More Sangiovese, including a Chilean

Two more Sangioveses opened this evening, in service to my readers - and prompted by my recently roused curiosity about this variety.

Errazuriz Estate Sangiovese 2005 Aconcagua Valley, Chile
(Waitrose)
Does Sangiovese travel? Not very well in my limited experience, and this wine is frankly disappointing. Immediately there's this distinctively Chilean nose: sweet pastille red/black fruit with a slightly rubbery, green herby edge. It's hard to pick up any varietal character. The palate similarly shouts 'Chile' rather than 'Sangiovese', although if you can see through this masking character, then you get some fresh, spicy red fruit and a bit of earthiness that does have a slightly Italian feel to it. It fails to excite and I don't really enjoy drinking it. I was going to say, 'it's not a bad wine', as a qualifier, but I fear that it is. 76/100

Piccini Selezione Oro Chianti Riserva 2004 Italy
(£7.99 Tesco, though from 12/09 until 9/10 it will be at £4.99)

Nicely bottled with a rather snazzy gold label, this is a well balanced, light-ish, easy-drinking style of Chianti. There's a modest sort of nose here: some sweet, slightly earthy/spicy fruit emerges after a bit of coaxing. On the palate there's a nice balance between the approachable plummy, red berry and cherry fruit and the earthy spiciness - overall, the impression is one of savouriness. This isn't a wine that will blow you away, but at the offer price it's a very respectable companion for a weeknight evening meal that offers great value for money. It's incredibly easy to drink, and every few sips you get a hint of seriousness. 85/100

So Sangiovese does rock, after all?

Further to my comments on the Querciabella yesterday, some more thoughts on Sangiovese.

You know, I think Sangiovese is a grape that falls into the Serious rather than the Non-Serious category, despite what I may have said in the past. It's just that, for one reason or another, it frequently underperforms. Thinking out loud, it seems that even those grapes which are mostly Non-Serious, like Merlot, do have their moments (anyone for Petrus?), and when they do perform they can be stellar. But, generally, it's good advice to pass when offered a Merlot.

So I search my rack for more Sangiovese. I come up with the following:

Banfi Chianti Classico Riserva 2003
(£9.99 Majestic)
Now I'm going to give Banfi the benefit of the doubt here, and put this wine's relative underperformance down to the dodgy 2003 vintage. Now this is a perfectly adequate Chianti, showing a muted, rather earthy nose which leads to a savoury, balanced palate with a bit of plummy fruit, some spice and a rather earthy, tannic finish. But it doesn't excite or thrill. It lacks something, but I can't quite put my finger on what this something is. 86/100

So I return to the Querciabella Chiantic Classico 2004. You know, I may have underrated this wine last night, even though I enjoyed it a good deal. It has so many different dimensions: acidity, tannin, fruit, spice, aromas, savouriness, length, bitterness. It's really alive. On tonight's showing, after being open for 24 h, I'd rate this as 92/100, with some upside potential.

Chianti and Aglianico

Two Italian wines tonight. With some spaghetti. How cliched.

First, a Chianti. I've been a little tough on Chianti here on this blog in recent months. This is one I like, though. And it has the most amazing, high-quality long cork, just like they used to use in the old days (pictured).

Querciabella Chianti Classico 2004
Quite deep coloured, this has an arresting nose of savoury, quite minerally/gravelly dark fruits, with subtle earthiness and a fair dollop of refinement. The palate is distinctively savoury, combining a plummy bitterness that is so typical of many Italian wines with Claret-like weight and poise. This is a serious effort that isn't taking the short-cut of concentration, over-ripeness and new oak that some Tuscan wines opt for, but instead retains authenticity and adds to this refinement. I like it. 90/100 (£13.99 Waitrose)

Second, an Aglianico - nicely packaged, and good enough without being terribly exciting (like so many of today's wines, I guess).

Cantine Sasso Aglianico del Vulture 2005
Great label design, with a vivid bright red synthetic cork to match. Deep coloured this has a distinctive, rather baked oxidative edge to the spicy, earthy red fruit nose. The palate has an earthy, herby, rather evolved character that's quite savoury, but which lacks freshness and fruit. This would work well with hearty, full flavoured food, but on its own it tastes a bit tired. 82/100 (£6.99 Waitrose)

Confusing Chianti

One of the wine regions I can't get my head round is Chianti. I've had so many disappointments here, and so few memorable wines, that it's made me question whether there's much merit to Sangiovese at all. But in theory I'm still hoping; still believing; still trusting - surely Chianti is capable of greatness.

Tonight's wine leaves me confused once again. There are bits about it I really like, but then bits that put me off. The package as a whole doesn't quite convince, but then when I prepare myself to dismiss it, I take another sip and suddenly I think it's serious again.

Fattoria Selvapiana 'Vigneto Bucerchiale' 2003 Chianti Rufina Riserva
A perplexing wine. It's quite deeply coloured, with a nose of sweet, lush red and black fruits with a compelling spicy complexity and a hint of tar. The palate is alcoholic and sweet, but this is offset nicely by a lovely savoury, spicy structure, that persists through the finish with some mouth-drying tannins. There's a hint of oak, too. I love the spicy complexity, and the structure suggests this could be one for the cellar, but I'm slightly worried by the sweetness of the fruit and the 14.5% alcohol. It's not at ease with itself at the moment, but I reckon cellar time might cure that. 89/100 (£18 Marks & Spencer)

Torres and Tuscany

Had a tasting, lunch and lots of tecchie chat with Mireia Torres, daughter of Miguel and technical director for all Torres' wines. We began by tasting all the Torres Chilean wines, and then lunched at La Trompette in Chiswick, which performed very well, getting my two dishes just right. I'm quite a fan of the Torres wines: their strength is that they do commercial winemaking very, very well, and their higher end wines aren't bad either. As an example, with lunch we had Grans Muralles 1998, and it was singing: evolved but still very fresh, bright and focused. And their two top Chilean wines - the spicy Carignan-dominated Cordilleira 2005 and the lush Conde de Superunda 2000 with Tempranillo, Cabernet, Mourvedre and Carmenere - rank among the very best that Chile has to offer. I also like the Marimar Torres wines from California.

Switching from Torres to Tuscany, I'm drinking a wine I can't make my mind up about, but which I think I like.

Villa Cafaggio San Martino 2001 IGT Toscana
This is a wine I'm enjoying quite a bit, but which leaves me unsure about whether it's truly serious or not. It's a wine made from different clones of Sangiovese in Chianti (so why is it an IGT Toscana?), aged in new small oak barrels. Weighing in at 14% alcohol this is quite deep coloured. It has a fresh, bright nose that's more red fruit than black, with some lifted spice complementing the tight fruit. The palate is mouthfilling, tannic and quite extracted, dominating by bright red fruits with a vivid spicy, grippy character that leaves the mouth feeling quite dry. There's certainly a lot going on here: I really like the freshness of fruit, I appreciate the savouriness, but I struggle a bit with the rather agressive spiciness, some of which I suspect has its origin in the new oak. Is this wine overextracted and lacking in elegance? Will the dry tannins outlive the fruit? Or is it a serious wine caught early in its youth? I like the fact that it's not soupy and overripe, so I'm going to give it the benefit of the doubt. Very good/excellent 93/100 (c. £23 Waitrose, D Byrne, Sandhams, Upton on Severn Wines, Satchells, Wine Times, Wright Wine)

walking the dog, drinking Chianti

It has been a weekend of walks. Mostly dog-driven activity. On Saturday morning a quick jaunt through local Hanworth Park, and then in the afternoon a lengthy romp through Windsor Great Park (including a winter picnic of hot soup and bread), where Rosie jumped into the water for the first time. Then today another early morning Hanworth Park visit, followed by a longer walk in Richmond Park in the afternoon. While winter has a beauty all of its own, I'm really looking forward to spring and summer, when all this outdoor activity will be much more inviting.

I said some slightly mean things about Chianti a week or two ago - and one reader disagreed enough to send me an upset e-mail. So in a spirit of fairness and reconciliation, I'm going to persevere and add data points by drinking more Chianti. A bottle I enjoyed a lot more than the previous few is the Fonterutoli Chianti Classico 2004. It's dense and spicy, with a very Italian cedary, almost medicinal streak under the concentrated red and black fruits. It isn't terribly refined, but there's some gutsy presence that I enjoy. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's rustic - but its intense savoury character makes it a useful food wine. It's not cheap at £17.99 (Swig, Noel Young, Harrods, The Wine Society), but it is an accomplished wine, and I'd give it 91/100 if you want a score. This is a wine that shows that my two categories classification of Chianti (dilute and sappy or spoofy and oaky) is actually wrong. This is recognizably Chianti, but it has plenty of richness and concentration. Could age very well, too.

Three Chiantis

Three Chiantis last night. I dunno about you, but I’ve never really got into Chianti. Most of them tend to fall into one of two camps: either basic, honest, dark cherry fruited examples with a bit of plummy bitterness and a savoury streak, or souped-up, rather oaky Chiantis with the foot full down on the throttle. I’m not terribly keen on either.

These three were nice enough wines, but considering their price tags, disappointed a bit. I liked the fact that they were savoury, with good acidity, but I came away a little underwhelmed: there wasn’t quite enough to grab the attention. Of course, it’s too small a sample to draw any conclusions from, and it needs to be borne in mind that both 2002 and 2003 were problematic vintages here.

Poggio Torselli Chianti Classico 2003
Ripe, sweet cherry fruit nose with some spicy 'old cask' and mineral/tar notes. The palate is midweight with a tarry, tannic, subtly herbal edge to the cherry and red fruits. A drinkable food wine, but perhaps a little dilute to be really good. Sappy and savoury, I guess. Very good+ 87/100 (£10.95 Flying Corkscrew)

Casaloste Chianti Classico 2004
Sweet dark cherry fruit nose with a savoury twist and some tarry minerality. Slightly roasted. The palate is a little sappy with midweight fresh cherryish fruit. Nice acidity gives it a savoury, food friendly personality. Juicy but perhaps a little lacking in concentration considering the price tag. Very good+ 88/100 (£14.95 Jeroboams)

Cecchi Monteguelfo Chianti Classico Riserva 2002
Light colour. Evolved earthy nose leads to a soft, savoury palate with an earthy character and a drying finish. Drinkable and not without some charm, but disappointing. Very good 82/100 (£9.99 Thresher, Wine Rack)