![\"english](\"http:\/\/www.wineanorak.com:\/wineblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/09\/P9281341-500x333.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
I mentioned a while back that I’d taken part in a tasting of English sparkling wine versus Champagne<\/a>. Organized by counter-culture wine publication Noble Rot<\/a><\/em>, it pitted a carefully selected quartet of English fizz against four very good grower Champagnes, and four very good Grand Marque Champagnes. It was a fair fight: all three quartets had been well chosen, and there was a ceiling on price, so like was facing like.<\/p>\n The tasters were an eclectic bunch, including some very fine wine palates, but also some gastronomically fine non-wine palates. For full details, read the next edition of Noble Rot<\/em>, which will be mailed early next week. The<\/em> Telegraph<\/em> jumped the gun a bit and published the results ahead of the embargo, which is why I’m not linking to the article here – nor have I given it social media love (for the record, this isn’t the fault of their excellent wine writer).<\/p>\n The big headline? When the results of all the tasters was totted up, English wines occupied spots 1 and 2. That’s a striking result. As a fan of English sparkling wines – it’s a sector I’m really excited about – this is a great result. But I’d urge a little caution here: in the tasting some of the non-sparkling wine specialists were giving scores with a crazy range, which could hit some of the wines hard. We were asked to score out of 20, and some were giving some of the wines low single-digit scores (even one of the wine specialists did this). This is nuts: this is a really strong line-up of wines. I think it’s because less experienced tasters score hedonically (how much do I like this?) rather than for quality (I may not like the style, but this is a really good example).<\/p>\n So I thought it might be useful to publish my own blind scores and notes (unedited, save for a tiny bit of tidying up). As well as scoring out of 20 for official purposes, I also scored out of 100. Below my scores, I’ve published the official results. Here we have my ranking, the tasting note, and in brackets the group ranking.<\/p>\n 1 Champagne Taittinger NV France<\/strong> 2 = Gusbourne 2010 England<\/strong> 2= Champagne Chartogne-Taillet Sainte Anne NV France<\/strong> 4= Champagne Marguet Cru Extra Brut NV France<\/strong> 4= Nyetimber Classic Cuv\u00e9e 2010 England<\/strong> 6= Champagne Frerejean Freres Brut NV France<\/strong> 6= Champagne Pol Roger NV France<\/strong> 8= Champagne Bereche Brut Reserve NV France<\/strong> 8= Wiston Cuvee NV England<\/strong> 10 \u00a0Champagne Veuve Cliquot Brut NV France<\/strong> 11= Hambledon NV England<\/strong> 11= Champagne Savart L’Ouverture NV France<\/strong> Overall results<\/em><\/p>\n![\"OLYMPUS](\"http:\/\/www.wineanorak.com:\/wineblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/09\/P9281349-500x333.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"english](\"http:\/\/www.wineanorak.com:\/wineblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/english-sparkling-versus-champagne-500x320.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\nLinear and pure with fine citrus, pear and white peach. Impeccable balance here, showing subtle toastiness and lovely citrus fruit. Very pure and refined: stylish stuff. 94\/100 (group position 4)<\/p>\n
\nVery appley, distinctive and pretty. Open and a bit toasty with lovely depth of flavour: pear, apples, spices and fine fruitiness. Quite light but just so distinctive. 93\/100 (group position 9)<\/p>\n
\nOpen , quite appley nose with a hint of herbs. Tight, lean and focused on the palate with some appley, slightly oxidative notes and keen citrus fruit. Lovely complexity and harmony with a long finish. Beautiful. 93\/100 (group position 10)<\/p>\n
\nSuperbly balanced. Subtle toasty notes and a bit of appley richness on the nose, with nice lemony fruit. Really elegant and refined with fine bready toasty notes and some subtle oxidative characters. Very fine. 92\/100 (group position 8)<\/p>\n
\nVery refined and fine. Subtly toasty with attractive pear, peach and citrus fruit. Linear and precise: a really pretty wine. 92\/100 (group position 2)<\/p>\n
\nComplex toasty nose with nice savoury, nutty hints. The palate has lovely fruitiness combines with honey, toast and pear. Broad and stylish with nice richness. 91\/100<\/p>\n
\nLemony and crisp with bright apple and pear fruit. Lovely lemony focus here, showing precision and purity. There\u2019s a touch of sweetness. So focused yet has a little richness. Pure. 91\/100<\/p>\n
\nFaint pink edge to the colour. Taut, citrussy and lively nose is quite shy. Lively appley palate with citrussy acidity. Lemony and quite structured with a savoury, dry character. Still youthful. 90\/100<\/p>\n
\nVery lively, complex and citrussy with a distinct toastiness and high acidity. A real mouthful: intense, primary, linear and quite pretty, but just so youthful and intense. 90\/100<\/p>\n
\nLively and bright with lovely lemony fruit and a bit of toastiness. There\u2019s a sweet core of pear and apricot. Rich and balanced, this is a crowd pleaser with lovely harmony. 89\/100<\/p>\n
\nSome creamy\/dairy notes\u00a0 on the nose.\u00a0 Sweet, lively and fresh with keen lemony acidity. Very bright and quite tart with precise, intense lemony character. Linear and pure. 88\/100<\/p>\n
\nExtremely appley, oxidative nose of lemons, baked apples and pears. The palate is concentrated, fresh and appley with crisp fruit. Linear and distinctive in an oxidative style. Complex and broad: maybe too oxidative? 88\/100<\/p>\n\n