WALTER SPELLER

VINO NOBILE 2007 v 2006

2010-04-27T17:51:00.000+01:00

The 2007 vintage in Montepulciano, less clement than for Chianti Classico in general, showed wines that seemed to struggle with less-than-ripe tannins combined with a slight stewed fruit character. Increased temperatures during March and April meant that budbreak took place 15 days earlier than normal. Rainfall in May and June prevented water stress, with relatively low temperatures in June followed by above-average temperatures in July. High temperatures and virtually no rainfall in August delayed grape ripening. But the extreme heat affected the grapes, leading in some cases to overripeness and loss of aroma.

Certainly, there seems to be no shortage of sweet fruit in the 2007 vintage, but in many cases there is not enough acidity to counteract this, making the wines look rather too 'populist' and sweet, lacking in freshness. Quite a few samples showed stewed fruit character, and several wines seemed somewhat oxidative. Tannins seemed in quite a few cases not entirely ripe, and although the wines cannot be released onto the market until they have been aged for two years after the harvest (three years for Riserva wines), this additional ageing did not entirely compensate for this. Conversely, the 2006 Riservas stole the show. With near-perfect balance, they were an absolute joy to taste.

The en primeur tasting itself, held in stunningly beautiful Montepulciano, proved to be a modest affair with only about 50 wines on show from no more than 29 of the 70 producers the Consorzio counts as members (20 further Vino Nobile producers do not belong to the Consorzio). This leaves a slight doubt as to how representative these en primeur tastings are for a genuine assessment of how this denomination stands today within the Tuscan landscape, and as to the will of its producers to close ranks and co-operate in promoting Vino Nobile on the international market.

VINO NOBILE 2007

Angelini, Tre Rose 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15 Drink 2010-2013
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Canaiolo 5%, Cabernet Sauvignon 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Fabrizio Ciufoli. Concentrated, maturing ruby with orange reflexes. Touch reductive and closed on the palate. Fruitcake impression on the palate, and warm, rustic finish. (WS) 14.5%

Avignonesi 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15 Drink 2010-2013
Prugnolo Gentile 85%, Canaiolo 10%, Mammolo 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist Paolo Trappolini. Medium concentrated ruby, with broad rim. Serious and seriously sweet, jammy nose. Very sweet and popular too, jammy, a touch unfocused. Should have been much more interesting. (WS) 13.8%

Le Bèrne 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
Prugnolo Gentile 97%, Colorino 3%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Paolo Vagaggini. Deep ruby, rim already shows orange reflexes. Sweet nose with dried fruit notes. Dried fruit character repeats itself on the palate contrasted by some nice acidity. Fiercely tannic at this stage. Will the fruit get through? (WS) 15.22%

Bindella 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2015
Sangiovese 85%, Colorino, Canaiolo, Mammolo 15%. Cask sample. Crimson, youthful optic. Sweet forest fruit nose with earthy hints. Quite opulent sweet fruit on the palate too. One dimensional at this stage, but lots of extract. Promising. (WS) 14.64%

Boscarelli 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 17 Drink 2010-2014
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Canaiolo, Merlot 5%, Colorino 5%. Cask sample. Oenologists: Maurizio Castelli, Luca de Ferrari, Mary Ferrara. Medium ruby, already starting to get lighter. Subdued at first. Very attractive dark berry and tobacco leaf. Sweet fruit attack, followed by a very compact, tight palate. Drying tannins dominate at this stage but fruit returns on a long and understated finish. Well balanced. (WS) 14.34%

La Braccesca 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Merlot 10%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Lorenzo Dongarrà. Estate owned by Antinori. Crimson. Hazelnut and muesli opening, brooding cherry fruit. Iron note. Quite reluctant on the palate, the wine shyly shows some cherry fruit, underpinned by persistent, grainy tannin. Perhaps it hasn't quite enough extract to deal with the big structure. (WS) 13.5%

Fattoria del Cerro 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2015
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Colorino 5%, Mammolo 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Lorenzo Landi. Deep crimson, but rims starts to lighten up. Reductive opening, subdued but interesting; concentrated but not sweet. Same interesting, fragrant fruit starting to get more depth. Struggles with the tannic frame at this stage, but will get out fine at the other side. (WS) 13.8%

La Ciarliana 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2014
Prugnolo Gentile 95%, Mammolo 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Paolo Vagaggini. Evolved ruby with orange rim. Somewhat mature nose too, with cherry pie, dark fruit, orange peel/iron note and tar. Austere and savoury and subdued, but fragrant finish. Crunchy tannins. (WS) 14.7%

Contucci 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 13 Drink 2010-2012
Prugnolo Gentile 80%, Canaiolo 10%, Colorino 10%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Contucci Alamanno. Crimson with lighter rim. First sample showed distinct browning apple, the second has more (stewed) fruit, dark chocolate notes, and still signs of oxidation. (WS) 13.9%

Croce di Febo 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15 Drink 2010-2013
Prugnolo Gentile 85%, Mammolo 3%, Colorino 2%, Merlot 5%, Syrah 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Andrea Mazzoni. Very dark crimson and youthful looking. Slightly clichéd nose of oak, spice, and sweet compote-like fruit. Stewed and jammy fruit palate framed by powdery but fierce tannins. Ready to drink. (WS) 13.85%

Dei 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
Sangiovese 90%, Canaiolo Nero 10%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Niccolo D’Afflitto. Deep crimson. Sweet, and somewhat alcoholic Christmas cake nose. Fairly simple, stewed fruit palate, pulled up by acidity. (WS) 13.5%

Il Faggeto, Pietra del Diavolo 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2014
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Canaiolo 5%, Mammolo 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Andrea Mazzoni. Very dark ruby with orange rim. Attractive herbal and tarry red fruit nose and hint of graphite. Complex. Well-balanced elegant fruit cloaked in grainy tannin. Will improve despite its mature look. (WS) 13.9%

Fassati, Pasiteo 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2013
Sangiovese 95%, Colorino 3%, Mammolo 2%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Riccardo Periccioli. Deep ruby with rim just starting to develop. Quite an international nose of French oak, sweet dark fruit, cinnamon and fruit cake. Contrasting high acidity on the palate making the wine look much more austere. With hints of vanilla on the finish. (WS) 13.5%

Gattavecchi 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
Sangiovese 95%, Canaiolo%, Colorino 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Federico Ricci. Bright, light ruby, with some signs of development. Seems oak driven as well as austere. Interesting, succulent palate of red fruit and orange peel. Gentle but long finish. Astringency is evident, but length convinces. (WS) 13.8%

Gracciano della Seta 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16.5 Drink 2010-2015
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Merlot 10%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Giuseppe Rigoli. Quite light ruby with broader rim showing some orange reflexes. Nose shows stewed fruit and a layer of strawberry jam. Sweet strawberry jam immediately counteracted by drying tannins. Mouthfilling aromatic finish. Very popular. (WS) 14.2%

Godiolo 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15 Drink 2010-2013
Prugnolo Gentile 96%, Canaiolo 2%, Colorino 2%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Franco Fiorini. Medium ruby with broad rim. Reductive, almost sweaty nose. Talcum powder. Hard to see the fruit through all this. Mellow and somewhat nondescript attack. Quite light fruit finish, touch alcoholic too. (WS) 14.1%

Icario 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
Sangiovese 80%, Canaiolo 5%, Merlot 10%, Colorino 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist Paolo Vagaggini. Dark, medium-concentrated ruby, with broader orange rim. Dry French oak and sweet pastry opening. Palate shows much more in favour of the fruit, which is very compact and backward but handles the oak treatment well. Drying tannins at this stage but with sweet fruit finish. Oak a bit too upfront for Sangiovese? (WS) 14.7%

Lodola Nuova 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2015
Predominantly Prugnolo Gentile. Cask sample. Oenologist: Alessandro Chinello. Estate belongs to the Ruffino company. Deep ruby with broad orange rim. A sweet cherry jam and fruitcake nose with a medicinal note. Very intense cherry fruit palate, rustic tannins, and alcoholic finish, but in a way genuine and begs for food. (WS) 14.45%

Nottola 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 13 Drink 2010
Prugnolo Gentile 80%, Canaiolo 10%, Merlot 10%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Riccardo Cotarella. Medium-concentrated dark ruby, almost black tinge. Very stewed nose – oxidised. Second sample is the same. Is it the cork? (WS) 14.5%

I Poderi di Poggialgallo 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 17 Drink 2010-2015
Prugnolo Gentile 85%, Canaiolo, Colorino, Ciliegiolo 15%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Paolo Vagaggini. Medium-deep evolving ruby with broad rim. Seriously multilayered with perfectly integrated oak. Perfumed sweet cherry. Same multilayered palate too. Interesting complex fragrant finish too. Perhaps a touch more acidity would have lifted it. (WS) 13.5%

Poliziano 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
Prugnolo Gentile 85%, Colorino, Canaiolo, Merlot 15%. Cask sample. Oenologists: Carlo Ferrini and Fabio Marchi. Deep ruby, small rim showing the beginning of orange. Appealing, sweet and even multilayered with orange peel and touch of lead pencil. Mellow, round palate, lots of sweet fruit here. Good balance too and very good length. Popular, but well made. (WS) 14.6%

Salcheto 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
Prugnolo Gentile 100%. Cask sample. Oenologists: Michele Manelli and Paolo Vagaggini. Very dark ruby, youthful rim. Fruit cake and savoury, meaty notes, kitchen spice too. Slightly stewed fruit character. Ends on a sweet fruit impression, but good length. (WS) 13.5%

Terra Antica 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Merlot 5%, Cabernet Sauvignon 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Paolo Vagaggini. Medium-concentrated maturing ruby. Open knit and very approachable. Jammy fruit, Morroccan leather. Soft round and fruity, seems to be an early-developing wine. Savoury finish begs for food. Good length, though. (WS) 14.43%

Triacca 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15.5 Drink 2010-2015
Sangiovese 90%, Colorino 5%, Merlot 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Luca Triacca. Medium-deep ruby with broad orange rim. Compact brooding nose of dark fruit and only hints of fruitcake. Sweet fruit impression on the palate, but backward nevertheless. (WS) 13.5%

Valdipiatta 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16.5 Drink 2010-2015
Prugnolo Gentile 85%, Canaiolo 15%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Mauro Monicchi. Deep crimson and rim just starting to get lighter. Tight and compact nose. Same compactness on the palate, but finish shows some pretty interesting aromatic echoes. Fierce tannins - designed for eternity? (WS) 14.3%

Vecchia Cantina, Poggio Stella 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 14 Drink 2010-2012
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Canaiolo 10%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Ugo Pagliai. Very dark ruby, almost black-brown tinge. Horse saddle – perhaps a touch too much? Touch flabby on the palate as well. No great extract either. (WS) 13.5%

VINO NOBILE SELEZIONE 2007
'Selezione' has no legal meaning but was used at the tasting to denote single-vineyard wines or special cuvées.

Bindella, I Quadri 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
Sangiovese 85%, Colorino, Canaiolo, Mammolo 15%. Cask sample. Deep ruby with orange-tinged rim. Candied fruit and pastry opening. Similar, somewhat confected cream-pie fruit aromas. Finish however shows more complex with graphite notes. Alcohol makes tannins look a touch rough. (WS) 13.5%

Fassati, Gersemi 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15 Drink 2010-2012
Dark ruby, still quite youthful looking. Crowd-pleasing cherry pie and cinnamon nose. Same intense sensations on the palate. Cream vanilla finish. Lacks a bit of acidity to lift it and give tension. (WS) 13%

Gattavecchi, Parceto 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
Sangiovese 95%, Canaiolo%, Colorino 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Federico Ricci. Dark, medium-concentrated ruby. First sample showed dangerously oxidative, second sample less so, but still there is a distinct note of browning apple. Sweet dried fruit palate offset by acidity. Lacks finesse and freshness of fruit. (WS) 14%

Valdipiatta, Vigna d'Alfiero 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2014
Prugnolo Gentile 85%, Canaiolo 15%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Mauro Monicchi. Medium-deep bright ruby. The nose seems a tad dominated by fruit cake, but underneath is some pretty cherry. Balsamic and incense-like hints. Somewhat dried fruit character on the palate but finish shows more multifaceted. Could do with more acidity. (WS)

Vecchia Cantina, Cantina del Redi 2007 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Canaiolo 10%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Ugo Pagliai. Dark, medium-concentrated ruby with broad orange rim. The nose looks quite forced with hints of horse saddle and fruit cake. Compact and tight fruit on the stewed side. Lifting acidity gives focus and freshness, but quite nice coating tannins. (WS) 13.5%

VINO NOBILE SELEZIONE 2006
'Selezione' has no legal meaning but was used at the tasting to denote single-vineyard wines or special cuvées.

Angelini, Simposio 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2015
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Canaiolo 5%, Cabernet Sauvignon 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Fabrizio Ciufoli. Medium-concentrated mature-looking ruby with brickstone reflexes. Unashamedly leathery, dominating the nose. Sweet and concentrated on the palate, with fine but fierce tannins. Seems to have all the stuffing to turn into something more complex. (WS) 14.5%

Boscarelli, Nocio 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 17 Drink 2010-2015
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Canaiolo, Merlot 5%, Colorino 5%. Cask sample. Oenologists: Maurizio Castelli, Luca de Ferrari, Mary Ferrara. Deep rub. Herbal, liquorice and hint of dried cherry. Complex if a bit closed at this stage. Also the palate is somewhat backward, but on the finish quite complex flavours. Elegant and long. (WS) 14.5%

Fattoria del Cerro, Antica Chiusina 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15 Drink 2011-2015
Very dark ruby with orange-tinged narrow rim. Touch of horse saddle and graphite and herbal notes. Palate shows somewhat mute, but aromatic development on the finish. (WS) 14%

La Ciarliana, Vigna Scianello 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15.5 Drink 2011-2015
Very dark, medium-concentrated ruby with beginning of orange on the rim. Spicy and a touch of leather. Fruit is just opening up on the palate. Seems to have good overall balance. Slow developer, and finish dominated by leather. (WS) 15%

Villa Sant'Anna, Poldo 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 14.5? Drink 2010-2014
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Canaiolo 2%, Mammolo 1%, Colorino 1%, Merlot 6%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Carlo Ferrini. Deep ruby and broad rim with orange reflexes. Herbal and kitchen spice, with the fruit playing hide and seek. Slightly musty feel to the otherwise concentrated fruit, which is a shame as the wine displays some pretty sweet-sour crunchiness. Bitter note on the finish seems to confirm the problem. (WS)

VINO NOBILE RISERVA 2006

Avignonesi, Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 14.5 Drink 2010-2014
Prugnolo Gentile 85%, Canaiolo 10%, Mammolo 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist Paolo Trappolini. Very dark with orange reflexes on the rim. Very exotic, even strange nose of orange, rose water, cherry liqueur. Is this wine or perfume? Same potpourri of exotic aromas and cherry. Artificial. (WS) 14%

Le Bèrne, Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2014
Prugnolo Gentile 97%, Colorino 3%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Paolo Vagaggini. Dark ruby, with rim just starting to show some age. Spicy sweet fruitcake nose with notes of dark chocolate. Palate seems fresher compared with the nose, with sweet strawberry fruit impressions. Tannins dry out the finish slightly. (WS) 14.5%

La Braccesca, Vigneto Santa Pia Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16.5 Drink 2010-2015
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Merlot 10%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Lorenzo Dongarrà. Very deep, almost impenetrable ruby. Still very youthful. Impressive and elegant with pronounced but fine sweet red fruit perfectly balanced by oak. Wonderful concentration and length. Structure is not entirely knit together yet, and tannins seem a touch drying, still very good. (WS)

Canneto, Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16.5 Drink 2010-2016
Prugnolo Gentile 95%, Merlot 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Carlo Ferrini. Youthful medium-deep ruby. Very closed on the nose and youthful on the palate too, but fruit is focused and fresh. Boisterous tannins at this phase but should age gracefully. (WS) 14.5%

Carpineto, Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15 Drink 2010-2014
70% Prugnolo Gentile, with Canaiolo and Merlot. Cask sample. Oenologists: Giovanni Sacchet and Gabriele Ianett. Very deep crimson. Very attractively restrained dark fruit with hints of lead pencil. Soft sweet fruit that becomes more concentrated on the finish showing an abundance of cherry and strawberry jam. Perhaps a tad over the top. Seems completely ready for release. (WS) 13%

Contucci, Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2015
Prugnolo Gentile 80%, Canaiolo 10%, Colorino 10%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Contucci Alamanno. Deep ruby starting to evolve. Broad rim. Maturing nose with telltale tobacco leaf and sweet, spicy fruit. Good concentration of red and dark fruits with well-integrated acidity. Everything seems to fall into place here. Fragrant finish. Not enormously complex, but satisfying. (WS) 13.5%

Croce di Febo, Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 17 Drink 2010-2016
Prugnolo Gentile 85%, Mammolo 3%, Colorino 2%, Merlot 5%, Syrah 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Andrea Mazzoni. Deep medium ruby, just beginning to age. Nose only very reluctantly shows hint of cherry and merest suggestion of leather. Great aromatic development on the palate. Tannins are persistent and stalky, but not overpowering. Very long. (WS) 13.5%

Dei, Bossona Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2014
Sangiovese 90%, Canaiolo Nero 10%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Niccolo D’Afflitto. Very deep ruby with orange reflexes. Posh if subdued nose. Quite subdued on the palate too, but with richness of fruit on the finish, almost jammy even. Attractive but seems a tad untypical and somewhat alcoholic. (WS) 14%

Gracciano della Seta, Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16 Drink 2010-2013
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Merlot 10%. Oenologist: Giuseppe Rigoli. Medium-deep ruby with broader, orange-tinged rim. Pomegranate syrup and cherry. On the palate cherries steeped in alcohol. Very attractive if not entirely well balanced. May improve with age? (WS) 14%

Icario, Vitaroccia Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 17.5 Drink 2010-2016
Sangiovese 80%, Canaiolo 5%, Merlot 10%, Colorino 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist Paolo Vagaggini. Deep, dark medium-concentrated ruby, with the beginning of orange in small rim. Quite pure, fruit-driven nose. Same purity of fruit on the palate. This has sweetness of fruit as well as savoury tannins balanced by acidity. Very long and aromatic, this goes on and on. (WS) 15%

Lodola Nuova, Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 15 Drink 2010-2015
Predominantly Prugnolo Gentile. Cask sample. Oenologist: Alessandro Chinello. Very dark ruby with orange reflexes in very small rim. Heady nose, cherries on alcohol and a band-aid note. Concentrated fruit with grainy tannins. Finish displays hints of dried fruit. Massive structure. (WS)

Terra Antica, Riserva 2006 Vino Nobile di Montepulciano 16.5 Drink 2010-2016
Prugnolo Gentile 90%, Merlot 5%, Cabernet Sauvignon 5%. Cask sample. Oenologist: Paolo Vagaggini. Deep bordeaux-look-a-like ruby with the beginning of orange reflexes. Herbal and kitchen spice at first. Palate shows more promising with succulence and concentrated and lasting fruit flavours. Very good length too. The opulence matches the structure.(WS) 14.43%

MOISTURISERS FROM MONTEPULCIANO

2010-04-03T10:37:00.001+01:00

The next stop on February's en primeur tastings in Tuscany, beginning with Chianti Classico, was Vino Nobile di Montepulciano. This series of en primeur tastings, concluding with the wines of Brunello di Montalcino, on which I will report later, saw Italian and international journalists, buyers and restaurateurs flock to the region to assess the latest vintages that come onto the market this spring.

This year the Consorzio of Vino Nobile seemed to be particularly concerned with our dermatological health, to judge from the series of bath products and moisturising creams made with the 'essence of red grapes', which all tasters found in their hotel rooms. Although the list of their ingredients dutifully states 'Vitis vinifera', it doesn't specify whether this is the revered Prugnolo Gentile, as Sangiovese, the principal grape of Vino Nobile, is known here.

On a more serious note, the Consorzio announced that with around eight million bottles on the market, their sales volume had remained stable since last year, although they did admit that the average price of their wine had decreased. This must have had a considerable impact on the region that exports about two-thirds of its total production, its most important markets being Germany (28%), Switzerland (26%), and the USA (18%), with the UK representing a modest 5%.

Some important changes took place in 2009, of which the most relevant was the modification of Vino Nobile di Montepulciano production regulations, just before the introduction of last year's CMO/OCM. The modification has not been without controversy, as it increased the percentage of 'authorised grape varieties' other than Prugnolo Gentile, including the non-indigenous Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot, raising eyebrows as well as the question as to why the proportion of Prugnolo Gentile should be reduced in a wine that has been considered so Nobile all these centuries.

The formulation of the amended regulations is slightly cryptic, too, in that they state that the proportion allowed of 'additional grape varieties' (ie the aforementioned foreign intruders) is increased from the original 20% to 30%, while the firmly local Canaiolo can be included only to a maximum 20%. This still gives conscientious producers the chance to produce a Vino Nobile consisting of Tuscan varieties only, but the modification cannot shake off the impression that the Consorzio doesn't think very highly of Canaiolo. It's intriguing too that the (legal) addition of white grapes to the fermentation tank will be reduced from the current 10% of the blend to 5% over the next five years. This is a step in the right direction that is too late and too timid in the eyes of purists.

All this has not led to a clearer image of this wine, which finds itself stylistically between Chianti Classico and Brunello di Montalcino. Author Nicolas Belfrage MW has aptly described Vino Nobile as combining the elegance of Chianti Classico with the firm structure of Brunello di Montalcino, seeing this firm structure as a guarantee for ageworthiness of the wines. But it seems that some producers are only too happy to use the new, increased proportion of Merlot to make wines in an earlier-maturing, more international style. And it is true that one is well advised to drink the tannic, more classical examples of Vino Nobile with food.

CHIANTI CLASSICO 2008 AND RISERVA 2007

2010-03-18T22:15:00.001Z

The Consorzio of Chianti Classico showed mild optimism during last month's en primeur presentation of 2008 Chianti Classico and the 2007 Riserva wines in Florence. At the same time last year the Consorzio spoke of Chianti Classico as a 'fortress' that would well withstand the stormy economic weather, while this year Marco Pallanti, proprietor of Castello di Ama and current president of the Consorzio, spoke of a positive trend reversal in sales. Not known for lingering in the spotlight, Pallanti kept his speech very short to allow us, press and trade, to get on with the tasting of some 400 wines on show.  

Discussing the wines with international colleagues during the Collezione Chianti Classico, I discovered quite a few who admitted to struggling with the en primeur/anteprima concept. This was mostly based on the fact that they found it hard to assess wines at such an early stage, characterised as they are by upfront acidity and unsettled tannins. I must confess that I was quite suprised by some of these reactions, not least as most of the professional tasters present wouldn’t blink an eye at the prospect of tasting young bordeaux en primeur, taking exactly these factors into account.

Not only that, 2008 Chianti Classico normale showed wonderful freshness and savouriness, and I could easily imagine many of these wines going very well with a range of dishes.   Provided the balance of these wines is right, it is relatively easy to see how they will develop. I felt that the normale had gained, if anything, in value, showing wines with good ageing potential and depth of flavour. In general the wines showed a clarity of fruit unblurred by stewed fruit character, which would turn up, unfortunately, later that same week in Brunellos from the less clement 2005 vintage. The 2007 Chianti Classico Riservas showed even better, with concentration and that all-important Spiel or play between an intense, sweet red fruit sensation cut through by lifting acidity and crunchy, stalky tannins. This vintage, at least on this quality level, should prove to be a real vin de garde.   

That is not to say that quite a few samples didn’t show astringency and big bold dark fruit flavours, which I personally do not readily associate with the best Sangiovese can bring. More often than not in these cases, additions of Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot to the blend of indigenous varieties are to blame, and I can’t help but suspect that these two non-Tuscan varieties in particular are often employed to compensate for vineyards which, due to poor exposure or clones, won’t allow Sangiovese to shine on its own. This, in turn, means almost by definition a reduced focus on terroir, which the region has in spades, and a greater focus on results in the cellar. This may unfortunately only help to perpetuate the erroneous view that Sangiovese is a good, rather than a great, grape variety.   

Wines are listed in the following groups, and then alphabetically by producer (sur)name within each group: Chianti Classico 2008, Chianti Classico 2007, Chianti Classico Riserva 2007, Chianti Classico Riserva 2006.
Alcohol levels given in brackets with a question mark were taken from the back label of cask samples, so they may not be totally accurate but they are a good estimate.    

CHIANTI CLASSICO 2008  

Badia a Coltibuono 2008 Chianti Classico 17 Drink 2011-2015
90% Sangiovese, 10% Canaiolo. Cask sample (14%?). Oenologist Maurizio Castelli. Medium, almost light crimson (Pinot Noir optic). Restrained, appealing, sweet cherry confiture and liquorice nose. Touch warm. Beautiful balanced by only a pinch of oak. Closed, brooding fruit. Soft finely grained tannin. Needs at least another year to open up, but very promising. (WS)

Barone Ricasoli, Brolio 2008 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
Mainly Sangiovese. Cask sample (13.5%?). Oenologists Carlo Ferrini and Marco Cerqua. Deep violet glass-staining crimson. Opulent, popular, almost jammy but undeniably Tuscan nose. Generous dark fruit lifted by acidity, making the tannins look a tad rustic at this stage. (WS)

Bibbiano 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2011-2013
95% Sangiovese, 5% Colorino. Cask sample. Oenologist Stefano Porcinai. Formerly advised by the legendary Giulio Gambello, Sangiovese’s oldest protagonist (and history seems to prove him right). Medium deep ruby, seems surprisingly mature for a cask sample, at least colour-wise. Dense sweet cherry and cherry cake nose. Sweet cherry-fruit palate balanced by stalky tannins. Very good length but tannins need time to integrate. (WS)

Bibbiano, Montornello 2008 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2015
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologist Stefano Porcinai. Deeper than the Bibbiano, but similar mature optic. Generous, quite big, sweet red fruits and hints of fruit cake. More extract and power than previous, with persistent tannins but backed up by more substance. Seems already accessible. (WS)

Borgo Scopeto 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2011-2015
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample (13.5%?). Oenologist Simone Giunti. Deep crimson, with rim showing some development. Very sweet, round, open dark-fruit nose. Touch of oak only. Soft round fruit attack, which closes up on the finish. Fruit at this stage harnessed by perceptible and touch drying tannins, perhaps enhanced at this stage by the acidity. Ends a touch warm. Wants food. (WS)

Brancaia 2008 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2013
85% Sangiovese, 15% Merlot. Cask sample. Oenologists Barbara Kronenberg-Widmer and Carlo Ferrini. Medium deep crimson. Classic nose of dark fruit, cherry, spicy oak and a touch of tar. Stylish and well balanced, succulent dark fruit, with hints of vanilla and soft, bitter tannins. The hint of tar might indicate this is for relativly early enjoyment. (WS)

Carpineto 2008 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2013
80% Sangiovese, 20% Canaiolo. Cask sample. Giovanni C. Sacchet and Gabriele Lanett. Medium deep ruby with small rim which shows quick evolution Nose seems slightly medicinal and earthy. Quite shy on the fruit front. This is confirmed on the palate, which seems quite light and fruit seems a touch short to keep up with the slightly astringent tannins. (WS)

Casa al Vento, Aria 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2013
Cask sample. Oenologist Stefano Chioccioli. Medium deep, youthful ruby. Meaty, savoury and sweet, almost touch farmyardy. Quite tight and compact, somewhat unapproachable and quite austere on the finish. Will this improve with bottle age? (WS)

Casa Emma 2008 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2014
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample (13.5%?). Oenologist Carlo Ferrini. Medium deep ruby with small but evolved rim. Subdued but spicy fruitcake nose. With air the nose shows soy sauce. Somewhat closed at this stage and certainly restrained on the palate. Bit of a chore to taste at this stage, with dominating, rustic tannins. Ends warm. Begs for food. (WS)

Casale dello Sparviero 2008 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2011-2015
95% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo. Cask sample. Oenologist Attilio Pagli. Medium deep ruby, this already shows some ageing at the rim. Sweet, perfumed strawberry jam with underlying soft kitchen spice. Savoury, but somewhat closed palate with youthful, almost boisterous tannins. Old school but honest, deserves more age. (WS)

Castellare di Castellina 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2014
95% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo. Cask sample (13.5%?). Oenologist Alessandro Cellai and Maurizio Castelli. Medium crimson with lighter rim. Sweet, savoury cherry nose with a hint of oriental spice. Earthy too. Round, almost fleshy fruit palate (the fruit seems to be subdued, or toned down by something that is round and shows some MLF notes ie creaminess) and rustic stalky tannins. But retains good overall balance. Good length too. (WS)

Castelli dei Grevepesa 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2011-2014
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologists Stefano Mosele and Gabriela Tani. Deep ruby. Open knit, generous sweet strawberry jam. Catchy almost. Palate is much more focused, with structuring acidity and grainy tannins, promising some development over the next year or so. (WS)

Castellinuzza e Piuca 2008 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2011-2015
90% Sangiovese, 10% Canaiolo. Cask sample (13%?). Oenologist Marco Chellini. From the 'Frazzione' of Lamole, a higher site within the commune of Greve, which is, among insiders, considered a true cru because of its higher altitude, resulting, at least in theory, in more elegant and longer lived wines. Medium deep, youthful ruby. Sweet nose, which at this stage seems a bit suppressed by farmyardy notes, but improves with air. High acidity seems to betray its high altitude, with there is real interest underneath with lurking fruit and savoury tannins. Opens up on the finish. Could be more polished to attract a larger public. (WS)

Castello delle Stinche, Antico Lamole Vigna Grospoli 2008 Chianti Classico 17 Drink 2011-2015
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologist Federico Staderi. From Lamole. Medium deep crimson. Sweet, popular and almost jammy. A touch of spicy oak pulls it back in. The same with the high acidity, resulting in an attractive sweet-sour fruit sensation. No high flyer, but very attractive and genuine. (WS)

Castello di Bossi 2008 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample (13.5%?). Oenologist Alberto Antonini. Deep, and evolving ruby. Open, dense, sweet and almost international. Fruit struggles between being dense and compact, tied back by acidity and stalky tannins. Good length, but at this stage it looks like the fruit will probably mature faster than the structure. (WS)

Castello di Fonterutoli 2008 Chianti Classico 16.5? Drink 2010-2014
90% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot, 3% Colorino, 2% Malavsia Nera (one wonders why bother at all with 5% Merlot?). Cask sample (13.5%?). Oenologists Luca Biffi and Carlo Ferrini. Very dark crimson with violet rim. Herbal, almost medicinal, backward nose. With aeration sweet and concentrated with a hint of leather. There seems a touch of browning apple on the palate, suppressing the fruit, which is a shame as the wine shows great concentration and balance. Two different samples tasted, it could be be the cork batch, so the verdict is out on this one. (WS)

Castello di Monsanto 2008 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2011-2014
90% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo, 5% Colorino. Cask sample (13.5%?). Oenologist Andrea Giovannini. Medium concentrated ruby. Sweet, rich cherry with earthy, almost farmyardy undertone, but attractive. Closed fruit palate, unwilling to show a lot. Persistent, stalky tannins. Has the real generosity been saved up for the Riserva? (WS)

Castello di Querceto 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2014
92% Sangiovese, 8% Canaiolo. Cask sample (13%?). Oenologist Giovanni Cappeli. Very dark ruby, youthful. Lovely dark fruit, garden herbs and earth nose. Quite round fruit with balancing acidity. Finish is dominated by tannins, but fruit is quite persistent. Unsettled, so wait. (WS)

Castello di Verrazzano 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
95% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo. Cask sample (13.5%?). Marco Chellini. Deep ruby, with orange reflexes in the rim. The nose seems also evolved, with herbal, almost liquorice-like fruit. The soft fruit palate seems to lack expression and lift, due to very soft acidity. Touch bitter on the finish. Inoffensive. (WS)

Castello di Volpaia 2008 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2011-2015
90% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot, 5% Syrah. Cask sample. Oenologists Lorenzo Regoli and Riccardo Cotarella. Medium deep crimson. Sweet red fruit, spice and baked rhubarb pie. Attractive sweet sour red fruit and cherry palate with crunchy tannins. Very good length too. Fun to drink, will make a good dinner companion, but does it need the international suspect, really? (WS)

Vicchiomaggio, San Jacopo da Vicchiomaggio 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
90% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo, 5% Colorino. Cask sample (13.5%?). Oenologists John Matta and staff. Medium concentrated ruby, with lighter rim. Earthy fruitcake nose, not overtly expressive. Same impression on the palate with quite light fruit, which could be a touch more concentrated to deal with the tannic structure. (WS)

Cecchi, Teuzzo 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
90% Sangiovese, 10% Cabernet Sauvignon. Cask sample (13.5%?). Oenologist Miria Bracali. Very dark, impenetrable ruby. Somewhat numb nose, with a touch of farmyard. Palate seems closed, but the balance seems struck with the acidity if less so with the persistent tannins. Will open up with an additional year. (WS)

Concadoro 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2010
90% Sangiovese, 10% Canaiolo. Cask sample (14.5%?). Oenologist Marco Chellini. Evolved ruby. Herbal nose with sweet fruit hints and mustard. The palate only reluctantly shows some fruit, even more so on the mid palate. Ends on bitter tannins. (WS)

Le Fonti 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2013
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologist Paolo Caciorgna. From Poggibonsi. Medium deep, evolved ruby. Attractive sweet-sour cherry pie nose. On the palate the initial succulent fruit ends in quite soft, round and slightly inexpressive dark fruit with touch of creaminess from MLF. Medium length dominated by tannins. But there seems some potential for the wine to open up. (WS)

San Giusto a Rentennano 2008 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2011-2013
95% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo. Cask sample (14%?). Oenologists Francesco Martini di Cigala and Attilio Pagli. Medium crimson showing some evolution on the rim. Open knit, popular, sweet and lifted nose. The palate seems somewhat less straightforward at this stage. Rustic tannins enforced by alcohol on the finish. But should make for a hearty wine. (WS)

Felsina Berardenga 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2014
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample (13%?). Oenologist Franco Bernabei. Concentrated crimson, with the beginning of age on the rim. Medicinal opening, and reluctant to show fruit at this stage. But generous red fruit and cherry palate with lovely structuring acidity, which melts on the finish. Good balance and length. A somewhat rounder style of Chianti Classico. (WS)

Fietri 2008 Chianti Classico 14 Drink 2010-2013
85% Sangiovese, 15% Merlot. Cask sample. Oenologist Stefano Chioccioli. Medium-concentrated crimson. Very unusual, almost artificial sweet fruit pie and fruitcake, and cinnamon. Definitely the commercial model. Palate shows much more tension with uplifting acidity and rustic tannins. But fruit lacks a touch of concentration to stand up to the structure. Touch bitter on the finish. (WS)

Roberto Grassi, Montericcioli 2008 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2011-2013
95% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot. Cask sample. Very deep crimson with violet reflexes. Quite pure cherry and cherry compote with notes of laurel. Closed compact palate, but finish shows good concentration. Touch bitter tannins on an alcoholic finish, and fairly moderate in acidity for the variety. Will open up. (WS)

I Fabbri, Terra di Lamole 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2012-2016
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample (13.5%?). Oenologist Marco Chellini. From Lamole from vineyards at 630 m. Medium concentrated crimson. Opens farmyardy. Practically closed on the nose. And completely closed on the palate too. Acidity doesn’t seem elevated for such high altitude, but tannins are persistent. Numb on the finish too. Wait. (WS)

Il Palagio 2008 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2013
95% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot. Cask sample (14%?). Oenologist Marco Chellini. Deep ruby with some development on the rim. Sweet-sour cherry nose, with a distinct herbal/vegetal note. Sweet lifted fruit palate seems to struggle at the finish to make its mark. Touch bitter tannins. (WS)

Isole e Olena 2008 Chianti Classico 17.5 Drink 2011-2015
80% Sangiovese, 15% Canaiolo, 5% Syrah. Cask sample. Oenologist Paolo de Marchias. Medium-deep ruby. Forthright, open and fruit driven nose with immediate appeal. Quite pure red fruit palate too, pushed further by juice acidity, well balanced with persistent but fine tannins. Closes up on the finish, but shows great potential. Being one of the undisputed leaders, one can only wonder why do they persist in adding Syrah to the blend, especially when Sangiovese seems to be in such knowledgeable hands? (WS)

Le Fonti 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2013
95% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot. Cask sample. Oenologist Stefano Chioccioli. Panzano. Deep crimson. Red fruit and earthy iron notes. Fairly simple but honest fruit on the palate, with medium length. Unproblematic and probably what the average Chianti drinker expects. (WS)

Monte Bernardi, Retromarcia 2008 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
95% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot. Cask sample (13.5%?). Oenologist Michael Schmelzer. The second wine of Monte Bernardi. Medium deep, youthful ruby. Balsamic, spicy and savoury nose, somewhat closed on fruit at this stage. The palate makes more than up for this with lifted, succulent cherry fruit and crunchy tannins. Refreshing and elegant. New School, which should not suffer from giving up on the Merlot content. (WS)

Monteraponi 2008 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2013
95% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo. Cask sample. Oenologist Maurizio Castelli. Medium concentrated ruby with signs of development in the rim. Earthy, herbal with savoury notes with brooding dark fruit. Strikes very good balance between fruit sweetness and acidity ands crunchy tannins. Closes up on the finish. Old school but with class. (WS)

La Capella 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2013
90% Sangiovese, 10% Merlot. Cask sample. Consultant Luca d’Atoma. Medium concentrated crimson, violet reflexes. Opulent fruitcake and cherry, and dried fruit impressions (is this the Merlot?), almost baked apple. But refreshing acidity on a red and dark fruit palate. Good balance too. Tight finish, needs time. (WS)

Terreno 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
90% Sangiovese, 10% Canaiolo. Cask sample. Oenologist Paolo Vagaggini and Francesco Rapisarta-Haniez. Deep ruby with first signs of development on the rim. Very unusual. Initially sauerkraut, evolving into cherry. Cherry fruit palate with nutty notes. quite astringent. (WS)

Poggio Bonelli 2008 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2013
90% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot, 5% Colorino. Cask sample (14%?). Oenologist Leonardo Pini and Carlo Ferrini. Medium-deep ruby showing some signs of development on the rim. Soft sweet-sour red fruit nose with vegetal undertones. Spicy fruit of medium length. Touch nondescript. Certainly not overachieving. (WS)

Poggiopiano 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2013
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample (14.5%?). Oenologists Attilio Pagli and Valentino Ciarla. Medium concentrated ruby. Seems a bit musty and alcoholic. Lively fruit underlined with stalky tannins, and soft bitter finish. (WS)

Querciabella 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2013
95% Sangiovese, 5% Cabernet Sauvignon. Cask sample. Oenologist Guido de Santi. Medium deep crimson. Softly perfumed, spicy fruitcake and cherry nose. Generous, sweet, almost jammy fruit, but crunchy tannins and lifting acidity kick in at the finish. Good length. Popular. (WS)

Renzo Marinai 2008 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
90% Sangiovese, 10% Cabernet Sauvignon. Cask sample (13%?). Oenologist Giovanni Cappelli. Deep, youthful ruby. Horse saddle and sweet-sour fruit compote with savoury notes. The style seems to have evolved to a more refreshing, lifting, and less rich palate, although this still includes 10% Cabernet Sauvignon. (WS)

Rignana 2008 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
85% Sangiovese, 15% Canaiolo. Cask sample (14.5%?). Oenologists Giulio Gambelli and Paoli Salvi. Deep ruby with the first signs of development on the rim. Restrained nose showing kitchen spice, cumin. It has a lurking perfumed quality that doesn’t come to the fore yet. Same reluctance on the palate showing soft creamy MLF notes, and shy cherry on a rustic, tannic finish. Genuine. (WS)

Rocca delle Macie 2008 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2012
95% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot. Cask sample. Oenologist Giuseppe Caviola. Concentrated, medium ruby. Sweet, compote-like fruit with an earthy, dried-fruit undertone. The palate is completely the opposite with high acidity underpinning red fruit, and somewhat unsettled tannins at this stage. Should make an attractive, short-term drink. (WS)

Rocca di Montegrossi 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2013
90% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo, 5% Colorino. Cask sample (13.5%). Oenologist Attilio Pagli. Youthful ruby. Very sweet, almost jammy nose. With aeration, more fruit definition. Definitely popular. Sweet, generous, almost confected fruit palate, but with sour bite on the finish. Should be appealing to most. (WS)

Ruffino, Santedame 2008 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2012
80% Sangiovese, 15% Merlot, 5% Cabernet Sauvignon. Cask sample. Oenologists Gabriele Tacconi and Alessandro Chinello. Deep ruby. Dark fruit and hints of baked apple. The palate is more invigorating. Not amazingly long. (WS)

Arceno 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
80% Sangiovese, 20% Cabernet Sauvignon. Cask sample. Oenologists Lawrence Cronin and Pierre Seillan. Medium crimson. Not entirely clean on the nose (musty), a touch alcoholic, with cassis and cherry notes. High acidity counteracts sweet fruit, which at this stage is subdued. Will develop, unless astringent tannins take over. (WS)

Villa Trasqua 2008 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2013
95% Sangiovese, 2% Colorino, 2% Malvasia Nera, 1% Canaiolo. Cask sample. Oenologist Stefano Chioccioli. Medium ruby with the first signs of development on the rim. Cherry compote and herb liqueur. Sweet, round, rich with herb liqueur finish. Slightly biting alcohol on the finish and big tannins. Lacks elegance. (WS)

Terrabianca 2008 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2012
97% Sangiovese, 3% Canaiolo. Oenologist Vittorio Fiore. Attractive deep ruby with some maturation. Cassis and cherry liqueur nose with hints of blackcurrant leaves. Distinct cassis palate. Should appeal to the masses, also because of its refreshing acidity. (WS) 13.5%

Val delle Corti 2008 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2013
95% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo. Cask sample. Oenologist Sean O’Callaghan. Light ruby with violet reflexes. Heady dark fruit and earth nose. Earthy impression lingers on the high acidity palate. Angular. Difficult to forecast its development, but lingering finish seems to bode well for the future. (WS)

Vallone di Cecione 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2012
90% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo, 5% Cabernet Sauvignon. Cask sample. Oenologist Alessandro Fusi. Deep crimson. Very young nose with MLF notes. Seems so unsettled, it is almost unfair to review it. Very sweet, very rich fruit. Rustic, stalky but not unripe tannins giving good contrast to the fruit sweetness. Seems to have lots of extract, but with relatively modest acidity, making it quite a big wine. Good persistence on the finish. For an international market? (WS)

Vignavecchia 2008 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
90% Sangiovese, 10% Merlot. Cask sample. Oenologist Federico Staderini. Dark ruby. Appealing cherry nose with a mineral note. Well balanced, but ends quite compact and restrained. Wait. (WS)

Villa Cafaggio 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2014
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologist Stefano Chioccioli. Very deep and dark crimson. Subdued but hints of sweet dark fruits. Hallmark persistent tannins, but seem less massive, more refined than in the past. Fairly modest acidity, this wine seems to aim for a wide audience. Quite compact still, but will open up. (WS)

Villa Calcinaia 2008 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2013
90% Sangiovese, 10% Canaiolo. Cask sample. Oenologist Federico Staderini. Medium deep crimson. A reluctant, closed nose, and equally reluctant palate. On the finish the wine wakes up, and shows good concentration and integrated acidity. Surprisingly lingering after taste, despite persistent tannic frame. (WS)

CHIANTI CLASSICO 2007
This category at the Collezione Chianti Classico consisted mostly of single-vineyard wines (which are actually of Riserva quality) as well as en primeur releases from estates that prefer to hold on to their wines longer than is the norm.

Barone Ricasoli, Castello di Brolio 2007 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
Sangiovese with (unspecified) portions of Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot in the blend. Oenologists Carlo Ferriniand Marco Cerqua. Very deep dark crimson. At first herbal, but opens up with aeration. This definitely needs decanting. Lovely dense fruit palate with sweet sour impression and crunchy tannins. Fruit seems a touch muted on the finish. well made, and should be very popular.(WS) 14%

Salcetino 2007 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2012
95% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo. Oenologist Andrea Dominutti. Medium-deep ruby with orange reflexes. Sweet opulent, and hints of candied fruit. Much gentler on the palate with a rash development on the finish. (WS) 13%

Candialle 2007 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2013
97% Sangiovese, 3% Petit Verdot. Oenologist Vittorio Fiore. Deep ruby, with first signs of age. Quite sweet with fruitcake notes and hints of spicy oak. Lots of sweet-sour interplay on the palate, to only disappoint slightly in length. Young vines? (WS) 14%

Casale dello Sparviero, Vigna Paronza 2007 Chianti Classico 17 Drink 2010-2015
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologist Attilio Pagli. Very deep ruby, Bordeaux-lookalike. Very unusual, very pure forest-strawberry nose. Concentrated strawberry and cherry with crunch and lift. Definitely old school, but with potential. (WS)

Casaloste 2007 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2012
85% Sangiovese, 15% Merlot. Oenologists Giovanni Battista d’Orsi and Gabriela Tani. Concentrated ruby with some orange reflexes. Meaty, savoury opening. Quite soft fruit palate. Easy going, without highs or lows. (WS) 13.5%

Rocca di Castagnoli 2007 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2013
90% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot, 5% Syrah. Oenologist Martin Froelich. From Castellina. Organic. Medium deep ruby starting to light up. Earthy, sweet with distinct minerally notes, and hints of Morrocan leather. Lots of concentration and succulence here, but the finish seems a touch oak dominated. Very lively, though. (WS) 14%

Castellinuzza e Piuca 2007 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2012
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Marco Chellini. Medium-concentrated ruby with some development on the rim. Very sweet, this is all fruit on the nose. No sign of oak. Lively palate, but not very concentrated, hence alcohol shows up. Lacks a bit of stuffing. (WS) 13.5%

Castello della Paneretta 2007 Chianti Classico 17 Drink 2010-2013
90% Sangiovese, 10% Canaiolo. Oenologist Nicola Berti. Medium-deep ruby with the first signs of age. Serious and brooding dark fruit and spice nose. On the palate lovely bite as well as strawberry and juicy cherryfruit. Carries its alcohol effortlessly. (WS) 14.5%

Castello delle Stinche, Vigna Grospoli 2007 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2013
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologist Federico Staderini. Quite mature-looking medium-concentrated ruby. Very sweet strawberry jam and nutmeg. With depth. At this stage subdued on the finish, but lots of extract. One wishes only for a little lift of acidity. (WS)

Castello di Bossi 2007 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2013
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Alberto Antonini. Mature-looking ruby. International nose of concentrated fruit and hints of oak and fruit cake. But there is something undeniably Tuscan about it as well. International appeal on the palate as well, with lots of sweet fruit contrasted by stalky tannins and long finish. A crowd pleaser. (WS) 13.5%

Castello di Meleto 2007 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2012
90% Sangiovese, 10% Merlot. Oenologist Federico Cerelli and Stefano Chioccioli. Deep, concentrated ruby. Sweet but subdued nose. Very mellow fruit palate, revived by acidity shot through the red fruit. Persistent tannins but enough fruit to withstand. (WS) 13.5%

Concadoro, Vigna di Gaversa 2007 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2012
85% Sangiovese, 15% Cabernet Sauvignon. Oenologist Marco Chellini. Dark, youthful looking ruby. Sweet jammy fruit and hints of baked apple, indicating overly fast development? There is some succulent fruit on the palate with crunchy tannins and just enough lift. Quite nice, without blowing one away. (WS) 14%

Dievole, La Vendemmia 2007 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
90% Sangiovese, 5% Colorino, 5% Canaiolo. Oenologists Santo Gozzo and Simone Anselmi. Medium-concentrated ruby starting to show some age. Very closed. Herbal nose. The wine doesn’t open up on the palate either. Strangely nondescript on the finish. Touch bitter. Perhaps this needs time? (WS) 13.5%

Montemaggio 2007 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2013
95% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot. Oenologist Andrea Paoletti. Medium-concentrated ruby. Sweet jammy nose with hints of spice and touch of bacon. Quite sweet and rich palate, with mellow, dense fruit. Lots of extract, but seems to lack a bit of personality? (WS) 14.5%

Nittardi, Casanuova di Nittardi 2007 Chianti Classico 17 Drink 2010-2014
97% Sangiovese, 3% Canaiolo. Oenologist Carlo Ferrini. Concentrated ruby with orange reflexes in the rim. Hugely attractive nose of sour cherry and nutmeg. Enticing sweet-sour fruit palate with lots of interest. Very long. (WS) 13%

Fontodi 2007 Chianti Classico 17 Drink 2011-2014
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Giovanni Manetti. Medium-deep ruby. Subdued and understated. Same on the palate, seems still very youthful. Extremely well balanced with invigorating acidity, coating tannins and subdued but long finish. This needs more time. (WS) 14.5%

Isole e Olena 2007 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2015
80% Sangiovese, 15% Canaiolo, 5% Syrah. Oenologist Paolo De Marchi. Medium-deep ruby with orange reflexes. Somewhat closed with herbal notes. Lively acidity pushes forth a sweet fruit palate. Seems a tad closed at this stage. (WS) 14%

Lamole di Lamole, Blu 2007 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2012
80% Sangiovese, 10% Merlot, 10% Cabernet Sauvignon. Oenologist Loris Vazzoler. Bordeaux lookalike ruby with orange reflexes. Soft red fruit notes with hint of vanilla. Quite full bodied and sweet. Crowd pleaser but lacks a touch of lift.(WS) 13.5%

Le Cinciole 2007 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2013
98% Sangiovese, 2% Canaiolo. Oenologist Stefano Chioccioli. Crimson with the beginning of orange reflexes. Closed on the nose, showing some incense-like notes. Somewhat subdued on the palate too. Full-bodied sensation. Very nice coating tannins. Will need more time but has the stuffing. (WS) 13.5%

Monte Bernardi 2007 Chianti Classico 17.5 Drink 2010-2015
95% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo. Oenologist Michael Schmelzer. Deep ruby with just the beginning of age on the rim. Very refined, perfumed nose, with amazing depth. Very poised. Very fine, gentle softly fruity palate too, framed by grainy tannins. Impressive in its elegance and with lots of potential. Sangiovese at its best. (WS) 13.5%

CHIANTI CLASSICO RISERVA 2007

Agricoltori del Chianti Geografico, Montegiachi Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 14 Drink 2010-2010
95% Sangiovese, 5% Colorino and Merlot. Oenologist Lorenzo Landi. Deep, medium-concentrated ruby. Popular and slightly stewed fruit nose. Sweet palate too, with dried fruit notes. Quite soft, with rustic tannins. Drink now. (WS) 14%

Badia a Coltibuono, Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2016
90% Sangiovese, 10% Canaiolo. Cask sample (14.5%?). Oenologist Maurizio Castelli. Medium-concentrated ruby with broad rim showing the beginning of orange reflexes. Elegant nose of dark fruit, hints of earth and cigar box. More austere on the palate, with grainy tannins, but very good overall balance. Not amazingly complex, but may gain in time. (WS) 14.5%

Barone Ricasoli, Rocca Guicciardi Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
Sangiovese with 'complementing' (sic) grape varieties. Oenologists Carlo Ferrini and Marco Cerqua. Dark ruby, still youthful looking. Ripe, plummy fruit and kitchen spice, and perhaps a hint of undergrowth and saddle. Ripe and fragrant fruit contrasted by grainy, persistent tannins. Length indicates potential. (WS) 13.5%

Bibbiano, Vigna del Capannino Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologist Stefano Porcinai. Youthful dark ruby. Open and accessible nose of dark fruits and fruitcake. Similar impressions on the palate, without being overtly complex. Warm finish enforces tannic impression. (WS)

Capannelle, Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2013
90% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo, 5% Colorino. Cask sample. Oenologist Simone Monciati. Very deep, concentrated ruby. Dark evolving ruby with orange reflexes. Quite complex sweet nose with well integrated oak, and quite restraint for this flamboyant estate. Compact fruit palate with succulent lift, and crunchy tannins, which at this stage determine the finish. More to come. (WS)

Casa al Vento, Foho Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2013
90% Sangiovese, 10% Merlot. Cask sample. Oenologist Stefano Chioccioli. Deep ruby showing the beginning of age. Earthy, spicy fruitcake and hint of leather. Fairly simple, uncomplicated. (WS)

Casa Emma, Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2014
95% Sangiovese, 5% Malvasia Nera. Oenologist Carlo Ferrini. Very dark, almost opaque ruby. Very open, round, mature, with plummy, spicy fruit, notes of liquorice and spice. Very appealing on the palate too, with sweet dark fruits offset by austere grainy tannins. ends warm. A crowd pleaser, no doubt. (WS) 14%

Casale dello Sparviero, Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2015
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologist Attilio Pagli. Deep ruby, small rim with the beginning or orange. Generous, soft round fruit nose with just a hint of dark chocolate, tar and cherry. Similar round, gentle fruit spiked with stalky tannins. Great length. Well made old-school style. (WS)

Castellinuzza e Piuca, Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2014
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Marco Chellini. Medium-deep ruby with orange reflexes in broad rim. Dark fruit and herbs opening. Lovely strawberry fruit followed by stalky tannins. Acidity kicks in on the finish. Elegant fruit closes up on the finish, but it looks like there is more to come. (WS) 13.5%

Castello di Meleto, Vigna Poggiarso Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2015
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Federico Cerelli and Stefano Chioccioli. Beautiful deep ruby with tiny orange rim. Bags of red and dark fruit compote here. Looks international, also on the palate. Good length with a persistent layer of grainy tannins. Keep. (WS)

Castello di Monsanto, Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2011-2014
90% Sangiovese, 5% Colorino, 5% Canaiolo. Oenologist Andrea Giovannini. Deep and still quite youthful ruby. Evolved nose with ripe dark fruits and a touch of tar. Compact if appealing. Quite elegant palate, but the compact red fruit struggles with astringent tannins on the finish at this stage. However, there seems potential for the fruit to open up more. (WS)

Castello di Volpaia, Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2013
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologists Lorenzo Regoli and Riccardo Cotarella. Very deep, almost impenetrable ruby. Very small rim only just starting to evolve. Very attractive with sweet red fruits perfectly balanced by oak. Definitely appealing and modern. On the palate the oak treatment seems to have compromised the fruit as the wine ends astringent. This astringency dominates the entire finish. Food would do wonders. (WS)

Castello di Volpaia, Coltassala Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2012-2016
95% Sangiovese, 5% Mammolo. Cask sample. Oenologists Lorenzo Regoli and Riccardo Cotarella. Deep dark ruby, with very small, lighter rim. Seductive cherry nose with sweet spice and oak notes. By contrast the palate shows good extract, but tannins are all over the place. Still, genuine. (WS)

Casuccio Tarletti, Campoalto Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 15? Drink 2011-2010
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Fabrizio Thomas. Medium-concentrated ruby with broad rim showing first signs of age. Firmly closed at first. Earthy cherry and strawberry hints and a touch of bacon. Extremely compact and backward on the palate too. Firm tannins and hints of liquorice on a closed finish. Difficult to assess. (WS) 13.5%

Cecchi, Riserva della Famiglia Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
90% Sangiovese, 10% Colorino. Oenologist Miria Bracali. Medium crimson. Closed on the nose and closed on the palate. Inert and somewhat charmless. (WS) 13.5%

San Giusto a Rentennano, Le Baroncole Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 17 Drink 2011-2016
97% Sangiovese, 3% Canaiolo. Cask sample (14.5%?). Oenologists Francesco Martini di Cigala and Attilio Pagli. Medium-deep ruby with small orange tinged rim. The nose strikes a very good balance between oak, ripe cherry and plummy fruit. Also hints of undergrowth and tar. There is austerity on the palate, promising more for the future. Very long with lasting fruit as well structure. Wait. (WS) 14.5%

Felsina, Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2013
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Franco Bernabei. Concentrated ruby starting to mature. Quite catchy, if at first somewhat dusty oak fruit nose. Round fruit rolls over the tongue interrupted by elevated acidity. Good length, though, but no overachiever. (WS) 13.5%

La Madonnina, Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
90% Sangiovese, 5% Cabernet Sauvignon, 5% Merlot. Oenologists Luca Triacca and Vittorio Fiore. Medium deep ruby, rim showing some beginning of orange reflexes. Understated but sweet nose. Palate is slightly less exciting with soft, somewhat nondescript fruit and bitter tannins, this impression is augmented by the alcoholic finish. (WS) 13.5%

La Sala, Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2015
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Gabriella Tani. Very dark ruby. Marked by posh oak and mint, cherry and fruitcake. Attractive, nevertheless. Succulent, almost rich cherry and plum fruit, supported by crunchy tannins. Very good length. Generous. (WS) 14%

Monteraponi, Il Campitello Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 17 Drink 2010-2015
90% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo, 5% Colorino. Cask sample. Oenologist Maurizio Castelli. Medium deep ruby with broader rim showing signs of age. At first reluctant nose, shyly opening up to strawberry jam. Minerally, almost iron-like note. Very young and taut on the palate, with sweet strawberry and candied fruit, and coating, persistent tannins on a long finish. This should age very well. (WS)

Poggio al Sole, Casasilia Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2013
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologist Johannez Davaz. Deep ruby, quite impressive colour. Almost formulaic nose with maraschino cherry, fruitcake, the merest hint of cassis and notes of oak and tobacco. Quite lively dark and cherry fruits and stewed notes. Quite pleasant, with stalky rustic tannins. (WS) 14.5%

Poggio Torselli, Riserva 2007 Chianti Classico Faulty Drink 2010-2010
100% Sangiovese. Cask sample. Oenologists Vittorio Fiore and Massimo Cresti. Deep ruby with orange reflexes on the rim. Vegetal and what looks like oxidised (two different samples tasted). Vegetal and browning apple too. Bottling problem? (WS)

CHIANTI CLASSICO RISERVA 2006

Casaloste, Don Vincenzo Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2011-2014
95% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot. Oenologists Giovanni Battista d’Orsi and Gabriella Tani. Crimson, just starting to evolve at the rim. Restraint and a touch medicinal. Brooding fruit and a hint of oatmeal. Great reluctance of fruit on the palate and, at this stage, lots of tannins dominating the finish. May need more time, but will never be the most generous of wines. (WS) 13.5%

Castellare di Castellina, Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
95% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo. Oenologists Alessandro Cellai and Maurizio Castelli. Deep crimson, with only just the beginning of age. Dried-fruit nose with the merest suggestion of baked apple. Linear fruit, not an enormous lot of charm here. (WS) 13.5%

Castello della Paneretta, Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2015
90% Sangiovese, 10% Canaiolo. Oenologist Fabio Albisetti. Attractive medium ruby. Intriguing nose of herbs, cherry and black currant leaves. Sweet fruit attack, followed by lovely succulent fruit harnessed by powdery, grippy tannins. Good length, will certainly benefit from additional cellaring. (WS) 13.5%

Castello di Bossi, Bernardo Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 16 Drink 2010-2014
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Alberto Antonini. Very dark ruby with orange reflexes in very small rim. Subdued nose of earthy, plummy fruit and cherry, and a hint of tobacco. Viscous mouthful of fruit followed by stalky tannins. Will mellow out with age. Good complexity and balance. Good food partner. (WS) 14%

Castello di Meleto, Vigna Casi Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
85% Sangiovese, 15% Merlot. Oenologists Federico Cerelli and Stefano Chioccioli. Deep crimson. Popular , rich dark fruit, fruitcake and spicy oak nose. Concentrated and dense on the attack, pulled in by stalky tannin and lifting acidity. Very good length. (WS) 14%

Castello di Monsanto, Il Poggio Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2011-2015
90% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo, 5% Colorino. Cask sample. Andrea Giovannini. Deep, medium concentrated ruby, with orange reflexes. Maturing, if somewhat backward nose with dark and dried fruit character and tarry notes. Initally very sweet on the attack, this evolves quickly into fragrant cherry fruit with fierce but not overpowering tannins. Very good length, which starts to become complex. Inspite of the hefty tannins, it still seemd balanced, if not integrated yet. Traditionalist style. Wait. (WS) 14%

Vicchiomaggio, La Prima Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2013
100% Sangiovese. Oenologists John Matta and staff. Deep Bordeaux-like ruby. Stewed fruit, fruitcake, and strawberry jam. Sweet and concentrated, a bit one dimensional. Stalky tannins on the finish perk it up. Ends warm. (WS) 14%

Vicchiomaggio, Gustavo Petri Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2013
80% Sangiovese, 20% Merlot. Cask sample. Oenologists John Matta and staff. Very dark crimson, almost opaque. Tiny rim with orange reflexes. Dense, maturing nose, with dark fruit and note of candied orange peel, this wine will look already mature upon release, but perhaps this is the style the estate aims for. The palate confirms this impression with soft, ripe, and very approachable. Drinking well now, so it is intriguing why it hasn’t been bottled earlier? (WS)

Dievole, Novecento Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 14.5 Drink 2010-2012
90% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo, 5% Colorino. Oenologists Santo Gozzo and Simone Anselmi. Very dark ruby with orange reflexes in tiny rim. Old-fashioned nose of fruitcake and fruit steeped in alcohol. Livelier palate, but without greast interest. Depending on the price this looks like it is aiming at masses. (WS) 14%

Dievole, Dieulele Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 14 Drink 2010-2012
95% Sangiovese, 3% Colorino, 2% Canaiolo. Oenologists Santo Gozzi and Simone Anselmi. Even darker, with orange-tinged rim. Stewed, raisiny fruit with round fruitcake style palate. Ends quite dry and sudden. (WS)

Montemaggio, Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2013
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Andrea Paoletti. Maturing, medium-deep ruby. Earthy, with tobacco notes, tar and mineral and lurking plum fruit. Sweet, concentrated fruit with lifting acidity, and stalky tannins. Looks slightly tired? (WS) 14%

Nittardi, Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
95% Sangiovese, 5% Merlot. Oenologist Carlo Ferrini. Deep, youthful ruby. Opens with oriental spice and dried cherry. Intense, almost jammy fruit with only the merest suggestion of oak on the finish. Well balanced, hugely popular style. (WS) 13.5%

Fontodi, Vigna del Sorbo Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
90% Sangiovese, 10% Cabernet Sauvignon. Oenologist Franco Bernabei. Deep crimson, rim just starting to lighten. Heady, sweet cherry-liqueur nose. Ripe, concentrated, almost intense sweet fruit lifted by juicy acidity. Coating tannins. Well balanced. A bigger, international style of Chianti Classico. (WS) 14.5%

Lamole di Lamole, Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2012
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Loris Vazzoler. Medium-concentrated ruby, with rim just beginning to show some orange. Canned cherries and strawberries. Quite sweet initially on the palate. No real highs or lows here. (WS) 13.5%

Lamole di Lamole, Vigneto Campolungo Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2012
85% Sangiovese, 15% Cabernet Sauvignon. Oenologist Loris Vazzoler. Deep crimson. Intense strawberry jam and cherry pie with earthy notes. Rich and sweet on the attack, long and concentrated, grainy tannins giving much needed contrast, but without great depth and seemed to lack a bit of focus. (WS) 14%

Le Cinciole, Petresco Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Stefano Chioccioli. Medium-concentrated ruby. Lovely maturing nose of fruit and oak. Some tarry notes pop up, adding to the multilayered impression. Palate seems quite young and subdued, but there is lots of concentration here as well as balance. This is structured more by acidity than by tannin. (WS) 13.5%

Monteraponi, Baron'Ugo Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 17 Drink 2010-2015
90% Sangiovese, 5% Canaiolo, 5% Colorino. Cask sample. Oenologist Maurizio Castelli. Medium-deep ruby, with broad rim displaying orange reflexes. Old-school nose with cherry liqueur notes, tobacco and a hint of cinnamon bark. Sweet sour interplay of fruit and acidity and well-handled tannins, giving it a savoury feel. Very long and enjoyable. (WS)

Principe Corsini, Le Corti Cortevecchia Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2013
95% Sangiovese, 3% Colorino, 2% Canaiolo. Oenologists Carlo Ferrini and Giuseppe Lucido. Concentrated ruby with orange reflexes. Appealing sweet, dark fruit compote and a touch of nutmeg and liquorice. Rich and sweet attack, but fades away on the middle to return at the end with hints of dried fruit. (WS) 13%

Renzo Marinai, Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 15 Drink 2010-2013
85% Sangiovese, 15% Cabernet Sauvignon. Oenologist Giovanni Cappelli. Impenetrable, almost black, immediately suggesting addition of Merlot and/or Cabernet Sauvignon to the blend. Already quite developed, with tobacco and tarry notes and intense sweet dark fruit. Same international approach on the palate with bags of sweet fruit and low acidity. Could be anything, if anything rich and concentrated. (WS) 13.5%

Riecine, Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Sean O’Gallaghan. Deep ruby with broader rim showing orange reflexes. Posh, refined dried cherry nose with cigar box hints. Animating, sour-cherry palate with ripe, crunchy tannins. Well balanced and accessible without being one dimensional. (WS) 14%

Rignana, Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 15.5 Drink 2010-2014
85% Sangiovese, 15% Merlot. Oenologists Giulio Gambelli and Paolo Salvi. Very dark ruby. Subdued, tarry fruit and liquorice opening. The wine seems quite mature already. On the palate round, loosely knotted dark fruit. Could perhaps do with a little bit more freshness. (WS) 14.5%

Villa Cafaggio, Riserva 2006 Chianti Classico 16.5 Drink 2010-2014
100% Sangiovese. Oenologist Stefano Chioccioli. Medium-concentrated dark ruby, with small orange rim. Appealing if very sweet, and ripe, with hints of earth and tar. Palate shows more age with tobacco and almost confected cherry. Bouncing acidity gets to grips with the fruit sweetness, but end completely dry. Impressive, if monolithic. (WS) 14%

CENTOPASSI - WINES FROM CONFISCATED VINEYARDS

2010-01-19T12:04:00.002Z

Charities which focus on the production of wines can expect to elicit the same reaction most organic wines have provoked: it is laudable but is the product any good? I must admit I had similar thoughts when I first heard of Centopassi, a Sicilian co-operative located in the heartland of the Cosa Nostra, Corleone. For most people, just hearing the village's name will conjure up all kinds of romantic if violent clichés, fed mostly by endless reruns of The Godfather, but from my own experience I remember Corleone as a sinister place. Sheltered, or hidden, depending on the point of view, by the rock mass of the Alto Belice Corleonese, it firmly turns its back on strangers attracted by its infamous reputation, as home of one of the Mafia's most feared bosses, Toto Riina.

Italy has several projects and/or co-operatives which try either to fight wrongdoing or to rehabilitate people gone off the tracks. That it can work is evidenced by San Patrignano in Emilia Romagna, a project helping severe addicts give up hard drugs while integrating them into work in the vineyard and cellar. Some pretty classy wines are turned out by the estate, which has Riccardo Cotarella, no less, as a consulting oenologist.

Centopassi is the viticultural and winemaking merger of two Co-operative Sociale, la Cooperativa Sociale Placido Rizzotto-Libera Terra and la Cooperativa Sociale Pio La Torre-Libera Terra in Sicily. Both co-operatives manage agricultural lands confiscated from Cosa Nostra bosses Brusca and Riina. Libera Terra, the association which runs the co-ops, is itself part of a much larger organisation, whose sole objective is to fight the mafia in all areas of Italian society, and is called Libera. Libera Terra came into being as the result of the so-called Rognoni-La Torre law, also known as law 109/96, which was drawn up in 1996 after more than a million farmers had signed a petition to allow for the confiscated land to be used for its original purpose. The law was the brainchild and dream of Pio La Torre, a fierce opponent of organised crime, who in the 1980s started to prepare the grounds for confiscation of mafia properties, and who, in 1982, literally paid for this with his life.

Libera Terra manages confiscated properties throughout southern Italy, with the majority (47%) in Sicily, as well as several properties in Calabria, Campania, Lazio, and, surprisingly, Lombardia. The co-ops produce all kinds of agricultural produce but Centopassi's wines have actually found the recognition of italy's leading wine guides, L'Espresso and Gambero Rosso. Or, to quote the journalist Luciano Pignataro, the worst thing you could do would be to regard Centopassi as a charity or some kind of reserve. The only way to make the mission successful is to produce something exceptional. And in order to do this, and get the attention of the market, you must simply have to keep up the morale and do things better than others.

And keeping up the morale may have been the single most important ingredient for Centopassi's success so far, judging by the experiences of Antonio Castro, Centopassi's agronomist. In a chilling account, he explains that there is a general fear of working the confiscated lands because one constantly meets members of the Mafia families in the streets. Either you stop caring, as Ascione has done, or you leave, unable to withstand the psychological pressure.

If that were not enough to make you buy the wines, it so happens that these are some of the most exciting wines currently coming from Sicily. The three wines described below are all crus, from single vineyards, and from some of Sicily's most promising grape varieties. The grapes are organically grown, as Centopassi believes that organic viticulture is part of the resistance against organised crime, which it wants literally to clear the soils. Or, to quote Don Luigi Ciotti, Libera Terra's founder: 'In Sicily a culture against Mafia has unfortunately grown on blood'.

THE WINES

Libera Terra manages some 400 ha (988 acres), of which 42 ha are vineyards. The land and the vineyards are managed organically and produce pasta, honey, dried vegetables and wine. A stone's throw away from the mafia stronghold Corleone, it also has several buildings formerly owned by the mafia, which have been turned into an agriturismo, Italy's answer to bed & breakfast.

The wines were presented during a seminar at Parlano I Vignaioli, the very first organic wine fair held in Ercolano, Naples, in November.

Centopassi, Terre Rosse di Giabbascio Catarratto 2008 IGT Sicilia 16 Drink 2010-13
Produced from 100% Catarratto, one of Sicily's most planted varieties, from a vineyard of about 20 years old, at 400 m. The name terre rosse stems for the fact that the 4 hectares of vineyard have been planted on reddish brown sand, a very rare soil type in this part of Sicily. Late harvested - for Sicily - in the second half of September, and without any irrigation. Owing to the elevation, there is a considerable difference between day and night temperatures.

The wine is dedicated to Pio La Torre, and his incessant fight for peace and justice, and whom Italy has to thank for the existence of the so called Rognoni-La Torre law in 1996, which regulated the confiscation of Mafia assets. La Torre was killed in 1982 by two masked men who openend fire at him while he was getting into his car. In 1992, a 'Mafioso pentito', a Mafioso turned informant, revealed that La Torre was killed on the order of Totò Riina, the boss of the Corleonesi branch, because of his proposed law regarding confiscation of mafia possessions.

Deep yellow. Beautiful ripe white fruit and orange marmelade and honeyed notes with a mineral streak, and camomile. Completely dry palate as a contrast, with a touch of malolactic creaminess. Fine acidity integrated in viscous mouthfeel. Lots of potential and could certainly do with another year in bottle. 13% (WS)

Centopassi, Rocce di Pietra Longa Grillo 2008 IGT Sicilia 17.5 Drink 2009-13
From a recently planted vineyard in the Contrada Pietra Longa in Monreale near Palermo at about 500 m above sea level. Because of the elevation, the vineyard is characterised by high diurnal temperature variations, with a general cooling effect. The soil is extremely rocky and poor, resulting in low yields (35 hl/ha) and accelerated fruit ripening (the rock content stores the heat). Harvest normally starts at the beginning of September.

This wine is dedicated to Nicolò Azoti, who was killed by the mafia in 1947. Azoti was the secretary of the chamber of commerce, and engaged in the foundation of an agricultural co-operative. His concept and design for a share-cropping law that would give 60% of agricultural produce to the farmers and 40% to the owner, clashed with the mafia interests, and he paid with his life. The case never made it to court, and the perpetrators remained unpunished.

Even deeper yellow than the Catarratto. Wild, opulent nose of flowers and honeycomb, minerally notes of stone, and almost metallic herbal hints, melon and apple, quince jelly and pear. Elegant and fragrant and at the same time restrained palate, leaving a beautiful taste of lemon and lemon peel and satsuma. Very fine, very unusual with lots of energy, the wine is characterised by an almost metallic minerality. Taut and impressive at the same time. 14% (WS)

Centopassi, Argille di Tagghia Via Nero d'Avola 2008 IGT Sicilia 17 Drink 2010-15
From a vineyard near Corleone, on calcareous, porous clay at 600 m above sea level. Low yields of around 40 hl/ha.

The wine is dedicated to Peppino Impastato. Descended from a mafia family himself, he broke with his father at an early stage in his life to become active in politics and the fight against the mafia. He led the resistance of the farmers whose land was to be confiscated in order to build a third runway for the airport of Palermo. In 1978 he ran as a candidate for the Democrazia Proletaria, the same year he was murdered. The cantina is named after the film portraying the life of Impastato, I Cento Passi (the hundred steps).

Very young looking, bluish violet garnet. Opens wild, with strawberry, pure cherry, raspberry and hints of spice. Very seductive. What has now become for me the Centopassi hallmark fragrant nose, without a trace of sweetness. On the palate, bitter, coating tannins and notes of tamarind and salted capers, with high acidity. Energetic. Strikes a very good balance, but unsettled tannins suggest further ageing required. This certainly has the 'wow' factor. Opens up further and becomes more perfumed with aeration. 14% (WS)

OBSERVATIONS ON ITALY'S "REAL WINE" MOVEMENT

2010-01-14T10:10:00.000Z

Italy’s national values may be staunchly conservative and traditional, but the reaction to the reactionary is never far away, and never fails to find enough support to become a voice, even if it is initially underground. Curiously, Italy is also the country, which performs the miracle act of converging the reactionary with the progressive. In this case, its seemingly innate sense of tradition and conservatism is the basis of one of Italy’s, and possibly the world’s, most innovative trends: that of the production of “natural wine”.

Natural wine, of course, doesn’t exist. To paraphrase the late Maynard A. Amerine, America’s most famous oenologist and teacher, wine without the intervention of man or woman is nothing more than grape juice in the process of turning into vinegar. Nevertheless, the movement, or rather a large range of associations, wine fairs and producer groups that have sprung up in the last 10 years or so in Italy, is almost always referred to as “Vini Naturali”, natural wine, or “Vini Veri”, real wine. The latter is also the name of the most influential association of wine producers, who has defiantly turned its back on Italy’s largest winefair, Vinitaly, by staging its own gathering of a select group of likeminded wine producers at exactly the same time. Presided by the late Teobaldo Cappellano, the association soon faced a split off by several producers, headed by Angiolino Maule, calling itself “VinNatur”. These two groups only represent the top of the iceberg, with many other permanently or loosely organised groups, such as Triple “A” (Agricoltori Artigiani Artisti), La Sorgente del Vino, Vini di Vignaioli, and the brandnew Parlano i Vignaioli, an initiative from Italy’s most promising and yet most inert region, Campania coming to the fore.

Although most of Italy’s quality conscious producers are acutely aware of organic and biodynamic grape growing and wine making practices, the “natural wine” movement has not been ignited by worries concerning sustainability or consumer health in the first place. It is much more the result of a genuine longing back to traditional agricultural practices and times when agrochemicals were not known and international grape varieties and barriques had yet to appear in Italy’s vineyards and cellars. This heartfelt sentiment can be traced back as far as the 1960s and the beginning of the 1970s, and finds its main inspiration in Mario Soldati.

Soldati, one of Italy’s most respected writers and film directors until his death in 1999, was fascinated by the country’s food and wine culture. Between 1968 and 1975 he travelled extensively throughout Italy to record its ancient viticultural and winemaking practices. Considering himself a chronicler of this history, he wanted to witness it firsthand before it would inevitably disappear behind stainless steel and clonal selection. He published his observations in what was to become one of the Italian “real wine” movement’s handbooks, Vino al Vino. The work does not primarily documents wines of the highest quality, but is in search of the genuine, the “real”, embodied by wines that were the result of ancient agricultural practices. Wine not primarily representing nature but culture, and one Soldati feared was in danger of disappearing forever.

Soldati’s ideas may seem sentimental, but his book, recording historic and traditional methods, summarises the very way Italy experiences wine. Contrary to France’s terroir concept, which tends to explain wine’s identity as the result of plant, soil and climate more or less exclusive of human input, Italy sees wine’s identity as the result of history, culture and traditional practices, including vinification. It is the same concept that became the very basis of Italy’s DOC and DOCG’s.

Over the years Soldati’s enthusiasm for traditional practices as well as his concern for their disappearance, has gained a steady following and echoes of his ideas can still be heard, most notably last year May in an appeal, called “In difesa dell'identità del Vino Italiano” (In defense of the identity of Italian Wine). The appeal appeared online at the height of the Brunello scandal and was formulated by Porthos, a group of wine journalists, whose motto is “Ribelle Nobile Disperato” (desperate noble rebels). Named after Porthos, one of Alexandre Dumas’ Three Muscateers with an insatiable appetite for good wine and food, the group tried to mobilise public opinion against what they describe as an attack on the history of Italian wine.

Brunellogate, as the scandal also came to be known by, divided the Italian wine landscape into diametrically opposed camps. On the one side, a high profile group of consultant oenologists and wine makers argued the impossibility of following the word of the law in producing a 100% Brunello wine only, arguing that even if it would be possible, it would result in a wine that consumers would not appreciate.

The other camp, represented by the likes of Porthos, see the very suggestion of the problem not being fraud but the Italian law itself, which fails to accommodate market demands and preferences to render Italian wines more competitive, as an unacceptable attempt to bend the rules. According to Porthos, the other camp uses Italy’s highest denominations without any respect for its history and traditions, which were originally designed to safeguard and guarantee the identity and integrity of Italian wines. To restore some of the credibility of the DOC and DOCG disciplinaries, Porthos demands from the authorities a stricter implementation of rules and tighter controls.
It also demands stricter legislation concerning the use of chemicals and systemic products, and condemns cultured yeasts, enzymes and biotechnology in general, which are used to produce better wine, but in reality “make vain the concept of territoriality (sic)”. Porthos emotional appeal in defence of the identity of Italian wines was followed by an online petition, which the very first to sign were Teobaldo Cappellano for Vini Veri and Angiolino Maule for VinNatur.

Porthos voices the growing concern of many Italian wine producers who see Italian wine becoming more and more standardised in an effort to appeal to international markets. According to them not only the introduction of international grape varieties in Italy’s vineyards are to blame but also the omnipresence of technology in its cellars, introduced and endorsed by oenologists. These consultants regularly advise multiple wineries, while often lacking the time or the experience to understand each single terroir. Pressed for time many consultant oenologists will rely on the execution of their protocols or instructions, to be executed by staff in vineyard and cellar. Any risk is arguably undesirable, if the final wine is to bear the trademark of the consultant, in order to secure international attention and sales.

Aside from these protocol-like oenological practices, there is general concern of the use of chemicals in the vineyard and cultured yeast in the cellar. Great wines that reflect their origin should be the fruit of agricultural methods which now have almost disappeared, and which need very little or no intervention in vineyard or the cellar. Wines that practically “make themselves”. This adage has lead to a sense and urgency in experimentation not seen since the 1980s when Italy’s wine production took an enormous leap in quality forward, not in the least instigated by modernisation of its cellars and the introduction of stainless steel and temperature control. This new scene characterises itself by a relentless desire for experimentation to the point of total anarchy. Current trends are borne out of a reaction against the modernisations introduced in the recent past, and are often their complete antithesis.

The clearest leitmotiv between all associations and all wines is a growing commitment to indigenous grape varieties. Italy’s infatuation with international grape varieties, which in the past were glorified as an “amelioration”, may well have come to and end, now that it realises that a certain “sameness” in the wines can be counteracted most effectively by using indigenous ones. And lower yields and better vineyard site selection will heighten this even more.

But variety and site are not the only determining factors in the character of wine. Central to all these concepts is the idea that the way the grapes are processed and the juice fermented is all part of wine’s identity. Fermentations are generally without the use of cultured yeast, and temperature control is more often than not rejected. An enormous curiosity in any fermentation vessel other than stainless steel, be it amphora, large oak casks, cement vats or glass ballons, has led to a very strong laissez-faire policy during all phases of the vinification. As wine, now more than ever, has come to stand for something “natural”, “pure” and “genuine”, new oak barriques are avoided. Many producers opt for large old oak casks for fermentation as well as ageing, and the initial hints of vanilla in the wine is the sole compromise producers who threw out their stainless steel to start working with wood are willing to put up with during the first two years of their use.

The idea of wine “making itself” sees numerous different interpretations, from hardliners, who fearlessly reject any use of sulphur, as well as more moderate approaches, using as little sulphur as possible, and at the bottling stage only. Both views have resulted in an increased tolerance of winefaults in the resulting wines, the most common being oxidation, and high levels of volatile acidity. Although the organic movement seems to attract many untrained newcomers, this can only partially explains this tolerance, as even skilled and experienced wine makers show a forgivingness to winefaults unheard of before, while pushing the limits as far as they can.

While sulphur has become the new bête noire, the use of indigenous or ambient yeast is on the rise. Many of the aforementioned associations decline the use of cultured yeast altogether, arguing that natural yeast, which normally is present in the cellar as well as the vineyard, is part of the terroir. Although this being a very strong argument, it regularly leads to higher levels of residual sugars in the wines. In combination with a general rejection of stabilisation, filtration and sulphuring, a refermentation in the bottle can occur, which, again, is not seen as something faulty and undesirable, but the consequence of wine being a “living thing”, which also reflects itself in bottle variation.

Since “control” has become a dirty word for many producers, vatting times are greatly prolonged, with fermentation curves often going up and down depending on the ambient temperature of the season. Malolactic fermentation may occur or not (unsurprisingly, inoculation with lactic bacteria is out of the question) and the wines remain on skins and, more and more, stalks for as long as possible, as grapes regularly end up into the fermentation vessel without being destemmed. Vatting times are also greatly extended by long ageing on the lees. Especially “Triple A” considers a long lees contact fundamental to the wine’s health. Often, frequent batonnage is not considered essential, and there is surprisingly little fear for reduction on the part of many winemakers. Racking can be as little as once a year, and the resulting wines often seem to support the impression that this practice is executed more often out of routine than necessity in more conventional winemaking. After the wines have been bottled many producers think nothing of holding off their release for another 12 to 24 months, and regularly even longer. As the release date of the wines are often postponed for years, their elevated price tag comes as no surprise.

The most obvious trend, and one wholly unstoppable, is the fermentation of white wines on the grape skins during part or the entire period of the alcoholic fermentation. Gravner may have been one of the first to experiment with this, ending up with wines no longer white but distinctly orange in colour, but many producers have adopted this ancient practice, arguing that all the goodness is in the skin, whereas the pulp of the berries mostly contain water. Frequently these whites have a distinct aroma of apricots, and for the unaccustomed consumer many of them may smell the same, implying that distinct terroir characteristics have been sacrificed. But producers who use this technique are quick to point out that no one would ever say that about red wines, which are all fermented in this way. According to them it is just a question of experience and regular exposure to these wines that will make wine lovers become aware of a diversity of aromas and tastes never experienced before. They also argue that the method greatly increases the ageability of these wines, as the style is often oxidative and the maceration of the skin will have added some tannins to the wine, an indication that they may prove to be robust, if not everyone’s cup of tea.

Many of these “old new wave wines” are so unorthodox and without any precedent that hardly any of them manage to pass the official controls, and are regularly rejected as “untypical” and, ironically, “untraditional”. As in the past, some of the very best wines with a real heightened sense of place have no choice but to take refuge under the lowly IGT designation, as did the Super Tuscans in the past. This fact will invariably weaken the higher DOC and DOCG category further, as it is incapable of either honouring experiments nor recognising quality and therefore loses more and more any credibility or stimulus for high quality wine production.

Although the category of “natural” or “true wine” may seem niche, several of its unorthodox approaches and techniques are resonating in the wider vinous landscape. Notably Bisol started producing in tiny quantities a Prosecco called NoSo2, without any added sulphur. And more and more Prosecco producers are adding a line of bottle fermented Prosecco to their range, after examples from the completely organic CostadiLa estate appeared to be a much greater success than was initially expected from a niche product like this. Even something simple as Lambrusco can be had as a “metodo ancestrale” vintage wine as Bellei shows. The use of amphora for fermentation as well as ageing will become much more wide spread than is now the case, with especially COS showing the undiscovered potential with its Pithos Nero d’Avola, and Castello di Lispida in Veneto’s Colli Euganei using it to ferment Friulano and Merlot. And while conventional producers tend to shun any kind of collaboration out of fear of teaming up with the competition, the many “natural wine” associations and winefairs have created platforms for lively discussions and exchange of ideas and experiences, which are set to become a growing force in Italy’s winescape, and widen the horizon for producers and consumers alike.

NEW SCANDAL HITS ITALY

2009-12-18T08:13:00.000Z

12 December
Italian media reported yesterday that scores of Chianti wineries/oenologists (some of which are said to be 'renowned') are going to have to answer questions relating to fraudulent blending/invoicing of 'Chianti' wines from the NAS (Italy's fraud squad).

News emerged yesterday that the Guardia Finanza of Siena in Tuscany is investigating what appears to be a sequel to the recent Brunello scandal.

This time it apparently concerns as much as 10 million litres of blended inferior wines labelled with some of Tuscany's most prestigious denominations, including Rosso di Montepulciano and, again, Brunello di Montalcino. (At a presentation in London on Monday to celebrate Gaja's 150th anniversary, Gaia Gaja, while presenting a couple of vintages of their Pieve di Santa Restituta Brunello, observed about the earlier Brunello scandal that while it was the fault of the producers involved, perhaps the Consorzio was too lax in allowing the extraordinary growth of this denomination from 150,000 to 7 million bottles in the last 40 years - JR.)
No fewer than 17 people and 42 companies are reportedly under investigation. Although the enquiry is currently focused primarily on Tuscany, the scandal seems to implicate some as far north as Trentino.

The news comes just after some Montalcino producers, under investigation in the original Brunello affair, had their wines sequestered and were forced to declassify questionable wines to the lowly IGT designation in order to have them released and avoid further prosecution.

16 DECEMBER
According to one report, a total of five hectares in Castellina in Chianti has been sequestered by the authorities. This is prime Chianti Classico land, but the five hectares are not necessarily denominated as such. Allegedly the land belongs to an operation that had been in the news recently because it was discovered that it was blending wines from Puglia into its Chianti. The police apparently followed a truck transporting bulk wine from Puglia to its final destination, confiscated the wine, and the whole batch was made IGT.

My own interpretation is that to produce the volumes of Chianti or Chianti Classico at the lowest possible price in order to service the large supermarkets, especially Germany and the UK, companies are willing to venture outside the law. I am not saying that supermarkets force them to do, but the fact remains that large retailers can put such pressure on price points, that this is one of the inevitable outcomes, especially when contracts on volumes and prices have been drawn up long before any fruit has appeared on the vines...

ASSOENOLOGI DECLARES 2009 VINTAGE AS "VERY GOOD"

2009-12-05T09:22:00.001Z

The Assoenologi, Italy’s Association of enologists has declared the 2009 vintage as “very good”, a positive assessment in an otherwise less than glorious overall looking picture. Volume is down by 4% in comparison to 2008 (44,5 mio hl against 46,3 mio in the previous year), which surely is a good thing for a wine producing country that still favours quantity over quality, but prices for some wines have fallen by a staggering 40%. Rumours of cellars full of unsold wine, notably in Piemonte, seem to win in credibility against these figures.

Italy has seen its total vineyard plantings fall from 1,230000 ha in 1980 to 684,000 ha in 2008, an enormous decline by anyone’s standard. Assoenologi interprets these figures as a consequence of an ongoing specialisation and monoculture in a country that traditionally treated wine as a part of a mixed agricultural activity, with uproot premiums from the EU doing the rest. However, a factor that puts at least as much weight in the scales is the fact that over the last 20 years or so Italians are drinking less and less wine (45 litres per capita today compared to 100 in the 1970s). Or, as Assoenologi’s director, Giuseppe Martelli explains: “Italian wine has changed from being a foodstuff and part of the diet to something non-essential (“Il vino italiano in vent’anni è passato da “alimento” a “genere voluttuario”).

At this moment Italy’s entire viticultural sector is worth more than13 billion euros annually, with export responsible for 3.6 billion Euros. Currently 55% of the total production is red wine, with the balance being white. Cantine Sociale or Co-operatives are still responsible for 50% of the total national wine production. With the declining consumption at home it comes as no surprise that Italy is relying more and more on exports. But it is especially in its main export market, the United states, that Italy has come to feel the pinch of the recession, with consumer demand shifting towards less expensive wines.

Assoenologi explains this year’s reduced yields as the consequence of a very irregular weather pattern during the 2009 growing cycle. Winter brought lots of rain and unusual heavy snowfall in the North and Northwest, replenishing the water tables for the 2009 season, but also delaying the start of the growing cycle. A very warm spring with temperatures regularly hitting 30 C benefited a quick and regular flower set. Until July the general weather pattern was extremely benign with very warm and dry weather and the occasional precipitation, which budded expectations of an early harvest.

The first week of July brought rain increasing fungal pressure throughout the country. However, August saw intense heat and virtually no rain at all, a situation that remained until mid September. The heat and lack of water forced many vines to shut down, retarding grape ripening and resulting in the rare occurrence of low sugar levels combined with low acidity, respired by the plants in the heat. With the continuous August heat in some vineyards signs of sun burn and dried fruit became apparent. The situation protracted harvests in large parts of the country as producers were waiting for much needed rain to increase volume in the berries, and to set the plant’s cycle in motion again to trigger ripening, which until then had been arrested. But large temperature differences between day and night prevented 2009 of becoming a 2003, a vintage equally characterised by high temperatures, but with little cooling down during the night. Large parts of the North and Centre were blessed with a sunny September, although with many producers hoping for rain instead, whereas the South and the Islands faced torrential rains.

2009 will be the year of old vines and high altitudes. In general, the older vineyards suffered far less from the weather pattern, as rootstocks are well developed to reach water reserves filled up by the exceptionally wet winter, and with less fruit to support. Young vines, as a consequence suffered more. While irrigation can be a potential aid, and permits in extreme weather conditions can be applied for, the majority of Italian vineyards are not equipped with water systems.
High altitude vineyards, which win in importance not least due to increased temperatures due to climate change, generally experienced the greatest difference in day and night temperatures, allowing the vines much needed rest and alleviating the heat stress.

Because of the heterogeneous character of the year, generalisations are hazardous. Piemonte can look back on early harvested, healthy whites with good acidity levels, and a fairly regular growing season for the late ripening Nebbiolo, especially on the higher sites, while Franciacorta experienced a very early harvest for its Pinots and Chardonnay.

Alto Adige also experience an earlier vintage than usual, and although the grapes were general healthy, the white Burgundian varieties seem to have fared best, as well as the red indigenous Teroldego and Lagrein. The average high altitude vineyards of the region proved a natural advantage this year.
Although Trentino started harvesting more than 15 days earlier compared to last year, hopes are high for both whites and reds.

Veneto’s most important white variety, Garganega was more affected by the unusual large bunches causing potential dilution in the final wines, than the prolonged ripening season. Some parts of Conegliano-Valdobbiadene have been struggling with the long and intense period of heat. Its main protagonist Prosecco had difficulty retaining acidity levels, while sugar levels remained low due to the vines slowing down due to stress.

Also Friuli Venezia Giulia started harvesting a full week earlier compared to last year. Rains fell mid September, which may have been a fraction too late for most aromatic whites, but welcomed for the late ripening Friulano, Ribolla and the red varieties.

Central Italy shows a much more diverse image with some producers, notably in Chianti Classico, showing great enthusiasm for the quality of Sangiovese. Although the fruit was very healthy, some producers struggled with high sugar levels in the berries, caused by a delayed harvest in the hope for rain. Again, higher altitude and old vine vineyards have generally fared best, and some very good wines can be expected.

Campania experienced the same sped up growing cycle, which came to a halt during a very cool September. In some parts this came as a blessing, especially for late ripening varieties. Campania’s most important red, Aglianico, normally not harvested before the end of October, may have fared best, especially on higher altitudes.
The same kickstart in the growing cycle was experienced in Sicily. An advanced harvest of Merlot in the first week of August was followed by Syrah and Nero d’Avola before the arrival of torrential rains interrupted the harvest and delayed further ripening of the grapes.

Although it is much too early to come to final conclusions due to the large viticultural area Italy represents, with many different meso and micro climates, 2009, for the time being, has triggered less enthusiasm and media exposure than Bordeaux. Contrary to popular belief Italy’s vintages rarely reflect France’s and vice versa. Often generalisations on vintage quality of Italian wines by professionals and wine lovers alike are based on France’s and especially Bordeaux’ overall performance. But comparisons between, 1999 (very good to outstanding in Central Italy and the North, less favourable for France) and 2000 (exactly the opposite) as well as 2001 (again, very good for Italy, and less so or France), to name a few, show no linked pattern.

CHARDONNAY UNDER FLOR FROM LOMBARDY

2009-10-19T09:32:00.003+01:00

Oltrepò Pavese, located south of Milan in the south of Lombardy, remains one of Italy's most obscure wine regions. Sandwiched between Piemonte and Emilia-Romagna, and with the majority of its vineyards planted on the foothills of the Ligurian Apennines, it is responsible for 60% of Lombardy's entire DOC output. The region has consistently presented itself as bulk producer of international grape varieties with substantial plantings of Pinot Noir (some 3,000 ha at the latest count and going up) followed by Chardonnay, Pinot Bianco and the ubiquitous Pinot Grigio.
As the average quality of grapes grown on the hills can be quite high, Oltrepò Pavese has traditionally been the prime source for sparkling wine producers from outside the region, especially from Piemonte and Trentino. Only very recently has the region begun to market itself on its suitability for Burgundian varieties. Its Metodo Classico Oltrepò Pavese was promoted to DOCG status in 2007 and, beginning with the 2008 vintage, the regulations stipulate a minimum of 85% Pinot Noir, the balance being Chardonnay, while the still red wine Oltrepò Pavese Pinot Noir must be 100% of this grape.

While these measures aim at upgrading Oltrepò Pavese's reputation, they continue to ignore its own indigenous grape varieties. It seems that it takes an outsider to ignite an interest in Oltrepò Pavese's own grape varieties, and to save the rarest from oblivion. Dario Tiraboschi is such a person. He combines an administrative job in Bergamo, more than 170km north of Oltrepò Pavese, with running the Fattoria Mondo Antico, in the beautiful, secluded Rocca Susella.
Tiraboschi is a descendant of a family of cheesemakers, which has equipped him with a strong interest in anything agricultural, but he turned to wine by accident. Twenty years ago, one of Tiraboschi's relatives, who was living in Oltrepò Pavese, mentioned he was interested in buying a farm which came with a vineyard. The initial interest of his relative ebbed away, but Dario decided to buy the property himself after having seen the magnificent Collina del Pernione, a steep hill with perfect south to south-west exposition.

Dario proceeded to divide the steep 5-ha slope, characterised by white terra bianca soil, rich in limestone and not unlike those found in Jerez, into several blocks using the different expositions to suit his grape varieties' needs. The first is the south-facing slope planted with two local types of the Croatina variety, which Dario planted in 1993 to create Agenore, a wine which he wants to be a proper vehicle of terroir in a sea of indifferent Croatina blends pouring out of the region. Vigneto Chardonnay was planted the same year with the white burgundy grape and takes up the south-west-facing part of the hill producing. it produces Perpolio, an unoaked Chardonnay aged under the film-forming yeast flor (see your online Oxford Companion to Wine for more), while the top part is a minuscule 0.5 ha planted with four different clones of Pinot Noir.

Another plot of 1.7 ha right in front of the hill is the Vigneto Vigna Vecchia Rosso, a seemingly neglected vineyard full of old vines, most of them 60 years and older. Although its unkempt state would never suggest this, it is a true treasure trove of ancient and forgotten grape varieties. With the help of a viticulturist, Dario started to isolate, select and propagate the rarest and, from a quality point of view, most promising varieties.
The first grape he stumbled upon was the red Moradella. One of the region's oldest grape varieties. nowadays it can be found only in old vineyards because, owing to some perverse act of fate, the variety is not officially registered in the Catalogo Nazionale delle Varietà di Vite (Italy's official, but apparently not exhaustive, register of the nation's grape varieties) and is therefore absent from the DOC regulations. There is, however, a general assumption, that the typical OP reds, Buttafuoco and the sweet Sangue di Giuda, mainly consisting of Barbera and Croatina, were much more interesting in the past when Moradella was still included in the blend. According to Dario, the variety has a thick skin and therefore shows good resistance to rot, which it needs, being a late ripener picked normally at the end of October.

As well as Moradella, Dario discovered a superior clone of small-berried Barbera and also the red Uva Cascina, considered practically extinct. This variety is apparently almost the total opposite of Moradella, ripening a full three weeks earlier, giving very perfumed, full-bodied red wines. Dario is convinced that all three varieties are of high quality because of their small, but not-too-compact bunches with tiny berries resulting in a good skin to juice ratio in the fermentation tank. He plans to vinify and bottle the varieties separately as an ongoing investigation into their peculiarities, with the first bottlings not expected before 2010.

In this museum of grapes, Chardonnay and Pinot Noir seem the odd ones out, and Dario is gradually replacing the 'too international' Chardonnay with the indigenous white Verdea, an ancient grape used in the past for making sweet wines, and Pinot Noir, for which he seems to have a genuine passion.

However, Mondo Antico's Chardonnay is most unusual, not just because of its complete absence of oak, but because of the flor that develops after fermentation on the surface of the wine, which is then aged under it for a year. Dario discovered this style by chance while visiting a wine fair in France's Jura. He followed the Jura practice by racking off the wine after fermentation and then leaving it in a vessel a third unfilled, in this case made of stainless steel rather than oak. After a couple of weeks, a fine film of yeast appeared on the surface. Normally when tanks or casks are not properly topped up, wine falls prey to oxidation and can turn into vinegar. Why this is not the case here, Dario is unable to explain.

It could be that part of the explanation for the occurrence of flor lies in the exceptionally white terra bianca, soil rich in potassium, phosphorus and magnesium, nutrients that yeasts thrive on. The high limestone content has excellent water-retaining capacity, soaking up winter precipitation. This forms a water reservoir the vines can dip into during the growing cycle, especially welcome on steep slopes. A disadvantage, however, is its low organic matter. To increase this, soy, mustard and fava beans are planted and then mowed in during the spring. This is complemented by spraying the biodynamic 500 preparation (the infamous dung-filled cowhorn) twice a year, in spring and immediately after the harvest.

Dario's unorthodox approach, saturating the wine with oxygen during the entire vinification, may also be part of the explanation of the flor riddle. Throughout the fermentation he racks frequently, whites as well as reds. As he explains, it allows for a steady and quick fermentation, without having to rely too much on temperature control, and he even allows the temperature to go up to 20-24 ºC for his whites. The reds are more or less left to their own devices, but as Dario vinifies them in small epoxy tanks, the heat developed during fermentation can escape quickly and the wine never exceeds 30 ºC.

Dario has started to produce a still, unoaked Pinot Noir. In his cellar, which is dominated by small stainless-steel and epoxy-resin vessels, a couple of abandoned barriques stand in the corner. Dario tried them but found that the resulting wine was dominated by the taste of oak and dry tannins. He is convinced that his Collina can produce great Pinot Noir, but, as if to prove his seriousness of intent, he declassified all his 2007 because he was not happy with the level of ripeness. And neither is there any of the 2006 maiden vintage left. It was snapped up by a German importer, who came across it at Prowein in Düsseldorf and, after tasting it, bought the lot without a second thought.

Mondo Antico, Perpolio 2007 Oltrepò Pavese Chardonnay 16.5 Drink 2009-10?
The name Perpolio comes from Latin and signifies something 'refined'. The yield per hectare for this wine was less than 40 hl. The wine is fermented in stainless steel. During the first month Dario does a closed remontage on the lees twice a week followed almost immediately by spontaneous malolactic fermentation. The whole process takes about four weeks, after which the wine is racked off the gross lees into another tank, which is filled to only 2/3 of its capacity, where after some 15 days a fine film of flor appears.
Light amber, indicating a late harvest of very ripe fruit and oxidative winemaking. At first intense apricot jam, with iodine notes and bruised apples, a touch creamy too. Less refined than its name indicates, but certainly fascinating, it has an almost wild quality to it. This also goes for the palate, showing opulent fruit with a fine citric edge and yeasty, bready impressions. Ends warm and a touch sweet (RS 5-6g/l). Very peculiar and in the 'love-hate' category. 13% (WS)

Mondo Antico, Sinodo 2006 Oltrepò Pavese Rosso 16.5 Drink 2009-12
From 60-year-old vines, this can be considered a classic Oltrepò Pavese blend uniting Barbera, Croatina, Uva della Cascina and Moradella, although this last is not officially allowed. The name of this wine comes form the Greek, meaning 'assembly' or 'meeting'. The grapes stem from the old, mixed vineyard. Owing to their different ripening times, several passages through the vines are needed to complete the harvest. The first two are done only by Dario's family, without the help of other pickers, as through experience they can distinguish the different varieties, and know what to pick and what to leave. The wine is fermented in steel and undergoes lots of remontages and déléstages. Regardless of whether alcoholic fermentation has been completed or not, the wine is racked off the skins after 12 days or so to prevent further tannic pickup. Once the fermentation is terminated, the wine gets one racking only to separate it from the gross lees, after which malolactic fermentation immediately starts, presumably because so little sulphur is used at this stage. Racking at regular intervals is done throughout the year to prevent reduction, which is a greater risk when using totally inert glass-fibre and stainless-steel tanks.
A deep crimson colour. Immediate, lifted, vivid nose with a touch of VA. Dark fruits with a layer of maraschino cherry and savoury notes, followed by a rustic, energetic palate of sweet concentrated fruit with crunchy, bitter tannins. Ends warm and rustic. Very animated and long. Seems quite young. RS about 5 g/l. 14% (WS)

Mondo Antico, Agenore Bonarda 2006 Oltrepò Pavese 16 Drink 2009-12
This wine is in fact a 100% Croatina. Bonarda is the local synonym for Croatina, and the Oltrepò Pavese Bonarda DOC requires at least 85% Croatina and doesn't allow the use of Bonarda Piemontese, a completely different variety. (If Dario wanted to label the wine Croatina, he would have to declassify it and label it IGT.) Bonarda Piemontese is apparently not present in Oltrepò Pavese. The wine's name is derived from the Greek, meaning 'virile' or 'strong'. Quite an apt name as it turns out.
Deep purple, with intense sweet forest fruit nose. Again a touch volatile and lifted, with layers of cherry liqueur and notes of garden herbs. On the palate, multilayered with just a touch of spritz and dark fruits with structuring acidity. On the finish, a bitter tannic twist offsetting all that dark-fruit abundance. Singular, with signature rusticity and not for the faint hearted. The wine's various components seem unsettled, suggesting further bottle age is needed. Great length, though. 14% (WS)

AMARONE - LA MAMA V THE CHEF

2009-10-19T09:12:00.001+01:00

Last Monday 10 of Amarone's most illustrious producers assembled in London to attract attention to their collective attempts to halt the decline in price of what they consider one of Italy's most important and iconic red wines.
The group teamed up under the ambitious-sounding title Le Famiglie dell'Amarone d'Arte, abbreviated for the Anglo Saxon market to Amarone Families. On a decisively autumnal, rainy Monday, the group managed to attract a considerable crowd of wine professionals who, almost in vain as it turned out, sought information on the group's ambitious manifesto sent out some weeks before, declaring that the fall in price of Verona's most famous wine had to be stopped.

The Families' manifesto, promising increases in minimum total dry extract and ageing periods, offers many discussion points. The most obvious seems the stated restriction that only small- to medium-sized producers can be part of the group although curiously Masi, the estate of the group's president Sandro Boscaini (pictured), produces some 3.5 million bottles annually, a large quantity by anyone's standard.

Boscaini welcomed us by introducing the group, while extending an invitation to any producer who shares the same understanding of the production of Amarone. Tellingly, Boscaini spoke of 10 'brands' when referring to the members, something that would very much set the tone for the rest of the seminar.

According to Boscaini, Amarone enjoys the same kind of prestige in the international market as Barolo and Brunello and the 10 represent the historic producers of Amarone who aim at protecting the wine and promoting it collectively on the international market. Boscaini phrased this quite cryptically when speaking of their founding moment, now less than a year ago, when the members realised that there are different ways of 'understanding Amarone'. The moment coincided with a historic slump in prices, with the Consorzio trying to get the message through to its producers that the 15 million bottles projected for the 2009 vintage would be double the number that can realistically be sold. Earlier warnings issued by the Consorzio going back as far as 2006 had until now fallen on deaf ears, as Amarone seemed to promise such a secure cash return.

Boscaini continued by maintaining that Amarone is a legacy of their ancestors, although in fact the wine is a very recent phenomenon and before the 1960s Amarone was generally considered a Recioto gone wrong. For Boscaini, Amarone is the flagship wine of the whole Veneto region and in this role it also represents all other wines produced there, including Soave and Prosecco. According to him, all these wines can take advantage of what Amarone stands for. Unfortunately, until now both wines mentioned have mostly represented the cheapest of wines coming from the Italian peninsula, and have therefore benefited little from the alleged prestige of Amarone.

Boscaini continued by saying that the 10 wish to protect a wine which by its very nature is limited, at least if you want to make this wine in a proper way. The classic hillside vineyards are a prerequisite, although he hastily added that this is not always necessary. (Boscaini's correction was understandable as many of the larger members source fruit from outside the classic area in order to produce the volumes they require, or simply because they do not possess vineyards in the Classico hills.) A long period of grape drying and fermentation is needed, but this goes without saying for both modest as well as high-quality Amarone, and although Boscaini is generally right, the Families' manifesto does not truly impose much harsher production criteria than are already defined by law.

What is far more striking about the manifesto is its vagueness on yields and its reluctance to propose measures which will make an immediate impact not only on quality but on volume as well: reducing the very generous 70% of total grape production that may be turned into Amarone, and limiting the source of grapes to the hills, which historically have produced the best wines. But there appeared to be a certain unwillingness during the seminar to delve into these issues. The opinion on the general over-production of Amarone, as described by one of the group's members, is that it is actually 'not our problem'. Instead, it is the problem of the ones who jumped on the bandwagon, eager to take a share of the cake, and spoiling the international market with cheap dilute products bearing the same name.

In an earlier statement, the group had been quoted as saying that Amarone should have a retail price of at least €25, yet Masi’s Costasera Amarone is available on Tesco's website for just £20, or €22.48, at the time of writing.

When asked why so far only the largest producers are part of the new association, and how this chimes with the many fine, small, artisanal producers, Boscaini drew a parallel with the culinary world: La mama can make a great plate of pasta, but only a skilled chef can make something truly outstanding, the chef in this case being the Families.

Although the objective of the assembled Families seems logical, the main question I had, and one yet to be answered, is why single out just one specific wine style for protection? Why not try to upgrade and improve the wine output of the entire region, which seems a much more valuable long-term prospect, while at the same time allowing for the inclusion of many more producers. Especially in the light of the introduction of the OCM last August, with Italy's Consorzios losing their controlling and regulating function while trying to adjust to a marketing role, the foundation of the Amarone Families looks like a first distancing of producers away from the official Consorzio, resulting in a fragmentation of marketing efforts. If the region as a whole wants to promote its wine, its producers will need to work together. The Consorzio could play a far more inclusive role in this than any privately set up association aiming at a certain exclusivity, while blaming others for Amarone's devaluation.

Below are my notes on the 2000 Amarones tasted during the seminar, with the exception of Zenato's as at that point I spilled wine on my laptop, and the keyboard started to lead a life of its own. As it is now, it probably cannot be repaired, but I have tried not to get this incident colour the article.

Musella, Amarone 2000 Valpolicella 16 Drink 2009-14
Deep ruby with the beginning of orange in the rim. Marked by oak and spicy notes, this shows sweet amarena cherry, shoe polish too. Seems a bit tight, and needs decanting. Lively high acidity on the palate with enough fruit concentration. Bitter soft tannins matching the sweet fruit impact. Touch alcoholic on the finish, with astringent dry twist. Food compatible. 3.56 g/l RS, 16.9%

Speri, Vigneto Monte Sant'Urbano Amarone 2000 Valpolicella Classico 17 Drink 2010-2016
Aged in Allier tonneaux. Very dark ruby with the beginnings of age at the rim. Sweet, inviting cherry jam and dried fruit notes, at the same time still compact. Generous on the attack, with sweet cherry compote and bittersweet fine tannins on the finish. Closes up on the finish with firmer tannins coming through, suggesting further ageing needed. 14.9g/l RS, 15%

Nicolis, Ambrosan Amarone 2000 Valpolcella Classico 16.5 Drink 2009-14
Not destemmed before fermentation. Very deep dark ruby, almost impenetrable. Brooding, sweet, dried-fruit nose and oriental spice. Less fine on the palate but with lots of concentration and stalky persistent tannins. Bigger style. The sugar level seems high but is compensated for by flattering bitterness. Warm finish. 7.5 g/l RS, 16%

Brigaldara, Case Vecie Amarone 2000 Valpolicella 17 Drink 2009-13
Deep, dark, but quite youthful rim. Open and opulent with lots of dried cherry and distinctive Averna herbal liqueur, almost heady nose pushed by alcohol. Big, dried fruit with a touch of bruised apple, and angular but not astringent tannins. Sweet warm finish but with considerable length. Modern style and popular. 17.5%

Masi, Costasera Ultra Premium Amarone 2000 Valpolicella Classico 15.5 Drink 2009-13
Old-school nose with bruised apple and dried fruit. This seems an oxidative wine-making style, and quite mature and evolved. The nose seems to indicate the wine is at its peak. Dusty, grainy tannins support a somewhat underwhelming palate, followed by high acidity, making the wine more food compatible than the initial first impressions, but it lacks excitement. 15%.

Tedeschi, Capitel Monte Olmi Amarone 2000 Valpolicella 16 Drink 2010-2014
Deep mature ruby with orange reflexes. Balsamic nose, and although from colour the most advanced of the flight, surprisingly compact. More herbal than fruit at this stage. Intriguing, which is perhaps another word for lacking in definition. Initially more open on the palate, but firm tannins and compact fruit closes up on the finish, while persistent tanins seem to suggest that more is to come. 17%.

Tenuta Sant'Antonio, Campo dei Gigli Amarone 2000 Valpolicella 16.5 Drink 2009-14
Impenetrable dark, deep ruby, with very small rim. Intriguing nose of sweet dried cherry and fruitcake, maraschino too, with a touch of spice from the oak. Succulent sweet fruit palate lifted by acidity. The tannins seem a tad rustic, an impression heightened by the wine's alcohol. Warm, but long finish. Ends a touch sweet. 16%

Allegrini, Amarone 2000 Valpolicella Classico 17 Drink 2010-14
Very dark and deep ruby, quite youthful still. Curious, upfront cassis and cassis leaf and cherry juice nose. Talcum powder. On the palate more restraint with youthful, dominating tannins (oak?), and underlying, but concentrated fruit. Somewhat unapproachable at the moment with nose and palate sending out different signals. Finish shows drying oak tannins. Very modern. 15.4%.

Tommasi, Amarone 2000 Valpolicella Classico 16.5 Drink 2009-14
Mature looking ruby. A touch of horse saddle jumps up from the glass. Underneath, savoury plum and meaty notes. Quite sweet fruit palate harnessed by drying tannins. Long lasting, concentrated sweet fruit finish. 15%

ITALY'S AGRICULTURE MINISTER ON THE ATTACK

2009-09-15T11:33:00.002+01:00

Luca Zaia, Italy's charismatic and controversial agricultural minister, has recently attracted a storm of protest after having expressed his dismay that a total ban on drinking and driving would criminalise the Italian wine industry. Critics accused the minister of putting economic interests first, and suggested the minister's comments that a glass or two of wine would not impair driving capabilities were 'unscientific' to say the least.

The minister, a keen media player, started his counter-offensive on Wednesday on his own website, www.lucazaia.it. (with its portrait of Zaia shown here allowing no doubt as to his allegiance to the wine industry). In the website's news section, called Zaia News, the minister published his 'Ten Questions no one is asking', aimed at steering the anti-alcohol debate away from the almost exclusive concentration on alcohol-related lethal traffic accidents.

Some of the questions Zaia would like to have answered are:

How come that until now no other statistics are published on other possible causes of accidents, such as the abuse of pharmaceuticals and medications, especially since consumption of antidepressants rose 7.9% and tranquilizers 7.8% in 2007?

How come no one considers the effect of prolonged hours of driving which surely cause psychological stress and hence many accidents?

Why is using a mobile phone while driving a car not considered serious?

Why is no one saying that the main cause for accidents are lack of respect for the rules concerning overtaking, stopping at traffic lights, and stop signs (17.59%), ignoring speed limits (12.20%), or keeping too little distance (9.83%, all statistics from Aci-Istat, the official Italian Automobile Club).

Zaia also asks why until now in the debate some astonishing figures have been ignored, such as the consumption of cocaine from 1.3% in 1991 to 14.2% in 2007 (no source cited), or why smoking while driving a car is still not forbidden.

One of the last on Zaia's list is the rhetorical question, why, instead of demonising wine, has no one ever inquired into the general state of Italy's infrastructure and traffic signs? According to Zaia, the anti-alcohol lobby maintains that alcohol, including wine, is the main cause of road accidents, ignoring that many other factors play their part such as the psychological and or physical state of the driver, the inappropriate consumption of spirits and pharmaceuticals, the general condition of the vehicle, drug consumption, use of mobile phones, and general lack of respect for traffic rules.

VALPOLICELLA AD ALBERELLO

2009-09-04T06:46:00.006+01:00

Amarone, one of Italy’s most famous wines, seems especially hit by the current economic situation. With total production for 2009 forecasted at some 15 million bottles, the Consorzio of Valpolicella recently admitted that this is double that of what the international market is able to absorb. In an effort to ward off the prospect of cellars full of wines that nobody wants, it has sent out an urgent recommendation to its members to drastically reduce production of this wine, and apparently with success.
And while recently a group of 10 illustrious producers teamed up under the name “Amarone Families” in a marketing effort to prevent Amarone to fall further from grace, and, more importantly, its traditionally elevated price point, one woman producer from the region has given up altogether on the production of this wine, not out of trend, fad, or precaution, but out of conviction, and this already since 1990.

Originally from a Veronese family of innkeepers, Cecilia Strucchi, a trained garden architect, and her family came across a baroque edifice, the Villa Bellini, in the Valpolicella Classico region in 1987. The elegant 17th century building, high up in the hills and overlooking the plains, where much of the maligned cheap Valpolicella, and now also low priced Amarone is being produced, sits on the verge of the road that exits the pretty village of Castelrotto.
The Villa is set in a beautiful garden, surrounded by low storage and service buildings and bordering about 6 ha of terraced vineyards enclosed by an ancient stone wall. The whole place is doused in tranquillity, while exuding a distinct air of being unfinished. Strucchi tells me that she is still in the process of revamping the storage buildings into an agriturismo, Italy’s rural answer to “Bed and Breakfast”. Originally, the plan had been to transform the Villa into a hotel, but for years the plan was obstructed by draconian bureaucratic rules. In hindsight a lucky thing, as the owners of Le Ragose drew Strucchi’s attention to the Villa’s vineyard instead, which until then was rented out and tended by local peasants. They told her that in the past it had been famous for producing the finest Recioto in the region. As a consequence, Strucchi took control over the entire vineyard in 1990, an exceptional vintage for Recioto it later turned out.

With little actual knowledge of viticulture, but a great fascination for plants, the first task Strucchi took on was the restoration of the stone vineyard terraces, called “Marogne” or “dry built wall” in local dialect, referring to the intricate stapled stone structure held together without any binding agent. She also decided to tend her entire “Clos” organically. Back in 1990 this certainly was highly unusual, and the conversion to organics became a bone of content with the neighbours, mostly small landholders and peasants, who argued the Villa Bellini vineyard would soon become the source of all kinds of disease and maladies. Ironically, it was she, who had the real problem of staying organic, surrounded by growers using conventional methods and therefore chemicals, potentially contaminating her vines. The high wall as well as the shrubs and trees around them, certainly provided a much needed shield.

Another unusual step she took when she decided to replant most of the vineyard “ad alberello”, or bush vine training. She tells me she always disliked the modern and conventional trellis systems, its rigid wires upsetting the countryside’s natural aesthetics, but became truly convinced of the benefits after having seen organic bush vine vineyards in Sardinia.
Unsurprisingly, her vines are not planted in neat rows but follow a diamond pattern, with 80 cm distance between the plants horizontally and 130 cm diagonally. In this way the vines benefit from sunshine that can reach all parts of the plants, and the very high density of 10,000 plants per hectare creates competition among the vines, forcing them to develop a deep root system.

There is, however, a considerable downside to the narrow interspacing and high density: it only allows for manual work. As Strucchi also chose to allow herbs and grass to grow freely between the vines and with no mechanical equipment available, it condemned her to pull weeds manually, until only very recently a befriended professor in engineering helped her building a tiny tractor, which can move through the vines and cut the herbs. The machine is still in the prototype phase, and after each use amendments still need to be made to suit the vineyard. However awkward the phase, Strucchi’s time pulling weeds and grass has dropped significantly. She remarks dryly that before the machine’s invention she always had great difficulty finding people to work at the estate. Most of the applicants were trained on working with machines and as soon as they saw the high density low bush vine vineyards their initial eagerness to work for the estate instantly dried up.

But the weed controlling work is essential if the ad alberelo vineyards are to come to fruition. Weeds and herbs can become competition for moisture, and will shade the fruit and the leaves, impairing proper photosynthesis and hence fruit ripening. And although the vineyards are all southwest facing and twice cooled by currents of northerly winds from the Alps, the weeds can also obstruct much needed ventilation in more humid conditions.

When I ask her why she persevered with a training system that demands such total dedication, she tells me that from quite early on she was rewarded with fruit of such high quality it surpassed her wildest expectations. But more interestingly, while Corvina has the impracticable tendency of not bearing fruit on the first four buds, in an experiment, she began in 1999, she disregarded this defect by pruning much shorter than normally is the case. And against all odds from 2003 on the plants started to respond, giving now fruit on the third and fourth bud.

Mercifully, a small part of the vineyard is trained on pergola, with ungrafted Molinara vines of over a hundred years old. Strucchi is not a huge fan of Molinara, a grape she considers very average, but with vines this old, she tells me it gives very little but superb fruit adding a structuring acidic vein to the blend. However, it is not just the age of the vines, but also an ancient genotype, which is superior to the more modern clonal selection of Molinara, which invariably has been cultivated to produce high yields. She is working on a clonal selection programme to protect her Molinara from extinction and replace the very old vines with that once they die.

Her rejection of Amarone initially did not grew out of her general dislike for alcoholic and heavy reds, but, as she phrases it, she wanted to “free her mind of the Amarone dogma”, which, according to her, has lead to nothing else but full cellars especially since the 2006 vintage. Her main objection to Amarone is the selection process it automatically entails. “I never wanted to divide the grapes into different styles”, she comments, “I want to have the full picture, to see what the vineyards are capable of.” At the beginning she felt she didn’t know the vineyard well, and needed to build up knowledge and experience in its characteristics. By selecting out bunches and drying these for up to 4 months, the resulting wines would show less the vintage differences, and therefore she feared she would never understand fully the soils and their potential.

“Amarone is actually only a very recent phenomenon, whereas Recioto is a historic wine”, Trucchi explains. But as she produces Recioto only in outstanding vintages, the main part of the production is focused entirely on the creation of a still dry red wine, and with this she goes against all current trends in Valpolicella. She also stopped using ripasso more than 13 years ago. Ripasso, unsurprisingly, is another style she doesn’t appreciate. According to her, Valpolicella proper has been degraded to what she calls a “vinello” a simple wine, and ripasso mainly employed to boost its meagre alcohol level. Her “straight” Valpolicella Classico Superiore, called “Taso”, is Villa Bellini’s most important wine.

Taso, meaning “to remain silent” in local dialect, summarises the estate’s philosophy in a nutshell: “not to speak, or to remain silent is fundamental in order to grasp the nuances of the territory incapsulated in this wine.” the 2005 vintage, with modest 13% alcohol, shows a beautifully focused, lifted sweet cherry nose, with an attractive edge of oak. A surprisingly youthful palate is at this stage harnessed by the acidity, and although already attractive it will need more age to open up. It is a serious wine with a serious price tag, retailing at the same level as many wellknown Amarones. It is a consequence of the intense manual work and very low yields, but one senses also a certain stubbornness from the side of its creator, who feels strongly that her wine actually expresses terroir, has structure as well as “a story to tell”, as she herself puts it. Almost involuntarily she grins, when adding that she herself thinks Taso very ambitious plan.

On the very rare occasion she gets to produce a Recioto, the bunches are not dried in temperature and humidity controlled storage rooms as is now standard practice in the region, but in wooden crates in the open air, only protected by a roof. Her estate is high up in the Classico hills, well over the fog line. These fogs, rolling in during autumn as well as winter can promote grape rot, and therefore, until the introduction of mechanical temperature and humidity control equipment, the production of Recioto as well as Amarone was traditionally confined to the hills.
The Taso gets a different treatment. Strucchi harvests each single plot at the optimum ripeness, but vinifies the whole lot at the same time. This means that the first bunches are stacked up in their wooden cases in an attic, waiting for the last fruit to be harvested. This can mean a period of up to two weeks, but according to Strucchi it is not an “apassimento”, and has very little aromatic impact on the final wine. Interestingly, after vinification in stainless steel, the wine spends around two years in casks, of which 50% is renewed every year. When I air my surprise at such high level of new oak, she argues that the use of new oak as such has been demonised, while according to her it all depends on how you use it, and, most importantly, whether your grapes have the concentration needed to stand up to the treatment and gain by it. She coyly adds, that the 50% new oak is only an estimate, as it all depends on how much she has in her wallet. All wines are fermented by indigenous yeast, but, refreshingly, she doesn’t consider herself an advocate of the “No Sulphur” trend, also because according to her Rondinella has a tendency to oxidise. And with this she again seems to go counter a trend that has become almost a dogma within organic wine cycles.

The 2004 Valpolicella Classico Superiore Taso is imported into the UK by Aubert & Mascoli Ltd, London
020 7374 6033

AMARONE - HALTING THE DECLINE?

2009-08-10T15:57:00.002+01:00

Ten of the most influential producers of Amarone have teamed up to reverse what they call the 'trading down' of one of Italy's most important wines, Amarone. The producers have formed an association, Le Famiglie dell'Amarone d'arte or Amarone Families, to voice their concern over what they see as the wine's increasing loss of identity.

In recent years, Amarone has become an international success to such an extent that production figures have tripled over the last 10 years, from 2.3 million bottles in 1999 to more than 8 million in 2007, resulting in lower prices and lower quality overall.

The mission of the 10 families - Allegrini, Brigaldara, Masi, Musella, Nicolis, Speri, Tedeschi, Tenuta Sant'Antonio, Tommasi and Zenato - is to keep prices as well as quality up. Or, as their press release states: 'Our Amarone must remain exclusive, precious and correctly priced'. Masi's Alessandro Boscaini, president of the newly founded association, argues that Amarone must remain 'rightly priced to stop low cost logics and the standardisation of taste'.

To this end the association has set up the following list of criteria and requirements. Wineries must be small or medium sized as well as family led. They must grow at least some of their own grapes - although the proportion is not specified. They must also have a history of producing Amarone for at least 15 years, of which total sales must be at least 20,000 bottles per year, and the Amarone of each member must be available in at least five foreign markets.

Furthermore, the wines must have a minimum alcohol content of 15% rather than the legal minimum of 14%, with a minimum dry extract of 30 g/l (cf 26 g/l by law) and must be aged for at least 30 months from the 1 Dec following the vintage (by law this is 24 months). But the most important, and the most drastic, rule is that members of the association promise to declassify their fruit should the vintage not allow for an optimal product.

The concern of the Amarone Families seems genuine enough, even if it may be inspired by the fact that the estimated 15 million bottles of Amarone that may be released in 2011 are likely to be nearly twice as many as the market can absorb, but they themselves seem to struggle to comply with the regulations of their own manifesto. Masi, producing 3.5 million bottles a year, Zenato with 1.2 million bottles and Tommasi with 900,000 bottles can hardly be considered 'small- to medium-sized wineries'.

Instead it would appear that the most internationally visible Amarone producers have decided to combine their strength to stop prices falling. But with their considerable total weight they should certainly prove an effective challenge to the generous production rules of the Consorzio of Valpolicella, the producer association. Currently, the Consorzio's rules allow up to 70% of DOC Valpolicella grapes to be turned into Amarone, which, combined with strong demand for the wine, provides very little incentive to select only the best fruit.

Traditionally the production of Amarone, which involves a mandatory period of grape drying, was confined to the hills, because autumn fogs increased the risk of rot on the plains, but the enlargement of the classic zone when the DOC was introduced in 1968 and the introduction of modern technology to control humidity and temperature has resulted in a dramatic increase in Amarone production.

So far, proposals to limit Amarone production to superior vineyards have, perhaps not surprisingly, gained little ground. Improvements in quality, accompanied by price stability, could also be achieved not only by restricting which grapes may be dried but also by mandatory bottling within the DOC zone, and restricting grape varieties to the superior Corvina and Corvinone (which may currently constitute no more than 80% of the total blend) and prohibiting the Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon currently allowed.

The 10 members of Amarone Families, which already represent 40% of the value of total Amarone sales, are keen to stress that the Association is willing to extend membership to all of those willing to comply with its rules.

2006 BAROLO AND BARBARESCO UNDER FIRE

2009-08-02T15:50:00.001+01:00

The recent decision of Bruno GiacosA not to bottle any of his Barolo or Barbaresco of the 2006 vintage has caused quite a stir in Italy. After the announcement, the estate's English importer Armit was quick to point out that a stroke Giacosa suffered in the same year made it impossible for him to be in the vineyard or the cellar, suggesting his poor health was the main reason for the allegedly unusually low quality of the wines resulting in this financially tough decision.

This explanation did not go down well with some of Italy's most prominent wine critics, who argued that Giacosa's action not only tarnished the reputation of the 2006 vintage generally, but also openly suggested some connection with the recent departure of Dante Scaglione who had been Giacosa's winemaker and right hand for more than 16 years and was considered instrumental to the high quality of the wines.

While speculation circulated online, Giacosa denied that Scaglione's departure had anything to do with the decision, but refrained from shedding more light on whether the quality of the grapes or Scaglione's work had been the main reason for the declassification of the vintage.

With 2006 Barbaresco already released on the market, to be followed by 2006 Barolo next January, the situation has triggered a potentially damaging debate on the quality of the 2006 vintage, which was halted only after one of Italy's prominent wine critics, Franco Ziliani, asked Piemonte's most knowledgeable oenologist, Armando Cordero, for his opinion. While admitting he had not tasted Giacosa's 2006s, Cordero came out in favour of the vintage in general.

He has now been joined by the Consorzio of Barolo and Barbaresco, which has sent out a press statement maintaining that 'the 2006 vintage is a very good one, with some exceptional peaks'. To back up their assertion, they have issued the following vintage report:

In order to highlight the great value and quality of the 2006 vintage for both Barbaresco and Barolo, we hereby summarize the climatic conditions which characterized that year.

During 2005/2006 winter it snowed a lot, but springtime was not very rainy, thus causing some risks of water shortage. Rain luckily fell in the second half of June.
Even though the summer started with thunderstorms, it quickly turned to dry weather. Actually, July 2006 was one of the hottest Julys in history. Rainfall around mid-August refreshed the air, mitigating the pre-maturity in the development of grapes caused by the dry July.

The climatic trend in September - usually the crucial month for the final quality of the Nebbiolo grapes used to produce Barbaresco and Barolo - was very favourable: warm but rather windy during the day and fresh during the night. These conditions allowed the grapes to ripen correctly.
Even the rain that fell between 24 and 26 Sep did not create any problem to the quality of grapes. At the most it determined a short interruption in harvesting, which nevertheless ended up with general satisfaction. Therefore, 2006 vintage has been characterized by a standard rhythm, with harvesting of Nebbiolo grapes - healthy and of excellent quality - taking place between the end of September and the beginning of October.

As far as the wines are concerned, both Barbaresco and Barolo 2006 show great structure, full body and roundness. Even if young, both are elegant. The garnet colour is intense, in some cases still with ruby-red highlights. The perfume is full-bodied, with clear fruity hints and the first hints of spices. The taste is full and persistent.

CONTROVERSIAL CHANGES TO VINO NOBILE DI MONTEPULCIANO

2009-07-09T00:34:00.004+01:00

The Consorzio of Vino Nobile di Montepulciano, the regulating and protecting body of the wine from this Tuscan region, has proposed controversial changes to the disciplinary for the production of its wine. At this moment Vino Nobile, which was the first of all Italian wines to be elevated to the superior status of DOCG in 1980, must consist of a minimum of 70% of Sangiovese, or Prugnolo Gentile, as it is known here, with the balance made up of a maximum of 20% of the indigenous Canaiolo and a maximum of 20% of authorised grape varieties. This rather cryptic regulation already allows for the international grape varieties, first and foremost Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot and, more and more, Syrah to put a stamp on the wines, but with the new proposal this will be increased to a hefty 30%. Unsurprisingly it has the protagonists of Sangiovese up in arms, as they consider the change an official degradation of Sangiovese. According to this camp it erroneously suggests that this most important ingredient of all Tuscan wines is not capable of producing great wines on its own, and needs “amelioration, as this authorisation of “other grape varieties” is euphemistically known by.

With the recent Brunello scandal fresh in mind it is curious, to say the least, that the Consorzio is going this way, especially in the light that there does exist a perfectly suitable category, Rosso di Montepulciano, with exactly the same regulation, and which allows for a free hand with the international intruders, unlike the Rosso di Montalcino equivalent, which must consist of 100% of Sangiovese only. Therefore, the argument, which claims that out of economic reasons (and catering for an alleged international, but mainly American consumer taste) there must be more lenience with the blend, is virtually powerless. Contrary to the Brunello di Montalcino debate, the Rosso di Montepulciano category already pulls in all grape varieties other than Sangiovese into the legal framework, whereas in the Montalcino area, Cabernet & Co can only be marketed under the much less commercially appealing DOC of Sant’Antimo, which doesn’t allow to capitalise on the famous Montalcino name.

While the Consorzio proudly states on its website that the Vino Nobile is considered a true expression of its terroir, it is questionable in how far this message can be conveyed in a wine that relies so heavily on non Italian grape varieties. Although advocates of the change argue that regardless of grape variety used, terroir characteristics are mainly the result of a specific site and soil type, it is doubtful if an international style would be able to express the uniqueness of the wine and make it inimitable on a global market saturated with French varieties. However, according to Thomas Francioni, Project Manager and marketeer of the Consorzio of Vino Nobile di Montepulciano, the proposed changes merely simplify the existing situation, introducing more clarity to the legislation without any radical amendments.

A GRAPE IS A GRAPE BY ANY OTHER NAME

2009-06-14T21:45:00.003+01:00

The Consorzio Tutela Prosecco Conegliano Valdobbiadene celebrates 40 years of protected origin and carries the Prosecco grape to the grave.

This year’s Vino in Villa, the annual presentation of Prosecco wines organised by the Consorzio of Producers of Italy’s most famous sparkler in the Province of Treviso, commemorated 40 years of DOC, the equivalent of France’s AOC and established in 1969. This large annual tasting, a stylish affair, not least due to its stunning location, the impressive Castello di Susegana, overlooking at one side the plain of Piave, the source of large volumes of cheap wine, and on the other the hills of Treviso towards the Alps, was also the inaugural event to introduce the highest quality designation, the so called DOCG, to the region just in time before the OCM kicks in this August.
The Consorzio’s motto for this year’s event was: Prosecco is not the wine of a specific provenan or terroir, but rather a terroir expressing itself in a wine. This may seem an open door to most wine lovers accustomed with France’s AOC, but, with very few exceptions, Italy rarely gets philosophical about its viticultural history.

The changing status of Prosecco Conegliano Valdobbiadene, as the wine is officially called, has far more implications than meets the eye. Giancarlo Vettorello, the Consorzio’s director and its most important communicator, is one of the main protagonists behind the elevation of the wine to DOCG status. Interestingly, Prosecco Conegliano Valdobbiadene is not the only area to benefit from a promotion. What were until now the so called IGTs, a table wine category with a geographic indication, of which there are five in Veneto, accommodating large volumes of Prosecco produced under less strict rules, will also be pulled up in the hierarchy to Prosecco DOC.

Although in general the DOCG category represents the highest level of wine quality with more stringent production methods, the new status for Prosecco wines from Conegliano Valdobbiadene, will not result in any major changes, neither in volume nor methods. The DOC, on the other hand, which will plainly be called “Prosecco” and including all the IGT’s under which previously the sparkling wine was produced, will see a considerable lowering of yields, from 250 to 180 quintals. One doesn’t need to do think long to realise that these lower yields will have a major impact on the large and very large bottling operations in Veneto, which, with the beginning of the 2009 vintage, will see their total production volume come under pressure. The only way this can be compensated is by planting new vineyards. And although with more than 10,000 ha the province of Treviso alone produces 95% of all Prosecco in Italy, the whole of Veneto can be expected to see a formidable increase in hectares in the next few years.
Vettorello, however, sees the changes as an enormous benefit for the consumer, who has associated Prosecco with a sparkling wine from Italy in the first place, blissfully ignorant that the word actually stands for a grape variety. Not only will a lower yield for the elevated DOC Prosecco mean an increase in quality according to Vettorello, but the quality control that comes with it, and which has never been mandatory for IGT wines, will improve the wines further, at least in theory.

It is easy to see that one of the main reasons for the changes is the fact that Prosecco has become a victim of its own success. According to Vettorello, many hundreds of hectares of Prosecco vineyards, especially in South America, will come on stream in the near future, potentially threatening one of Italy’s most lucrative wines. But one doesn’t have to look too far into the wine world, nor the future, to realise how fragile Prosecco as a truly Italian product is. Recently, a German court ruled that still wine from Prosecco grapes imported into Germany and undergoing its secondary fermentation in that country, legally could be labelled “Prosecco”. The court ruled that the base product originates from Italy, and while respecting the IGT regulations, exactly where the wine is made sparkling doesn’t play any role.

In the very near future, praxis like this will no longer be possible, as Prosecco no longer be a will be grape variety but a designated region, literally anchored in the village of Prosecco on the Slovenian border in the province of Friuli. From the 2009 vintage on any wine labelled Prosecco can only come from this enormous DOC, which will represent de basis of the quality pyramid, with the Conegliano Valdobbiadene DOCG representing the top, and the Cru of Cartizze, around 106ha of the very best vineyard sites in the classic hilly area producing grapes of the highest standard, the very pinnacle.
Although it would seem that all regulation are in place to prevent any abuse of the word Prosecco within Europe, and furnishing Italy as a EU partner with a strong weapon to prosecute any idle use of the name, this didn’t seem to go quite far enough for the Consorzio. The very name of the grape will cease to exist, and will officially be changed into Glera, the Friulian synonym for Prosecco. Perhaps the Italians are now more than ever on their guard, especially after having recently seen their white Tocai Friulano grape variety loose its name, when Hungary claimed exclusivity over it. But one can’t help a certain loss, Prosecco probably being the same grape the Romans called Pucinus and officially documented from the 16th century on. But Vettorello is adamant that only these drastic changes will see a halt to what he considers abuse of the Prosecco name. And that will include the Prosecco Rosé, a fizzy Prosecco literally coloured with a dash of the red Raboso and sold at the lowest price point in strikingly gaudy pink labelled, and which recently appeared on the shelves of one of UK’s largest supermarkets.

At the Vino in Villa tasting the Consorzio had changed the traditional alphabetical producer order into rooms devoted to the largest of the Rives, with the two subzones, Conegliano and Valdobbiadene each having most of the space.

Even after having tasted more than 50 wines, all in the Extra Dry category in an effort to keep at least one of the variables constant (a fallacy in itself, as Extra dry ranges from 12 to 20 g/l of residual sugar, with overlaps both into Brut – up to 15 g/l – and Dry – from 20-35 g/l), a common theme did not emerge.

Please note that the life span of Prosecco in general is roughly about 18 months, which gives it just enough time for the last vintage to be drunk before the next one is released on the market.

Conegliano
Buffon Giorgio, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 14.5 Drink now – 2010
Cold fermentation aromas with a certain yeasty impact, perhaps a touch medicinal even. Sweet fruit on the palate without a lot of length. 11.5% (WS)

Ca’ Vittoria, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 15 Drink now - 2010
Fresh green apple and white fruits. Very fine, but fleeing co2 on the palate. Highish acidity on the finish with pleasant bitternote. 11.5% (WS)

Carmina, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 16 Drink now – 2010
Subdued but elegant white fruit palate, well balanced, clean and attractive. 11.5% (WS)

Carpene Malvolti, Prosecco di Conegliano Spumante Extra Dry 14.5 Drink Now - 2010
Initially dusty nose. Assertive co2 on the attack, while on the medium finish the residual sweetness pops up briefly. 11.5% (WS)

Giavi, Prosecco di Conegliano Spumante Extra Dry 15 Drink now – 2010
Characterful, almost minerally nose. Fragrant palate, but medium length disappoints somewhat. 11.5% (WS)

Lucchetta Marcello, Prosecco di Conegliano Spumante Extra Dry 14 Drink now – 2010
Open, inviting nose, with hints of earth and bubblegum. Somewhat earthy on the palate too. Not entirely clean? 11.5% (WS)

Massotina, Prosecco di Conegliano Spumante Extra Dry 15.5 Drink now – 2010
Fresh green fruit nose. Assertive co2 attack, but the impression lasts. Well balanced, would make for a nice aperitif. 11.5% (WS)

Salatin, Prosecco di Conegliano Spumante Extra Dry 15 Drink now -2010
Very restraint, almost herbal. Similar restraint palate, without great impact, but fragrant finish and lasting co2. 11.5% (WS)

Refrontolo
Colsaliz, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 14.5 Drink now -2010
Boskop apple with a touch of spice. Almost aggressive co2 on the palate, contrasted by sweet apple sauce notes, and well integrated sweetness. Not ridiculously long. 11.5% (WS)

Colvendrà, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 15 Drink now – 2010
Pronounced green apple. Attratcive wine, without a lot to say on the mid palate, but fragrant finish with freshness. 11.5% (WS)

Tarzo
Andrea da Ponte, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 15.5 Drink now – 2010
Vinous nose of white stone fruit and bread crust. Quite vinous palate too with refined co2 and good length. Quite delicious. 11.5% (WS)

Pieve di Soligo
Cantina Colli del Soligo, 2008 “Solicum Cuvee”, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 16 Drink now – 2010
Spicy apple and Satsuma nose, with a light fragrant palate, and aromas becoming more pronounced on the fisish. Good length and balance. 11% (WS)

San Pietro di Feletto
Bepin De Eto, Prosecco di Conegliano Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 16 Drink now – 2010
Light, herbal apply nose, with notes of cut grass and white blossoms. Apple fruit palate with sweet sour balancing act on a lingering, but light finish. 11.5% (WS)

Frassinelli, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 15.5 Drink now – 2010
Earthy white fruit and yeast nose. Quite persistent with mid palate concentration. Assertive co2. 11.5% (WS)

Il Colle, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 14.5 Drink now – 2010
Subdued, soft and very fine co2, which doesn’t make it to the finish. 11% (WS)

Le Manzane, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 15 Drink now – 2010
Earthy, almost smoky. Somewhat less impressive on the palate, but fresh fruit impression returns on the finish. The earthy note gives it some complexity. 11.5% (WS)

Roberti Itali, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 16 Drink now – 2010
Uplifting, fresh with an invitingly featherlight palate. Elegant and quite delicious finish. 11.5% (WS)

San Giuseppe, Prosecco di Conegliano Spumante Extra Dry 16 11% Drink now - 2010
At first somewhat neutral and at the same time serious. Develops notes of tropical fruit on the nose but shows restraint on the palate. Finish with long lasting co2, good balance without being overtly sweet. 11% (WS)

Vittorio Veneto
Bellenda, “Miraval” Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 14 drink now – 2010
Does this wine have a problem? Seems quite vegetal. 11.5% (WS)

Le Vigne di Alice, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 15 Drink now – 2010
Brooding, almost heady fruit fragrance, with a restraint palate. Good balance. Pleasant. 11.5% (WS)

Cison di Valmarino
Vigne Matte, “Millesimatte” (sic) Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 16 Drink now – 2010
Fresh, light and appealing, with notes of spicy apple. Quite assertive co2 on a full flavoured palate. Touch of boiled sweets but charming. 11.5% (WS)

Miane
Gregoletto, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 16 Drink now – 2010
Seems to have a bit more colour than the other wines. Brooding white fruit compote, intense, medium sweet apple palate, and interesting apply finish, with very good length. 12% (WS)

Susegana
Borgoluce, 2008 Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 16 Drink now – 2011
Small production of 4000 bottles, made by Collalto, but marketed under a separate label. Quite vinous with spiel and full bodied sensation on the palate. Full flavoured too and long. Will certainly not be cheap. 11.5% (WS)

Malibran, “Gorio” Prosecco di Conegliano Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 15.5 Drink Now - 2010
Lifted fruit nose with hints of bread crust. Good persistence on the palate, with lasting acidity balancing the sweetness. 11.5% (WS)

Farra di Soligo
Perlage, “ Col di Manza” Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 14.5 Drink now – 2010
From biodynamically grown grapes.
Sweet, almost candied lemon peel. Quite sweet attack with herbal finish. 11.5% (WS)

Progettidivini, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 15 Drink now - 2010
Fresh nose, with a hint of candied peel. Very light co2 on the palate, just enough to reach the finish. Shows attractive acidity in a medium white fruit finish. 11.5% (WS)

Vidor
Scandolera, “Vigneti del Fait”, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 14.5 Drink now - 2010
Apple compote with a vegetal note. Similar vegetalness comes through on a light fruit palate. No great persistence. 11.5 % (WS)

Valdobbiadene
Bortolin Angelo, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 15 Drink now - 2010
Lifted green apple with a touch of melon and cold fermentation aromas. Quite “dry” fragrant fruit and lemony notes on a medium finish with very fine co2. 11% (WS)

Col Vetoraz, Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Spumante Extra Dry 14.5 Drink now – 2010
White fruits with green streak. Less pronounced on the palate with modest length. 11.5% (WS)

PROSECCO CONEGLIANO-VALDOBBIADENE IS SET TO BECOME A DOCG

2009-04-19T22:36:00.002+01:00

Just in time for August, when the harmonisation of the European wine law will convert existing national wine denominations into a single system of DPOs, or Denominations of Protected Origin, the Consorzio per la Tutela del Vino Prosecco di Conegliano-Valdobbiadene announces the elevation to DOCG for sparkling Prosecco wines produced in the historic area, beginning with the 2009 vintage.

The production zone of Prosecco di Conegliano-Valdabiodene is confined to the hills around the towns of the same name, where yields are naturally lower as vineyards are planted on terraces. This guarantees, at least in theory, a higher quality of wines than the ones produced under the much more lenient IGTs Veneto, Marca Trevigiana and Colli Trevigiani, which stretch for miles and miles on the plains of Veneto. This trio spews forth enormous volumes of sparkling wine which have become so popular internationally that foreign imitations of Prosecco abound.

In a way the Italians have only themselves to blame, allowing Prosecco to become shorthand for inexpensive bubbly. Current total production of Prosecco is around 1,300,000 hl annually, of which 60 million bottles are marketed as DOC, but more than 100 million hl as IGT, and selling at half the price.

As with all varietal wine, protection of origin is a sheer impossibility, which is why the Consorzio has been fighting to get recognition for the superiority of produce from the hills. Unfortunately, at least from a consumer’s point of view, the name does not exactly roll off the tongue.

While British and German supermarkets in particular have kept downward pressure on prices, the ultimate slap in the face came with the introduction of a Prosecco in a can, with Paris Hilton recommending drinking it with a straw. Producers were up in arms about what they saw as a further deterioration of the wine’s reputation, but the regional government was less offended, welcoming the product as an ingenious way of dealing with potential overproduction.

However, officials did begin to worry after Prosecco from outside the prescribed zone started to appear on the markets, potentially affecting profitability of the Italian original. Allegedly Luca Zaia, Italy’s Minister for Agriculture, and from the Veneto region himself, promoted the idea of the creation of a generic DOC Prosecco, which would stretch all the way up to Friuli Venezia Giulia, where the village of Prosecco is located near the Slovenian border. This would provide the legal condition of protection, which is based on provenance of agricultural produce only, and hence what was previously the name of a grape variety would now be a name with geographical significance.

It therefore comes as no surprise that while DOCG status is introduced for Prosecco Conegliano-Valdobbiadene (and at the same time also for its much more obscure southerly neighbour Prosecco Montello e Colli Asolani), a new DOC has been designed to encompass no less than eight provinces (Belluno, Gorizia, Padova, Pordenone, Treviso, Trieste, Udine, Venezia, and Vicenza), absorbing practically all of the IGTs under which Prosecco production outside the classic hills has been marketed. Curiously, while the province of Treviso boasts more than 10,000 ha devoted to the grape, Padova, Vicenza and Belluno together have no more than 600 ha planted with Prosecco, and Friuli a mere 125 ha.

Although the producers from the classic area now at last may see official recognition for the superiority of their wines, the ambition of their Consorzio goes further. During the annual Vino in Villa festival to be staged next month, the Consorzio will introduce the notion of crus. This in itself is nothing new, as witness the suffix Cartizze, a tiny subzone within Valdobbiadene considered the source of the finest Prosecco of all. Apart from this subzone, common knowledge within the region itself has it that, among others, the villages of Saccol, Vidor and Santo Stefano historically have been the source of outstanding grapes. An official classification, however, has previously not been considered, and it will be interesting to see whether the wines actually allow for such subtle division reflecting their terroir.

At the same time the Consorzio has started a campaign to obtain recognition for Conegliano-Valdobbiadene as an official Unesco World Heritage site - which could confer even great prestige on the area than any DOCG could achieve.

OBSERVATIONS FROM THE FLORENTINE FORTRESS

2009-04-07T20:57:00.003+01:00

The Consorzio of Chianti Classico, the organisation which represents most of the producers and bottlers of the region, except for a few rebels and the likes of Antinori, who would rather spend the money on its own marketing, has always been one of the most proactive when it comes to promoting Chianti Classico.

It has the unenviable task of raising awareness of the fact that Chianti Classico is a whole different ballgame from straight Chianti. Although both denominations carry the highest quality designation, DOCG or Denominazione d’Orgine Controllata e Garantita, in the form of a pink banderol around the bottle’s neck, they are actually two separate designations, with Classico being the original, historic area, with much stricter regulations, especially with regards to yields, than the catch-all, do-whatever-you-like DOCG Chianti. This is not a distinction easily conveyed to the general public, especially when the name itself has been tarnished with mediocrity, and the difference between Chianti and Chianti Classico not a given in terms of quality either.

Since 2006, in an ongoing marketing effort to get international recognition for the progress the region and its wines have made, the Consorzio of Chianti Classico annually organises a showcase tasting in Florence - the Collezione Chianti Classico. It is an almost all-encompassing tasting of the most recent vintages held in a defunct and dramatic but sombre-looking 19th-century train station, Stazione Leopolda. Where once trains would roll in, now hundreds of Chianti Classico wines on tables as long as wagons are waiting to be poured to an international gathering of buyers and journalists by smart, if old fashioned-looking, sommeliers with tastevins dangling from their necks as if to prove their expertise.

At the beginning of the first of two days of solid tasting, Marco Pallanti, proprietor of Castello di Ama and the Consorzio’s current president, took only a couple of minutes to welcome the guests, explaining that the original Greek meaning of the word ‘crisis’ is ‘separating’ or ‘selecting’. The parallel to the current economic crisis that he sees is the fact that choices need to be made. He went on to say that he was certain that we would surely find something to select from the 350 or so offerings on show. This was mirrored by the surprising optimism the Consorzio showed in its press release, which stated that the region sees the recession as though from a ‘fortress’, since the majority of estates and wineries are wholly owned by their proprietors and therefore ‘quite immune to the fluctuations of the finance markets’. This confidence seemed naive, to say the least, especially as in the same breath the 100 million euro investments made over the last five years in the region were also mentioned. And investments, we all know, need to be earned back sooner or later.

While this two day tasting exercise clearly showed that the wines have in general improved considerably, the real question is: has the image of Chianti Classico in the consumer’s eye kept up with these quality improvements? In other words: can Chianti Classico sell itself confidently enough to recoup these investments?

One look at the grape variety blend that makes up Chianti Classico shows that Sangiovese as the sole ingredient for Chianti Classicos is rapidly gaining ground, although the law requires only an 80% minimum. In those wines which are not all Sangiovese, more often than not it is complemented by ancient Tuscan grape varieties such as Canaiolo, Colorino, Malvasia Nera and Pugnitello. But the fashion for a dollop of Cabernet Sauvignon and especially Merlot is not over yet. And as Canaiolo tends to be unreliable, giving irregular yields, its sudden popularity is not easily explained. Several wines were too deeply coloured and often too international in aroma to be wholly convincing as an expression of the Tuscan spirit.

This in itself is not surprising. Although Sangiovese is undoubtedly the most capable carrier of the Tuscan terroir message, many of the region’s vineyards are planted with clones that were selected for quantity rather than quality. Interestingly, a hectolitre of wine produced as Chianti Classico now fetches double that of something bearing the name Chianti. The direct result of this is that many unsuitable spots in the Classico region are planted with Sangiovese, which has led to a lowering of quality, as well as adding credibility to the assumption that Sangiovese is merely a good, rather than an excellent or even outstanding grape variety. This in turn makes it difficult for producers who are genuinely convinced of the quality of Sangiovese to get a proper return on their financial investments and timely efforts in the vineyards. Planting the right clones and bringing down total yields comes at a cost, which continues to be compromised by the still significant production of cheap, low-quality wines which nevertheless lawfully carry the Chianti Classico designation.

It is therefore no wonder that many producers still believe in international grape varieties, notably Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot, to beef up the wines for an international market that is not used to acidity as a main structural element in Chianti Classico. These grapes, however, have a considerable impact on the style of the resulting wines, and tend to impair Sangiovese’s characteristic perfume on the one hand and compromise the ageability of the wines on the other, turning Sangiovese’s garnet colour into a brownish black ruby, with a nose dominated by tarry and tired fruit.

The Chianti Classico zone is also heavily dependent on winemaking consultants, who in some cases have acquired superstar status. Because the most celebrated of them are considered nothing less than a guarantee of return on investment due to their international exposure and their internationally appealing style of wine, some of the oenology courses at Italy’s universities are now over-subscribed. The Italian Association of Oenologists, Assoenologi, warned two years ago that the situation would lead to an over-representation of the profession. And while Assoenologi was worrying about how to guarantee enough employment, others were expressing concern about how this breed of professionals ‘detached from the land’ would ever be able to express the sacred notion of terroir in their wines – especially if they had so many clients that they could never truly study the special characteristics of specific plots of land over the long term.

But it is not all bad news. Fortunately, this year’s tasting showed the high quality 2007 vintage of Chianti Classicos, as well as the equally attractive 2006 Riservas, which, with their additional mandatory 24-month ageing period, are just appearing on the market. The general quality of the wines is high, pairing sweetness of fruit with tangy, biting acidity and long and fragrant fruit flavours. The wines are food partners par excellence, and while bistecca fiorentina is the clichéd match for a fine Chianti Classico, the best examples fare much better with subtler foods, especially after being allowed some bottle age.

A noticeable trend was that regular as opposed to Riserva Chianti Classico seemed a touch neglected, almost being treated as a ‘second wine’, with the best quality grapes reserved for the Riserva. Meanwhile, the price of regular Chianti Classico has increased substantially even though the level of concentration, balance and persistence does not always seem to warrant these prices. However, progress throughout is undeniable, and most producers have started to embrace Sangiovese’s fresh, crystal clear acidity which, in combination with its sweet, ripe red fruit flavours, creates agreeable tension and freshness on the palate.

A final, but nevertheless striking, observation from the Florentine fortress was that the UK trade and media seemed surprisingly under-represented. One can only conclude that the Consorzio’s resources are being channelled into other efforts and, especially, other markets, which seem more promising than the cooling UK market.

Could it be that the current government tax regime, with its steady if unpredictable increases in duty, is starting to affect the UK’s reputation as the world’s largest export market for wine, as well as its past image as prestigious shop window and the ‘place to be seen’ for any producer with international ambition? British supermarkets have certainly done their fair share of deflating the value of wine by suppressing price points to an absolute minimum, making the decision to invest in markets with a less harsh regime promising a much higher return seem a logical one. However, the long-term investment which the Chianti Classico Consorzio has built up in the UK over the past few years is bound to dissipate and will surely be much more costly to rebuild in the future. British wine lovers and Chianti Classico producers alike will be the poorer for it.

CAMPANIA'S 120 YEAR OLD VINES - MONTE DI GRAZIA

2009-03-30T00:31:00.005+01:00

It is not everyday that one stumbles upon 120 year old vines, and although Australia has it fair share of centenarian vineyards, mainly in areas unaffected by phyloxera (South Australia and Henschke’s Hill of Grace in particular immediately springs to mind), in Europe they tend to be extremely rare. Part of the explanation is that except for afore mentioned phyloxera, old vines produce less grapes, and yields can become so uneconomically low that the plants are uprooted and replaced. But often the lifespan of many vines is also unnecessarily shortened by the unreasonably high yields demanded of them, which literally wears the plant out. This is especially true for many of Italy’s vineyards, where high yields are responsible for diluting wine as well as reputation.

The vineyard in this particular case, Madonna del Carmine, yields so little it is nothing short of a miracle its vines were allowed to grow to such old age. Its owner Alfonso Arpina jumps through this tiny patch bordering a small chapel, after which it is named, and keeps on shouting to me: vieni qua – come here! He grasps my hand and drags me from vine to vine, all ungrafted and on their own rootstocks, pointing out a bird’s nest hidden in one of the mansize trunks, or a particular long branch meandering its way throughout the entire vineyard making bends and u-turns. One branch is so long it is impossible to follow it with the eye, and, mostly out of disbelief, I walk along it to the very end of the vineyard. Arpina kneels down and hugs one of his vines (he knows them one by one) to show me how wide their trunk is. After the assault on all senses, which Naples is, the tranquillity in this part of Campania, in Italy’s South, is almost overwhelming, with only the sound of rain contrasting it.

Alfonso Arpina, medic by day and viticoltore by conviction is the proud owner of this and 3 other old vine vineyards, which have been in the possession of his family for as long as he can remember. Until the early 1990s they had been rented out leaving only a small portion of the grapes to be vinified by Arpina himself in his kitchen using demijohns and plastic canisters.

The vineyard’s main protagonist is the Tintore, an indigenous red grape variety, and even by Campanian standards very rare. As its name indicates, it belongs to the Teinturier family,
sporting red flesh as well as juice, resulting in deeply coloured wines with lots of extract. The wine’s structuring element is its high level of acidity, which, in combination with the intense red and black crushed fruit and tamarind aromas and flavours, creates a lipsmacking sensation without ever being heavy or alcoholic.
In Italy in the past all grape varieties belonging to the Tenturier family were conventionally referred to as “tintore”, although 19th century ampelographic research, notably by the Campanian scholar Giuseppe Froio, already distinguished between the Tintore di Tramonti, Tintora di Lanzara and Olivella Tingitora, with “Tintora”, a variety cultivated on the island of Ischia in the Bay of Naples, appeared to have no relationship with the Tramonti variety either.

The Tintore di Tramonti is characterised by elongated loose bunches with small berries, which makes it much less prone to fungal diseases than varieties with compact bunches. It is an early ripener, at least to Campanian standards, as it is normally harvested at the end of September, a full four to six weeks earlier than Aglianico, Campania’s signature grape. The variety is almost exclusively confined to the Monte Lattari valley, where Alfonso’s vineyards lie. Its existence, however, is duly acknowledged in the larger Costa d’Amalfi DOC, in which it can be a minor ingredient in a blend featuring Campania’s most universal red varieties Piedirosso, Sciascinoso and Aglianico. Curiously, the Costa d’Amalfi distinguishes officially three subzones, of which Tramonti is one (the others being Furore and Ravello), but its historical and cultural vineyards of Tintore have been completely ignored when the regulations were drawn up in 1995. Hence a Tintore “in purezza” can only be marketed under the modest IGT designation, which is basically no more than a table wine with a geographical indication.
This, however, doesn’t make any difference to Arpina, who has been convinced of Tintore’s greatness and ageing potential ever since he tasted a wine made by his father in 1974. This made him decide to cease renting his vines out and instead start for himself, albeit only on a part time basis. And thus the Monte di Grazia estate was born.

Arpina’s holding is tiny, a mere 2,7 ha located in the commune of Tramonti, in the heart of the Monte Lattari and a stone’s throw away from Costa d’Amalfi while 45 km from Naples. The terraces on which the vineyards have been planted consist of volcanic ashes, originating from eruptions of the nearby Vesuvius in the past, and red clayey soils. Although a secluded spot, well hidden from Naples, there is continuous ventilation coming from the nearby coast as well as inland winds blowing from the North, which not only has a mitigating effect in summer as well as winter, but the constant thermic movement add to the special micro climate in this part of the hills.

The vines are Tendone trained, and similar to a pergola with an overhead trellis from which the fruit hangs down. This not only facilitates picking but normally also allows for very high yields. But in this case the antiquity of the vines means yields are a fraction of what can normally be expected, whereas the organic methods used by Arpina reduce this even further. Interestingly, the branches (canes is not an appropriate reference due to their size) are tied to the tendone by using willow shoots. These shoots are also used to construct a series of hedge like walls not unlike the ones used for horse jumping, which are scattered around the vineyard, and which turn out to be a biological way to combat Esca, a fungal disease. The fungus is more attracted to the humid willow hedges than to the old vines it would normally attack.

Although with an average of 25 hl yields are truly tiny, it is still a hell of a lot to ferment in a kitchen. Arpina therefore took a plastic bottle, filled it up with his Tintore red, and headed off to Naples to look for a consultant who could help him build a cellar.
This may not seem the most logical place to search for one, but Arpina was looking for is Gerardo Vernazzaro, a young oenologist in charge of his family’s Cantine Astroni, in the Campi Flegrei, or Phlegraean fields, an area existing of craters dotted around the Vesuvius. This DOC, with its flag bearers the white Falanghina and the red Piedirosso, is right in the middle of Naples’ urban sprawl fighting a lost cause against speculation and real estate, making the vineyards of Chateau Haut Brion in the suburbs of Bordeaux look distinctly rural.
Gerardo told me that he still remembers seeing Arpina turn up with his plastic bottle to present him the home made contadina style 2003 vintage, black as the night and with more than 15% alcohol. Gerardo expected a dirty, oxidised wine, but was immediately taken by its complexity and high acidity. Two days later he drove down to the Madonna del Carmine vineyard, and after having seen the ancient vines he immediately decided to team up with Alfonso. A minuscule cellar was constructed, so tiny you wonder how they got the already quite small stainless steel tanks in there.

The pair started off with the somewhat unforgiving 2004, a very cold vintage giving grapes with searing acidity and little extract. They did the best they could, but Gerardo admits that at that stage he didn’t know the grape very well. He also wanted to use oak to make the wine look more flattering, but Alfonso, who had gained his experience with Tintore using plastic demijohns and glass ballons only, vetoed this, and Gerardo never suggested it again.
Under Gerardo’s guidance an equally impressive white wine from Pepella, Ginestra and Bianca Tenera, as well as a Rosé version of Tintore are produced. With a total production of a mere 7000 bottles in total one can easily understand how obscure grape varieties remain just that. Their extinction is often literally prevented by the likes of Arpina and Gerardo, whose driving force passion only, as the expectancy on a financial return on the estate is as low as the yields of the centenarian vineyard.

The wines
The vineyard plots are all vinified separately in stainless steel tanks and without any use of sulphur. Malolactic fermentation is hoped for but not actively sought, as Tintore’s acidity can be of such high level that it inhibits the activity of the bacteria.
After its fermentation Tintore may be blended with a tiny portion of Moscio, another obscure and ancient Campanian red variety, of which the quantities are too small to justify a separate bottling. However, Arpina and Gerardo are experimenting with a passito version of Moscio. The idea to produce a dessert wine of partially dried grapes came when they faced their first cool and rainy year, and they felt they were struggling to produce a good wine. As Tintore’s high acidity and low extract in those vintages doesn’t create something exceptional, Gerardo wants to “declassify” in such years the Rosso and make only a Rosé. In very good years on the other hand, he wants to make a Moscio passito, the grapes of which are now used as a tiny component in the Rosé.

Monte di Grazia, Bianco 2008 Campania IGT cask sample 17.5 Drink 2010-14
Healthy as well as a proportion of very lightly botrytised Pepella, Ginestra and Bianca Tenera grapes where left in the pneumatic press to macerate overnight.
Pepella has the genetic peculiarity of sporting tiny as well as large berries on the same bunch, however there is no difference in ripeness between the small and large berries. And although Ginestra can easily be considered Campania’s greatest grape according to Gerardo, due to the tiny numbers of vines left, the grapes are generally blended into the white to increase the production.
Deep, brilliant yellow. Opens very sweet and multilayered, with notes of apricot preserve and develops almost Riesling like. Full, concentrated apricot, peach and apple palate, well balanced by lots of lemony acidity. Lemon fruit finish. Pristine acidity, crystal clear. 1000 btls produced. 12.5%

Monte di Grazia Bianco 2007 Campania IGT 16.5 Drink 2009-214
Ginestra, Pepella, Bianca Tenera.
Very pale yellow. Perfumed sweet pear and peach jelly, with high acidity immediately kicking in on the palate, carrying a long, softly fragrant fruit finish. Elegant. 11.5%

Monte di Grazia, Rosato 2008 Campania IGT cask sample 17 Drink 2009-14
A blend of Tintore and Moscio.
This wine was made properly as a rosé instead of being the result of the saigné method, which improves the skin-juice ratio during red wine vinification, and with the Rosé being a left over product.
Tintore was left to macerate for 8 hours in the press, which suffices for the skins to release an unusual amount of anthocyans, the colour pigments, and therefore there is no need to start the first part of the fermentation on the skins to distract some colour of the skins. The wine went partially through malolactic fermentation, but the wine’s high acidity prevented a full functioning of the bacteria responsible for this transformation.
Pale violet ruby.
Heady, fragrant nose of red fruit coulis, strawberry and cherry. On the palate immediate and intense impressions of sweet summer fruit salad and cherry lifted by high, linear acidity. Ends on cherry, strawberry and lemon sorbet. Unusual and unique. 13% vol.

Monte di Grazia Rosso 2008 Campania IGT cask sample 17.5 Drink 2009 -16
After the wine has finished fermentation it is being racked every month, exposing it to as much oxygen as possible to stabilise the colour and aid the polymerisation of the tannins.
Impenetrable, almost black violet. At this stage reductive, showing shy notes of stalky red fruits, but the enormous concentration behind it is immediately apparent. Develops into lots of minerally fruit with hints of pepper corns. Signature freshness and concentration on the palate, with very fine, filigran tannins absorbing the acidity. Closes up again on the finish. Very pure and crystal clear, impressive and long. 13.5% vol.

After this wine Gerardo handed me a sample without actually telling my what it was:
Same impenetrable, black violet as the previous wine. The nose seems more open though, with bright cherry and stalky dark fruits. The impression you get when smelling a wine just finishing fermentation with notes of hay. Full, sweet concentrated and intense fruit attack, but closes up immediately on the finish. Finely grained, powdery tannins. It turns out to be the press wine of the 2008 Campania Rosso.

Monte di Grazia Rosso 2007 Campania IGT 17 Drink 2010-18
This wine has just been bottled, but will not be released on the market for another year.
Deep, concentrated violet ruby. Plum, spice and lots of dark fruits, with succulent red and dark fruit palate, with hallmark freshness. Somewhat compact and closed on the finish, but already showing lots of potential for extended cellaring. 14% vol.

Monte di Grazia Rosso 2006 Campania IGT 18 Drink 2010-18
Deep, violet ruby, extremely youthful looking. Fascinating nose of crushed blueberry, basil leaves and a touch of pepper, as well as savoury, minerally notes all at once. Lots going on here. Smoky, minerally plum, blackberry and blueberry notes and very fine tannins. Very long and elegant, developing on the finish. Impressive in its elegance. Not ostentatious at all. 14% vol

Monte di Grazia Rosso 2005 Campania IGT 17.5 Drink 2009-18
Very dark ruby. Almost upfront nose of spicy, almost oriental nose with lots of black and red fruits. Lots of depth on the palate too with persistent dark and red fruit salad impressions with a fine layer of grainy, soft tannins. Very long and elegant, with potential. 13% vol.

ANGELO GAJA AND THE BLOGGERS

2009-02-24T23:01:00.005Z

Angelo Gaja, whose estate hasn’t even got a website, recently seized the opportunity to reflect online with the help of an army of bloggers.

While it may seem that the Brunello di Montalcino scandal has lost most of its newsworthiness, especially after the majority of its producers voted with a clear ‘no’ against any adulteration of what by law is supposed to be a 100% Sangiovese wine last year, a very belated aftermath was staged this January way up in northern Italy, miles away from Montalcino, by Angelo Gaja.

Gaja, who also produces a Brunello di Montalcino at his wine-making operation Pieve Santa Restituta, offered last September to stage a ‘blogger summit’ on the Brunello scandal in his winery in Barbaresco. The offer was made public in a thread on the Gambero Rosso website (Italy’s most influential food and wine organisation, and responsible for the annual publication of Vini Italia guide) promising total openness in expression of thought. The date for this summit was set for 18 Jan 2009, so far in the future that it was thought that by then the event could well be past its sell-by-date.

Last year Gaja had already meddled in the Brunello scandal by openly discrediting last October’s acrimonious debate involving Italian wine writer Franco Ziliani and Ezio Rivella of Castello Banfi, calling it ‘boorish’ and comparing it to ‘pub banter’.

The January summit assembled 20 bloggers at the Gaja headquarters in Barbaresco, all of them reporting live on a discussion fed by questions from a virtual public while a Rinaldi 1999 Barolo was served. This seemed a somewhat inconvenient way of discussing such a complex topic, interrupted as it was by five-minute toilet breaks and a general slowing down of the debate due to the multi-tasking challenge of arguing and typing at the same time. Italians seem to have taken a liking to this medium that allows them speak out in favour of or against controversial issues in a country staunchly clinging to conservative values. However, it did furnish a stage for Gaja to repeat much of what he had said in the past. He openly questions the law that stipulates the sole use of Sangiovese for Brunello, which came into force in 1982, and which he considers a political decision made in Rome, far away from the reality of the vineyards in Montalcino.

Gaja had already aired his thoughts in a thread on the Il Numeri di Vino website last August, in which he explains that the original Brunello area back in the 1960s comprised no more than 60 hectares, with around 20 or so producers, and with Biondi Santi as the leading estate. In the 19th century, Biondi Santi had isolated a superior clone of Sangiovese, capable of producing wines of great longevity, and called it ‘Brunello’. This wine reached near mythical status in Italy and abroad for sheer rarity due to the fact that the single vineyard version Il Greppo was only very rarely made during the last 100 years or so.

The region enjoyed enormous prosperity after Banfi, an Italo-American operation, settled in the area in 1977, buying large swathes of land to plant with Moscadello, an aromatic but mediocre white grape variety designed to produce the Tuscan equivalent of Moscato d’Asti. Banfi’s ambitious Moscadello planting scheme became a financial fiasco, until the estate started focusing on Brunello as well as the production of a range of international grape varieties, most notably Merlot and Syrah, planted alongside Sangiovese.

According to Gaja, the huge success of Banfi’s Brunello, especially in the United States, triggered a frenzy of plantings in the region, increasing total vineyard area to 2,000 hectares divided among 250 producers. This enormous increase was undiscriminating to say the least, not taking into account that Sangiovese, a variety with ‘weak points’, according to Gaja, demands certain specific sites to ripen properly. A high return seemed to be secured by the name Brunello on the label alone. However, to mitigate the tartness of Sangiovese planted in too cool spots, the international grape varieties introduced by Banfi appeared to be ideal blending partners.

Over time the wines have met with huge international success and, again according to Gaja (and Rivella), it is unacceptable that anyone would want to defend a 100% Sangiovese wine, which would mean that large parts of the Brunello vineyards would not be suitable for its production. Although during the blogger summit Gaja literally said that he didn’t want to tell the producers in Montalcino what to do, and would rather keep his thoughts to himself in order to avoid controversy, in reality there was no doubt that he clearly favours a legalised inclusion of international grape varieties in Brunello either to make the wines more marketable or to compensate for sites where Sangiovese struggles to ripen, or a combination of both.

The law that stipulates a 100% Brunello doesn’t take this into account, and Gaja argues that if producers are constantly in conflict with that law, the law should be changed. The suggestion made by one of the bloggers to use the more flexible St Antimo DOC that allows grape varieties other than Sangiovese, was declined by Gaja. He said that, having made a considerable investment in Montalcino, he expects a proper return on that.

Gaja’s critics point out that this idea of a ‘blended’ wine which is supposed to be monovarietal comes from the same man who tried to have the Barbaresco DOCG changed to allow for inclusion of a certain percentage of anything other than the revered Nebbiolo. He failed in this and as a consequence declassified some of his most prestigious wines to the fairly nondescript Langhe Nebbiolo DOC, which allows up to 15% of other grape varieties in a Nebbiolo-based wine.

Gaja also criticised the outcome of the ‘100% Brunello’ vote, calling it an act of hypocrisy, saying that in spite of almost all producers having voted in favour of this varietal purity, it doesn’t reflect the reality. He pleads for a regulation in which producers themselves can decide how to make a marketable Brunello, especially as, according to Gaja, more than half of all vineyards registered for the production of this wine are not suitable for Sangiovese, but no one can (or wants to) declassify them.

It is easy to see that statements like these infuriate the purists who defend the special characteristics that only a 100% Brunello, plus bottle age, will possess. They also insinuate that Gaja was a relatively late comer to Montalcino and therefore may have been unable to buy up the best vineyards for the production of a truly great Sangiovese Brunello. But Gaja thinks it is irresponsible to endanger the position of Brunello, and its international sales, by laws making the production of a rounder, easier wine impossible. During the bloggers’ summit, he exclaimed that drinkability goes before typicity (‘la bontà del vino fa premio sulla tipicità’), especially if a producer ends up with a Sangiovese which is a bit thin, and decides to ‘ameliorate’ it even if this possibility lies outside the law.

The question why Gaja always seems to want to change some DOCG or the other, first for Barbaresco and now for Brunello, is answered by one of the bloggers with a succinct ‘because the wines that are obtained by following the law are inadequate according to Gaja’. Even the president of the Enoteca Regionale del Barbaresco, Giancarlo Montando, came to Gaja’s defence, making the bold statement that it is hypocritical to even think that a pure single varietal wine is possible in Italy, as there will always be something in its vineyards that doesn’t comply with regulations. And it is Gaja’s strong belief that any law should work around that fact.

The summit ended punctually at 12.56 when its chairman Antonio Tombolini exclaimed ‘and now it is time to have lunch at Ristorante Antica Torre di Barbaresco!’ The summit didn’t seem to have ruined anyone’s appetite greatly, although one cannot escape the impression that Gaja seems to be more interested in marketability than terroir characteristics. It was very odd too that during the summit no one wanted to even accept the fact that a ‘consumer friendly’ Brunello can be perfectly legally produced in Montalcino, but without the use of the prestigious name. And it is here where one suspects the true problem lies.

SOAVE BUT NOT AS WE KNOW IT

2009-02-18T20:50:00.002Z

Alessandro and Filippo Filippi challenge the meaning and value of the Soave appellation

Soave, the wine at which most wine lovers would turn up their noses, has suffered for years under a self-inflicted inferiority complex, having allowed the production of bland and cheap wines under its appellation. Although the Consorzio, the controlling body of Soave, recently embarked on an ambitious project to describe and map single vineyards in an effort to restore the wine’s ancient, but largely forgotten, reputation (of which more later), it has yet to restore the reputation of Garganega, the white grape responsible for wines that are often described as ‘flowery, elegant and with finesse’, but could easily mean ‘dull’.

Garganega, Soave’s main ingredient, is not generally considered a great grape variety, although this view is almost always based on the mediocre wines described above rather than on true efforts to find out what it is capable of. Of course, a handful of producers, notably Pieropan, have been stubbornly producing wines of concentration and complexity, but recently this very select camp has been joined by two brothers, whose wines seem to add a completely new dimension to Garganega. They provoke the question: is Garganega light and flowery or full bodied and multi-layered? Their wines also do away with the age-old myth that Garganega’s yields should never be too low as this would compromise the wine’s ‘elegance’, which, according to the brothers Filippi, is nothing other than dilution and a direct result of unreasonably high yields.

Alessandro and Filippo Filippi determinedly cling to old vines trained on the maligned pergola training system and, with one exception, have turned their back on the much more modern Guyot system. They refuse to green harvest and use exclusively organic and biodynamic methods. They scorn any other grape in their Soave except for Garganega, and their highly original wines, all single-vineyard bottlings, show purity, concentration of fruit and minerality in such abundance that they have found it difficult to get the official approval for their wines because the Consorzio struggles to recognise them as ‘traditional and genuine’. Part of the Filippi range can therefore be marketed only under the meaningless classification IGT Veneto Bianco, signifying another lost opportunity for Soave to spruce up its battered reputation.

Although the estate seems to have appeared out of the blue, the family has since the 14th century been firmly rooted in Castelcerino, one of the highest and oldest parts of the Soave hills, and they have an enviable monopoly in two of the very best crus, Vigne della Bra and Monteseroni, and 1.5 hectares in the über cru Castelcerino. The estate was one of the first to vinify its own grapes, but estate bottling wasn’t introduced until 2003, when the Filippi brothers took over the reins from their parents.

The soils in this part of the Soave hills are extremely varied and complex with basalts of volcanic origin and layers of ancient, prehistoric limestone (the Filippi office is full of stones with fossile imprints found in their vineyards). The soils of the Castelcerino vineyard, with-50 year-old vines, are volcanic with black basalt stones, whereas Monteseroni, only a stone’s throw away, consists mainly of limestone. A perfect south exposition makes it the warmest of the three vineyards, and although the vines are pergola trained, yields are very low thanks to vines 60 years old.

Vigne della Bra has sandy clay soils with a skeleton of basalt rock. The vineyard is surrounded by a forest, shielding it from cooler winds, with a marked difference between day and night temperatures. A row of trees neatly divides this vineyard into two separate plots, which is duly recognised by their separate vinification and bottling.

Although Castelcerino is one of the oldest vineyards in the region, only part of it falls within the superior (at least on paper) Soave Classico designation, while the highest and smallest part is confined to the nondescript Soave Colli Scaligeri designation. The Filippis can literally see the border of Soave Classico run past their front door, making a bow around their vineyards, thus raising doubts over the seriousness of a legal designation which doesn’t recognise some of its finest terroirs.

As Soave Colli Scaligeri doesn’t mean anything to anyone, and Soave Classico is not a guarantee for quality, the brothers are considering taking all their wines out of the Soave denomination. The name Soave, according to Alessandro, hinders a proper return on investments, and prevents producers from focusing on quality instead of quantity. While Soave continues to be synonymous with the cheapest of wines, lower yields, a prerequisite for showing Garganega’s greatness, are not really an option, which makes the Filippi efforts even more laudable. For the moment, the vineyard names feature prominently on the labels, with the word Soave in very small print and relegated to the back label, as it could prevent wine lovers beating a path to their door.

The aforementioned pergola, which has traditionally been considered the main culprit for higher yields because it accommodates Garganega’s extreme vigour while giving support to an enormous number of loose-hanging, heavy bunches of grapes, has been lovingly embraced by Filippo and Alessandro. Although the modern Guyot trellis system has been adopted by one and all, it cannot automatically be read as a commitment to quality. Alessandro explains that in Soave, especially on the plains, it allows for a high level of mechanisation, impossible in a pergola vineyard. With the modern trellis system came the introduction of high-yielding Garganega clones, as well as the now so familiar international intruders, with Chardonnay playing the leading part. Although it has no affinity with the volcanic soils in the hills, and doesn’t produce anything of much character on the fertile plains, Chardonnay can fill out the mid palate of high-yielding, dilute Garganega and, more importantly, boost alcohol levels.

For Alessandro, the advantages of the ancient pergola system far outweigh the disadvantages, but even he admits that clones and the age of the vines play a key role. The Filippi vines are almost all 50 to 60 years old, all descendants of an ancient biotype, and not of selected clones from the beginning of the 1960s that were developed for quantity only. Unsurprisingly, clonal selection represents another bone of contention for the brothers. Pergola, especially in combination with old vines and low yields, produces loose bunches of grapes (Guyot, at least in Filippo’s experience, giving much more compact bunches) which are more resistant to rot. The high position of the bunches on the pergola, up to two metres above the ground, allow for ventilation, provided the vigour of the plant is kept in check. Old vines are naturally less vigorous, and the organic approach seems to restrict profusion even more. Another very important side effect is that quality is not improved by green harvesting, which the brothers describe as an artificial correction of an intentionally unbalanced situation.

The cellar, as you would expect, is an extremely simple affair, consisting of a couple of stainless steel tanks. Minimal intervention seems to come naturally here. As the building is set against a slope, gravity flow is the norm, while temperature control during fermentation is mostly left to the season, with perforated walls allowing streams of cool air into the cellar.

The grapes are handled as little as possible, with destemming and pressing only. Pre-fermentation maceration, which nowadays is almost standard practice, is not used – the brothers consider this a ‘trick’ to coax more out of a grape than it has brought with it in the first place. The wines, vinified and bottled strictly by vineyard, are fermented with indigenous yeast in stainless steel. The wines stay on the fine lees for six months, and often much longer, only to be disturbed by the occasional bâtonnage. In addition to adding complexity, this results in a natural clarification without the need for fining agents. Malolactic doesn’t occur, nor is it desired.

All wines get an additional year in bottle before they are released, as the high mineral content seems to inhibit the normally swift development of Garganega, and even the entry-level Soave Colli Scaligeri Castelcerino needs decanting, something the brothers advise for the entire range.

As if that were not enough, the Filippis produce in minuscule quantities (sometimes no more than 100 bottles) a range of wines called ‘Vini di Ricerca’ – research wines – which are in-depth investigations into late-harvested Garganega, fermented on the skins and given prolonged lees contact.

Their counterpart to the classically sweet Recioto di Soave is a deliberately dry wine made from dried Garganega grapes. This wine is called Scapa, dialect for ‘escape’, suggesting that the sweetness has escaped from the wine. The Filippis call this wine the white equivalent of Amarone, which, incidently, they also produce from a tiny patch of pergola-trained vines in Valpolicella, using Corvina, Corvinone, Rondinella and Molinara.

Alessandro and Filippo Filippi, Castelcerino 2006 Soave Colli Scaligero 16 Drink 2009-12
Quite deep yellow. Intense spicy fruit and camomile with lots of minerals. Serious stuff. Mineral fruit on the palate, restrained and elegant. Bitter almond finish. Still a touch yeasty and will benefit from another year in bottle. Needs decanting. 12.5%

Alessandro and Filippo Filippi, Monteseroni 2006 Soave Colli Scaligeri 16.5 Drink 2009-14
Restrained, very fine stony nose. Salty and minerally on the palate. Again tight, and complex. Great potential and length. 13%

Alessandro and Filippo Filippi, Vigne della Bra 2006 Soave Colli Scaligeri 17 Drink 2010-16
The most open of them all with soft fruit with depth and stony notes. Camomile and garden herbs. Much more restrained and closed on the palate. Mineral theme again, and soft sweet fruit, matched by marked but fine acidic structure. Will need more time, and has lots of potential. 13%

Alessandro and Filippo Filippi, Vigne delle Bra 20 mesi sui lieviti 2006 Soave Colli Scaligeri 16.5 Drink 2009-16
From the upper part of the Bra vineyard. Twenty months on the fine lees, hence the name. Perfumed nose of sweet white fruit, earthy and with touch of fresh dough. Fascinating. Closed at first, then shows more and more soft fruit, with minerality. Very elegant and persistent. 13.5%

Alessandro and Filippo Filippi Trebbiano 2006 IGT Bianco Veronese 17 Drink 2009-16
Vinification without sulphites and 6 months on the lees, with regular bâtonnage. Pale golden. Intensely sweet nose of honey and candied fruit, apricots and brioche, apple. Aromatic fruit but completely dry palate. Almost a touch phenolic. Genuine, but for a select few only. 12.5%

Alessandro and Filippo Filippi, Puro Garganega 2007 IGT Bianco Veronese 17 Drink 2009-16
Only stainless steel, skin contact for 4 days, no sulphides at any stage. Light golden amber. Intense, sweet nose of apricot marmelade, honey, cooked apple and nutmeg, caramel notes. Closed on the palate, minerals, bread crust. Marked but very fine acidic structure. Intense finish. Will develop over the years. 12%

Alessandro and Filippo Filippi, Tardiva 2004 Soave Colli Scaligeri 17.5 Drink 2009-16
Exceptionally late harvest. The fermentation is so slow - it takes three months to complete. The wine stays at least an extra year on the fine lees, and a year or so in bottle. There is virtually no residual sugar. The appearance of a dessert wine – brilliant golden. Beautiful, powerful, intense and pure sweet nose, apricot, bready and savoury notes too, camomile and green tea. Similar to the Puro, but finer, more refined. Minerally fruit palate is still compact and closed. 13%

Alessandro and Filippo Filippi, Secco 2002 Soave Colli Scaligeri 18 Drink 2009-16
Made of apassito (dried) grapes which were attacked by botrytis during the drying process. Bright amber. Opulent sweet complex opening. Apricot juice and notes of croquant. Beautifully balanced with focused, sweet fruit. Ends dry but there is great balance and pure fruit flavours, creamy notes, and lovely acidity. 14.5%

This article has been published previously on www.jancisrobinson.com

WILL WESTERN AUSTRALIA EVER RIVAL PESSAC-LEOGNAN?

2008-12-17T09:33:00.007Z

Margaret River’s Fraser Gallop Estate challenges the region’s producers to define what their terroir is about

The last Saturdayof November saw a most unusual encounter between the so called Old and New Worlds in the company of Domaine de Chevalier’s Olivier Bernard (on the right of the picture) and Nigel Gallop of the Fraser Gallop Estate in Western Australia’s Margaret River. All things being relative, Australia’s soils, probably the oldest in the world, can look back on 500 million years of history, but this particular patch has been planted with vines only since the early 1960s. With its Cabernet based blends it shot to fame indecently quickly, begging immediate comparison with Bordeaux not only on the basis of grape varieties used, but also because of its gravely soils producing powerful, yet refined reds. With a bit of Burgundy in the form of Chardonnay and Pinot Noir thrown in, and joined by Sauvignon Blanc, Semillon, Riesling, Malbec, and Tempranillo to name only a few, the region seems capable of producing premium wine from whatever grape variety winemakers take a fancy to, unhindered as they are by any regulation.

This ‘grape opportunism’ became a thorn in the eye of Gallop, a former software entrepreneur, whose boundless energy is matched only by seemlingly endless investments and time he puts into his estate. During the 1990s he had cast his eye on Margaret River after an interest in wine had budded during his working years in San Francisco with countless visits to Napa Valley. Gallop decided that the only place good enough for him was on the gravely red loam in the sub region of Wilyabrup where most of the top producers are concentrated. His 20 odd hectares of vineyards look decisively Garagiste compared with the average size of Australia’s winemaking operations. Here Bordeaux varieties, white and red, feature predominantly, with only Chardonnay as the exotic one out.

For Gallop, who is fanatical about Sauvignon Blanc and Semillon, the analogy with Bordeaux should certainly be taken further than red wine only. Something of a hardliner, he has little tolerance for any other grape varieties, Chardonnay excepted, which according to him only dilute the Margaret River reputation and delay the much needed investigation into its terroir.

Many Margaret River producers grow Sauvignon Blanc and Semillon Margaret River Wine Industry Association figures show that, while total plantings of Chardonnay have remained static during the last three years, plantings of both Semillon and Sauvignon Blanc are on the increase. The wines they produce are mostly of the fresh and fruity category, but for Gallop they are nothing more than ‘cash cow blends’. He wants to challenge Margaret River to come up with a more serious barrel fermented style analogous to Bordeaux’s white Graves.

To make his point, Gallop and his Australian distributor Gary Steel (a major importer of fine French wine into Australia), came up with the idea of a blind tasting comparing Margaret River’s more serious Sauvignon-Semillon wines, called ‘S-SB’ or ‘SB-S’ depending on the proportions in the blend, with Bordeaux’s finest dry whites. Steel sourced the likes of Chx Carbonnieux, Smith Haut Lafitte and Haut Brion, while Gallop made his acquaintance of the affable Olivier Bernard of Graves’ Domaine de Chevalier while travelling in Europe last June. You would think that the Bordelais would be wary of another excercise à la Judgment of Paris Tasting, but almost all Chateaux, with the exception of Haut Brion, willingly submitted samples. Not only that: Bernard travelled all the way to Margaret River with six vintages of his famous white. He must have felt immediately at home at the stately Fraser Gallop house, which grandeur would put many a Bordeaux Chateau to shame.

As Gallop and Steel were aware of the potentially historical significance of the event for the region - Bernard pouring 2006, 2004, 2001, 1989, 1981 and 1975 white Domaine Chevalier from magnum followed by the ‘MR v Bordeaux’ tasting the following day - they invited James Halliday as well as the Who is Who of Margaret River. Halliday, after having tasted the flight of the Chevalier wines, remarked that Margaret River is still to come up with a similar, minerally style of wine. But it is early days, as many of the plantings are still quite recent. Bernard spoke of the age of the vines at his home, which are well over 25 years of age, and the almost matter-of-factly way of winemaking. The secret probably lies as much in the sorting table and selecting anything but topnotch fruit, as the terroir and its indigenous yeast. And it must have been an eye opener for most of the wine makers to see their humble SSB in its 1975 Bordeaux counterpart well alive and kicking.

The next day, while spring rains were compromising what until then had looked like a quick flowering of the vines, the congregation of the previous night returned to the Fraser Gallop winery for the ‘International Sauvignon Blanc Semillon Tasting’. A flight of 16 wines consisting of 2005 dry white bordeaux and some of the most highly regarded Western Australian and Victorian 2005 and 2006 blends of Sauvignon Blanc and Semillon were served blind, to be scored out of 20 by the attendees. Below the results of what could have been a slap in the face of either region. Bernard showed a particularly able taster, recognising most of the Margaret River whites as not originating from Bordeaux. When asked how he had identified them, he explained they showed much greener and leaner than their European counterpart. A tendency to pick early in an effort to retain freshness as well as obtaining what is considered the typical ‘grassiness’ of Sauvignon is presumably the main reason for this.

The Fraser Gallop Estate itself hadn’t contribute any wine to the blind tasting because Gallop, together with his chief wine maker, ex Vasse Felix’s Clive Otto, are waiting for their Semillon vineyards to mature. Nevertheless, Gallop seemed pleased with the outcome. According to him, if the event has resulted in animating the Australian attendees to reconsider the potential of SBS/SSB it was a success. Not leaving anything to chance, he is already planning to turn the tasting in an annual event and other Chateaux in Graves can expect Gallop to be knocking on their door soon.

The results of the blind tasting below - with attendees divided into those who had judged on the Australian show circuit, other wine professionals and wine amateurs - make for interesting reading, although the differences between the highest score and the lowest is not so large as to be truly significant. On interesting remark after the tasting came from Jane Skilton, New Zealand’s only female MW, wondering aloud if this is a style of wine consumers would enjoy drinking at an elevated price point.

Judge
2005 Chateau Laville Haut Brion 18.62
2005 Domaine de Chevalier 18.47
2005 Chateau Smith Haut Lafitte 18.47
2005 Arlewood 18.37
2006 Mount Mary 18.37
2005 Chateau Haut Brion 18.17
2005 Chateau Carbonnieux 18.12
2005 Suckfizzle 18.02
2005 Chateau Malartic Lagraviere 18.02
2005 Yarra Yarra 17.78
2005 Chateau Pape Clement 17.77
2006 Cape Mentelle Wallcliffe 17.57
2006 Cullen 17.18
2005 Voyager Estate 17.17

Wine professionals
Chateau Smith Haut Lafitte 18.75
Chateau Laville Haut Brion 18.47
Domaine de Chevalier 18.13
Chateau Haut Brion 18.10
Suckfizzle 17.95
Yarra Yarra 17.90
Mount Mary 17.77
Cullen 17.72
Chateau Malartic Lagraviere 17.69
Arlewood 17.68
Cape Mentelle Wallcliffe 17.63
Chateau Carbonnieux 17.53
Chateau Pape Clement 17.42
Voyager Estate 17.40

Consumer
Chateau Smith Haut Lafitte 18.55
Chateau Laville Haut Brion 18.15
Chateau Haut Brion 17.92
Yarra Yarra 17.80
Chateau Malartic Lagraviere 17.77
Arlewood 17.72
Cape Mentelle Wallcliffe 17.70
Suckfizzle 17.67
Chateau Pape Clement 17.67
Domaine de Chevalier 17.65
Voyager Estate 17.55
Chateau Carbonnieux 17.47
Cullen 17.45
Mount Mary 17.40

GIORNATE DEL RIESLING - RIESLING IN ITALY

2008-12-16T16:59:00.003Z

An ambitious tasting shows that Italy needs to focus on terroir if it wants to pick up the German gauntlet

Behind this title hides an annual competition dedicated to Riesling only, which, now in its 4th year, takes place annually in one of South Tyrol’s most remote corners, indeed so remote that it even confused the satnav system on my way up to this very Northern part of Italy. It is organised at the same time as the famous Merano International Wine Festival, but the village of Naturns, the host of the Riesling event, is much less savvy in promoting itself. It’s a place where hotels carry names like Edelweiss and where there is no one on the street at 2pm in the afternoon. The North of Italy, largely bi lingual with the German language (and customs) being the standard, firmly considers itself as a natural extension of Austria and Italian by a quirk of history only. At the village gates a poster of the event announces the presence of Stewart Piggot, Germany’s demi dieu of Riesling, in pop star size letters for added gravitas. But I doubt whether any of the attendants would have known who he is. They seemed far too busy enjoying themselves in a Saturday afternoon’s drink, with even dogs allowed in. It was all very laid back, with candles and soft light to heighten the atmosphere, but it made the tasting somewhat of a guerrilla exercise, at least for me.
Curiously enough, a comprehensive range of Rieslings produced in Italy were presented next to the crème de la crème of German wines, so in all honesty, I couldn’t say I had been wasting my time driving to Naturns. This range was complemented by more Riesling from Felton Road, Chateau Ste. Michelle, Emerich Knoll, Franz Hirtzberger, and one or two oddities, like the Dutch Apostelhoeve. Perhaps the villagers knew after all what they had come for.

The event is a bit of a David & Goliath attempt: Whereas Germany can boast almost 22,000 ha, Italy’s total plantings of Riesling are truly minute, Alto Adige, with 27ha, possessing the largest part. But the variety is losing ground here, and plantings are roughly half now of what they were in 1993. Unsurprisingly, in the same period hectares devoted to Chardonnay and Pinot Grigio more than doubled.
The tasting showed a heavy bias towards Riesling coming from Alto Adige, or South Tyrol with its subsidiaries Eisacktal or Valle Isarco, and Vinschgau or Valle Venosta, the balance being made up of Trentino, Piemonte, Friuli, Piave, and an isolated example of the grape from Veneto.
Especially Valle Isarco showed the greatest potential, helped by its stony soils and, ironically, climate change. On one of my previous trips to the Valle Isarco visiting the biodynamic Kuenhof estate, the first to receive Gambero Rosso’s coveted 3 Bicchieri award two times in a row for its Riesling Kaiton, Peter Pliger, its proprietor (see picture), kindly took a moment of his time to talk to me about Valle Isarco’s fortune, busy as he is restoring, literally by hand, neglected old stone vineyard terraces on an altitude of 1000m. He explained that these very steep slopes were abandoned after WOII as ripening grapes here was a hit and miss affair. With temperatures going up, Valle Isarco is now able to produce the racy, succulent white wines it couldn’t in the past, so Pliger is happy, if only for the moment. According to him, climate change has been beneficial for the Valle Isarco appellation, but he would not like to see it progress any further.

All wines on show were of the 2007 vintage, which certainly for Germany was very good. A very wise decision of the organisers was to line up the Italian Rieslings first, as the consequent German flight was of such high quality it made their hosts look like beginners at best. It seemed slightly masochist, and unbalanced too, to select so many of German top wines to compare with the far more modest Italian efforts. With the likes of Horst Sauer, Fritz Haag, Kartäuserhof, Hermann Dönnhoff (superb his Niederhäuser Hermannshöhle Dry), Egon Schmitt, and Joseph Leitz, the contrast with the Italian interpretation of the grape couldn’t have been greater, and it must have sent a forceful message home. Hopefully not one of resignation.

However, the tasting did not so much reveal Italy’s potential in growing Riesling, but a general absence of terroir in most of the wines. Samples from Alto Adige and Trentino showed that Riesling has a great affinity with these regions if yields are kept in check, but a wine from Emilia Romagna displayed such little varietal character, it seemed safe to say that it was not Riesling Renano, as the German version is called in Italy, but Riesling Italico, aka Welschriesling, which, except for its name, has very little with it in common. This variety finds its main purposes in blends, benefiting mostly from early consumption but can produce a passable sweet wine. It shows little acidity, and although fragrant, has nothing of the clear linearity Riesling displays so well.
For Riesling to be the carrier of terroir, it needs low yields, a long, cool ripening season, and most of all, a prime site. These factors are of course not unknown to Italian viticulture, but site specificity generally is, as witnessed by a far too lenient wine law, loosely based on the French appellation model, but much less restrictive, especially with regards to yields. In the case of Northern Italy, Riesling, together with almost all other, frequently international grape varieties, disappears in the large and largely anonymous Alto Adige and Trentino DOC, a catch-all appellation that doesn’t do anything to trigger the quest for terroir. Only Valle Isarco and Valle Venosta are the very rare exceptions, and since 2002 appear on labels as a suffix to the Alto Adige DOC much, like Cotes-du-Rhone Villages. they are generally well worth looking out for.
Piemonte, one of the very few regions with an historic knowledge of terroir with Barolo and Barbaresco being the prime examples of producers of single vineyard wines based on the red Nebbiolo grape, seems to have an almost natural inclination to site specific plantings. In the future, Riesling may well vie with Chardonnay here for sites that are too cool for the red varieties, with Sergio Germano’s Riesling Herzu, planted in Serralunga d’Alba, being one of the examples. His wine is not unlike a Rheingau version and betrays Germano’s fascination with the grape.
There seems to be little point pursuing the investigation in Riesling’s adaptability to the soils of Veneto, where Garganega rules, whereas Silvio Jermann’s Afix, a Riesling of some repute from Friuli, Italy’s very Northeast corner, is an attractive wine despite the apparent use of oak.

Although it is unlikely that this event will trigger a frenzy in Riesling plantings, its relevance goes beyond the promotion of a single grape, which, ironically, is not even indigenous to Italy. Riesling, considered the grape that most clearly expresses its terroir, makes amply clear that Italy generally focuses on suitability of sites to plant vines, but now urgently must start an indepth and long term investigation in the effects of the sites on the wines, if it wants to identify great terroir. As it is, international varieties have been providing Italy with a commercial easy way out, as the likes of Cabernet and Chardonnay almost always provide some varietal hint or the other, seemingly regardless of the circumstances. Indigenous grape varieties paired with low yields will prove a better long term strategy, especially as a younger generation has come to the fore showing a whole new dimension in the simplest of Italian varieties not held possible by their parents and grandparents only 20 years ago.

The wines were below were tasted in the order of the flight
Kellerei St Michael Eppan, Montiggl Riesling 2007 Alto Adige 16 Drink 2009-0
Shy but attractive nose of peach and green apple, followed by a minerally palate with firm acidity. Will need a couple of months to open up. 13%

Joseph Brigl, Kreuzbichler Riesling 2007 Alto Adige 14.5 Drink 2008-09
Subdued but with some appeal, showing soft peach and apple. Aeration results in more definition. Disappointing, almost bland palate, lacking extract. A real shame as it started off so well. 13%

H. Lun, Riesling 2007 Alto Adige 15 Drink 2008-10
Yeasty opening with notes of lemon. A tight, closed palate with minerally, restraint fruit and surprisingly full bodied for its 11.5%. A bit more depth wouldn’t go amiss, though. 11.5%

Landesgut Kellerei Laimburg, Riesling Alto Adige 14.5 Drink 2008-09
A wine from the Experimental Agricultural and Forestry Training Centre.
Quite reductive at first, but with aeration showing stone fruit. The palate is much more evolved, with sweet tasting but rather non descript fruit. 13%

Cantina Vini Merano, Graf von Meran Riesling Alto Adige, 15 Drink 2008-09
From a small cooperative governed by International grape varieties, but particularly praised for their rendition of the local Schiava grape, aka Trollinger.
Clean and restraint, hinting at white fruits. Similar on the palate, with more aromatic development on the finish. Touch bitter, but fruit wins eventually.14%

Andreas Huber – Pacherhof, Riesling Alto Adige Valle Isarco, 16 Drink 2008-12
Well defined and intense nose of white fruits and lemon peel. Palate shows ripe, persistent acidity with elegant fruit. Has potential. 13.5%

Gunther Kirschbaum-Köfererhof Riesling Alto Adige Valle Isarco, 16.5 Drink 2008-12
Complex, tight but captivating nose of Passion fruit, smoky tea leaves and minerals. Ripe fruits on the palate with very fine, integrated acidity, which seems almost low. Touch of residual sweetness on great length. 13%

Peter Pliger-Kuenhof, Kaiton Riesling Alto Adige Valle Isarco, 17 Drink 2009-16
The first and only white so far from Alto Adige closed with a screw cap, and quite a brave step, as it seems to defy DOC regulation.
Lots of stones and earth on the nose as well as palate. It is so tight it is virtually mute, but brooding fruit tells there is much more to come. Needs decanting. It is nothing short of a miracle that Gambero Rosso gave it its highest praise, the 3 Biccherie, as it normally only awards wines for the here and now, refusing to judge them on potential.

Oswald Schuster-Befehlhof, Riesling Alto Adige Valle Venosta, 14 Drink 2008-09
Very deep colour, nut unlike an Auslese. Similar impression on the nose, with sweet honeyed fruit. Completely dry palate lacking charm. 12.5%

Franz Pratzner-Falkenstein, Riesling Falkenstein Alto Adige Valle Venosta 16 Drink 2009-12
Cool, attractive nose of stones and green apple. Ultra clean fruit palate, which will gain in weight with an additional 6 months in bottle. Understated. Very good length. 13.5%

Germano Ettore, Herzu Langhe Bianco 16.5 Drink 2008-12
Seems almost like a Rheingau Riesling with good minerality and compact white fruits. Only the slightest hint of petrol. Full bodied feel, with sweet white fruit and lime. Delicious.

Ceretto, Arbarei Langhe Bianco 14.5 Drink 2008-09
Yeasty, bread crust nose with sweet herbal fruit notes. Sweet tropical fruit palate seems a touch manufactured, with soft acidity (partial malolactic fermentation?). Ends on bitter peach stone note.

G D Vajra, Pétracine Langhe Bianco 14.5 Drink 2008-09
Interesting minerally, herbal nose, with a less rewarding palate, even somewhat dull. Good effort though, which deserves continuation. 14%

Poderi Colla, Cascine Drago Langhe Bianco 14 Drink 2008-09
Opens a touch sweaty with a hint of truffle. Quite sweet palate without enough definition.
Residual sweetness tries to mitigate high acidity. 13%

Ronco del Gelso, Riesling Isonzo del Friuli 14 Drink 2008-09
This wine generally receives praise, but with this vintage it is difficult to see why.
Reductive, vegetal fruit nose, followed by citric acidity on the palate and a bitter finish. 13.5%

Jermann Vinnaioli, Afix IGT delle Venezie 15.5 Drink 2008-10
Has this seen oak? Shows apricot preserve and a firm structure, with convincing length. It will benefit from another 6 months in bottle. 13.5%

La Vis/Valle di Cembra, Simboli Trentino Bianco 14.5 Drink 2008-10
Opens with what smelled like geranium and never a good sign, but disappears after aeration. Notes of Rhubarb on the palate and searingly high acidity, which seems to suppress the fruit. Considerable length. The verdict is still out on this one. 13.5%

Istituto Agrario San Michelle All’Adige, Riesling Trentino 15 Drink 2008-09
From Trentino’s Institute for Oenology.
Minerally and fragrant nose is followed by a somewhat dilute palate. Could be better but seems to have potential when lower yields are respected.

THE MESSAGE IS THE BOTTLE

2008-10-31T08:20:00.006Z

Chianti Classico producer Il Borghetto’s fetish for Burgundian bottles has fallen foul of the Consorzio.

Tim Manning, winemaker of Il Borghetto, an estate in Tuscany’s San Casciano, discovered recently that the regulations regarding bottle shape can change rather quickly and, in doing so, restrict him from continuing to fill the estate’s Chianti Classico in the sloping shouldered Burgundian bottles pictured here.   Originally from Liverpool, Manning came to Tuscany in 2004 on the back of vintages in New Zealand and Oregon where he had been working with Pinot Noir. He immediately saw similarities between Burgundy’s mainstay and Tuscany’s principal red grape variety, Sangiovese. Both are capricious varieties to grow, both are able to produce great wines of supple elegance which can express perfectly their origin, and both require a certain attention to winemaking detail to ensure that the subtleties of the grape find their way through to the bottle.

However, more important than vinification methods is the grape variety itself: Sangiovese depends more on perfume and elegance and less on extract and muscle. And although the addition of so called international grape varieties, especially Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot, can easily blur these characteristics, it is these blends that (legally) have become the norm in Chianti Classico rather than a 100% varietal Sangiovese.

From the very beginning the idea of giving Sangiovese free rein had determined Il Borghetto’s planting scheme, with six clones of Sangiovese matched to 15 different vineyard blocks. According to Manning, they make Sangiovese a little like one might make Pinot Noir: each block is fermented separately, while in some ferments a percentage of whole bunches, stems and all, are added to give a fine backbone of tannin.

Manning explains that if most Chianti Classico is a blended wine like those of Bordeaux and filled in a Bordeaux bottle, then their Chianti Classico in its 100% Sangiovese form is more Burgundian and the Burgundian bottle has been chosen to show this. He adds that they did it out of the conviction that Sangiovese is a bit like Pinot and as such it maybe best express itself unadulterated by any foreign, or even indigenous, additions.

The message is the bottle, and as such must have been picked up by the bureaucrats too, who have only recently started to change the rules, specifying the exact bottle shape Chianti Classico should be seen in. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it stipulates the use of Bordeaux bottles only, a decision which is soon to become legally binding.

The apparent haste to get the legislation through after more than half a century of silence on the subject seems curious. It could give rise to the speculation that the officials would like to see everybody in line in order to prevent the controversial issue of international grape varieties in one of Italy’s most famous wines made visible by a ‘Bordeaux bottle vs Burgundy bottle’ war, the latter being supported by small, artisanal operations trying to elaborate on terroir and embracing vintage differences, while the first is firmly supported by the larger producers (and even larger bottlers) who see their salvation in Merlot & Co, especially when Sangiovese is unaccommodating in less than ideal vintages.

The biggest surprise for Manning however, must be the fact that until he started using the Burgundian bottle, not a single attempt had been made previously to specify the shape. Although the Consorzio seems to act as if it were completely unaware of this, it remains curious, to say the least, that Il Borghetto’s wines, in their heretical form, have on several occasions passed through the offices of the Consorzio to be presented at various tastings.

If Manning wants to keep his bottle as a message, he will have to label his wine under the lower IGT qualification, and as the regulations don’t seem to leave him any other choice, we may yet see again another producer who could add credibility to Chianti Classico’s battered reputation pushed out of the boat.   On the up side of things: at least if he is forced to sell his wine as an IGT rather than as a Chianti Classico, he can probably charge a higher price for it now.

Brunellogate - the Sequel

2008-10-16T11:29:00.002+01:00

BRUNELLO DI MONTALCINO REMAINS FIRMLY IN THE SPOTLIGHTS - FOR ALL THE WRONG REASONS

Friday just past saw a bitter confrontation between some of the principal protagonists in the Brunellogate affair in a Face to Face Debate held in Siena. The ones responsible for the scandal are journalists in general and Italian wine writer Franco Ziliani in particular, according to Ezio Rivella, once consultant enologist to dominant Brunello producer Castello Banfi. He claimed it was the media who were "to blame for the Brunello scandal”.

The debate (available as a podcast at www.vinarius.it) was organised by Vinarius, the Italian Association of Wine Retailers, and the panel also included Ziliani himself, consultant oenologist Vittorio Fiore and Teobaldo Cappellano, Barolo producer and founder of the organic Vini Veri movement.

In what was supposedly a debate about the future of Brunello, the two camps remained diametrically opposed. Ziliani was one of the first to break the news last March about several Brunello di Montalcino producers being under investigation for illegal blending practices. Although in this case Sangiovese was allegedly diluted with wine originating from Puglia, the investigation quickly spread like an oil stain.

Ziliani responded to Rivella’s accusation by maintaining that it was the “corporate winemakers” (ie consultants like Rivella) who were part of the problem, as it is mostly large producers among their main employers who were found breaking the law.

In the meantime Ziliani, to support the fight for a 100% Sangiovese Brunello, has posted a 100% Sangiovese Brunello List on his website www.vinoalvino.org, which can be signed by producers whose philosophy of abiding by the current law results in pure Sangiovese Brunello. The list is still remarkably short.

One of the first to sign the list was Francesca Padovani, who, together with her sister Margherita, runs Campi di Fonterenza in Montalcino. The estate consists of four ha of which one is denominated for the production of Brunello. She is equally passionate about their Rosso di Montalcino as well as an IGT Sangiovese, which could also be labelled as DOC Sant’Antimo, or Rosso di Montalcino, as the disciplinare stipulates the same rules for all three denominations when the wine consists of a 100% Sangiovese. Their first-ever Brunello, from the 2004 vintage, will be marketed in January 2009.

I asked Francesca why she signed the list and she told me it was her mother who knows Ziliani, and who suggested this. Francesca herself mentions that she is not too fond of journalists, as she is particularly unhappy about the sensationalist nature of reporting about Brunellogate. When I counter that we have to thank journalists in the first place for making public the illegal blending practices that are threatening the industry’s credibility and Brunello’s unique character, she agrees, but she was horrified to see how news on Brunello tried to lay the link to poisoning wine. She points out that investigations are still without any official outcome, whereas the media have already damaged the reputation of each and every one.

When I mention the fact that Frescobaldi is allegedly under investigation for blending wines from Puglia into their Brunello, she says that everyone in Montalcino knows about the tankers that turn up from the south, and that she always suspected that blending was part and parcel of many cellar operations in the region. As she didn’t want to be associated with producers who follow these practices, she signed the petition online (among others, most notably Argiano, one of the wineries under investigation, who consequently declassified their Brunello in order to be able to sell it as the authorities have blocked their wine while the case is still pending).

According to Francesca, Brunello should only be about Sangiovese, but under market pressure producers try to make it into something else. This inevitably changes the characteristics of Brunello, which loses its uniqueness in a sea of international wines all looking the same. In such a situation it becomes especially hard to explain Brunello’s elevated price tag. She believes that Brunello can stand out from the crowd only if it stubbornly continues to be itself. This, according to Francesca, means that not all vintages may produce the necessary quality and that one must have the will to declassify lesser vintages into the more modest Rosso di Montalcino, especially from a price point of view.

An even more important factor she sees in the fact that Brunello is not “an easy drink”. The wine requires longer cellaring, which has cash flow consequences, and therefore it is no surprise that many producers create something more straightforward, “but this is not the identity of Montalcino, nor Sangiovese.” Except for blending practices, which for some may become an option under (perceived) market pressure, it is also the wine law itself, which is as much to blame for the situation. Although the total surface of Brunello di Montalcino cannot be increased (but this is by no means as static as for example in France’s AOC system), the law allows for the transfer of planting rights from one vineyard to another. Where one producer sells off the right to call a certain amount of hectares Brunello, another can buy this and plant a spot within the region that previously was never used for wine production. Finance, and not terroir, is the driving force here, resulting in an irregular quality profile affecting the entire region.

Francesca repeats Ziliani’s reproach, that the consultants are part of the problem. According to her there are simply too many of them in the region, and with a much more detached way of looking at their task. According to her, they seem less engaged with the terroir and the grape than is the actual producer. Francesca describes her goal as making wines that reflect the terroir of their estate. Therefore she first and foremost considers the wines to be Fonterenza and maintains she has no problem whatsoever in declassifying her wine, as she believes that especially in the current situation the name of the producer is now a better guarantee than any DOCG.

When I ask her about the Cabernet Sauvignon that is also planted in Fonterenza’s vineyards, she tells me that it was partially their naivety. When they started planting, their consultant at that time convinced them to plant this variety. At the same time it proved extremely hard to obtain Sangiovese vines from the nursery in 2002 as the region had just been enlarged, resulting in explosive demand for Sangiovese. At present she is very happy with the Cabernet, which is labelled IGT. But it does show how close Cabernet and Co co-exist with Sangiovese. This is very much the rule and not the exception in Montalcino, as not all vineyards within the region are classified Brunello, and therefore vineyards classed IGT are much cheaper, and a return is easier to achieve with an international wine than a label that states Sangiovese.

Another petition is doing the rounds in the region, this time to collect signatures of producers who are against a change of the law that would provide the easy option of legalising the international intruders, for which a majority of 55% is needed. And when the petition fails? Then one could still leave the Consorzio and set up a parallel organisation, in “which people can say what they think, and stop protecting the ones that are wrong”, according to Francesca.

I also asked Emila Nardi, the current proprietor and spokeswoman of Tenute Silvio Nardi, for her opinions on the current issues, which she addresses, understandably, with great caution.

According to her, Rosso di Montalcino should be opened up to include grape varieties other than Sangiovese (the so-called European rule of a minimum of 85% of the specified variety could apply here), but Brunello should definitely remain a pure Sangiovese wine. The issue at hand though seems to be how to restore the confidence of consumers and buyers alike in a wine that has become so tainted.

Asked for a solution, she states that at this moment there is no guaranteed analytical method available which could supply watertight proof that the contents of a bottle are exactly what the label claims. Sangiovese Grosso, the supposedly superior strain of Sangiovese, is not a single clone. Emilia points out that the variety is prone to mutation and 59 different mutations have been identified so far, making analysis of the various genetic parameters extremely difficult. She expects that DNA analysis will be available in the future, but until then the only guarantee will be the reputation of the producer.

Emilia doesn’t consider the relatively new, and flexible, Sant’Antimo DOC to be effective as it has shown little success. It is easy to see that this DOC created in the 1990s hasn’t got any historical significance, nor reputation, and has served only as a catch-all designation. The Rosso di Montalcino designation on the other hand has much more credibility, and economic significance, on which it is much easier to capitalise. According to Emilia, the production of a pure Sangiovese Rosso di Montalcino has led to an expensive product, and the market is no longer willing to absorb the production costs of it. Allowing international grape varieties into Rosso di Montalcino would result in lower production costs and, at least as important, a more straightforward wine.

Emila had not heard of Ziliani’s petition, but she confessed that she has little time for journalists at the moment. When pressed for a more precise answer she mentioned that Ziliani’s position is unclear, and not as objective as it may seem. She feels that his petition list may be irrelevant in the light of a recent general meeting of the Consorzio members, in which the future of a 100 per cent Sangiovese Brunello was discussed, and apparently an overwhelming majority rejected any change in the current legislation.

The Brunello scandal that was unleashed this April continues to make headlines in the Italian national press. The action taken by the government by putting the Consorzio of Brunello di Montalcino, the association of producers, under close scrutiny, therefore making it in theory powerless, has become the object of attention itself now that the independence of the advisors in the Comitato di Garanzia is openly questioned. The real surprise, for me at least, is that the Consorzio’s double role, advising on and developing legislative proposals on the one hand, and implementing and monitoring those on the other, has never been considered problematic previously.

In the meantime, the heated debate, which first centred on how to implement the ‘Brunello as 100% Sangiovese’ rule, including the herculean task of analysing all wines before their release, seems to have taken a u-turn. This was instigated by Angelo Gaja of Barbaresco fame (but with additional holdings in Montalcino), who proposed to change the law to allow for the inclusion of grape varieties other than Sangiovese. Perhaps this is not a surprise, coming from a man who has never shied away from using international grape varieties, albeit in a much more open and straightforward way. Curious, however, is the fact that Gaja is keen to maintain the Brunello name for these blends, the only difference being the creation of a separate label (a kind of B-category, I imagine) to distinguish between artisanal wines and those of large producers. The how and what remains unclear, and potential confusion especially for guileless consumers seems inevitable.

This was followed by another proposal coming from Franco Biondi-Santi, grandson of Ferrucio Biondi-Santi, who isolated a superior strain of Sangiovese in the family’s vineyards, called it Brunello, and started a tradition of 100% Sangiovese wine, which is now known the world over as Brunello di Montalcino. He suggests opening up the Rosso di Montalcino category for the use of foreign grape varieties. Rosso di Montalcino was created as a DOC to allow more lenient ageing periods. Unlike Brunello’s mandatory four years of ageing, Rosso di Montalcino can be marketed one year after the harvest. This wine must also be100% Sangiovese by current law.

All these proposals seem at odds with the hard fact that the law stipulates 100% Sangiovese, and producers are only now complaining that it is impossible to comply with this. Even more curious is the fact that there is already a separate category for the producers of Brunello to play with grape varieties other than Sangiovese, called Sant’Antimo, This designation has the advantage of being a full blown DOC, in stark contrast with almost all other regions in Italy, where experiments with Cabernet & Co can be marketed only under the much more modest Indicazione Geografica Tipica (IGT), a kind of glorified Vin de Pays.

With most big Brunello players now under scrutiny and almost daily revelations of illegal blending practices, the burning question remains: why is it impossible to create a 100% Brunello wine? Part of the answer may be that the larger producers consider a pure Sangiovese wine hard to sell to international markets, which seem to be infatuated by deeply coloured, sweet, concentrated red wines with lashings of new oak.

Another factor may be that Sangiovese can be an unreliable vine and the use of different grape varieties can compensate for this, as well as adding an international touch to the final wine. When following this line of reasoning, not only does the word of the law become blurred but it also begs the question as to what is Brunello’s precise USP.

However, a more credible explanation is the fact that the rapid expansion of vineyards has led to the inclusion of unsuitable sites where Sangiovese cannot achieve enough ripeness. And the presence of International grape varieties within the Montalcino region allows only too easy access to the forbidden fruit.

This article has previously been published on www.jancisrobinson.com

Pleasing the masses - the 80th anniversary of Villa Antinori

2008-09-28T13:47:00.011+01:00

Renzo Cotarella explains how, after more than 73 vintages, a historical Chianti Classico was turned into a modest IGT.

A wine of which more than 3 million bottles are produced annually and which Sainsbury’s has stocked since the mid 1980s you wouldn’t expect to be the centre of attention of a vertical tasting going back to 1974 presented in the sumptuous surroundings of the posh Lanesborough Hotel in Knightsbridge. This treatment is almost always exclusively reserved for what are considered Premier and Grand Cru wines only, but exactly this was the case last Tuesday. What made the invitation irresistible was the fact that I consider Antinori’s Chianti Classico Riserva “Villa Antinori” to be a “supermarket wine”, albeit in the higher echelons. This wine is one of the very few vinous offerings in large retailers to demand a retail price of well over £10.00, staggeringly high compared to the depressingly low average spent of £3.99 for a bottle of wine in the UK. I was curious to find out why such lavish marketing exercise was rolled out for this modest wine.

As if that was not enough, the stylish invitation sent out by Antinori’s UK importer, Berkmann Wine Cellars, seem to promise a huge flight of wines presented by Renzo Cotarella, the estate’s CEO and senior wine consultant himself. I was therefore somewhat surprised to see only 6 wines in front of me.

Cotarella started by explaining that the wine represents the flagship to the Antinoris, a Florentine Wine Merchant and Banking Dynasty, and one of the oldest independent wine producers in the world. Their history goes back to the 13th century and “Villa Antinori”, established in 1928 by Nicolo Antinori, it is the only wine that actually bears the family name, and this tasting had been organised to commemorate its 80th vintage. The Antinori portfolio, however, includes much more illustrious wines, like Tignanello, one of the first Super Tuscans, consisting of 80% Sangiovese and 20% Cabernet Sauvignon, and Solaia, a blend which is the exact opposite, this time with Sangiovese in the minority. Villa Antinori can’t keep up with this league, not least due to its enormous production.

Cotarello goes on to explain that Villa Antinori used to be firmly Tuscan as the grapes in the blend were indigenous, the main part being played by Sangiovese, and the balance made up of the red Canaiolo and the white Trebbiano. Until very recent the inclusion of white grape varieties in Chianti Classico was stipulated by law. With the 2006 vintage this at last has been reversed for all the obvious diluting reasons.

While tasting the first two vintages of the flight, 1974 and 1987, it became immediately clear that the elevated acidity in both wines have helped them survive. Cotarella explains that this is due to the inclusion of the white Trebbiano, and this controversial comment is only one of many to follow throughout the tasting.

According to me, Trebbiano historically played the role of softening agent to counteract the tart and sometimes tannic Sangiovese. I am supported in that view by Barone Ricasoli, a proprietor of an estate in the Classico area in the 19th century, who was the author of an afterwards often cited letter from 1872 stating that Sangiovese would be more palatable if blended with softening white grape varieties. However, the Barone only recommended this blend to produce wines for immediate consumption, and that Riserva qualities, destined for long cellaring, should never include white grapes. To me it seems much more likely that the high acidity in either the 1974 or 1987 originates from the late ripening Sangiovese and not from the usually high yielding and therefore flabby and dilute Trebbiano. Also, the main reason why Trebbiano ended up together with Sangiovese in the fermentation vat was the fact that vineyards were not as systematically organised as is the case today. Therefore, one could find both red and white grape varieties in a single plot. That white grapes could add longevity to Chianti Classico is highly unlikely.

Cotarella of course is right when he claims that it was legally impossible to make a Chianti Classico without the inclusion of white grapes (Malvasia being another one). Any producer interested in quality, therefore had to opt out of the DOC, the Denominazione d’Origine Controllata, Italy’s law of controlled designated origin, as its regulations wouldn’t allow for 100% Sangiovese wines, nor the use of French oak casks, as this was considered “untraditional.” These wines, which could only be labelled Vino da Tavola, became the true flagbearers of Italy’s new dawn of quality wine making. In this climate, wines like Tignanello could achieve cult status matched by high prices, indeed three times as high as the market would pay for Chianti Classico, which, until 10 years ago, was rightfully considered mediocre. It wasn’t until 1994 that wine laws were amended, and white grapes were no longer mandatory, although not forbidden either. The law went further: it also allowed the inclusion of what was euphemistically called “ameliorating varieties”. It is thus how Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot, to name but a few, could legally make their way into a wine that was previously firmly Tuscan. Although a generous margin of 20% of these foreign intruders were now legally allowed in the Chianti blend, for Antinori, who had shown great enthusiasm for Cabernet & co in the past, this was not enough and they decided in 2001 to no longer market the Villa Antinori under the DOCG Chianti Classico Riserva. In doing so they upset quite a few producers, who, driven by quality and a fascination for Sangiovese, wanted to strengthen the appellation’s reputation, but consequently saw one of the most famous Tuscan estates turn its back on it. Speculations went that Antinori, with the high volumes it produces, didn’t want to pay the obligatory fee per bottle to the Consorzio of Chianti Classico, but instead wanted to spend the money on marketing devoted solely to their own products.

Villa Antinori in the meantime had gone from a 90% Sangiovese blend to 60% in 2001 (the balance being Cabernet, Merlot and Syrah), sliding even further to 55% in 2005. Cotarella explains that Antinori used to consider themselves negociants instead of wine producers. As more and more producers started to bottle their own produce, Antinori not only saw the volume needed to sustain its production dwindle, but the wines they were offered were the batches producers considered unfit to be included in their own wine. This situation forced Antinori to start buying vineyards, which proved difficult and expensive within the Chianti Classico area, where, due to recent quality improvements, prices for vineyard land had shot up. They therefore expanded their vineyard holdings outside of the Chianti Classico area, like the Maremma and Cortona, where prices were, until recent, considerably lower. They now possess a total of more than 1750 hectares of vines spread throughout Italy.

Although Sangiovese dominates the blend in order for the wine to keep its Tuscan character, the international grape varieties help produce a more international style of wine, and at the same time they are much easier to grow. It took until 2001 for most of the new acquisitions to come on stream, and from that vintage on Villa Antinori was reborn as IGT Toscana, and de facto the cheapest Super Tuscan in the Family’s portfolio. According to Cotarella, Villa Antinori needs to be Tuscan but at the same time needs to be produced in large volumes to satisfy a global demand. In order to do so, it is of the utmost importance to maintain a constant quality, while promising an easier and more approachable style. “Toscana is not based on Sangiovese”, he proclaims, “and to offer a better and more approachable wine to people is not a crime”. And although I hardly ever heard the word “terroir” mentioned during the entire tasting by someone who started off stating he doesn’t consider himself a wine maker but a vineyard manager who makes wine, who would argue with that.

The wines

The below flight consists of vintages, which Cotarella calls “very particular”. 1974 is “nice, but not the best of the decade”. Apparently 1971 as well as 1975 were superior, but this became clear only after the 1975 had been bottled and one could properly compare the two. 1987 Cotarella calls “average”, while 1994 is “controversial”, with the vintage initially looking very promising until at the beginning of the harvest rain set in. Cabernet fared better, and Cotarella considers 1994 Solaia one of the greatest vintages ever. 2001 is described as a “great vintage, with lots of body and rich, ripe tannins, if perhaps not very elegant”, while 2004 Cotarella considers even superior, due to a very long, even ripening season. 2005 proved to be more challenging due to rains at the end of the ripening season. It is especially this vintage that elicits the remark from Cotarella, that “technology is important in order to produce a good wine, especially in bad vintages”.

1974 Chianti Classico Riserva Villa Antinori, 12.5% vol.

Completely mature ruby with amber rim. Wonderful nose of forest floor, cherry and herbal notes, with a touch of leather and hung game. Still alive and pronounced on the palate, with the first signs of oxidation. Less complex than the nose, but refined tannins.

It is at this stage that Cotarella claims that Trebbiano was added to give the wine ageing potential, comparing the practice to that of France’s Cote Rotie. This statement struck me as extraordinarily ambitious and creative.

1987 Chianti Classico Riserva Villa Antinori, 12.5% vol.

Fully mature with brickstone rim. At first notes of dried fruit, tar and hints of mushroom. Soft and somewhat one dimensional on the palate, with soft, astringent tannins. Acidic backbone well integrated in the finish. Ends alcoholic, due to fading fruit.

1994 Chianti Classico Riserva Villa Antinori 12.5% vol.

Very dark with very small rim. Powerful, savoury and meaty nose, with notes of cherry, licorice and cigar box. Much more understated on the palate, tired even, with high acidity and firm, astringent tannins.

2001 IGT Toscana Villa Antinori, 13% vol.

The grapes for this wine came from Cortona (Syrah), Bolgheri (Merlot), Maremma (Cabernet Sauvignon), Montalcino and Montepulciano (both Sangiovese).

Very dark, impenetrable, with orange reflexes. Still youthful, with a pronounced sweet cassis nose with notes of garden herbs and spice. Lively succulent fruit on the palate, with sweet, somewhat unsettled (oak) tannins. Quite closed on the finish with dried fruit notes. Rustic.

2004 IGT Toscana Villa Antinori, 13.5% vol.

Very dark, with first signs of age. Soft, and less focused on the nose than 2001 and somewhat monotonous on the palate without a lot of tension or interest. Restraint on the finish. Big tannins seem to suggest further ageing.

Cotarella remarks that this wine lacks minerality apparently due to the young age of the vineyards. He also tells us it is not easy to “fine tune” this wine, as it is not clear which blending approach will be right. According to him it takes a long time to find out how to make an elegant wine…

2005 IGT Toscana Villa Antinori 13.5% vol.

Impenetrable, almost black. Nose dominated by leather notes, almost horse saddle, and notes of dark, sweet fruit, nutmeg and oak. Vegetal too. Lively acidity at first, which quickly dissolves in dark fruits hinting at fruit cake underlined by astringent tannins.

The blend seems to take away all the edges, only saved by acidity. Alcoholic too.