I’ve never been a big fan of Italian wines, probably because I’m the kind of small minded person who holds a grudge for a long time. When I started drinking wine seriously, sometime in the last century or perhaps the one before that, virtually all of the white wines from Italy were horribly oxidized and completely devoid of fruit. The red wines, on the other hand, were horribly oxidized, completely devoid of fruit and full of dirty/barnyardy/bretty aromas and flavors.

Now that the Italians have cleaned up their act, I find most of the white wines boring and I tend to criticize the reds for either selling out to Parker by making “universal” wines that could come from anywhere, or for making wines that may be true to their place of origin but simply don’t taste very good unless you’ve got a big plate of pasta or a leg of lamb to soften the tannins and their rusticity.

It’s certainly safe to say, then, that I approached last night’s tasting of Super Tuscans with a completely open mind, total objectivity and high expectations.


1999 Guado al Tasso (60% CS, 30% Merlot, 10% Syrah) [Antinori – from Bolgheri]
My favorite wine of the night by a small margin. Dusty, earthy, cranberries and black cherries in the nose. Obviously young with a nice high-toned fruity note. Young and fruit forward in the mouth. Round, well balanced if a bit simple and new world-ish. Certainly tasty and easy to drink but if I were a die-hard Italiophile I’d probably feel shortchanged. This was the group’s favorite wine.

1999 Solaia (75% CS, 20% Sangiovese, 5% CF) [Antinori – from the Chianti Classico region]
This was the other wine I liked quite a bit. There’s so much ripe, plumy fruit in the nose that I thought this was going to have a big chunk of merlot in it. Heaps of fruit, gobs of tannin and very universal in style. This was the group’s second favorite wine.

1997 Solaia (75% CS, 20% Sangiovese, 5% CF) [Antinori – from the Chianti Classico region]
Pretty interesting: roses, earth, youthful, fruity, not much/any(?) sangiovese, ripe, alcoholic. A big mouthful of fruit and very new world-ish. Extremely ripe and chewy but too simple at the moment. This may turn out to be interesting with another 5+ years of age but it could just as easily fall flat on its face and be a boring blob. This was my third place wine, the group had it in the middle of the pack and Wine Spectator named it their Wine of the Year in 2000.

1997 Tignanello (80% Sangiovese, 15% CS, 5% CF) [Antinori – from the Chianti Classico region]
This wine was much more identifiable as Italian because of a leaner/earthy/Sangiovese character in the nose. Not young/fun/fruity nor old/mature/fascinating, just some reasonably pleasant aromas that were two steps away from being non-descript. It was clearly from a ripe year and clearly had a lot of sangiovese. Not bad, just unexciting. My fourth place wine and the one of the group’s least favorites.

1999 Tignanello (80% Sangiovese, 15% CS, 5% CF) [Antinori – from the Chianti Classico region]
Stuffy, menthol/mint, showing a bit of age and not at all distinctive. The flavors are dry, austere sangiovese and the wine is much younger than I guessed from the nose. On the second sip I was convinced this had a lot of cabernet in it and that it needed serious time in the cellar. By the third sip I didn’t know what it was and didn’t care. This is probably better than I’m giving it credit for – my fifth place wine and one of the group’s least favorites.

1999 Parador (a cabernet, Sangiovese, temperanillo blend from Napa)
An obvious ringer with odd, high toned, new oak aromas. Sweet ripe California flavors – mainly cherries – and then a big dose of brett. A few tasters liked this a lot while a few had it last. My sixth place wine.

1986 Sassicaia (85% CS, 15% CF) [Tenuta San Guido – from Bolgheri]
Old, fading aromas. Hints of olives and spice. The flavors are old and tired, clearly a wine well past its prime. This is one of those wines that is more interesting than it is good, but it’s a bit of a stretch to say it’s interesting. A couple of tasters liked it, most did not.

Richard

too bad you were not that happy with the 97 tignanello. it happens to be an excellent wine.

as for the 1986 sassicaia, this wine was dead five years ago. 1986 was a very difficult year in tuscany.

I'm surprised re your comments on 97 Solaia. I last had it in 2001 and thought it was magnificent with tons of potential.

wg-i have had the 97 tig four times. three times it was excellent. the one time it was not excellent the bottle was flawed, probably some storeage issue . the 97 tig should still taste very young and vibrant. if not there was probably some bottle damage. whether tasters are seasoned italian wine drinkers or not, a damaged bottle will not show well.

Well Geek,
Given your lowered expectations and your responses to these wines; I guess, no, you still don't like Italian wines.

Quote:

---

winegeek posted:
1997 Solaia (75% CS, 20% Sangiovese, 5% CF) [Antinori – from the Chianti Classico region]
Pretty interesting: roses, earth, youthful, fruity, not much/any(?) sangiovese, ripe, alcoholic. A big mouthful of fruit and very new world-ish. Extremely ripe and chewy but too simple at the moment. This may turn out to be interesting with another 5+ years of age but it could just as easily fall flat on its face and be a boring blob. This was my third place wine, the group had it in the middle of the pack and Wine Spectator named it their Wine of the Year in 2000.

---

Had a bottle tonight. I found the fruit was overwhelmed by oak (chocolate & vanilla flavors) but still down there deep. Pretty loud tannins were terrific with a steak. Isn't as "wonderful" as I remember it two and three years ago. Only 90 points this time. Schedule next bottle for 2007 (3 each of '96 and '97 left).

davidn, thanks for the update. I still have one sitting in my cellar, and your notes confirm my thought, which is don't touch for a few more years. Have you tried the 1999? If so how does it compare, and would you say its worth the price tag? I just saw some at the wine store up here yesterday.