Not really sure that I have ever seen a major critic go after a “big” wine so hard. And he was very negative on this comments about the 2009 vintage, also the area as a whole. Not that some/most of his points aren’t on target. But he lays the smack down pretty hard. Some quotes:
Why are Brunellos so inferior to the rest of the wines from Tuscany in 2009?
…Sangiovese has been exposed for what it is in Montalcino, a spotty performer.
Montalcino’s wineries are now paying the price for years of taking shortcuts.
A pretty strong piece from a major critic about one of Italy top wines, that is really loved by Americans. It will earn him no friends in Montalcino.
Is he saying that in Montalcino, sangiovese is a spotty performer, or that sangio is a spotty performer and this fact has now been revealed in Montalcino? Given the tenor of your post, I am guessing the former
I’m not sure if anyone else is openly admitting that Sangiovese is a spotty performer in Montalcino. What I get out of what he is saying is that it’s time for them to stop riding on their self-promotion and not always justified reputation of the appellation.
I think he is talking about the results from around Montalcino. Maybe this is just me, but he also seems to hint at the fact that many producers are now worried about using international varieties. Post the scandal. And that it has led to many of wines being exposed as “spotty”. If you think about that for a minute, it has broad implications for the region. Not sure if that is what he is saying, but it is shocking if that is the case. And what may be worse, he may be right. But I am not prepared to go these just yet on the results of one vintage. And a weak one at that, but Galloni does spend a good amount of time on the ground in the area.
I applaud him for being so specific, too - oftentimes, the pros lump in an entire country in a vintage report, or while not being exactly the same throughout, similar, and that’s SO often not the case
There are 230+ producers, and how many of them make truly great wine? It’s less than 10% in my opinion. There are many making good wine, but how many are truly great?
During that period there were serious problems at Pertimali. In the past they have made great wines, not sure where they are today. For me too great a risk. Overall there is way too much focus on the marketing and selling the image of Brunello. Make better wines and the image will take care of itself.
Have you read the Galloni article, Neal? He is comparing Brunello to Chianti Classico, arguing that too many wineries have coasted on Brunello’s strong reputation, and that the poor quality is particularly obvious in 2009 because it was a difficult vintage and because they no can no longer get away with blending in some Cabernet or other non-permitted varieties. Chianti, on the other hand, has a weaker reputation (remember those fiasco baskets?), so producers need to work harder to justify their prices, and in his judgment made better wines on average in 2009.
I suppose you might see something similar in Burgundy, where some producers could coast on the reputation of their vineyards. But just because it is true elsewhere doesn’t mean that it isn’t a worthwhile discussion in this instance.