, Mason Crosby hit a 40 yard field in the third quarter to make it 13-6 and added another 50 yarder at the beginning of the 4th quarter to make it 16-6. With 10:39 to go in the game, Mitchell Trubisky answered with a 46 yard pass to Josh Bellamy to make it 16-13. However, the Packers responded with an 8 play, 75 yard drive, capped by a 19 yard touchdown pass to Davante Adams to make it 23-13. The Bears hit another field goal through Conor Barth to make it 23-16. Despite a botched field goal by the Packers that would have iced the game, the Bears were stopped on fourth down to end the game.[36]

text: Playoffs[edit]

text: The Bears and Packers have made it to the playoffs in the same year only four times.

text:
1941 The Bears would go on to win the championship early on in the rivalry. This was also the only playoff game in which the two teams had played against each other until the NFC Championship game of the 2010 season.
1994 Both teams won first-round games only to be knocked out in the second-round games, seeing the 49ers go on to win the Super Bowl.
2001 The Bears had a first round bye but the Packers were the only one of the two teams to win a playoff game this year. The Packers had also given the Bears 2 of their 3 regular season losses that season. The Bears were knocked out at home by the Philadelphia Eagles while the Packers lost to the eventual Super Bowl runner-up St. Louis Rams.
2010 The two teams met on the last day of the season in what was a must-win for Green Bay. The Packers won 10–3 to capture the last wild card spot as the sixth seed, while the Bears had already secured a first-round bye as the second seed. Green Bay clinched a trip to the NFC Championship by virtue of a 21–16 win over third-seeded Philadelphia in the Wild Card round and then defeating top-seeded Atlanta, 48–21, in a divisional playoff. The Bears defeated fourth-seeded Seattle in the other divisional playoff, 35–24. Both teams advanced to the NFC Championship game, only their second playoff game against each other. Many fans of both teams describe the game as the biggest in the history of the rivalry, with a trip to the Super Bowl on the line. The Packers would ultimately prevail 21–14[33] and go on to beat the Pittsburgh Steelers in Super Bowl XLV.[34]

text: Statistics and records[edit]

text: As of November 18, 2016, there have been 194 games between the two teams—most in NFL history—since their first league game in 1921, of which the both teams have won 94 games and there have been 6 ties.[37][38] The largest margin of victory was a 61–7 Bears win on December 7, 1980. The longest winning streak is held by the Packers at 10 games from 1994–1998. After beating the Bears four times in 2011, the Packers became only the second team in NFL history to defeat the same opponent four times in one calendar year (the Los Angeles Raiders defeated the Denver Broncos four times in 1994).[39]

text: Club success[edit]

text: As of 2016, the Bears and Packers have won a combined 22 championships in the league's history.

text:
Team
NFL Titles[40]
Conference Titles
Divisional Titles[41]
Wild Card Berths
Playoff Appearances
NFL Title Game Appearances[42]
Super Bowl Appearances[43]
All-time Record

Chicago Bears
9
4
18
4
26[44]
8
2
761-586-42

Green Bay Packers
13
9
18
7
32
11
5
764-575-37

Combined
22
13
36
11
58
19
7
1525–1161–79

tag: table

text: Summary of results[edit]

text:
Bears wins
Ties
Packers wins
Bears points
Packers points

Regular season
93
6
95
3,314
3,358

Postseason
1

1
47
35

Total
94
6
96
3,361
3,393

text: Updated November 12, 2017.

text: Game results[edit]

text: The following is a list of results from all of the meetings between the Chicago Bears and Green Bay Packers, from their first meeting on November 27, 1921, to the present:

text:
Bears Victory

Packers Victory

Tied Game

Post Season Meeting

text: 1920s (Bears 7–6–3)[edit]

text:
Year
Date
Winner
Result
Loser
Attendance
Location
Series Record

1921
Sunday, November 27
Chicago Staleys
20–0
Green Bay Packers
7,000
Chicago
Bears 1–0

1923
Sunday, October 14
Chicago Bears
3–0
Green Bay Packers
4,451
Green Bay
Bears 2–0

1924
Sunday, November 23
Chicago Bears
3–0
Green Bay Packers
6,000
Chicago
Bears 3–0

1925
Sunday, September 27
Green Bay Packers
14–10
Chicago Bears
5,389
Green Bay
Bears 3–1

1925
Sunday, November 22
Chicago Bears
21–0
Green Bay Packers
6,898
Chicago
Bears 4–1

1926
Sunday, September 26

6–6

7,000
Green Bay
Bears 4–1–1

1926
Sunday, November 21
Chicago Bears
19–13
Green Bay Packers
7,500
Chicago
Bears 5–1–1

1926
Sunday, December 19

3–3

10,000
Chicago
Bears 5–1–2

1927
Sunday, October 2
Chicago Bears
7–6
Green Bay Packers
5,500
Green Bay
Bears 6–1–2

1927
Sunday, November 20
Chicago Bears
14–6
Green Bay Packers
6,000
Chicago
Bears 7–1–2

1928
Sunday, September 30

12–12

8,500
Green Bay
Bears 7–1–3

1928
Sunday, October 21
Green Bay Packers
16–6
Chicago Bears
15,000
Chicago
Bears 7–2–3

1928
Sunday, December 9
Green Bay Packers
6–0
Chicago Bears
14,000
Chicago
Bears 7–3–3

1929
Sunday, September 29
Green Bay Packers
23–0
Chicago Bears
13,000
Green Bay
Bears 7–4–3

1929
Sunday, November 10
Green Bay Packers
14–0
Chicago Bears
13,000
Chicago
Bears 7–5–3

1929
Sunday, December 8
Green Bay Packers
25–0
Chicago Bears
6,000
Chicago
Bears 7–6–3

text: Packers outscore Bears 144–124

text: 1930s (Bears 12–11–1)[edit]

text:
Year
Date
Winner
Result
Loser
Attendance
Location
Series Record

1930
Sunday, September 28
Green Bay Packers
7–0
Chicago Bears
10,000
Green Bay
Tied 7–7–3

1930
Sunday, November 9
Green Bay Packers
13–12
Chicago Bears
22,000
Chicago
Packers 8–7–3

1930
Sunday, December 7
Chicago Bears
21–0
Green Bay Packers
20,000
Chicago
Tied 8–8–3

1931
Sunday, September 27
Green Bay Packers
7–0
Chicago Bears
13,500
Green Bay
Packers 9–8–3

1931
Sunday, November 1
Green Bay Packers
6–2
Chicago Bears
30,000
Chicago
Packers 10–8–3

1931
Sunday, December 6
Chicago Bears
7–6
Green Bay Packers
18,000
Chicago
Packers 10–9–3

1932
Sunday, September 25

0–0

13,000
Green Bay
Packers 10–9–4

1932
Sunday, October 16
Green Bay Packers
2–0
Chicago Bears
18,000
Chicago
Packers 11–9–4

1932
Sunday, December 11
Chicago Bears
9–0
Green Bay Packers
5,000
Chicago
Packers 11–10–4

1933
Sunday, September 24
Chicago Bears
14–7
Green Bay Packers
12,000
Green Bay
Tied 11–11–4

1933
Sunday, October 22
Chicago Bears
10–7
Green Bay Packers
21,000
Chicago
Bears 12–11–4

1933
Sunday, December 10
Chicago Bears
7–6
Green Bay Packers
7,000
Chicago
Bears 13–11–4

1934
Sunday, September 23
Chicago Bears
24–10
Green Bay Packers
13,500
Green Bay
Bears 14–11–4

1934
Sunday, October 28
Chicago Bears
27–14
Green Bay Packers
18,000
Chicago
Bears 15–11–4

1935
Sunday, September 22
Green Bay Packers
7–0
Chicago Bears
13,600
Green Bay
Bears 15–12–4

1935
Sunday, October 27
Green Bay Packers
17–14
Chicago Bears
29,386
Chicago
Bears 15–13–4

1936
Sunday, September 20
Chicago Bears
30–3
Green Bay Packers
14,312
Green Bay
Bears 16–13–4

1936
Sunday, November 1
Green Bay Packers
21–10
Chicago Bears
31,346
Chicago
Bears 16–14–4

1937
Sunday, September 19
Chicago Bears
14–2
Green Bay Packers
16,658
Green Bay
Bears 17–14–4

1937
Sunday, November 7
Green Bay Packers
24–14
Chicago Bears
44,977
Chicago
Bears 17–15–4

1938
Sunday, September 18
Chicago Bears
2–0
Green Bay Packers
15,172
Green Bay
Bears 18–15–4

1938
Sunday, November 6
Green Bay Packers
24–17
Chicago Bears
40,208
Chicago
Bears 18–16–4

1939
Sunday, September 24
Green Bay Packers
21–16
Chicago Bears
19,192
Green Bay
Bears 18–17–4

1939
Sunday, November 5
Chicago Bears
30–27
Green Bay Packers
40,537
Chicago
Bears 19–17–4

text: Bears outscore Packers 280–231

text: 1940s (Bears 16–4–1)[edit]

text:
Year
Date
Winner
Result
Loser
Attendance
Location
Series Record

1940
Sunday, September 22
Chicago Bears
41–10
Green Bay Packers
22,557
Green Bay
Bears 20–17–4

1940
Sunday, November 3
Chicago Bears
14–7
Green Bay Packers
45,434
Chicago
Bears 21–17–4

1941
Sunday, September 28
Chicago Bears
25–17
Green Bay Packers
24,876
Green Bay
Bears 22–17–4

1941
Sunday, November 2
Green Bay Packers
16–14
Chicago Bears
46,484
Chicago
Bears 22–18–4

1941
Sunday, December 14*
Chicago Bears
33–14
Green Bay Packers
43,425
Chicago
Bears 23–18–4

1942
Sunday, September 27
Chicago Bears
44–28
Green Bay Packers
20,007
Green Bay
Bears 24–18–4

1942
Sunday, November 15
Chicago Bears
38–7
Green Bay Packers
42,787
Chicago
Bears 25–18–4

1943
Sunday, September 26

21–21

23,675
Green Bay
Bears 25–18–5

1943
Sunday, November 7
Chicago Bears
21–7
Green Bay Packers
43,425
Chicago
Bears 26–18–5

1944
Sunday, September 24
Green Bay Packers
42–28
Chicago Bears
24,362
Green Bay
Bears 26–19–5

1944
Sunday, November 5
Chicago Bears
21–0
Green Bay Packers
45,553
Chicago
Bears 27–19–5

1945
Sunday, September 30
Green Bay Packers
31–21
Chicago Bears
24,525
Green Bay
Bears 27–20–5

1945
Sunday, November 4
Chicago Bears
28–24
Green Bay Packers
45,527
Chicago
Bears 28–20–5

1946
Sunday, September 29
Chicago Bears
30–7
Green Bay Packers
25,049
Green Bay
Bears 29–20–5

1946
Sunday, November 3
Chicago Bears
10–7
Green Bay Packers
46,321
Chicago
Bears 30–20–5

1947
Sunday, September 28
Green Bay Packers
29–20
Chicago Bears
25,461
Green Bay
Bears 30–21–5

1947
Sunday, November 9
Chicago Bears
20–17
Green Bay Packers
46,112
Chicago
Bears 31–21–5

1948
Sunday, September 26
Chicago Bears
45–7
Green Bay Packers
25,546
Green Bay
Bears 32–21–5

1948
Sunday, November 14
Chicago Bears
7–6
Green Bay Packers
48,113
Chicago
Bears 33–21–5

1949
Sunday, September 25
Chicago Bears
17–0
Green Bay Packers
25,571
Green Bay
Bears 34–21–5

1949
Sunday, November 6
Chicago Bears
24–3
Green Bay Packers
47,218
Chicago
Bears 35–21–5

text: Bears outscore Packers 489–286 (this does not include the 1941 playoff game)

text: 1950s (Bears 14–5–1)[edit]

text:
Year
Date
Winner
Result
Loser
Attendance
Location
Series Record

1950
Sunday, October 1
Green Bay Packers
31–21
Chicago Bears
24,893
Green Bay
Bears 35–22–5

1950
Sunday, October 15
Chicago Bears
28–14
Green Bay Packers
51,065
Chicago
Bears 36–22–5

1951
Sunday, September 30
Chicago Bears
31–20
Green Bay Packers
24,666
Green Bay
Bears 37–22–5

1951
Sunday, November 18
Chicago Bears
24–13
Green Bay Packers
36,771
Chicago
Bears 38–22–5

1952
Sunday, September 28
Chicago Bears
24–14
Green Bay Packers
24,656
Green Bay
Bears 39–22–5

1952
Sunday, November 9
Green Bay Packers
41–28
Chicago Bears
41,751
Chicago
Bears 39–23–5

1953
Sunday, October 4
Chicago Bears
17–13
Green Bay Packers
24,835
Green Bay
Bears 40–23–5

1953
Sunday, November 8

21–21

39,889
Chicago
Bears 40–23–6

1954
Sunday, October 3
Chicago Bears
10–3
Green Bay Packers
24,414
Green Bay
Bears 41–23–6

1954
Sunday, November 7
Chicago Bears
28–23
Green Bay Packers
47,038
Chicago
Bears 42–23–6

1955
Sunday, October 2
Green Bay Packers
24–3
Chicago Bears
24,662
Green Bay
Bears 42–24–6

1955
Sunday, November 6
Chicago Bears
52–31
Green Bay Packers
48,890
Chicago
Bears 43–24–6

1956
Sunday, October 7
Chicago Bears
37–21
Green Bay Packers
24,668
Green Bay
Bears 44–24–6

1956
Sunday, November 11
Chicago Bears
38–14
Green Bay Packers
49,172
Chicago
Bears 45–24–6

1957
Sunday, September 29
Green Bay Packers
21–17
Chicago Bears
32,132
Green Bay
Bears 45–25–6

1957
Sunday, November 10
Chicago Bears
21–14
Green Bay Packers
47,153
Chicago
Bears 46–25–6

1958
Sunday, September 28
Chicago Bears
34–20
Green Bay Packers
32,150
Green Bay
Bears 47–25–6

1958
Sunday, November 9
Chicago Bears
24–10
Green Bay Packers
48,424
Chicago
Bears 48–25–6

1959
Sunday, September 27
Green Bay Packers
9–6
Chicago Bears
32,150
Green Bay
Bears 48–26–6

1959
Sunday, November 8
Chicago Bears
28–17
Green Bay Packers
46,205
Chicago
Bears 49–26–6

text: Bears outscore Packers 492–374

text: 1960s (Packers 15–5)[edit]

text:
Year
Date
Winner
Result
Loser
Attendance
Location
Series Record

1960
Sunday, September 25
Chicago Bears
17–14
Green Bay Packers
32,150
Green Bay
Bears 50–26–6

1960
Sunday, December 4
Green Bay Packers
41–13
Chicago Bears
46,406
Chicago
Bears 50–27–6

1961
Sunday, October 1
Green Bay Packers
24–0
Chicago Bears
38,669
Green Bay
Bears 50–28–6

1961
Sunday, November 12
Green Bay Packers
31–28
Chicago Bears
49,711
Chicago
Bears 50–29–6

1962
Sunday, September 30
Green Bay Packers
49–0
Chicago Bears
38,669
Green Bay
Bears 50–30–6

1962
Sunday, November 4
Green Bay Packers
38–7
Chicago Bears
48,753
Chicago
Bears 50–31–6

1963
Sunday, September 15
Chicago Bears
10–3
Green Bay Packers
42,327
Green Bay
Bears 51–31–6

1963
Sunday, November 17
Chicago Bears
26–7
Green Bay Packers
49,166
Chicago
Bears 52–31–6

1964
Sunday, September 13
Green Bay Packers
23–12
Chicago Bears
42,327
Green Bay
Bears 52–32–6

1964
Saturday, December 5
Green Bay Packers
17–3
Chicago Bears
43,636
Chicago
Bears 52–33–6

1965
Sunday, October 3
Green Bay Packers
23–14
Chicago Bears
50,852
Green Bay
Bears 52–34–6

1965
Sunday, October 31
Chicago Bears
31–10
Green Bay Packers
45,664
Chicago
Bears 53–34–6

1966
Sunday, October 16
Green Bay Packers
17–0
Chicago Bears
48,573
Chicago
Bears 53–35–6

1966
Sunday, November 20
Green Bay Packers
13–6
Chicago Bears
50,861
Green Bay
Bears 53–36–6

1967
Sunday, September 24
Green Bay Packers
13–10
Chicago Bears
50,861
Green Bay
Bears 53–37–6

1967
Sunday, November 26
Green Bay Packers
17–13
Chicago Bears
47,513
Chicago
Bears 53–38–6

1968
Sunday, November 3
Chicago Bears
13–10
Green Bay Packers
50,861
Green Bay
Bears 54–38–6

1968
Sunday, December 15
Green Bay Packers
28–27
Chicago Bears
46,435
Chicago
Bears 54–39–6

1969
Sunday, September 21
Green Bay Packers
17–0
Chicago Bears
50,861
Green Bay
Bears 54–40–6

1969
Sunday, December 14
Green Bay Packers
21–3
Chicago Bears
45,216
Chicago
Bears 54–41–6

text: Packers outscore Bears 416–233

text: 1970s (Bears 11–9)[edit]

text:
Year
Date
Winner
Result
Loser
Attendance
Location
Series Record

1970
Sunday, November 15
Green Bay Packers
20–19
Chicago Bears
56,263
Green Bay
Bears 54–42–6

1970
Sunday, December 13
Chicago Bears
35–17
Green Bay Packers
44,957
Chicago
Bears 55–42–6

1971
Sunday, November 7
Green Bay Packers
17–14
Chicago Bears
55,049
Chicago
Bears 55–43–6

1971
Sunday, December 12
Green Bay Packers
31–10
Chicago Bears
56,263
Green Bay
Bears 55–44–6

1972
Sunday, October 8
Green Bay Packers
20–17
Chicago Bears
56,263
Green Bay
Bears 55–45–6

1972
Sunday, November 12
Green Bay Packers
23–17
Chicago Bears
55,701
Chicago
Bears 55–46–6

1973
Sunday, November 4
Chicago Bears
31–17
Green Bay Packers
56,267
Green Bay
Bears 56–46–6

1973
Sunday, December 16
Green Bay Packers
21–0
Chicago Bears
55,701
Chicago
Bears 56–47–6

1974
Monday, October 21
Chicago Bears
10–9
Green Bay Packers
55,453
Chicago
Bears 57–47–6

1974
Sunday, November 10
Green Bay Packers
20–3
Chicago Bears
48,273
Milwaukee
Bears 57–48–6

1975
Sunday, November 9
Chicago Bears
27–14
Green Bay Packers
57,455
Chicago
Bears 58–48–6

1975
Sunday, November 30
Green Bay Packers
28–7
Chicago Bears
56,267
Green Bay
Bears 58–49–6

1976
Sunday, November 14
Chicago Bears
24–13
Green Bay Packers
57,359
Chicago
Bears 59–49–6

1976
Sunday, November 28
Chicago Bears
16–10
Green Bay Packers
56,267
Green Bay
Bears 60–49–6

1977
Sunday, October 30
Chicago Bears
26–0
Green Bay Packers
56,267
Green Bay
Bears 61–49–6

1977
Sunday, December 11
Chicago Bears
21–10
Green Bay Packers
57,359
Chicago
Bears 62–49–6

1978
Sunday, October 8
Green Bay Packers
24–14
Chicago Bears
56,267
Green Bay
Bears 62–50–6

1978
Sunday, December 10
Chicago Bears
14–0
Green Bay Packers
57,359
Chicago
Bears 63–50–6

1979
Sunday, September 2
Chicago Bears
6–3
Green Bay Packers
56,515
Chicago
Bears 64–50–6

1979
Sunday, December 9
Chicago Bears
15–14
Green Bay Packers
54,207
Green Bay
Bears 65–50–6

text: Bears outscore Packers 326–311

text: 1980s (Bears 11–7)[edit]

text:
Year
Date
Winner
Result
Loser
Attendance
Location
Series Record

1980
Sunday, September 7
Green Bay Packers
12–6
Chicago Bears
54,381
Green Bay
Bears 65–51–6

1980
Sunday, December 7
Chicago Bears
61–7
Green Bay Packers
57,176
Chicago
Bears 66–51–6

1981
Sunday, September 6
Green Bay Packers
16–9
Chicago Bears
62,411
Chicago
Bears 66–52–6

1981
Sunday, November 15
Green Bay Packers
21–17
Chicago Bears
55,338
Green Bay
Bears 66–53–6

1983
Sunday, December 4
Green Bay Packers
31–28
Chicago Bears
51,147
Green Bay
Bears 66–54–6

1983
Sunday, December 18
Chicago Bears
23–21
Green Bay Packers
35,807
Chicago
Bears 67–54–6

1984
Sunday, September 16
Chicago Bears
9–7
Green Bay Packers
55,942
Green Bay
Bears 68–54–6

1984
Sunday, December 9
Green Bay Packers
20–14
Chicago Bears
59,374
Chicago
Bears 68–55–6

1985
Monday, October 21
Chicago Bears
23–7
Green Bay Packers
65,095
Chicago
Bears 69–55–6

1985
Sunday, November 3
Chicago Bears
16–10
Green Bay Packers
56,895
Green Bay
Bears 70–55–6

1986
Monday, September 22
Chicago Bears
25–12
Green Bay Packers
55,527
Green Bay
Bears 71–55–6

1986
Sunday, November 23
Chicago Bears
12–10
Green Bay Packers
59,291
Chicago
Bears 72–55–6

1987
Sunday, November 8
Chicago Bears
26–24
Green Bay Packers
53,320
Green Bay
Bears 73–55–6

1987
Sunday, November 29
Chicago Bears
23–10
Green Bay Packers
61,638
Chicago
Bears 74–55–6

1988
Sunday, September 25
Chicago Bears
24–6
Green Bay Packers
56,492
Green Bay
Bears 75–55–6

1988
Sunday, November 27
Chicago Bears
16–0
Green Bay Packers
62,026
Chicago
Bears 76–55–6

1989
Sunday, November 5
Green Bay Packers
14–13
Chicago Bears
56,556
Green Bay
Bears 76–56–6

1989
Sunday, December 17
Green Bay Packers
40–28
Chicago Bears
44,781
Chicago
Bears 76–57–6

text: Bears outscore Packers 373–268

text: 1990s (Packers 13–7)[edit]

text:
Year
Date
Winner
Result
Loser
Attendance
Location
Series Record

1990
Sunday, September 16
Chicago Bears
31–13
Green Bay Packers
58,938
Green Bay
Bears 77–57–6

1990
Sunday, October 7
Chicago Bears
27–13
Green Bay Packers
59,929
Chicago
Bears 78–57–6

1991
Thursday, October 17
Chicago Bears
10–0
Green Bay Packers
58,435
Green Bay
Bears 79–57–6

1991
Sunday, December 8
Chicago Bears
27–13
Green Bay Packers
62,353
Chicago
Bears 80–57–6

1992
Sunday, October 25
Chicago Bears
30–10
Green Bay Packers
59,435
Green Bay
Bears 81–57–6

1992
Sunday, November 22
Green Bay Packers
17–3
Chicago Bears
56,170
Chicago
Bears 81–58–6

1993
Sunday, October 31
Green Bay Packers
17–3
Chicago Bears
58,945
Green Bay
Bears 81–59–6

1993
Sunday, December 5
Chicago Bears
30–17
Green Bay Packers
62,236
Chicago
Bears 82–59–6

1994
Monday, October 31
Green Bay Packers
33–6
Chicago Bears
47,381
Chicago
Bears 82–60–6

1994
Sunday, December 11
Green Bay Packers
40–3
Chicago Bears
57,927
Green Bay
Bears 82–61–6

1995
Monday, September 11
Green Bay Packers
27–24
Chicago Bears
64,855
Chicago
Bears 82–62–6

1995
Sunday, November 12
Green Bay Packers
35–28
Chicago Bears
59,996
Green Bay
Bears 82–63–6

1996
Sunday, October 6
Green Bay Packers
37–6
Chicago Bears
65,480
Chicago
Bears 82–64–6

1996
Sunday, December 1
Green Bay Packers
28–17
Chicago Bears
59,682
Green Bay
Bears 82–65–6

1997
Monday, September 1
Green Bay Packers
38–24
Chicago Bears
60,766
Green Bay
Bears 82–66–6

1997
Sunday, October 12
Green Bay Packers
24–23
Chicago Bears
62,212
Chicago
Bears 82–67–6

1998
Sunday, December 13
Green Bay Packers
26–20
Chicago Bears
59,813
Green Bay
Bears 82–68–6

1998
Sunday, December 27
Green Bay Packers
16–13
Chicago Bears
58,393
Chicago
Bears 82–69–6

1999
Sunday, November 7
Chicago Bears
14–13
Green Bay Packers
59,867
Green Bay
Bears 83–69–6

1999
Sunday, December 5
Green Bay Packers
35–19
Chicago Bears
66,944
Chicago
Bears 83–70–6

text: Packers outscore Bears 452–358

text: 2000s (Packers 12–8)[edit]

text:
Year
Date
Winner
Result
Loser
Attendance
Location
Series Record

2000
Sunday, October 1
Chicago Bears
27–24
Green Bay Packers
59,869
Green Bay
Bears 84–70–6

2000
Sunday, December 3
Green Bay Packers
28–6
Chicago Bears
66,994
Chicago
Bears 84–71–6

2001
Sunday, November 11
Green Bay Packers
20–12
Chicago Bears
66,944
Chicago
Bears 84–72–6

2001
Sunday, December 9
Green Bay Packers
17–7
Chicago Bears
59,869
Green Bay
Bears 84–73–6

2002
Monday, October 7
Green Bay Packers
34–21
Chicago Bears
63,226
Champaign
Bears 84–74–6

2002
Sunday, December 1
Green Bay Packers
30–20
Chicago Bears
64,196
Green Bay
Bears 84–75–6

2003
Monday, September 29
Green Bay Packers
38–23
Chicago Bears
61,500
Chicago
Bears 84–76–6

2003
Sunday, December 7
Green Bay Packers
34–21
Chicago Bears
70,458
Green Bay
Bears 84–77–6

2004
Sunday, September 19
Chicago Bears
21–10
Green Bay Packers
70,688
Green Bay
Bears 85–77–6

2005
Sunday, January 2
Green Bay Packers
31–14
Chicago Bears
62,197
Chicago
Bears 85–78–6

2005
Sunday, December 4
Chicago Bears
19–7
Green Bay Packers
62,177
Chicago
Bears 86–78–6

2005
Sunday, December 25
Chicago Bears
24–17
Green Bay Packers
69,757
Green Bay
Bears 87–78–6

2006
Sunday, September 10
Chicago Bears
26–0
Green Bay Packers
70,918
Green Bay
Bears 88–78–6

2006
Sunday, December 31
Green Bay Packers
26–7
Chicago Bears
62,287
Chicago
Bears 88–79–6

2007
Sunday, October 7
Chicago Bears
27–20
Green Bay Packers
70,904
Green Bay
Bears 89–79–6

2007
Sunday, December 23
Chicago Bears
35–7
Green Bay Packers
62,272
Chicago
Bears 90–79–6

2008
Sunday, November 16
Green Bay Packers
37–3
Chicago Bears
71,040
Green Bay
Bears 90–80–6

2008
Monday, December 22
Chicago Bears
20–17
Green Bay Packers
62,151
Chicago
Bears 91–80–6

2009
Sunday, September 13
Green Bay Packers
21–15
Chicago Bears
70,920
Green Bay
Bears 91–81–6

2009
Sunday, December 13
Green Bay Packers
21–14
Chicago Bears
62,214
Chicago
Bears 91–82–6

text: Packers outscore Bears 439–362

text: 2010s (Packers 14–3)[edit]

text:
Year
Date
Winner
Result
Loser
Attendance
Location
Series Record

2010
Monday, September 27
Chicago Bears
20–17
Green Bay Packers
62,179
Chicago
Bears 92–82–6

2011
Sunday, January 2
Green Bay Packers
10–3
Chicago Bears
70,833
Green Bay
Bears 92–83–6

2011
Sunday, January 23*
Green Bay Packers
21–14
Chicago Bears
62,377
Chicago
Bears 92–84–6

2011
Sunday, September 25
Green Bay Packers
27–17
Chicago Bears
62,339
Chicago
Bears 92–85–6

2011
Sunday, December 25
Green Bay Packers
35–21
Chicago Bears
70,574
Green Bay
Bears 92–86–6

2012
Thursday, September 13
Green Bay Packers
23–10
Chicago Bears
70,543
Green Bay
Bears 92–87–6

2012
Sunday, December 16
Green Bay Packers
21–13
Chicago Bears
62,534
Chicago
Bears 92–88–6

2013
Monday, November 4
Chicago Bears
27–20
Green Bay Packers
78,122
Green Bay
Bears 93–88–6

2013
Sunday, December 29
Green Bay Packers
33–28
Chicago Bears
62,708
Chicago
Bears 93–89–6

2014
Sunday, September 28
Green Bay Packers
38–17
Chicago Bears
61,736
Chicago
Bears 93–90–6

2014
Sunday, November 9
Green Bay Packers
55–14
Chicago Bears
78,292
Green Bay
Bears 93–91–6

2015
Sunday, September 13
Green Bay Packers
31–23
Chicago Bears
62,442
Chicago
Bears 93–92–6

2015
Thursday, November 26
Chicago Bears
17–13
Green Bay Packers
78,488
Green Bay
Bears 94–92–6

2016
Thursday, October 20
Green Bay Packers
26–10
Chicago Bears
78,217
Green Bay
Bears 94–93–6

2016
Sunday, December 18
Green Bay Packers
30–27
Chicago Bears
61,137
Chicago
Tied 94–94–6

2017
Thursday, September 28
Green Bay Packers
35–14
Chicago Bears
72,928
Green Bay
Packers 95–94–6

2017
Sunday, November 12
Green Bay Packers
23–16
Chicago Bears
55,661
Chicago
Packers 96–94–6

text: Packers outscore Bears 437–277 (this does not include the 2011 playoff game)

text: * – Denotes a Playoff Game