I suspect I might be the only person in the UK to say this, but I was disappointed that this year the Real Wine Fair and RAW, the parallel/similar/rival (delete as appropriate) event arranged by Isabelle Legeron MW are being held months apart. Others might have rued the fact that the two events were held on almost exactly the same dates last year, but for me – travelling to London from afar for the tastings – this only made the trip even more useful, as I had two tastings for the price (or the train fare, at least) of one; day one at RAW, day two at Real.

Not so this year. And so yesterday I trekked down from Edinburgh for the Real Wine Fair. The venue was Tobacco Dock, on Wapping Lane, a rather foreboding venue, its high brick walls perhaps once de rigueur for keeping out the tobacco-interested thieves and vagabonds, but I soon found myself wandering down Wapping Lane wondering where the entrance might be. As it happened a friendly security guard clearly took pity on the country hillbilly sauntering towards him, and he waved to beckon me on with some eagerness – as if I were about to miss a just-departing ferry – while I was still several hundred metres distant. How remarkable; a friendly, mind-reading security guard! Either that, or I look like someone he was expecting; maybe his contact in a cigarette-smuggling gang?

Inside the venue was light and airy; the cellars at Victoria House, the location of last year’s tasting, seem to have come in for some criticism, although I (no doubt in the minority, as usual) thought they were fine. Jim Budd, meanwhile, continually refers to the venue as a ‘Hitlerian bunker’. The Tobacco Dock should come in for no such stick though. It is conveniently located five minutes walk from Shadwell Station on the Docklands Light Railway, which is itself about 20 minutes from King’s Cross Station which is where I arrived in London (only delayed 15 minutes – not bad considering there was some very difficult ‘light drizzle’ for the trains to deal with).

Sadly, however, the turnout from Loire producers – my focus for the day, just for a change, I hear you say – felt much smaller than last year, and so within a couple of hours of arriving I had finished the wines I felt I ‘needed’ to taste. Where last year I met Lise Jousset, Frantz Saumon, Noëlla Morantin, Chahut et Prodiges, Thierry Germain and quite a few others, none of these names were present at this year’s fair. Still, I enjoyed getting to grips with some less familiar names, and the mature wines from Jérôme Lenoir and Domaine de la Chevalerie were attractive, even if they were more indicative of what I would regard as ‘old-school’ Loire Valley. I think they would appeal most to punters who think Loire Cabernet Franc is at its best when it shows that very cliched, herbaceous style, rather than the superbly focused red wines that really lead in the region these days, from the likes of Frédéric Mabileau and Matthieu Baudry. And of course it was a delight to chat (using my Franglais, naturally) with Olivier Cousin (pictured above).

The best wines there on the day, within the Loire at least, were clearly those of Domaine Mosse. Agnès Mosse brought along a selection from the 2011 vintage, including a lovely Savennières, and also the ever-fun Moussamoussettes. Having said that, I also enjoyed the two wines on show from Les Vignes Herbels more than I expected to. Having tasted some wines from Nadège and Laurent Herbel at last year’s event I found the style too marked by oxidation to appeal. Those wines that I tasted this year, however, seemed to strike a better balance between an oxidative character and attractive aromas and flavours directly related to the variety in question, Chenin Blanc, including notes of orange blossom and flowers. This was an impressive feat; I’m looking forward to writing this domaine up, and adding the profile to my ever-growing list of new and updated Loire reports.

Beyond the Loire, whereas there was a smattering from Bordeaux last year, including the excellent Clos Puy Arnaud, this year there were none. I spent the last few hours tasting some less familiar wines, everything from the biodynamic Champagnes of Francis Boulard to prolonged skin-contact and lees-aged Soave. I headed home refreshed, ready to do it all again in May for RAW.

Filed under: Bordeaux, Loire
Posted by Chris Kissack on March 19, 2013 at 4:41 pm
Comments Off

It is Saturday morning, and I have a busy schedule ahead. Taking one son to rugby, whipping the others into shape on the piano before the imminent Grade 2 and Grade 3 examinations arrive, before encouraging a little homework activity. Who knows, maybe I will have time for a little relaxation too….not until I have prepared my forthcoming updates for Winedoctor next week though. Suddenly, however, I have been distracted, by a thread on the excellent Wineberserkers site on the story of Florent Baumard, his 2012 Quarts de Chaume, and cryo-extraction. I felt compelled to comment; piano practice and homework will just have to wait for half an hour.

My comment is on page three of the thread, which begins here. Having written it, it encompasses much of my thoughts on the story which is, in my opinion, still evolving. I thought, therefore, I would reproduce it here. I have left it exactly as written, so please excuse the references to “other comments” and previously made arguments.

My post in full:

This is a really fascinating thread, and having been quoted so frequently I feel compelled to comment, even though deep down I feel no desire to further stoke the fire on this. I find the events as they unfold fascinating, and I consider this a very important story for the Loire, but it is Jim’s work not mine.

First up, to be clear, I know Jim personally, having met him numerous times at tastings, and having spent time with him in the Loire, especially during the Salon des Vins de Loire. I have also met Florent Baumard a number of times, and have spoken with him directly about the 2012 harvest.

I have to say I find having chunks of my Baumard profile cut and pasted a little disconcerting. I have no problem with the text being taken and picked over, but I sense it is used as a defence for the technique of cryo-extraction. I believe (I need to go back to my profile) that further down the page I cast my own personal doubts on the “renaming” of the method as cryo-selection. I would agree with previous posters that you can’t change what you are doing just by changing the name. I don’t feel that this comes across when you cut and paste chunks away, but I see some have gone and read the whole profile, thanks for that, and thanks for the comments on its factual and objective nature. That was my intent, to present what is done, rather than to judge, and let the reader conclude for him/herself. The disadvantage of this, of course, is that readers might conclude according to their pre-existing prejudices.

Having made some indication of my misgiving as per the technique Baumard is using, I would not say I am against cryo-extraction per se. Its use has unwittingly been perfectly acceptable to me as I know I have tasted many wines and enjoyed them, long before I had realised they had been made with a little help from cryo. In particular I am thinking of Doisy-Védrines, the proprietor of which Olivier Castéja is very open about his use of cryo-extraction to improve a little his harvest. My view of how Olivier uses it, however, is that he takes hard-won botrytised fruit, true to what Sauternes is, and removes a little water. How much I don’t know, as I’ve never asked him, but if I see him at the primeurs in a few weeks I will certainly do so. As for what Baumard does, this is a little more difficult to define, as information is not forthcoming. Nevertheless, Florent (pictured below) told me last year that he has, in at least one vintage, removed more than 80% of the volume using cryo-extraction. When I wrote that up I emailed him to clarify as I found the figure so unbelievable. 80%! Yes, I am sure many vintages are less than this, but I do not have the data to say what the figures are for other vintages, not for want of asking I should add. Even accepting data is limited, the technique does not seem here to be fine-tuning, but is the major process by which the wine is made, in at least some vintages.

But here is the rub. Cutting through all the obfuscation (because this debate has been all over Twitter as well as on this forum and the willingness to confuse and obscure the real issue seems full of intent at times), the debate isn’t about the rights and wrongs of cryo-extraction or cryo-selection or whatever you want to call it. It is about how a wine is represented to consumers; the Baumards at present have declared (this is second-hand information from Jim’s blog) a significant volume of Quarts de Chaume in the 2012 vintage, a wine which will be highly priced (for the Loire, for a sweet Layon wine), and in order to do be sold as Quarts de Chaume the wine must meet certain criteria. To my understanding these are:

(a) each tri that is picked must achieve 298 g/l sugar (I believe this is 18.5º alcoholic potential but happy to be corrected by winemakers with proper knowledge!) to qualify as Quarts de Chaume

(b) a tri may be subjected to ‘freezing treatments’ to a temperature of -5ºC but only if they have first registered more than 298 g/l. This is true until the 2020 harvest, when the technique will be outlawed whatever the sugar content at harvest.

My knowledge of the 2012 growing season leads me to conclude that it was not a vintage that favoured the production of a Quarts de Chaume. This is a sweet wine where the concentration comes from botrytis, just like Sauternes. Therefore you need the same conditions, moisture (from mists, here from the Layon) or showers of rain, and drying conditions (romantically, sunny afternoons after misty mornings, but winds and breezes probably more/just as important). Too much rain or humidity and you get grey rot. Bad weather as the grapes succumb to botrytis, in October and November, and you lose the harvest. And October 2012 was very, very, very wet. Claiming that data from a weather station 20 km away is not valid holds no water with me I am afraid; the rain hit all Muscadet, Anjou and Touraine; all weather stations recorded it. And having spoken to owners of vines on the Quarts de Chaume, including Claude Papin (Pierre Bise) and Jo Pithon & Wendy Paillé (Pithon Paillé) the conditions here were dreadful. Pithon Paillé saw the alcoholic potential fall from 13º to 9º during the October rains, something Jo had never seen before, as the vines and grapes sucked up the water. The berries ruptured and grey rot set in.

Later on, if the fruit could survive this, some harvested fruit close to or above the 18.5º potential, but this was much later in the season. Nobody has huge quantities though, except for Florent Baumard who picked in October (I think the accepted dates are 16th and 17th, but I’m not sure where this info comes from) right in the middle of the rains. The implication is that, for his wine to be Quarts de Chaume, the harvested fruit must have been over 18.5º alcoholic potential. It would of course, be illegal to achieve that only after cryo-extraction; just to be clear, I am not for one second alleging that this is what has happened. Nevertheless, it seems fair to ask for some data on the harvested fruit. Jim has done this very publicly and got nowhere it seems, only a wordy response on the ‘attack’ on Florent’s website.

I have asked Florent the same questions, and these are the responses received:

(a) I asked Florent face-to-face at the Salon des Vins de Loire in early February, but he was not able to recall picking dates, or sugar at harvest, or alcoholic potential. He said he did not like to carry such information around in his head. He invited me to ask again at a later date, indicating he would furnish me with the information.

(b) I asked in the midst of a debate on Twitter, prompted by Baumard supporters (and I’m afraid I do sense there are ‘factions’ in this debate), giving Florent a chance to declare the picking dates and concentration/alcoholic potential of his fruit, and therefore put to bed any rumours that the grapes picked from the Quarts de Chaume vineyard, and surely intended for sale as Quarts de Chaume, did not meet the criteria for that to be so. Florent did not respond on Twitter.

(c) About five days later I received an email from Florent, thanking me for my questions, but ultimately not providing any data as he says he finds such numbers “meaningless”.

It seems to me very sad, and also unusual, that Florent should not want to make public the sugar concentration at harvest. This is basic data for a winemaker, not top secret confidential information! It would have quashed any stories, based on pictures prior to harvest, and on data concerning harvest dates and the weather at the time, that the fruit harvested by Baumard had not achieved the sugar concentration required. In the face of continued non-disclosure of this information, I am certain that this debate will rumble on, until definitive information is revealed. That will then put an end to it one way or the other.

This answer doesn’t respond to every post above that deserves merit (“the proof is what’s in the glass” from Jamie Goode deserves a response – really Jamie, in this debate?……and I also don’t think Jim’s credibility as an investigative journalist is up for debate, he has a long track record of uncovering dodgy dealings in wine investment and other wine-related stories), nevertheless I hope it is useful. I would like to think it helps to bring the issue at hand into focus, which is not the rights and wrongs of cryo-extraction and what we call it, but its use in the 2012 Baumard harvest, and whether a wine made with it can *legally* (and the appellation law is quite specific) be called Quarts de Chaume. That, simply, depends on sugar concentration at harvest, information which has been asked for many times, and not given.

Filed under: Loire
Posted by Chris Kissack on March 9, 2013 at 9:50 am
3 Comments »

Further adventures in Sherry now, with two tasting notes for the price of one. The following two wines come from Cayetano del Pino, and are bottled by Romate. Both are under screwcap and – not that it really matters, but I can’t help admiring them – are blessed with the most brilliant labels. The wine inside the bottle is also tip-top of course. Both are available from The Wine Society in the UK, although the links should guide readers outside the UK to their nearest stockists.

Cayetano del Pino Fino Perdido 1/15: Under screwcap. Helpfully described as a “lost fino“, which gives a good clue as to the story behind this wine. Having begun life as a fino, covered in a protective layer of flor, this wine was left for eight years before bottling. This is much longer than would be the norm with the fino style, which would usually be bottled early, and then shipped and consumed within as short a time as possible. Here, during the eight years of repose, the flor died, and the wine took on some oxidative character. The colour has deepened, but only to a rich golden hue, and nothing darker, despite other reports I have seen and despite the wine having been described in some quarters as a fino-amontillado, which it definitely isn’t. The nose is very pungent at first, rich with acetylaldehyde which may of course reflect the work of the flor, or of oxygen. It feels like dry wood at first, but later shows some leesy-cheesy richness from the flor, and also some sour-fruit character. The palate has a very good presence, with the woody oxidative notes quite prominent at first, but they soon fade leaving more appealing nutty elements, and hints of green olive and pepper. It has a good harmony, is fleshy but dry, with good acids, and it really rounds off in the finish in a harmonious fashion. Overall this is long and appealing, especially returning to it for subsequent glasses when the woody character subsided further. 16/20 (March 2013)

Cayetano del Pino Palo Cortado Viejísimo 1/5: From a half bottle, under screwcap. The first obvious feature worth noting here is in the colour, which is an impressively concentrated golden-amber hue, with a faint greenish tinge at the rim. The nose is immediately enthralling, rich and expressive. There are scents of vanilla, coffee, caramel, roasted oranges and sandalwood, along with a subtle vein of acetylaldehyde which runs very much in the background. It has a full and confident character, and this is confirmed on the palate which has a wonderful, weighty substance for a palo cortado, and yet it retains a sense of the silky elegance that can be found in this style. It maintains a very fine cottony texture through the middle, with very polished edges and a fine frame of acidity. Suddenly on the end of the palate this all wells up, giving the wine an exciting, turbo-charged finish, flavoursome but more importantly full of energy and vigour. The vanilla and peppercorn notes sound like a trumpet, slowly fading, as the finish goes on and on. Just a little note of dry wood here disrupts the overall harmony, but otherwise this is an impressive show indeed. Truly excellent. 18/20 (March 2013)

Filed under: Spain
Posted by Chris Kissack on March 7, 2013 at 2:35 pm
Comments Off

It’s been a busy week, and I’ve not had the time to post as much on the blog side of Winedoctor as I would have liked. I had some fascinating replies from some questions I put to Philippe Bardet, of Château Val d’Or, but I haven’t had sufficient time to translate all of them and give his answers suitable thought. And there has been quite a lot happening in Bordeaux recently, with stakes in both Château d’Issan and Château Monbousquet sold off in the past week or so. I need to add these new pieces of data to the site. And of course I had to give suitable time to reading the comments on Jim Budd’s post on Baumard’s Frozen Miracle, including some really very specious arguments from anonymous posters. That’s not to mention all the real work I had to do, such as publishing this week’s Loire 2012 reports, my review of Au Bonheur du Palais, and my updated Carbonnieux profile.

And then suddenly it’s Friday afternoon. Thankfully, just time for a quick post on my most recent Sauternes, following on from the 1998 Coutet. This time, another wine from Barsac, but back once again to the 2001 vintage, with Château Doisy-Daëne. I will come back to Issan over the weekend. As for Monbousquet, well, it is time I added a profile to the site I guess.

Château Doisy-Daëne (Barsac) 2001: This wine has a bright and golden hue in the glass. Aromatically, it is dominated by oranges and apricots, run through with hints of cream and caramel, scented and rich, but also lifted by notes of crunchy apple and freshening mint. It has a lovely expressive character, showing very dense and concentrated, but imbued with grip. A fabluously evocative style, with plenty of firm structure to it, but also fine textrue and substance. Impressive character, with a really long, grppy finish. The palate is defined, well framed despite the increasingly rich character presented on the nose as the wine sits in the glass. Certainly a success. 17.5/20 (March 2013)

Filed under: Bordeaux
Posted by Chris Kissack on March 1, 2013 at 4:28 pm
Comments Off

It’s many years now – well, five or six at least – since I last took a serious look at Roussillon. It’s a region with a very distinctive and fascinating style when it comes to wine; the reds in particular have always seemed strong, the whites too although perhaps not at the same level as the reds, for my palate at least.

One estate to which I have not given much attention in recent years is Le Soula, which was established as a joint project between Gérard Gauby, perhaps one of the best known names of the region, and Richards Walford, a well-known UK-based wine importer which was taken over only last year by the even more well known Berry Bros. & Rudd. The relationship between Gérard Gauby, Roy Richards and Mark Walford dated back to the 1990s, although Le Soula was born only in 2001. A new winemaker, Gérald Standley joined, to work alongside Gérard Gauby, in 2001. It is my understanding that, since the sell-off of Richards Walford, Gérard Gauby, Gérald Standley and Mark Walford and continuing to work together on this project.

I recently tasted two wines from this estate, both from the 2008 vintage.

Le Soula Blanc (VdP des Càtes Catalanes) 2008: A blend of Sauvignon Blanc, Macabeu, Vermentino and a selection of other varieties including Marsanne and Roussanne. The colour in the glass is a rich gold, the nose an enticing mix of reductive, matchsticky notes, which tend to dissipate with time, along with richer and more golden tones reminiscent of honey, nuts and ginger in a style very consistent with richly ripe fruit and low yields. The palate has a broad and grippy style, with more matchsticky reduction evident here, and with a very fine sense of grip and acidity. Overall a wine of appealing structure, with plenty of substance, and great grip underpinning it all. 17/20 (February 2013)

Le Soula Rouge (VdP des Càtes Catalanes) 2008: This is 55% Carignan, 35% Syrah and 10% Grenache. Very low yields here, just 14 hl/ha. A confident colour in the glass, deep at its coore, but vibrant and youthful at the rim. It has a lightly toasted nose, with white pepper, dark and concentrated, full of sweet and dense roasted cherry. There is plenty of texture on entry and through the middle, with softly polished tannins, a lovely grip to it all, and correct acidity. Roasted cherry, plump but dark, with a savoury confidence despite the sweetness. A very good balance to it all, and a long, grippy finish. Another impressive wine. 17.20 (February 2013)

Filed under: Roussillon
Posted by Chris Kissack on February 27, 2013 at 3:31 pm
2 Comments »

During the Salon des Vins de Loire I spent an evening at Bouvet-Ladubay. It was an intimate affair, just me, Jim Budd, Edwina Watson of Lay & Wheeler, Chris Hardy of Majestic, and about 450 other guests. The entertainment was not particularly wine related, but I simply can’t bear the thought of no-one else ever seeing some of these images.

The evening gets underway….Bouvet-Ladubay on ice.

 

This rope artiste seemed half asleep at first.

 

But she soon woke up, with several heart-stopping “she’s falling” moments, and no safety net. She is quite some way up in the cellars. At one point she managed to give the illusion of walking up the rope. Overall, a very impressive act.

 

A ghost in the cellars. I showed this image to my three teenage children; first I had to explain what he was doing (not much). Then I had to explain that the machine on the wall behind was playing a cassette tape, to provide some spooky background music. Then I had to explain what a cassette tape was. Remember this guy, he crops up again later.

 

This acrobatic pair were one of the highlights of the evening. Don’t be fooled by her dystonic appearance.

 

This balancing act doesn’t look too difficult.

 

This was though. Wow!

 

I told you this guy would crop up again. This was more funny than it looks now. Honest.

 

No, please don’t do what I think you’re going to do with those weights.

 

Oh come on, I did ask nicely……

 

Finally, two other pictures, not quite in focus, but hopefully doing something to capture the spirit of the evening. First a crazy but really quite entertaining woman on a rope swing. Again, pretty high up, and no safety net.

 

And one of three ladies swinging above the dining hall as we ate.

All entertainers (and those featured above are just a selection – there were stilt-walkers, more acrobats, and even a strange ensemble who managed to pour a glass of Bouvet-Ladubay while one stood atop a step ladder, and the other was doing a hand-stand on top of another’s shoulders), led by the Compagnie Masdemoiselles are available for hire; I have their contact numbers and email address should you wish to arrange a similar spectacle.

Filed under: Loire
Posted by Chris Kissack on February 23, 2013 at 12:01 pm
Comments Off

I recently reported on a selection of wines from the Languedoc and Provence, imported to the UK by Leon Stolarski. Prompted by my post, the team from one of the domaines featured – Minna Vineyard – kindly sent a couple more bottles for me to look at.

Minna Vineyard Blanc (VdP des Bouches du Rhône) 2009: A blend of 46% Vermentino, 33% Roussanne and 21% Marsanne. Yields 22.35 hl/ha, hand-picked, vinified in steel and oak and with élevage in same, with bâtonnage for those wines kept in oak. The nose is fine and fragrant, with nuances of lavender and thyme over white peach and little undercurrents of slightly sweet but subtle tropical fruit. A little of that oak comes through, although it is fine and well-framed by the other aromas present. There’s also a sense of grippy pith to it, although what comes out on the palate is a very polished texture at first, the more grippy elements only appearing in the finish. Quite full, confident and well balanced though, with a fine, slippery, vanilla-tinged substance and good acidity. A very attractive wine. 17/20 (February 2013)

Minna Vineyard Rouge (VdP des Bouches du Rhône) 2007: A blend of 58% Syrah, 31% Cabernet Sauvignon and 11% Mourvèdre. Hand-picked fruit, cold maceration then pressing and fermentation in stainless steel by indigenous yeasts. The élevage lasts 24 months, with bâtonnage of the lees. A very dark, concentrated hue in the glass. The nose is redolent of sweetly roasted berries overlaid with similarly sweet oak, laced with darker tones of charcoal and black liquorice. Cool but fleshy on the start, showing more grip and dry structure through the middle. It is a wine of considerable backbone, but it has the substance to match through the middle, and there is some acid to help lift the wine here. The flavours seem rather diffuse, and there a warm, meaty presence from the tannins. Big and substantial in the finish. 15/20 (February 2013)

Filed under: Languedoc
Posted by Chris Kissack on February 22, 2013 at 12:50 pm
Comments Off

In an article published online today in Sud Ouest (link at the bottom of this post), Franck Dubourdieu – the cousin of consultant and Bordeaux professor Denis Dubourdieu – has launched a stunning attack on the 2012 St Emilion classification.

Dubourdieu clearly isn’t averse to expressing his opinions, and doesn’t shy away from naming names when it comes to identifying what he sees as inconsistencies and potential conflicts of interest with the drawing up of the new classification, which he points out saw the area of classified land increase from 800 hectares to 1300 hectares, just short of one-quarter of the entire appellation.

The promotion of Angélus and Pavie (pictured above) to Premier Grand Cru Classé A is the first questionable decision according to Dubourdieu, which pushes him into a state of “stupefaction”. These châteaux do not, according to Dubourdieu, have the same level of terroir as Cheval Blanc or Ausone. He goes on to ask why weren’t estates with great terroirs, such as Figeac, Canon and Clos Fourtet elevated instead? There is no doubting Dubourdieu’s intended meaning – despite his stating that he does not doubt the transparency of the assessment – when he points out that Hubert de Boüard de Laforest, proprietor of Angélus, is also (a) regional INAO president, (b) a national committee member of the INAO, and that he was (c) responsible for endorsing the process and (d) responsible for the selection of the committee of impartial assessors. Dubourdieu also points out that the tasting for the premier category accounted for only 30% of the score, as requested by the châteaux, whereas it was 50% at lower levels, another inappropriate and curious decision.

Dubourdieu points the same finger at Yves Besnard, a former associate of Bernard Arnault at LVMH, who has also been involved in the process by virtue of his position with the INAO. It seems clear that Dubourdieu thinks this is important when it comes to the elevation of the LVMH properties Quinault L’Enclos and Tour du Pin, both managed alongside Cheval Blanc (and usually tasted at the estate during the primeurs). This elevation came, says Dubourdieu, despite the lesser sandy terroir of Quinault L’Enclos, a particular travesty in his view.

Finally, in a generic attack on taste and the importance of ‘made’ wines, Dubourdieu attacks the predominance of inky-black wines in the new classification. These are, he says (translated by me – hope I get this right!) “over-extracted, sweet, supple with low acidity, and obviously overoaked” before he goes on to attack these “blockbusters” as having “le goût américain” (I don’t think that bit needs any translation). I think Dubourdieu is making a good point here about the state of some wines in St Emilion today, so it’s a shame he has to finish it off with this jingo-istic anti-American (anti-Parker, maybe) swipe.

With three St Emilion estates already mounting a challenge to the classification as it stands, it seems as though the 2012 listing has the potential to be yet another long chapter in the St Emilion classification saga.

Full article (in French) here.

Filed under: Bordeaux
Posted by Chris Kissack on February 21, 2013 at 12:42 pm
Comments Off

Last week I returned from the Loire Valley (actually it was nearly two weeks ago now – no wonder I’m feeling withdrawal symptoms) after five very intense days of tasting. I have a lot of reports to write, domaine profiles to update, notes to publish and new names to feature. I kicked off yesterday, however, with my Loire 2012 report, the most detailed vintage review for the Loire I have ever published, and I believe the most detailed source of Loire 2012 information online anywhere. I hope it’s useful!

In the past I have highlighted ten “top wines” from the Salon; I’m not about to do that here, nevertheless I did find a handful of tastings so joyous that it is only right I think to throw the spotlight on them here. Largely it’s the quality of the wines that impressed, because that’s what really matters when you or I pull the cork, but in some cases these people are doing great things beyond the bottle as well, be it rigorous adherence to organics, or significant work invigorating their ‘base’ appellation.

Some are already well known – I make no apology for that – some less so. In no particular order then:

François Chidaine: Chidaine is, I think, to Montlouis and to some extent Vouvray what Didier Dagueneau was to Pouilly-Fumé. When will he hit critical mass and gain wider appreciation beyond Loire-geek wine circles I wonder? His wines have long been super (the 2008 Clos Habert is, I think, the best Montlouis I have ever tasted) but on this tasting it seemed like his wines were head-and-shoulders above every one else’s, with such intense, mineral purity and definition. And this included wines from 2011, not exactly the greatest of vintages.

Pierre Martin (Sancerre): Pierre (pictured above) is unheard of, I imagine, but I will be adding a profile to Winedoctor this year, which might help. Having taken over the family domaine in the last few years, Pierre is making his mark, helped by ownership of vines in some prestigious sites, including Les Monts Damnés. The singing purity of his entry-level Sancerre was just divine, and it only got better from there, with superb translation of the terroir, which I adore in Sancerre; flint cuvées should taste like they come from flint, limestone from limestone, and so on. Pierre’s wines do this. Hopefully, soon to be listed in the UK.

Thierry Germain: OK, put Clos Rougeard to one side for a moment. Whose Saumur-Champigny are you going to drink, now that the Foucault wines are so hard to track down and – in the case of Le Bourg in particular – so expensive? I have tasted Thierry’s portfolio three times over the last 12 months (report coming soon, honest) and this last tasting of the 2012 vintage was truly impressive. The wines showed that haunting floral purity that Cabernet Franc does best, the sort of definition you get in Ausone or Cheval Blanc. Note, please, I’m note trying to draw comparisons or create hyperbole, just that there is a particular feature Cabernet Franc brings to some of the best Bordeaux that can also be found in these wines. Having said that, a few years ago these wines were also made like Bordeaux, with heavy oak influence, but that has been wound back these days, the wines showing more purity as a result. And the estate is biodynamic too, if that matters to you.

Vincent Carême: I have long been an advocate of Vincent and his wines. Well, for a couple of years I have anyway. In 2012, a very difficult vintage, he has managed through grit and determination to pull something really appealing out of the bag. This is not a vintage for truly great wines, but one instead that shows the measure of the man or woman who makes them. Vincent is surprised at the quality he has managed to extract from the vintage, (“I never thought I could manage it in this vintage” he said when we agreed the wine was good) but it is down to his determination, and that of his wife Tania and their team. More importantly, Vincent is fostering new talent within the appellation. Up-and-coming vignerons – Peter Hahn, Sebastien Brunet, Mathieu Cosme, Michel Autran – look to Vincent for guidance. No wonder, as I think he may well have produced the best 2012 in the appellation (OK, I haven’t tasted everything, including Champalou and Foreau, but I will place a small bet all the same). If there is a Vouvray resurgence coming, Carême will be at its heart.

Yves Guégniard: Not familiar with Yves’ wines? He is not the most famous of Loire vignerons, less well known that his Anjou peers such as Nicolas Joly, Claude Papin or Richard Leroy, but that is not his fault, because some of his wines are stunning. Sometimes its the Anjou-Villages Evanescence that blows me away, sometimes it is one of his Savennières cuvées, but on this occasion it was three vintages of Quarts de Chaumes – 2007, 2010 and 2011 – that were the real stars of the show. Three breath-taking, low-yield, botrytised, handpicked wines to challenge even the greatest Sauternes. These are wines which, I can assure you, I will be tracking down for my own cellar…..along with those of Chidaine, Carême, Germain and Martin.

Filed under: Loire
Posted by Chris Kissack on February 20, 2013 at 12:31 pm
Comments Off

Despite the Bordeaux 2012 primeurs looming (you might think the primeurs circus a long way off, but I’ve already made all but two of my appointments for the week) most of the chat at the moment concerns Bordeaux 2010. Memories of the barrel samples may have long faded, but a fresh round of tastings and expressed opinions have brought the vintage to the fore once again. Last November the Bordelais descended upon London for a showing of the wines, during which I tasted about 120, recently written up here. Neal Martin has done the same, augmented with some reports from a trip to Bordeaux to taste those wines that refuse to travel, and he is currently publishing these day by day on Parker’s site (subscription only, $99 per annum). In addition, the Union des Grands Crus de Bordeaux (UGCB) has continued the tour, taking in the USA, giving American consumers a chance to taste and form their own opinions. James Suckling has also been busy reporting on his website (subscription only $143.90 per annum). And, perhaps most significantly, Parker is set to report in the next issue of The Wine Advocate (again, by subscription only, price as above).

Having completed my reports there is no doubt in my mind that Bordeaux 2010 is a great vintage, different in style to Bordeaux 2009, but equally worthy. But as my reports no doubt make clear, there is one notable fly in the ointment when it comes to this statement, and that is St Emilion. As always, the style of wine offered here is as diverse as ever, perhaps even more so than usual. And with such disparate styles, with varying degrees of ripeness, extraction and alcohol, the commune is bound to split opinion. Several wines are in position to be the poster child for this division; just half a length ahead of its peers, perhaps, is 2010 Château Troplong-Mondot.

Troplong-Mondot has in recent vintages, under the direction of Xavier Pariente and Christine Valette, and winemaker Jean-Pierre Taleyson, seen a marked shift in style. The wine was once elegant and pure; the 1994, for example, is drinking very well in this style, even though the vintage is, as Neal Martin put it a year or so ago, in general rather a dull one. But that all changed recently, and the style here is now one that favours dark colours, rich tannins, and high alcohol levels. The 2009 vintage was 15.5%, and although I liked it at the primeurs (I would never mark a wine down purely because of the alcohol) by the time it was in bottle it was showing this alcohol quite plainly. The 2010 also declared 15.5% at the primeurs, although I believe the final figure is more like 15.8%, and the label states 16%. Tasting it at the UGCB a few months ago this was all displayed very plainly, in keeping with my findings at the primeurs, with dried-desiccated fruit flavours, heat and hard tannin, and it did little to make me think of Bordeaux. Hot and awkward, it would be difficult to imagine me ever wanting to drink it. I can’t imagine the alcohol ever disappearing into the rest of the wine.

Others also express similar concerns, albeit without my rather pointed score; I should point out I have no wish to put words in the mouths of others, so I quote here as appropriate. Neal Martin has reported on it having tasted it twice, noting “[w]hilst the aromatics covet the alcohol level, in my mind it renders the finish rather heavy in the mouth and I can feel warmth at the back of the throat that would become fatiguing with time.” He certainly raised a question mark over it by refusing to score it, saying on Twitter when I asked why he had not done so that he wants to taste blind next year (no doubt at the Southwold tasting) before awarding a magic number. And looking at the reports from Team Jancis, these also seem very unenthusiastic; Jancis Robinson wrote “[p]erfectly serviceable modern St-Emilion style but a little bit painful to taste at this stage. Slightly drying finish. Pushed too far?” in April 2011, Julia Harding wrote “[v]ery very oaky, masses of mocha. The fruit flavours are ripe but the finish is tough” in April 2012 and from Richard Hemming we have “[t]he whole thing is overstated – which is fine if you like that sort of thing” in November 2012. The scores, however, seem rather positive in contrast – 15.5, 15.5 and 16 respectively.

In the interest of openness and contrast, it is only natural that I should point out that others seem to have adored this wine, with some primeur reports heaping praise upon it. James Lawther for Decanter described it as having a “[s]umptuous texture, balancing acidity and long, firm finish“, James Suckling as “[s]tunning” and Robert Parker as a “stunningly rich effort [which] offers abundant blueberry, black raspberry, licorice and graphite notes intermixed with a hint of espresso roast, a seriously concentrated, super-intense mouthfeel, full-bodied power, a complex, multidimensional texture and a nearly 50-second finish” which has to be a classic Parker note if ever there was one. The scores were suitably impressive, with 18.5, 95-96 and 96-98+. Suckling has retasted, but I haven’t seen his new score, but I’m sure it is similarly prodigious as his first. Parker will, I imagine, come out with at least a 98.

Happily these days there doesn’t seem to be any need for anybody to begin criticising the critics, rather than the wine. Ten-or-so years ago (was it really that long ago?!), a similarly controversial wine from Gerard Perse, than the relatively new owner of Château Pavie, sparked something of a war of words between Jancis Robinson and Robert Parker, and lines were drawn in the sand. We all have our own opinions, and I make no criticism of any of those opinions reproduced above that are different to my own. I merely wish to draw attention to this newly divisive wine, which has – perhaps unsurprisingly in view of the character of the commune – sprung forth from the same appellation as Pavie. The difficulty for the consumer, however, remains the same; whose palate do you follow? If you prefer freshness, vitality, purity and lift, can I gently steer you away from Troplong-Mondot to some other choice? If you prefer power, alcohol, concentration and sumptuous texture, then perhaps Troplong-Mondot is the wine for you?

Of course, there is one other plausible reason why 2010 Troplong-Mondot doesn’t seem to have stirred up the same controversy that 2003 Pavie once did, despite some seemingly disparate opinions. Maybe, as a result of too much hyperbole and exorbitant prices, nobody really cares any more? Is it that these days Bordeaux is more about, points, prices, owning and trading, that it is drinking? In which case, who cares how it actually tastes?

Filed under: Bordeaux
Posted by Chris Kissack on February 15, 2013 at 2:46 pm
3 Comments »