Category Archives: Wine

Time could be right for tetra pak wine

Is Australia ready for high quality regional varietal wines in tetra paks? We’ll know soon enough following this month’s launch of One Planet Adelaide Hills Sauvignon Blanc 2009 and McLaren Vale Shiraz 2008. They’re billed as “the green pour” and the marketing focuses on a zero carbon dioxide output across the product lifecycle. But the wine quality, and sheer convenience of the lightweight pack, means it won’t just be Bob Brown drinking OP.

One Planet Chief Executive, Sam Atkins, says one-litre tetra pak wines enjoy big sales in the USA, Canada and Argentina, with the French Rabbit brand now taking off in Europe and the UK. He says these are mostly cheaper wines, equivalent in quality to our wine casks. Convenience and economy, it seems are the key selling points – just as they are for our home-grown one-litre tetra pak offerings from Banrock Station and Long Flat.

Atkins believes One Planet tetra paks are the first in the world to offer premium regional varietal wines. Retailing at around $14.95 they’ll be pitched squarely against high-quality bottled products – a big ask in the current glutted, deeply discounted market. They certainly have the quality – both comfortably achieve Wine and Food’s three-star standard: the light, fresh sauvignon blanc shows the tropical fruit end of the varietal spectrum; and the shiraz is big, bold and fruity in the particularly robust style of McLaren Vale’s hot 2008 vintage.

The test will be on the shop floor. But Atkins remains confident and has the national support of Coles with its 1st Choice, Vintage Cellars and Liquorland outlets taking on the brand in advance of a wider rollout. In the warehouse-style 1st Choice stores, the wines will have their own purpose-built displays – for visual impact and to separate them from wine casks.

Atkins sees parallels with the successful re-launch of screw caps in the late nineties. Back then winemakers spread the message that screw caps delivered better wine than cork. The change was all about quality. Convenience was incidental. This time the key messages are wine quality and environmental friendliness. If people see the tetra pak only for its convenience, or as just another wine cask equivalent, they may not pay a premium for it.

So how good is the tetra pak as a wine container? And what does the wine come into contact with? Atkins says it’s six-layered product and the wine is in contact with an outer layer of polyethylene. It’s also used for long-life milk and fruit juice.

He believes the manufacturer’s suggested shelf life of two years is conservative, and could be as much as four years. Atkins says he’s tasted wine at two and half years and “felt comfortable with it”. Certainly the current wine is in excellent condition seven months after packaging.  This suggest tetra pak is a better medium-term container than another light-weight alternative, PET plastic bottles with their shelf life of around 12 months.

Atkins created the One Planet concept with Phil Reedman MW. Reedman had played a key role introducing screw caps to the UK as a buyer for Tesco supermarkets. This time they’ve spotted an opportunity to appeal to environmentally aware wine drinkers and for “specialised markets including boating, sporting and outdoor events… airline, rail, cruise ship and ferry industries”, reads the press release.

Atkins says the airlines are keen on a 200ml tetra pak now being developed. And restaurateurs are lining up to for the 750ml packs as pouring wines ¬– to be marketed as “green pours”. He says they like the wine quality and the advantages of handling and disposing of such a light package (10.5 kilograms a dozen versus 16–18 kilograms for glass bottles).

Atkins plans to export the wine and already has distribution contracts in the USA, Canada, Scandinavia and the UK. And he’ll be expanding the range of regional varietals in partnership with contract makers.

The Adelaide Hills sauvignon blanc was made by Sarah Fletcher and the McLaren Vale Shiraz by Tim Burvill. To these will be added a Yarra Valley Pinot Noir, in conjunction with Sticks, a Margaret River semillon sauvignon blanc with the Edwards family and there’s a Coonawarra cabernet sauvignon in the wings. And for the American market they’ll sourcing cabernet and chardonnay from California.

And if you thought Marlborough sauvignon blanc might be a no-brainer, think again. Atkins says it’s now so commoditised and discounted in Australia they opted for material from the Adelaide Hills, for its better image.

The catchy posters and point of sale material for One Planet’s launch push both the environmental and wine quality propositions. One, featuring a picture of Tim Burvill, maker of OP McLaren Vale Shiraz 2008 reads, “ The best of both worlds – for once you don’t have to make a sacrifice to help the planet”.

Philip Reedman MW, formerly of Tesco Supermarkets UK, appears in another with the message, “How heavy is your footprint? – Drink seriously good wine whilst considering the environment”.

And sauvignon blanc maker Sarah Fletcher appears in a third, reading, “Looking towards the future – better for the planet and in turn, the future of our kids”.

We’ve seen wine in tetra paks before. But not of this quality and not with such a groundswell of support from a major retailer, restaurateurs, airlines and overseas distributors. My hunch is they’ve sensed the time is right. Just as we embraced the screw cap a decade ago, we might now be ready for good wine that isn’t in glass.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2010

Wine investing ain’t easy

If you think you can make a killing buying wine, think again. Unless you can buy at or near wholesale price and pick the winning vintages, you’re unlikely to turn a dollar. Prices realised at auction by the Penfolds blue-chip reds released in May each year tell the story. On the positive side, the high turnover of Penfolds reds means you can always cash your cellar in, and cut you losses more readily than you can with lesser brands. But the sad truth is, you’re generally better off buying aged Penfolds reds at auction than acquiring the new vintages on release.

Look at Grange. You can buy the stunning, just released 2005 for between $500 and $550 a bottle, cellar it carefully for decades, then enjoy it. But you can pick up the 2004 at auction for about $485 (based on Langton’s most recent hammer price plus buyer’s premium and GST). The magnificent 2002 you can have for just $440. Or for the great 1983 vintage, now in full bloom, pay $436; or perhaps enjoy the supple and lovely 1982 at $345.

Note though that the market demands a little more for some of the acknowledged great vintages: 1998 fetches about $570, 1996 $461, 1990 $635 and 1986 $670. While the sellers of some of these vintages might make a nominal profit, real returns vary considerably and may be negative, especially where the original purchase occurred after the release of the 1990 Grange in 1995, when prices took off sharply.

For example, if you bought the 1986 at $100 in 1991, based on a hammer price of $583, you’d receive about $520 from an auctioneer today – a handy nominal margin of $420, but perhaps a more modest $245 in real terms. But if you’d bought the 1990 for $300 in 1995, you’re nominal margin today would be around $196, probably about $30 in real terms – a poor return on $300 invested fifteen years ago.

And if you auctioned your 2004 Grange, bought last year for $500, you’d walk away with just $380 – goodbye $120! Conclusion: if you drink Grange, buy it at auction. Caveat: talk to the auctioneer, be sure the wine has been well cellared; this becomes even more important over long periods of time.

And what of the other Penfolds blue chips? Magill Estate is a shocker. Cellar door price of the just-released 2007 is $114.99. But the 2006 recently fetched $82.80 at auction, the 2005 and 1996 $74.75. Again, buying mature bottles at auction seems to be the go.

Likewise the auction price of RWT Barossa shiraz, launched from the 1997 vintage, lags the retail price. It’s a fabulous wine, as good as Barossa shiraz get. The recently released 2007 retails for around $175, but you can buy the extraordinary 1998 at auction for about $122 or the wonderful 2002 for around $140.

There’s a glimmer of financial hope for St Henri lovers as word spreads that this elegant shiraz ages beautifully for decades. Last year the 1955 vintage fetched $5,750, the 1957 $8,108 and the 1959 $2,939. Admittedly these fetch a premium for scarcity – but this should be seen against St Henri’s growing reputation and a general rise in is price at auction

However, $89.99 retail for the current release 2006 vintage is quite a premium over the $67 auction price for the 2005. But where the 1983 Grange fetches less at auction than the current 2005 at retail, St Henri 1983 at around $153 is well above current vintage retail price. Similarly 1975 vintage fetches around $170 and 1971 around $674.

This groundswell of support for mature St Henri vintages points to good value even in the current vintage, especially where retailer discounting brings it close to the auction price of recent vintages.

Like Grange, Penfolds Bin 707 Cabernet Sauvignon, took a significant leap in price after the release of the 1990 vintage. However, for years it struggled to maintain the increase, though recent auction prices suggest it’s firming.

The new release 2007 sells at around $190 retail – well over the $147 fetched at auction by the 2006 vintage. However, the 2004 recently sold for $196, 1998 for $231, 1996 for $236, 1990 for $217 and 1986 for $220. These don’t necessarily imply a good return for the seller, but as for St Henri, the mature vintages at auction cost more than the current one at retail.

The real bargains for auction buyers seems to be with the next run down of Penfolds reds. For example, the current release Bin 407 Cabernet Sauvignon 2007 retails at around $55. That vintage can already be bought at auction for about $35, the 2006 for around $28 and the 2002 for $36.

Likewise the solid, juicy Bin 28 Kalimna Shiraz ($25–$34 retail for the 2007 vintage), recently fetched $21.85 at auction. The older vintages, however, move up a little, but not much, considering their ages – 2002 $30, 1998 $47.15 and 1971 $137.

The golden rules for buying at auction are to check the provenance, bid within your limit and don’t forget to add the buyer’s premium of 15 per cent to your bid price as that’s what you’ll actually pay. If you’re selling, negotiate the commission with the auctioneer after shopping around. Alternatively, if you have top quality, well-cellared wines, contact the buying departments of the large retailers as they’ll sometimes buy direct, generally at around current auction price.

The last point reinforces that auction prices are, in effect, wholesale prices for older wines – what sells for $100 becomes $150 retail or even more in restaurants. This explains, in part, why auctions are, in general, better for buyers than they are for sellers.

It also explains why if we’re after a really good old red, like Grange, buying the mature wine at auction can be better than buying the young wine and cellaring it.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2010

National Wine Show of Australia hopes to fill the gaps

Canberra’s National Wine Show of Australia recently announced major changes to this year’s event. The Royal National Capital Agricultural Society’s wine show committee, chaired by David Metcalf, hopes to open the competition to a wider range of exhibitors, especially high quality small producers from Australia’s many wine regions.

The event, held in Canberra each November, bills itself as the grand final of the Australian wine show circuit. But in recent years the show had fallen far short of this aspiration with notable gaps in the tasting line up.

The show’s failure to attract entries from many of Australia’s top regional producers hadn’t gone unnoticed. Feedback about its shortcomings had come from the judges, the major sponsor, Vintage Cellars (with 1st Choice and Liquorland, owned by Wesfarmers), from this column and other sources.

By the end of last year the show organisers were listening and preparing for change. On 9 December 2009 I received this email from then chair, Brian Graetz, “As the newly appointed Chair of the National Wine Show, I was very interested in your recent comments about the gaps in our ranks. This issue has interested me for some time and I’m now looking forward to the challenge of being able to do something about it.

Over past years we have become a little precious about qualifying shows largely, as I understand it, in response to an industry preference for recognising true regional shows at the expense of other shows (e.g. Cowra) and competitions. However, as you say, there is no structured show system at present and I doubt that it would work, as issues such as timing and stock availability intrude and exhibitors are not necessarily enamoured of entering multiple shows in a structured system. Moreover, my own recent comparative analysis of show results (wines exhibited at more than one show) provides no statistical justification for an overly-restrictive approach.

My view is that we should be aiming to see the best wines from whatever legitimate source, within reasonable and manageable limits; being overly exclusive is not an advantage. As one step in this direction, we will be reducing volume requirements in premium classes next year”. Graetz’s email then discussed increasing the number of wine shows feeding into the national.

In mid May 2010 the RNCAS announced details of the changes, effective for the 2010 judging in November. By reducing volume requirements in premium classes, accepting medal-winning wines from five additional wine shows and introducing classes for single-vineyard wines, the RNCAS hopes to widen the show’s catchment.

As well, the show will no longer accept entries from New Zealand. David Metcalf says the show judges, led by current chair of judges, Tom Carson, pushed for this change. Metcalf added the New Zealand entries numbered only about seventy, so there’d be little practical affect on the show and the focus would now be totally on Australian wine.

Reduction of the quantity requirements could attract more entries from small makers. Under the old rules a maker might qualify for the national by winning a medal in another approved show, but be ruled out for not having enough wine. For example, last year Ken Helm’s Premium Riesling 2009 qualified by winning the top gold medal in its class at the Royal Melbourne Show. But he’d made only 375 dozen, where the national demanded a minimum of 500 dozen. This year the quantity falls to 250 dozen. Helm applauds the change and says he’ll now enter the national when he meets its other requirements.

From 2010 the national will accept gold and silver medal winners from five additional events – the Canberra, Margaret River and Yarra Valley regional shows, the Winewise Small Vignerons Awards and the Alternative Varieties Wine Show. As well, the list of approved events now includes all of the capital city shows, and these regional and state competitions: Adelaide Hills, Barossa, Clare Valley, McLaren Vale, Limestone Coast, Hunter Valley, Victoria, Tasmania and Western Australia.

Metcalf believes the show can easily absorb more entries. By restricting entries in recent years, the numbers had dropped to about 1,300 wines in 2009. But he says four panels, each judging 150 wines a day, should cope well with about 1800 entries in the three days preceding trophy judging.

While these changes should plug some of the gaps in the show, the committee has further challenges. You can’t, for example, take a comprehensive look at Australian pinot noir and chardonnay without including wines from Mornington Peninsula and Macedon. Similarly, showings of riesling and shiraz ought to include wines from Great Southern, Western Australia.

Wines from these regions might make their way to the national through the Victorian and Western Australian Shows, but their paths aren’t as clear-cut as wines from regions with their own shows. This suggests that Metcalf and his committee should look closely at the gaps in the years ahead and find ways to plug them. He says this is on the cards.

And in a nod to regional specialisation, the show this year launches a series of new single-vineyard classes. Exhibitors need just one dozen wines to qualify. Metcalf says there’ll be classes for riesling, semillon, chardonnay, pinot noir, shiraz, cabernet sauvignon, other whites and other reds. The top-scoring gold medallist from each class will go to a taste-off for the new best single-vineyard wine trophy.

Since the proof of the pudding is in the eating, we’ll have to wait until November to see how effective the changes are.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2010

Wine review — Rahona Valley, Wynns, d’Arenberg and Hewitson

Rahona Valley Mornington Peninsula Pinot Noir 2006 $27 and Reserve Pinot Noir 2006 $34
Dromana Estate Mornington Estate Pinot Noir 2008 $30

After a few initial misgivings, the Rahona Valley pinots offered delicious drinking for several days after opening. They have the heady aroma, deep flavours and rich texture of good pinot, marred slightly by hard tannins. They’re very good wines, but those hard tannins keep them off the pace of the polished act we’re not seeing from top Mornington makers like Main Ridge and Kooyong. The paler-coloured Dromana Estate leads with varietal and spicy oak aromas, but the palate finally lacks fruit intensity. We tried again and again to love it over several days but finally lost interest.

Wynns Coonawarra Estate

  • Riesling 2009 $15–$20
  • Chardonnay 2009 $15–$20
  • Cabernet Shiraz Merlot 2007 $10–$20

Prices of Wynns wines vary enormously, depending on retailer moods. They’re good value at full retail price but become exceptional bargains when on special. Riesling 2009 is taut, acidic and flavour packed – an attractive, dry aperitif style. Chardonnay 2009 shows pure, vibrant melon-like varietal flavour. It’s full-bodied, flavour packed, fresh and dry. The red blend, with the familiar old Essendon red-striped, black label, has the austere, dry tannins of cabernet and merlot, but shiraz fills out the mid palate. The combination is very Coonawarra – deep, ripe-berry flavours with elegant but strong, assertive structure.

d’Arenberg McLaren Vale The Twenty Eight Road Mourvedre 2007 $30–$35
Hewitson Old Garden Barossa Valley Mourvedre 2008 $69
Same grape variety, similar very warm growing regions, very old vines – the former planted in the 1920s, the latter in 1853 – but, oh what different flavours they deliver. d’Arenberg’s is firm, savoury, earthy and tannic, with a core of ripe fruit; the sort of rustic wine that needs protein or savoury food as a match. Hewitson’s is stunningly aromatic, with buoyant, bright, well-deep fruit flavours (Dean Hewitson likens the flavour to glacé orange rind) with soft but mouth-filling tannin. In this hot vintage alcohol intrudes a little. But the seductive fruit wins; what a wonderful, distinctive wine from the Koch family’s venerable old vineyard.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2010

Language of the label

What do we look for in back labels and how much help do they give us when we buy wine? Can we rely on the information they provide? In an Australian study in 1999 Larry Lockshin and Tim Unwin found that almost 60 per cent of their respondents said they read back labels regularly when making purchasing decisions.

Lockshin and Unwin concluded the most useful information on back labels were “simple descriptions of the tastes or smells of the wine” and that experienced consumers had trouble matching the tastes of wines with their back label descriptions.
I don’t know if Lockshin and Unwin ever revisited the subject, but a decade later back labels still vary enormously in content, style and veracity.

And many still carry unintelligible tasting notes. What, for example, are we to expect of the “brooding mulberry and liquorice characters…enhanced by dark cherry and roasted chestnut” in Chapel Hill’s lovely McLaren Vale Cabernet Sauvignon 2008? Thankfully it’s full bodied, tastes like very ripe cabernet and has the variety’s assertive, firm finish.

Just as fruity, but more to the point, is Shingleback Red Knot McLaren Vale Shiraz 2008. The label says a few words about McLaren Vale and its wine style, then describes the wine more or less intelligibly – “vibrant in colour and highly aromatic, this intensely varietal Shiraz displays ripe strawberry and blackberry fruit and is subtly framed with American and French oak”.

Of more concern, though, are statements like this one on the back label of Mount Langi Ghiran Billy Billi Pinot Grigio 2009, “Mount Langi Ghiran has been a pioneer for cool climate wines in Australia, and was one of the few wineries to produce Pinot Grigio in the early 90s. The name Billi Billi comes from a creek that runs through the property”. Indeed, but does the wine come from the property? The label implies this, but the appellation South Eastern Australia, embracing most of the southern half of the continent, suggests otherwise. Why leave us guessing? If it’s not from the Grampians region why not just say so?

Then there are the factual errors I associate more with large producers – suggesting communications and winemaking arms aren’t talking to one another. Wynns Coonawarra Estate’s back label is one of the best I’ve seen anywhere and it’s still based on David Wynn’s design from the 1950s. But in recent years the back label map depicts Coonawarra township to the east of the Riddoch Highway. In fact, it’s to the west. The error appears on only some of the Wynns range, including the 2008 Cabernet Shiraz Merlot.

Likewise little inaccuracies blemish the exceptionally informative back label on Jacob’s Creek Reserve Chardonnay Pinot Noir 2007. Message: let the winemakers proofread the labels. They’ll tell us that pinot noir, not chardonnay, contributes structure, while chardonnay gives softness, not structure; and that creamy complexity comes not from secondary fermentation but from maturation on spent yeast cells after fermentation. It’s small stuff, but important to brand credibility in the long run.

The amount of information on back labels varies widely, too – from zero to lord’s-prayer-on-head-of-a-pin stuff. The further up the quality tree a wine sits, the less need there is for a back label. For example, Chateau Margaux, one of Bordeaux’s fabulously expensive ‘first growths’ sports no back label and only a simple front label. Australia’s no-back-label brigade includes Mornington Peninsula’s Main Ridge Estate Half Acre Pinot Noir. But Grange has one, though it didn’t until some time in the late eighties or early nineties. The current one adds little and could arguably be scrapped. The front label tells the story anyway, and Grange buyers don’t need to be told to cellar it for 20 years decant before serving.

But for wordy back labels, an old McLaren Vale producer tops the class. I have d’Arenberg The Twenty Eight Road McLaren Vale Mourvedre 2007 in front of me. The back label runs to around 300 words, set in a condensed font at about six or seven points. So read the label before you drink the wine. It’s packed with information about d’Arenberg, the region, the vineyards and the winemaking. It doesn’t attempt to describe the wine, but it builds anticipation and creates a great sense of place.

A number of other producers, including Margaret River’s Voyager Estate and McLaren Vale’s Pirramimma use helpful, long-copy back labels (but a word of advice to Voyager, please stop using all capitals; they’re even harder to read than d’Arenbergs’s tiny font).

And some, like Stanton and Killeen, adopt a minimalist approach. The back label of their just released The Prince ($45) reads, “Who is the Prince? www.stantonandkilleen.com.au” and the short descriptor, “A dry red blend of estate grown Portuguese grape varieties”. This point-to-the-web approach could work for the growing number of smart phone users – encouraging wineries to write concise back labels supported by the whole story online.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2010

Mourvedre — venerable survivor

The release this month of an extraordinary red, Hewitson 1853 Old Garden Barossa Valley Mourvedre 2008 ($69), begs the question, what is mourvedre? There’s not a lot of it grown in Australia – in 2008 just 785 hectares, mostly in the Barossa Valley – yet it’s survived here for almost two hundred years. And even if we’ve not heard of it, we’ve almost certainly enjoyed mourvedre (aka mataro), acknowledged or not in red blends or as an anonymous component in Australian “port”.

Descriptions of mourvedre contradict one another. Can it really be soft and fruity but also tannic and iron-hard; both low in acid with little colour and searingly acidic and opaque? The answer appears to be yes. Consider these contrasting accounts of Spanish and Australian mourvedre/monastrell/mataro from Jancis Robinson’s The Oxford Companion to Wine and Rolf Binder’s Veritas Winery website.

Jancis Robinson: “The wine produced from monastrell’s small, sweet, thick-skinned berries tends to be heady stuff, high in alcohol, tannins and a somewhat gamey almost animal flavour”.  Rolf Binder: “A mataro berry is about 1.5 times larger than a shiraz berry so bleeding off juice increases the juice to skin ratio” – in short, Binder bleeds juice off to increase extraction of tannin and colour, something his Spanish peers don’t’ need to do.

Robinson also writes that in southern France “mourvedre is considered an improving structural ingredient – a sort of vinous RSJ” – suggesting its firm tannins give the backbone lacking in the companion varieties, shiraz, grenache and cinsault.

Dean Hewitson offers two possible reasons for southern French mourvedre’s comparative toughness. The first, and most likely, he believes, is that varieties are mixed in the vineyard in the Rhone Valley but they ripen at different times. Therefore if a grower harvests a vineyard when the grenache is ripe, the mourvedre will be unripe, with hard tannins.

The second, is that the devastation of European vineyards by phylloxera in the late nineteenth century may have resulted in significant clonal differences between Australia and Europe. Barossa plantings are all pre-phylloxera and may be “clonally softer in tannin”, suggests Hewitson.

Because mourvedre buds and ripens very late, it needs plenty of late season heat. Little wonder, then, that it’s at home in the hot Barossa and Spain, but pushes only into southern France, and even there can struggle to ripen. (Follow a Rolf Binder 100-year-old Barossa bush-vine mourvedre from budburst to harvest to vinification at www.rolfbinder.com/index_alt.php?cmi=6001).

In Australia as in France and Spain, mourvedre plays mainly a support role to other varieties, historically for “port” and increasingly for red table wine. In the mid eighties the so-called Rhone Rangers led the Barossa revival of grenache-shiraz-mourvedre blends. This group, including Charlie Melton, Rocky O’Callaghan and Bob McLean, took the unique beauty of the Barossa’s very old vines to the world.

Mourvedre played a key role in their blends. But they weren’t the first to gain recognition, as Penfolds Shiraz Mataro Bin 2, made from 1960, remained popular until its discontinuation in the seventies. It was resurrected in 1980 and 1981, then discontinued and the remainder shipped to the UK. Production of Bin 2, now labelled as shiraz mourvedre, commenced again in 1990.

In The Rewards of Patience, edition four, 2000, Penfolds claims Bin 2 opened the UK market to Australian wine, “Originally, Bin 2 was a result of experimental work on the medium-bodied, soft-finishing ‘Australian Burgundy’ style, traditionally based on shiraz. The addition of mourvedre may also explain Bin 2’s success with British wine drinkers, as this variety has the effect of moderating the richness of shiraz, making the wine leaner and more European in both style and structure”.

Mourvedre seems set to continue its supporting role to shiraz and grenache. But Hewitson and Binder have both made jaw-dropping straight varietals as thrilling as any red on the market.

However, Dean Hewitson cautions, “It’s a matter of understanding when it’s a blending grape and when it’s not to blend”. He sources mourvedre from a dozen or so vineyards across the Barossa, several of them more than a century old, but still uses it principally as a blender, “to add complexity to Miss Harry [his grenache, shiraz, mourvedre, cinsault blend] and dimension to Ned and Henry’s [shiraz with a splash of mourvedre]”.

He adds that mourvedre’s not as forgiving a variety as shiraz or cabernet and it needs to be from a very special site – typically in sandy soils – to stand on its own.

Hewitson made his first straight varietal in 1998 from eight rows of mourvedre vines, remnants of a larger vineyard planted by Friedrich Koch in 1853, near the North Para River at Roland Flat, Southern Barossa. The vines are direct descendents of the collection brought to Australia by James Busby in1832.

Those remaining vines, he says, witnessed all the fads and fashions of the Australian wine industry, from fortified to table wine, and even contributed fruit to Orlando Carrington Blush bubbly in the eighties.

The mourvedre plantings had been more extensive, but the Koch family replaced them progressively with more fashionable varieties until Hewitson contracted the last eight rows in 1998.

From 1996 Hewitson propagated new vineyards using cuttings from the best of the old vines. These gradually increased the volume of mourvedre available for blending and, after ten years, contributed fruit to a second straight mourvedre, Baby Bush.

Hewitson believes we’ll see more straight mourvedre in the near future. He suspects recent sales of Baby Bush and Old Garden to fellow Barossa makers to be for benchmarking their own products.

We’ll have to wait and see. But even if more flow into the market, it’ll be a tiny volume. Mourvedre accounts for less than one per cent of Australia’s red plantings, and these vines produce only six to seven thousand tonnes of grapes a year.

Production may be small, but it’s a key variety, a great blender, sensational on its own on occasion and now, I’m told, the best grapes fetch very high prices. In the Barossa this means a small army of makers, many of them quite small, hunting down those very special, very old parcels.

Mourvedre will remain a niche variety. But it won’t remain anonymous. Watch for a review of Hewitson Old Garden in my Sunday Top Drops column.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2010

Antinori comes to Canberra

In 1385 Tuscany’s Antinori family commenced winemaking, Giovanni di Bicci de Medici, founder of the famous dynasty, turned 25 and Columbus hadn’t been born, let alone set sail. And given the squabbles on the peninsula, the notion of a unified Italy might’ve been less imaginable to a fourteenth century Florentine than a fabulous new world across the sea.

Indeed, the new world came and flourished long before Italy united. By the time Tuscany escaped Austrian rule and joined a united Italy in 1860, the American republic was 84 years old and Europe’s winemaking traditions, mainly French and German, had taken root on the planet’s oldest continent.

In 1849, as Antinori celebrated 464 years in the wine trade, an Englishman, Samuel Smith, founded Yalumba wines in the Barossa Valley. One hundred and thirty five years later, Robert Hill-Smith, Smith’s fifth generation descendent, established Negociants Australia – Yalumba’s import and wholesale arm. Hill-Smith included Antinori in his list of imports (now managed by 26th generation Piero Antinori).

Hill-Smith was Yalumba’s marketing manager at the time and driving the company’s modernisation. A year later he became managing director and five years later, with his brother Sam, bought out the other family shareholders.

It was a time of great turmoil in the industry. The end of retail price maintenance ten years earlier had unleashed a competitive wave that drove industry consolidation as producers struggled for market share and margin in a glutted market.

Producer consolidation in turn drove retail consolidation, a process that continues today, delivering Coles and Woolworths ever-greater market power. Retail consolidation then forced more producer consolidation. In conjunction with a currency-driven collapse in exports and overproduction, this consolidation continues to destroy value across the Australian wine industry.

Across these turbulent years, though, Hill-Smith focussed on his brands and along with other larger family owned companies, including Tyrrell’s, Brown Brothers, McWilliams and De Bortoli, gained market share as once-great brand names languished.

In this stable environment, with the long-term focus essential in the wine industry, Yalumba’s wine quality increased steadily. In every market segment they occupy, their quality is as good as it gets – and this includes traditional styles as well the alternative varieties now being pursued.

The Antinori story may be older, but its modern achievements share much with Yalumba’s – patience, innovation and a focus on quality, built from the vineyard up. As trading partners they’re a good match.

Antinori’s modern reputation intertwines with the creation of the so-called ‘super Tuscans’ in the early seventies. In 1971 Antinori thumbed its nose at Italy’s wine classification system. It voluntarily downgraded its flagship Tignanello from “Chianti Classico Riserva” to mere “table wine”.

By adding cabernet to the blend, they’d breached the Chianti Classico rules. However, Tignanello proved to be a great wine and word-of-mouth marketing quickly took it to the world, creating a new genre of Chianti spin-offs – blending classic Bordeaux varieties with the indigenous sangiovese grape. (In 1991 I enjoyed a bottle of the original 1971 Tignanello at a restaurant in the Tuscan town of Tavernelle. It was still drinking beautifully).

But the Antinoris didn’t drop “Chianti Classico” altogether. Indeed, they’ve polished the quality to extraordinary heights – and expanded their range into the nearby appellation of Brunello di Montalcino and to the coastal Bolgheri region.

Twenty-six years after Robert Hill-Smith established Negociants Australia, Piero Antinori’s godson, Jacopo Pandolini, arrived in Canberra, pulling the corks on the latest Antinori vintages for a trade tasting at Italian and Sons, Braddon.

They were jaw dropping, thrillingly good. Few single-maker lines ups in the world could match this range for drinking pleasure.

Peppoli Chianti Classico 2006 $32.90
This is the modern face of Chianti and a salute to the fruity wines of the new world. A little syrah (shiraz) and merlot in the blend, a touch of American oak, sweetens the aroma and fattens out the palate a little (sangiovese, the base wines, can be very austere). An enjoyable wine, but if you’re used to traditional Chianti, you might find Peppoli a little too “new world”.

Badia a Passignano Chianti Classico Riserva 2005 $62
This is a single-vineyard wine from the 325-hectare Badia a Passignano estate, purchased by the Antinoris in 1987. Rare for Chianti, it’s 100 per cent sangiovese. – a selection of the best berries, picked late in the season at full ripeness. It’s a beautiful Chianti Classico, austere, bone dry and elegant, with a delicious core of ripe, sweet fruit.

Pian delle Vigne Brunello di Montalcino 2001 $92
This is another 100 per cent sangiovese, sourced from Antinori’s Pian delle Vigne estate, six kilometres south of the town of Montalcino. In a word, it’s stunning – elegant, fine, ethereal. A great wine from a great vintage.

Tignanello 2006 $125
This blend of 85 per cent sangiovese, 10 per cent cabernet sauvignon and five per cent cabernet franc from the Tignanello estate seems soft and juicy in comparison to the straight sangioveses. The cabernets have a big impact on the aroma, flavour and structure – a wine that’s still firm in the scheme of things, but elegant and refined. A distinctive and utterly seductive wine.

Tenuta Guado al Tasso Bolgheri $115
This is a cabernet sauvignon, merlot syrah blend from Bolgheri, on the Tuscan coast. It’s fragrant and sweet fruited, driven by cabernet’s ripe-berry character, and elegantly structured. The sweet fruit flavour lingers on and on.

Solaia 2004 $420
Solaia combines cabernet sauvignon (75 per cent) and cabernet franc (five per cent) and sangiovese (20 per cent) sourced from the top blocks of the Tignanello vineyard. It reverses the Tignanello blend, putting cabernet to the fore, although it doesn’t dominate. This is a powerful, taut wine. But the solid tannins work harmoniously with the intense, fine fruit flavours. It’s another great wine ¬and built for long-term cellaring.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2010

Little Bridge partner buys Canberra’s historic Brooks Creek Vineyard

One of Canberra’s oldest vineyards is about to make a comeback under the Little Bridge Wines banner. In December last year Stephen Dowton, one of the Little Bridge partners, bought Brooks Creek Vineyard, at Bywong, from George Brownbill.

The 2.8-hectare vineyard includes a block of mourvedre, and possibly other survivors of the original 4-hectare vineyard planted there in 1973 by Max Blake, a research officer at the John Curtin School of Medical Research. In Wines of the Canberra District, Brian Johnston reports Blake had previously planted a trial block of 100 vines near Bungendore in 1968 — three years before Drs Riek and Kirk established vineyards at Lake George and Murrumbateman in 1971.

I recall tasting wines, including mourvedre, at the vineyard with Blake in the late eighties. At the time the vineyard was known as “Shingle House”.  Later it became “Brooks Creek” and ownership passed to the Brownbill family (probably in 1992, Dowton believes).

The partners intend restoring Brooks Creek vineyard to full production over the next three or four years. It’ll then be the third vineyard contributing fruit to the Little Bridge label. The other two are John Leyshon’s 2-hectare Mallaluka vineyard, at Dog Trap Road, Murrumbateman, and Roland Clark’s 2-hectare Folly Run vineyard at Butmaroo, southeast of Bungendore.

Roland Clark says he and the other three partners – Stephen Dowton, John Jeffrey and John Leyshon – kicked off the Little Bridge venture in 1996. “You could say we were a fishing group – a men’s drinking club that went wrong”. Fourteen years later, they continue to make major decisions over drinks – generally on an annual trip to the Clark family farm near Bega.

In fourteen years they’ve done everything from scratch – establishing vine rootlings, planting vineyards and making and selling wine – even designing the wine label. They grew the original cuttings at a farm, since sold by Stephen Dowton, on Dicks Creek Road, Murrumbateman. Cuttings from these later populated Clark’s Butmaroo vineyard.

Partner John Leyshon makes the red wines at his Mallaluka property Murrumbateman. But the Carpenters make the Little Bridge pinot noir at Lark Hill from grapes grown on Clark’s Folly Run vineyard – one of the highest in the district, at 860 metres above sea level. And the whites are made by Greg Gallagher and Rob Howell at Canberra Winemakers, a contract production facility located at Jeir Creek Wines, Murrumbateman.

The three Little Bridge vineyards, totalling about seven hectares, produce an unusually wide range of varieties for such a small holding – riesling, chardonnay, merlot, pinot noir, cabernet sauvignon, shiraz, sangiovese and mourvedre; and a couple of hats full each of gamay, petit verdot and malbec.

Whether the partners maintain the diversity remains to be seen. But at least the minor varieties can be blended with others (for example, mourvedre with shiraz; or malbec with cabernet). As well, we can expect the varieties to perform differently at the three unique sites. Over time this may lead to specialisation, especially as the three vineyards feed into one brand.

But as greater volumes come on stream, Little Bridge will benefit by paying serious attention to wine quality. Very small makers hand selling wine might get away with making middle of the road wines. But to build a reputation and really prosper, mediocrity won’t do. The district’s reputation rests on the outstanding wines, led to date by shiraz and riesling.

The acquisition of Brooks Creek also gives Little Bridge a cellar door – the physical presence it needs to reach the public. The partners say they’re launching Little Bridge at Brooks Creek on mother’s day, Sunday 9 May, with wine, food and music from 12.30pm to 6.00pm.

Here’s a run down on the current Little Bridge offerings:

Little Bridge Canberra District Riesling 2008 $20
A bright, fresh riesling with ripe, citrus-like varietal aroma and flavour. It’s soft and easy drinking, but the flavours are a touch mature for a riesling this young. Drink up.

Little Bridge Canberra District Riesling 2009 $20
A vibrant, floral-scented riesling, quite intensely flavoured but delicate. A significant step up from the 2008

Little Bridge Canberra District Pinot Noir 2009 $26
Made at Lark Hill using fruit from the 860-metre Folly Run vineyard. To my taste it’s the best made of the Little Bridge reds. It smells and tastes of pinot, albeit at the leafier end of the spectrum, and has the texture, too.

Little Bridge Canberra District Sangiovese 2008 $15
Little Bridge Canberra District Shiraz 2008 $20
Little Bridge Canberra District Cabernet Sauvignon 2008 $20

I noted blemishes in these three reds that made them unpalatable to me.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2010

When wines push our buttons

YouTube could be onto something. They revamped their website recently, paring the five-star user-rating system back to a stark “like/dislike” choice for content. It seems that under the old system most voting viewers hit the five star button, only a handful voted one star and just about no one voted in between. Overwhelmingly, viewers liked or disliked what they saw. Is it any different for wine drinkers? Do we simply like or dislike wines? Should reviewers follow YouTube to a thumbs-up or thumbs-down approach?

Hugh Johnson, one of the world’s most popular wine writers – and an admitted “relativist” – might be a supporter. After judging at the Royal Sydney Wine Show some years back he commented, “I judge wine by loving it or hating it and there’s not much in between. I love vitality in a wine, the sort of wine where one bottle is not enough. So giving wines points creates a spurious sense of accuracy and if you can believe it means something when someone gives a wine 87 points out of 100, then you would believe anything.”

But Johnson’s subtle approach won’t help everyone, notwithstanding his elegant, meaningful wine descriptions. Faced by thousands of wine labels, most of us become confused and insecure when buying wine. Little wonder then that we seek direction. For example, endorsements – such as awards, reviews and ratings from trusted, disinterested experts – give us direction and security. These ratings tend to be expressed in stars, points or show awards.

As a lapsed retailer I’ve seen gold medals and trophies boost sales. But buyers care nought for silver and bronze medallists – winemakers shouldn’t bother putting them on labels. Paralleling YouTube, gold medals and trophies become the “like” button for some drinkers.

Largely through the influence of American critic Robert M. Parker, many critics now use a 100-point rating system – although the five-star scale survives and a 20-point scale dominates Australia’s wine show system (15.5 equals bronze; 17.0 equals silver; 18.5 equals gold – however, the public seldom sees the scores, just the medals).

Even if we agree with Hugh Johnson that scores out of 100 give a spurious sense of accuracy, it’s hard not to accept that critics need some sort of rating scale and that whatever we use ought to give meaningful help to drinkers. If scores can’t describe wine styles they should at least reflect the relative quality of wines.

Wine shows build this principle into their medal-rating systems – and drill it into trainee wine judges. The first message an associate judge hears is, if you like a wine give it a high score; if you don’t like it give it a low score; if you think it’s middle of the road give it a middling score; if you thinks it’s seriously faulty, give it a very low score – in short, let your scores reflect the quality.

But the 100-scale rating system seems to push sales towards wines scoring 90 points or more – perhaps the YouTube phenomenon again. But, confusingly, critics seem to use very little of the 100-point scale.

In a recent advertising catalogue, the Dan Murphy tasting panel awarded 92 points to a $16 Cotes-du-Rhone and 94 points to a $60 Chateauneuf-du-Pape. Despite the price gape, that’s a plausible quality difference – a well-made Cotes-du-Rhone could equal or better a mediocre Chateauneuf-du-Pape

But I’d recently tried both wines and noted a big quality gap. They’re made by reputable Rhone Valley producer, Michel Chapoutier, and imported by Dan Murphy. One was a rich, rustic, slightly rough but enjoyable country wine; the other fragrant, subtle, silky and elegant – a classy example of a much abused appellation. As Johnson says, scores can’t be precise; but they shouldn’t mislead us and they ought, at least, reflect relative quality. On a 100-point scale, that’d be more like 75 for the Cotes-du-Rhone and 90 for the Chateauneuf-du-Pape.

As wine drinkers we quickly decide our likes and dislikes. But I suspect we have more than two buttons. If we’re interested in our wines, we invariably like some more than others. And the more we explore wine and the wider the range we drink, the more likely we are to develop complex rating systems in our minds.

When we head down this track, someone else’s score means less than a clear description – a note written in plain English, describing a wine’s provenance, style, and an opinion on where it rates within that style. This gets closer to the Johnson relativist view, and it opens the door to increased drinking pleasure.

While rating systems can be useful sources of information, they’re best taken with a grain of salt – and not used as Navmans that keep us on the narrow 90-point, gold-medal, five-star path.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2010

Nick O’Leary carves a Canberra niche

You don’t have to own vineyards or a winery to make your own wine. Ask Nick O’Leary, owner of one of Canberra’s hot new brands. You’ll find his wines on Canberra retail shelves and wine lists. But there’s no winery and no cellar door, just a web site (www.nickolearywines.com.au). And even that bears a ‘sold out’ sign.

Little wonder there’s no wine left, though, given the quality O’Leary achieved so quickly and the accolades that followed. These include rave reviews from Australia’s leading commentators, and an impressive string of awards at reputable wines shows – four gold medals for the current-release 2008 shiraz and a gold and two trophies for the 2009 riesling. Though sold out on O’Leary’s website, both can be found in stores and wine lists around town.

So what propels a newcomer so decisively into the limelight? The answer lies in careful fruit sourcing, attentive winemaking and sound judgement. Clearly, by the quality of his wines, O’Leary knew what varieties to use, where to source top-notch grapes and how to convert them to medal-winning wines. How come he knew all this at a tender 26 years?

Like his mentor and mate, Alex McKay, O’Leary worked at Kamberra Winery until late 2006 when Constellation Wines Australia (formerly BRL Hardy) sold up and made him redundant. But by then he’d served his winemaking apprenticeship under McKay, starting in 2003 as a cellar hand and working through the ranks to cellar supervisor then vintage assistant winemaker, running night shift for the whites.
O’Leary says he’d always wanted to be a winemaker and when Constellation left town he decided to stay on and build his own Canberra brand. By the end of 2006 a good grounding in winemaking made the decision natural. As well, he understood Canberra’s strengths and knew where to source good grapes.

He says, “Hardys gave me a good exposure to new technology and new techniques. I gained a good overview of wine and from where we were, we had a good ear to the ground”. And as well as making wine, O’Leary tasted widely and continues to do so. “I drink a lot with Alex and others who are not winemakers”, he says, finding inspiration in German riesling and “I love rieslings from the Clare and Eden Valleys”.

He and McKay assembled enough good shiraz from the 2006 vintage to blend and launch their own Nick O’Leary and Collector labels in 2007.
Then in vintage 2007, O’Leary bought about 10 tonnes of riesling and shiraz from growers he’d worked with during the Kamberra years, making the wine at Affleck Winery, owned by his in-laws, Ian and Susie Hendry.

The wines hit the mark immediately, largely attributable, says O’Leary, to the grape quality. He sources these principally from Wayne and Jennie Fischer’s Nanima Vineyard, Murrumbateman, but buys as well from Mike and Denise McKenzie’s Murrumbateman vineyard and from Wallaroo Vineyard, Hall.

These growers all understand the connection between fruit quality and wine quality, O’Leary explains. They’re prepared to do the hard work of shoot thinning and crop thinning – essential in getting crop levels just right, maximising flavour and balance. O’Leary works closely with his growers, “spending lots of time in the vineyard, especially just before harvest”, he says.

O’Leary and McKay maintained their connection after leaving Kamberra. In 2007 both joined the Karelas family at Lake George. They embarked on a major rejuvenation of the vineyard and made wine there in 2007, 2008 and 2009 – initially in Dr Edgar Riek’s original winery, then in the larger cellars next door after the Karelas family acquired David Madew’s property. The two left Lake George in late 2009.

But the Collector and Nick O’Leary labels live on. And they’re about to be joined by a joint brand to be launched in May or June. The initial wine, says O’Leary, is a 2009 vintage Canberra shiraz, likely to sell at a modest $18 a bottle. It’ll be joined later by chardonnay and pinot noir, both from the 2010 vintage. While these will be from Canberra, O’Leary anticipates sourcing future material from Tumbarumba as the cooler climate there better suits these varieties.

And what’s in store from Nick O’Leary wines in 2010? He says, “It was a challenging vintage. I haven’t seen one like this with rain towards the end of harvest”. But there’ll still be good wines from good producers, O’Leary says. In general whites came in ripe at lower sugar levels than usual and made sound, delicate wines. The reds “are not as robust as the 2009s, but they’re balanced. Whether they’ll live as long, I don’t know”.

We’ll see O’Leary’s 2010 riesling in a few months. And the 2009 shiraz should be a cracker when it’s released later this year. The riesling will sell at about $25 and the shiraz at $28.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2010