Most of Australia’s wine shows are packed into the last six months of the year to allow whites from the current vintage to be shown. From this burgeoning wine show scene come all those trophies, gold, silver and bronze medals adorning labels.

But what does all this glitter mean to a wine drinker? Are gongs really a good indicator of quality? The short answer is yes, but with some caveats, perhaps best illustrated by a judge’s eye view of a particular class being assessed.

Judges see nothing but wine-filled glasses lined up on numbered squares on a white table. Judges know that the wines are, say, dry rieslings from the current vintage – but nothing more.
Each of three judges and one or two associate judges, working in isolation (no discussion allowed at this stage) awards each wine a score out of 20 points.

Most Australian shows use this 20-point system. In theory this is sub-divided into three segments: a maximum of 3 points for appearance, 7 for aroma and 10 for flavour. In practice, most judges simply award an aggregate score based on an overall impression of a wine. 15.5 points equals bronze medal standard; 17.0 points silver and 18.5 gold.

After assessing the wines, judges and associates convene to compare notes.

The panel chair (the senior of the three judges) tallies the points as each judge calls a score for each of the wines. Typically, the majority of wines attract a narrow range of scores. These ‘consensus wines’ are simply aggregated (the associate judge scores are not included) to determine bronze and silver medallists and the also rans.

After this initial tally, the panel chair asks stewards to serve fresh glasses of all wine attracting a gold medal rating from any of the judges.

The judges and associates gather at one table – generally with the Chairman of judges — and now taste and discuss each gold-medal candidate in turn. This group tasting and discussion usually sees one or two gold medals awarded and another few candidates dropped back to a silver medal aggregate.

And what’s in the results of wine show judging for the consumer and the producer?

For the consumer, there’s a pretty reliable form guide. But it’s a guide to be viewed with healthy scepticism. To begin with, it’s not a race where there can be only one winner. In wine judging, in theory at least, every wine can be a gold medal winner.

And there’s the fact that the same wine receives variable scores in different wine shows. In part this reflects evolving aromas and flavours over time. But more than anything it shows that judges’ perceptions vary. As a general guide, a wine that wins medals consistently in a variety of shows is usually well ahead of the pack.

As well, bear in mind that many producers of benchmark wines choose not to enter wine shows. So trophies and gold medals, while a reliable guide to superior quality, do not imply that a wine is the best of its kind – just the best of its kind on a particular day in the opinion of a particular group of judges.

Producers enter shows both to win gongs and to benchmark. Hence, makers generally attend the exhibitors’ tasting after a show tasting their own wines against those from other regions and other makers.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2006 & 2007

Do we really need to breathe or decant high quality wines to get the most enjoyment from them? For most wines, the answer is no. Breathing is almost never necessary and often detrimental. And the only practical reason for decanting is to separate clear wine from sediment in the bottle.

The idea of breathing wine almost certainly dates to a time when winemaking was more rustic than it is today. Without the rigorous controls of modern winemaking, many a bottle held traces of smelly aromas and flavours – principally sulphide compounds.

These are natural products of fermentation and because they are reductive – formed in the absence of air – the traditional method of elimination was by racking wine: moving it from one vessel to another in the presence of air. Winemakers still do this with red wines today.

Because racking doesn’t eliminate all sulphides, modern winemakers, where necessary, remove the traces by adding small amounts of copper sulphate, sometimes determining the need to do so by a simple triple-blind test.

This means taking a wine sample, pouring it to three identical glasses and adding a trace of copper sulphate to only one glass. Put the three unmarked glasses to a winemaker, and if one glass smells different from the other two, then sulphides are indicated and the wine is appropriately fined.

Interestingly, the advent of the screw cap in recent years forced winemakers to be doubly diligent in the search for sulphides. Because the cap is a far more effective barrier to air than cork, some of the earlier bottles showed signs of reduction.

That such a tiny ingress of air through cork kept sulphides below the human aroma threshold is a clear illustration of why breathing wine was once all the go: smelly wines could be cleaned up by a good splash from bottle to decanter – effectively a final racking.

So, unless we find a stinky bottle, there’s no need to aerate it. And if we do find one, give a good gurgle into a jug or just splash it around in a glass. Simply pulling the cork and leaving the bottle open won’t work because the surface of wine exposed to air is insignificant.

And what of the belief that exposure to air releases the aromas and flavours of sturdy young reds? Well, there’s not a lot of science to support the notion. Indeed, quite the reverse appears to be true as prolonged exposure to air disburses a wine’s positive attributes.

Modern winemaking, too, means that fewer wines throw a sediment or ‘crust’ and therefore the need for decanting is much less than it was.

Cold stabilisation means that white wines seldom lose excess tartaric acid prior to bottling. Hence, it’s rare, albeit not unknown, to see deposits of tartrate crystals in bottles or on corks as we once did.

Filtration prior to bottling also reduces sedimentation in most commercial red wines. However, many of our more robust wines still drop sediment as they age.

As this looks terrible in the glass and tastes gritty and bitter, it’s easily removed by decanting. Simply stand the bottle up twenty-four hours beforehand then, particularly in the case of very old wines, open and decant immediately prior to serving.

Fine crystal decanters certainly add a sense of occasion. But if you don’t have one, decant to any clean jug, wash the bottle, then tip the wine back in. Now, take a sip and breathe easy.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2006 & 2007

While older drinkers might remember Seppelt for everything from sherry to bubbly to long-lived reds, younger people may have noticed nothing more than the amazingly good reds and whites now appearing under its retro label.

This striking suite of wines from western and south western Victoria — while owing much to the current winemaking team – have been built on an a much older culture that survived waves of industry consolidation.

Seppelt’s reputation was built largely on great fortified wines, produced at Seppeltsfield in the Barossa along with sparkling wines and, on a much smaller scale, superb, long-lived reds from Great Western, Victoria.

Then in 1964, Karl Seppelt, with remarkable prescience, foresaw the coming table wine boom and established vineyards at Padthaway, four hundred-odd kilometres south of the Barossa and at Drumborg near Portland in southwestern Victoria.

Despite Karl’s foresight, the company struggled and, in a wave of industry rationalisation, was acquired by South Australian Brewing Holdings in 1984. Then, in 1990, SABH acquired Lindemans from Philip Morris and Penfolds from Adsteam.

The conglomeration became Penfolds Wine Group but this became Southcorp Wines when SABH sold its brewery division in 1993.

Throughout this intensive blending of wine cultures, James Godfrey held (and still does) the fortified reins at Seppeltsfield while Great Western based Ian McKenzie supervised Seppelt winemaking overall.

Inevitably, rationalisation meant change. But the formidable fortified resources at Seppeltsfield remained intact. And McKenzie – aided by a mid nineties Victorian vineyard expansion — led both a rejuvenation of the Seppelt Victorian red styles and the development of top end whites and sparkling wines.

The reds were inspired mainly by those made at Great Western by Colin Preece in the forties, fifties and sixties – which, in turn, had been preceded by extraordinary early twentieth century vintages from the St Peters Vineyard, next to the winery.

While the cold, windswept Drumborg vineyard struggled for decades, renewed investment and improved management techniques saw the vineyard producing flashes of brilliance during the eighties and sustained high quality by the late nineties.

By the end of Macka’s stewardship in 2002 the Seppelt reds – led by St Peters Vineyard Shiraz (formerly called Reserve Shiraz) – were back amongst the most highly regarded in the country and the new whites, led by riesling and chardonnay from the Drumborg vineyard, showed a unique finesse and intensity.

And now, four years into Arthur O’Connor’s stewardship, we’re enjoying not just the Great Western and Drumborg wines but an expanded Victorian range based on vineyards – particularly the Glenlofty Pyrenees site — established in the mid nineties.

It’s really the culmination of one hundred years work, piled layer on layer and, finally, being brought to market in a coherent manner. Those new ‘old’ Seppelt labels really do convey something of this continuity – and the exceptional quality of the wines.

Seppelt Coborra Pinot Gris 2005 $25 to $29
This is a striking and individual pinot gris that appeals as soon as it’s poured. The brilliant pale straw colour promises the great freshness that follows. There’s lots of aroma here with pear-like fruit and a mineral edge. The palate is intense, pear like, and very finely structured for this variety. A taut, steely acid backbone seems to intensify the fruit flavour and carry it right across the palate leaving the mouth really refreshed and looking for the next sip. The fine-ness and intensity probably mean an interesting and slow flavour evolution in the bottle for those with good cellaring conditions.

Seppelt Jaluka Drumborg Chardonnay 2005 $25 to $29
Twenty years after it was planted Drumborg vineyard produced outstanding chardonnay sparkling wine. Another decade on, in the mid nineties, it produced classy chardonnay table wine – sometimes good enough for Penfolds flagship white, Yattarna. Now the vineyard’s fruit stands on its own. This one, made by Emma Wood, has at its heart the restrained, grapefruit-like varietal flavour of very-cool climate chardonnay, supported by lovely inputs of barrel fermentation and contact with yeast lees. It’s a rich but delicate delight to drink now but is of a style to evolve with careful cellaring for five or six years.

Seppelt Chalambar Grampian Bendigo Shiraz 2004 $25 to $29
Seppelt Victorian Shiraz 2004 $13 to $18
Above these two Seppelt reds sit the sublime St Peters and Benno shirazes. These establish a familial style based on richness with cool-climate structure, albeit with a distinct character to each wine. Victorian Shiraz is the often-discounted entry-level wine that invariably surprises new drinkers with its one-more-glass-please drinkability. Chalambar is the resurrection of a hallowed-then-devalued old Seppelt brand. The 2004 is sensational. It has the beautifully, floral perfumed lift of top cool-climate shiraz and all the supple, sweet, palate richness that goes with it. That means opulence without heaviness and enormous drinking pleasure. This is a very impressive wine.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2006 & 2007

In late April The Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation tipped a 2006 grape harvest of around 1.96 million tonnes – about one per cent down on last year’s record harvest.

AWBC’s estimate includes the assumption that, just like last year, two to three per cent of the 2006 vintage will be left on the vine or cast on the ground to rot.

With an estimated 900 million litres of excess stock in storage – and this year’s harvest running early – word is that storage capacity is stretched to capacity and the damaging surplus will be with us for a few years yet.

And the surplus may have been greater still had growers in some regions not responded to prospective lower prices and volume caps imposed by winemakers.

Grape yields “… were down five per cent in the Murray Valley and down ten per cent in the Riverland… due to low prices and tonnage caps. Many of the cooler climate regions also expected lower tonnages for similar reasons. For example, Langhorne Creek was down five per cent, McLaren Vale down eight per cent and Mudgee down ten per cent”, writes the AWBC.

But the warm, high-yielding Riverina increased its output by twenty per cent “on the back of winery capacity expansions in the area” – which I think we can safely assume means on the success of Casella’s ten million case a year Yellowtail brand.

Given the glut, it was somewhat surprising to learn of plans to add another 1800 hectares of vines to the 164 thousand that already exist in Australia.

On April 27th The Sydney Morning Herald quoted Mark McKenzie, executive director of Wine Grape Growers Australia, as saying “It beggars belief that some investment promoters are continuing to push large new vineyard plantings when the industry is struggling to digest current levels of production”.

But just to prove that booms, busts, gluts and surpluses seldom spread pleasure or pain evenly, the proposed plantings were defended by developer, Antonio de Francesca, and Winemakers Federation of Australia President, Stephen Strachan.

How could he be adding to the surplus Francesca, reportedly said, when a planned new 207-hectare development was pre-contracted to winemakers. And Strachan acknowledged that there can specific needs to be met – especially when we look at where demand might be in four or five years.

Writing in AWBC publication, ‘Wine Australia’, head of Hardy Wine Company, David Woods called the uneven spread of the glut a structural imbalance.

He wrote, “Approximately fifteen to twenty per cent of wine sold globally can profitably afford to come from what we loosely call cool climate regions, but in Australia currently as an industry forty per cent of our production from the last two vintages has been cool climate”.

In a nutshell that means that we have too many of our vineyards in high cost regions and not enough in low cost regions. Since winemakers produce to specific prince points, then they’ll pay only what that price point demands.

All of which says that for consumers vintage 1996 ensures that the good times will continue to roll. We can look forward to low prices for the foreseeable future.

But for uncontracted growers — or even those with contracts that allow lower tonnages or lower prices – it’s been another disastrous year.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan