If you enjoy them young, drink them young. You don’t need everyone on the board to agree with you. You seem to bring this up in every single Barolo thread.
It’s not about what I am doing; it’s about what I am reading here that others are doing. And I will continue to point that out.
I passed also.
Another ripple effect of the 100 point score appears to be the evaporation of back vintages…Up 'til a couple years ago, it was quite easy to pick up previous vintages at around release price. I was able to buy my fill of 2005 and 2008 without a problem.
Now the only back vintage available on WSpro is the 2012, for which the asking price is $200.
I’ll be interested to see where prices settle on Monvig going forward…
You seem convinced that things have changed. Can I ask which wines (or producers) from the 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s you had on release that you feel have become more open?
You a funny guy. People say it’s delusional to think the wines are accessible young even now, and you imply it was that way five decades ago.
Perhaps I should be more clear. I am “implying” that you don’t have the breadth of knowledge needed to be so sure of this “new paradigm” you constantly push.
A broad declaration of a new paradigm seems simplistic as I’d imagine you’d need to look at producers individually…not to mention by vintage.
I’m not wanting to join the ‘new paradigm’ wars but just in terms of my opening (and enjoying) this wine on release, that’s something I do for some Burgundies and Piemontese really just to get an idea of longer term potential. I’ll often buy an extra bottle in an allocation to ‘waste’ on this.
However, I’m pretty selective about which Piemontese wines I’ll do this for often preferring Barbarescos and lighter, more elegant Barolos eg the 2012 Rinaldi Tre Tine, definitely not a Rinaldi Brunate. As “the Burgundy drinker’s Barolo” the Burlotto Monvigliero (all recent vintages, really) is a good option for this. At the other end of the spectrum would be wines like Gajas or Marcarini Brunates that I would never open young. Vintage is also relevant to this of course. All other things being equal, I’d be more likely to open a bottle young from an accessible, earlier drinking vintage (eg 2012) than from a tannic, highly structured vintage.
The final factor, as Rob mentions, if I plan to open a Barolo early, is “when”. After release there is often a brief window of reasonable accessibility before the wine shuts down hard for 3-10+ years’ sleep, where you will definitely get your wall of tannins if you do open a bottle. I don’t know, perhaps the 2013 Monvigliero will close up shop soon or perhaps it’ll continue to be relatively accessible through its young life, but I won’t be risking one of my bottles in the danger zone …
For anyone who has followed and bought Bordeaux for the last two decades, there really isn’t anything new here. Sugar and phenolic ripeness resulting in sweet tannins and fully mature fruit. Better cellar practices e.g. temperature controlled fermentation and greater cleanliness, etc. have resulted in less harsh, earlier accessible wines. I’m surprised the debate isn’t about their potential longevity as opposed to their earlier appeal.
Potential longevity is not really a well posed question here for debate in my view when there is no established basis for prediction. It’s hard to debate an empirical question that can’t really be answered if you like Piemonte wines at age 25+. My recollection is that the first of what are considered traditional Piemonte wines that drank well on release in the way some do now were some 1997s. Some 1998s. (Some might say some 1990s.) But far from universal, including today. The mature drinking window where the wines gain bottle-aged sweetness hasn’t begun yet.
We need a lot more data before actual facts on longevity of such wines allow insight into potential longevity of new releases that drink well young, although no doubt there are signs to read.
I remembered tasting about 70-80 2011 Bordeaux in bottle when I sort of stumbled upon Parker’s vintage tasting at Domaine and found them to be completely inaccessible. Fiercely tannic for the amount of fruit. Almost painfully so, though quality was undeniable, among the better wines at least.
I opened a 2014 Lanessan against a 2014 Becklyn just for the experience when my 2014 Bordeaux started to come in. Took 2 1/2 days for the Lanessan to be drinkable.
Making ripe wine with subdued tannins and early-drinking pleasantness is, in this day an age, a choice that technologically sophisticated winemakers can make. Many producers around the world strive to make that sort of wine, and I’m sure that includes many in Piemonte, but I don’t know if that shifts the debate…
The '90 Barolos were drinkable in the mid-90s if you had some tolerance for tannins. And I liked the '96s when I visited the Langhe in 1998 and 2000. And that was a high-tannin year. I was new to Barolo then, but I bought quite a few. Now I’m still waiting on them. 
One change over the past generation or so that is less often mentioned is that few wines now have extended barrel aging beyond the legal minimums. In the past, a lot of wines were somewhat oxidative, so they had less fruit. Hence, the tannins were more conspicuous young.
A much more interesting question to me, than the early drinking topic which we’ve done to death now.
Time of course will tell, though some of the modernist experiments did end up falling over way too quickly. Others have lasted to medium term in good shape and with less noticeable oak than on release. There are good and bad examples that make it difficult to be strident in opinion.
I get the feeling (which I can’t back up) that over-ripeness in the vineyard is likely to be the biggest problem for maintaining the longevity that used to be achieved in the pre-modernist wines, both in the flavour profile of overripe fruit and a reduction in acidity needed for ageing. Barrique vs. Tonneaux vs. Botti - For me this comes down to being rather fed up with vanilla flavouring in too many wines, and that it often detracts from the charm of Nebbiolo for me. Many other wines age perfectly well in barrique, so I don’t see this as harming longevity. Maceration times - I’m not sure. I’m not in favour of the modernist changes with the aim being to make softer wines (less seed/skin tannin) with good colour via roto-fermentation - for me this softness feels like a compromise, being more approachable young, but removing some of the backbone for later. Time will tell.
Even the Acclivi 2013 is selling for about $70 in New York state, I see. Yikes!
This^
I paid less than $60 for the 12 this year. I tasted both the 12 and 13 and not sure if the 13 is that much better, the 12 is rounder and more elegant where the 13 is more structured. Not sure it is a 100 point wine.
Burlotto’s definitely trending. The Acclivi’s @ $70 aren’t a good bet to last long.
cracked one last night. decanted for about an hour and it needed it. nose was like nothing i’ve experienced before - kaleidoscopic - Chambertin with dust. really special. palate had beautiful structure, tannins super-fine. there is no harm in cracking one now.
It is a truly great Barolo, Henry. You should really hunt it down. Easy 98 p.
Burlotto is not a producer I buy every vintage, but I buy a few Monvigliero from time to time. I decided to look around for 2013 only to find out that prices have exploded and that the wine is virtually nowhere to find. Scary.
Unicorn wine.