Belguardo Poggio Bronzone Vertical

A vertical tasting - tasting different vintages of the same wine - is one of my favourite wine tasting activities. Sometimes with vintage notes in hand, sometimes not (like tonight), I sip these mysteries and try to picture the weather of years past in a distant land...dilute (rains at harvest), green/vegetal (earlier harvest), raisiny (extreme heat)...wines typically give us hints to the climate in which they were raised. Except for tonight, where this "accidental" vertical of four Tuscan vintages gave nearly identically wonderful expressions of Sangiovese.

Accidental? Most of the verticals in my cellar are carefully assembled, but this was a funny discovery (or perhaps a sign of aging) - four different vintages of this wine from Mazzei's Belguardo Estate! Mazzei has been pushing the promise of the Tuscan Maremma for a few years now, and judging by tonight's wines the Maremma is more than promising.

Tonight's favourite was the 2001 Belguardo Poggio Bronzone - beautifully complex on the nose, with earthy, charcoal notes, some cocoa powder, liquorice, basil and old fruit as well. A carpet of velvety tannins carries crisp, minerally cherry fruit to the palate. Poised, a very nice finish, nearly perfect if the oak was more subdued. Score: 17.5+/20

A nose of minty cooked fruit and the 2004 Belguardo Poggio Bronzone nearly passed for the oldest. Terribly interesting, later adding notes of sour cherries, roses, and cooked sausages. Silky tannins and raisiny, cooked fruit awkwardly danced across the palate - kinda odd at first, but it developed nicely. Bottle variation? Wish I had another '04. Score: 16.5/20

The 2005 Belguardo Poggio Bronzone was a lovely wine, with flinty sweet black cherries, and tobacco notes - a touch spicy. Juicy, tart and lighter bodied than the others, with a very long smoky finish, even a touch nutty. Very well balanced...Score: 17/20

The 2006 Belguardo Poggio Bronzone, was an impetuous youth - big smokey and leathery aromas with a heavy dose of toasty oak, fleshed out with roses and dark berries. Tangy, earthy and very smokey, with a deceptively long, minerally, finish. A bit over-oaked, but otherwise showing many signs of greatness. Score: 17/20

A great flight of Sangiovese (more similar than different), I can only speculate on the subtleties of these vintages - the 05 seemed touch dilute (rain?), the '04 hot and raisiny (hot and dry?). It is noteworthy that all were 13.5% alcohol, not showing the trend I see in my cellar with wineries showing increasing alcohol in consecutive vintages.

While there was not a bad wine in the bunch, a lighter touch with the oak would be appreciated by this palate...

Mini Vertical #6: 2003 vs. 2005 D'Arenberg "The Laughing Magpie"

Been away for a few days so I have a few posts to catch up on. Here's the last in my Mini Vertical series (for now), and it was another Australian night.

The 2003 D'Arenberg "The Laughing Magpie" was a dark cherry red with a slight brick colour at the edges. Opened slowly over the eveing - liquorice and cloves, then violet, blackberry cedar, tobacco, flint and prunes. Quite angular and harsh when first poured, but it softened very nicely over the evening, retaining a nice fresh acidity and elegance. Drink now, or over the next few years.
cork. 14.5% alcohol
Score: 17.5/20
Price: ~$27 (LCBO) (swapped some Montus for this one)

The 2005 D'Arenberg "The Laughing Magpie" was a purpley cherry red, with a very hot and spicy nose. Blackberry fruit, smokey, with some leafiness, later revealing violet, undergrowth, pepper, liquorice, butterscotch and cocoa, and a late showing of a strong, tar/fuel aroma. On the palate it was complex, with dry dusty tannins and not overly fruity, but not as well integrated. It should improve with some bottle age, but I really have no experience with wines aged under a screw cap. Give it a good decant.
screw cap. 15% alcohol
Score: 17/20
Price: $27.95 (LCBO)

So while tonight was meant to be a comparison of two different vintages, I couldn't help thinking about "closure". The 2003 has sat in my cellar for a few years under a cork closure, while the 2005 was purchased more recently and sealed under a screw cap. Can I really compare vintages in this scenario? Also interesting to note the difference that 0.5% alcohol made on my perception of the wines.

Sorry Edward - I promised a match up of the 2002 vs. the 2005 after your 2002 review, but I only had the 2003. Cheers!

Mini Vertical #5: 1999 vs. 2001 Chateau Carbonnieux

I couldn't do a series of mini-verticals without stepping into Bordeaux. Tonight's two Bordeaux come from the unheralded 1999 and 2001 vintages, sandwiching yet another one of the "vintages of the century" - I can't fault the Bordelais for trying, but as one of their primary customers I find it all a bit annoying.

Anyway, I was curious about these two "inferior vintages" of a wine that my tasting group seriously enjoyed a few years ago. Carbonnieux is based in Pessac-Leognan, and is unusual in that it produces nearly equal amounts of red and white wine. For red grapes the vineyard is planted 60% Cabernet and 30% Merlot, with the balance being Cab Franc, Malbec, Petit Verdot and Carmenere.

The 1999 Chateau Carbonnieux was cherry red, with some bricking at the edge. Vegetal and roses at first, some blackcurrant, prunes, blackberry, musk, leather, black pepper and gravelley wet stones, medicinal as well. On the palate it was a classic Bordeaux - very dry, crisp and spicy. Light to medium bodied, with powerful tannins and ample acidity that seemed a awkward, but developing improved elegance with more air time. I recommend drinking now, or over the next few years. Note this tasted nothing like my notes from 2005.
cork. 12.5% alcohol
Score: 17/20
Price: C$65 (SAQ)

The 2001 Chateau Carbonnieux was cherry red, with a caramel nose at first, but shifting quite dramatically to vegetal, then mushrooms, truffles, and black earth, roses and crisp berries. Very nice. On the palate were dry, firm tannins and good acidity, very powerful and rough around the edges at first, but developing and improving over the evening at a rapid rate. Despite the awkwardness this was a much more complex and interesting wine that I believe needs more time to develop - stick it away for another five years.
cork. 12.5% alcohol
Score: 17.5/20
Price: C$66 (SAQ)

A few observations: (1) Despite both being awkard, I felt the 2001 has potential and should develop nicely, while the 1999 does not appear to have that potential (2) Another major split between RP and WS tonight - the '01 was an 89 for Bob, but Suckling gave it a 79 - that's a very big gap (3) The prices on these were way too high - bad QPR.

Those following my Mini Verticals will notice that I have not made any comments on the actual vintages I am tasting. I have done that purposely - tasting first, reviewing the vintage commentary afterwards to compare to my notes. I will review this series in greater detail soon.

Mini Vertical #4: 2001 and 2002 Yalumba Signature - with a Middle Eastern Twist

Another mini-vertical tonight but my bro-in-law decided that, after some success with the Chateau Musar at our "Oddities Night", he would crash this Barossa party with a Lebanese wine. A Cab/Shiraz blend, it was a perfect match for my Yalumba tasting. This one is for you, Fadi!

Three wines, similar grapes, and harvested within a 12 month period, but with such different terroirs and styles - it should have been easy to pick out the Lebanese in this blinded tasting, right?

The 2001 Chateau Kefraya "Comte de M" is regarded in some circles as Lebanon's greatest bottling, vying with the Musar for that honour. A dark cherry red in the glass - similar to the others - but on the nose this wine was very different from the other two. Earthy, with melted chocolate, tea, liquorice, grendadine, cedar, musk, leather and compote - very complex, but an unusual wine that could be polarizing. On the palate is was a touch austere, even rustic. Very dry, with ample acidity and big tannins that made this full-bodied wine seem a touch off-balance. A lengthy finish, it softened up over the eveing, and it should be a few years before this wine struts its stuff. Nicely done, but I think I may have preferred the Musar. Rematch in five years.
cork. 14% alcohol
Score: 17.5/20
Price: $50 (SAQ)

The 2001 Yalumba "The Signature" comes from Australia's Barossa Valley, and is a blend of Cabernet and Shiraz. Deep, purpley-red in the glass with no signs of aging. Pepper and blackberry on the early nose, exploding over the evening with violet, strawberry, truffle, leather, vanilla, smoke and a hint of tarriness. Crisp currant fruit and very dry, dusty tannins on the palate, some tarry notes, this wine had an extremely long finish. This elegant, Bordeaux-styled wine was my favourite of the evening.
cork. 13.5% alcohol
Score: 18/20
Price: C$47

The 2002 Yalumba "The Signature" was so different from the 2001 that it was not easy to pick out the Lebanese wine amongst the three bottles. Deep, dark purple in the glass. Violet, blackberry, and vegetal notes dominated, later showing cherry, cedar, coffee, tobacco, cocoa and eucalyptus. Silky and elegant, it was juicier and more accessible than the others, yet had a very long finish and could also benefit from some cellar time. Definitely not a fruit bomb, but more fruit forward than the 2001.
cork. 14.5% alcohol
Score: 17.5/20
Price: C$43.50 (SAQ)

Despite a trio of warm climate cab/shiraz wines, there were no fruit bombs here tonight. These were complex, elegant and structured wines, and great pairings for Beef Wellington. As I tasted these a number of questions came to mind:

1) The '01 Signature was panned by Wine Spectator (87 pts), yet 95 points from Mr. Parker. Were they tasting the same wine? Perhaps Mr. Parker's roots in Bordeaux give him a better appreciation for this style?

2) The '02 Signature was better reviewed by WS (91), and similarly reviewed by RP (96). Hmmm - fruity and not fruity, but same in RP's books, but WS needed that extra ripeness to give it a decent score? Food for thought.

3) Is the Kefraya Comte de M Lebanon's best? A very well made wine and different from the Musar, which seems to come from another era. But the Musar was just so different, and therein lies he charm, in my mind.

4) There was a piece to the Comte de M and the Musar that was very similar, despite very different grapes and vintages. Earthy and liquorice-y, a Lebanese terroir?

(PS - apologies for the crappy photo)