I’m writing from the Mornington Peninsula, an area viewed by local vignerons as the heart of Australia’s pinot noir country. They’ve adopted pinot as their signature variety. And in a show of unity rare in an Australian wine region they’re taking this single, strong message to the world.

It’s a comparative small wine-growing region, where 61 wineries crush 6,000 tonnes a year of grapes from 940 hectares of vines. But it’s highly specialised as pinot noir accounts for 43 per cent (2,576 tonnes) of that output.

To put that in perspective it’s interesting to look at production in other areas specialising in pinot. The output of France’s Cote d’Or region (Burgundy), for example, dwarfs the Mornington figure – pinot accounts for about 45,333 (60 per cent) of the annual 75,333 tonnes crush.

And while the nearby Yarra Valley crushed significantly more pinot than Mornington, it’s 4,200 tonnes represented 22 per cent of the total of 19,000 tonnes – indicating that the Yarra’s far less specialised.

The story changes dramatically, though, when we shift a few degrees south to Tassie, where pinot represents 45 per cent of wine grape production – 1,264 out of 2,807 tonnes. However, much of this is destined for sparkling wine production, not red table wine production. Still Tasmania remains an increasingly important source of top-notch red wine made from pinot noir.

But the most stunning concentration of pinot production in the southern hemisphere is in New Zealand’s Central Otago region at 45 degrees south. Last year’s pinot production of 7,509 tonnes represented 80 per cent of the area’s 9,495 tonne harvest.

And in America, Oregon’s Willamette Valley vignerons processed 17,463 tonnes of pinot in a total crush of 25,869 tonnes.

Part of the marketing push by the Mornington Peninsula Vignerons Association is the annual International Pinot Noir Celebration, a two-day symposium and tasting, attended this year by about 170  wine industry folk and writers from around the world and a sprinkling of die-hard pinot drinkers.

They’re all pinot nuts and opinion makers, drawn there by the range and quality of wines up for tasting (not just from Mornington) — and discussions, led by some of the best Australian, New Zealand, French, American and Canadian winemakers and writers.

This year’s tastings included wine from France’s Burgundy region, California’s Anderson Valley and Oregon’s Willamette Valley in the United States, Chile’s San Antonio Valley, the Okanagan Valley in Canada’s British Columbia and several Victorian, Tasmanian and New Zealand regions.

But at the opening of the Celebration, keynote speaker Jancis Robinson, suggested a few surprise pinot-producing regions that might be included in future tastings.

These could include wines from Ontario – once too cold for grape growing, but not any longer – and perhaps some from Austria, Switzerland and Germany. The Germans, she said, are “mad about pinot noir”, known there as spätburgunder.

It’s now Germany’s second most planted variety after riesling, she said, and some of them are very good. She’d recently attended a tasting of very old German spätburgunders and French Burgundies (1920s to 1950s vintages) in the twelfth century Kloster Eberbach. The German wines fared reasonably well, she said, and some of the 1940s vintages looked more youthful than the Burgundian classics.

Jancis said she viewed the world’s growing interest in pinot as a search for lighter, more refreshing wines. She then moved on to the event’s theme – does good pinot result from nature or nurture – to be addressed in a series of masked tastings.

Over the next few weeks we’ll look at these and review a range of very different and very exciting pinot noirs.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2009

Sauvignon Blanc. Kath and Kym call it sauvignon plonk. Others call it cat’s pee. Over a glass or two, someone commented that it tasted like it’d been drunk before. The late Len Evans listed it with goat’s cheese among his pet hates. And England’s wine luminary, Jancis Robinson, once wrote that its ranking amongst the world’s nine ‘classic’ varieties came only because of its ‘divine combination with semillon in parts of Bordeaux’.

But whether you call it cat’s pee or dog’s nectar it’s now our biggest selling white wine style. Sauvignon blanc pipped chardonnay by 23.5 million litres to 22.5 million litres in the year to September 2008, according to AC Nielsen figures cited by Jeni Port in the Sydney Morning Herald on 25 January.

While wine show judges almost invariably find sauvignon classes disappointing, populated by weedy, tart wines, sprinkled with one or two juicy highlights. Despite all the sauvignon put downs, Aussie drinkers love the variety – notably as a straight varietal from Marlborough, New Zealand or, from Margaret River, Western Australia, blended with semillon.

Almost twenty years ago, Jancis Robinson wrote “Sauvignon blanc produces wines for our times: white, dry, refreshingly zesty, aggressively recognisable and ready to drink almost before the presses have been hosed down after the vintage”. Her words seem even more on the money now than they did in 1986.

And the word from retailers and producers throughout this decade was that sauvignon blanc and blends were the fastest growing segment in the domestic wine market. As far back as April 2004, national retailer, Vintage Cellars (part of the then Coles Myer Group) reported that sauvignon blanc constituted just one twenty fifth of Australia’s grape crush but represented one sixth of its white wine sales.

This suggested a dash into sauvignon blanc by Australia’s keenest wine drinkers. Even if New Zealand led the way the sustained growth in sauvignon blanc demand showed up, too, at Australia’s grape crushers. In 2002 we harvested 28, 567 tonnes of it. But that had increased to 43,107 tonnes in 2004 and to 66,267 tonnes in 2008 – suggesting many hectares of plantings coming on stream to meet rising demand.

So why the rise in popularity of sauvignon blanc? I suspect it’s the exciting quality of straight varietals from Marlborough and blends from Western Australia delivering what Jancis described 20 years ago, “dry, refreshingly zesty, aggressively recognisable and ready to drink almost before the presses have been hosed down”.

It seems that sauvignon blanc has found its niche as a fruity, zesty undemanding white well suited to our warm climate and casual dining habits – capturing what might have been riesling’s role. Alas, poor riesling.

Twenty years ago with a stronger Aussie dollar and a dearth of local material, the most loved sauvignons were those imported from Pouilly and Sancerre at the eastern end of France’s Loire Valley. Magically fruity with a minerally, bone dry finish, they reigned until international demand and a weakening dollar pushed them out of reach.

Domestic sauvignons, at the time, came from mainly warm areas and were often made in the ‘fume blanc’ style pioneered by Robert Mondavi in California. These attracted momentary attention but were by and large over oaked and lacking varietal flavour.

By the mid eighties Australians had begun to enjoy the first in-your-face Marlborough sauvignon blancs. These offered pungent, capsicum-like aromas and flavours in tandem with high natural acidity – the product of Marlborough’s very cool climate, a pre condition for good sauvignon.

A quarter of a century on and Marlborough’s the world capital of sauvignon, having spread from a few vineyards at the southern cooler side of the Wairau valley to the warmer northern side and to the even cooler Awatere Valley, over the Wither Hills to the south.

The resulting diversity of sites, viticultural practice and winemaking preferences means a great diversity of Marlborough styles today. In general that means zesty, fresh, well-defined varietal flavours. But the varietal spectrum varies from the riper citrus and tropical fruit character of warmer sites to the old in-your-face capsicum-like ones.

Australian sauvignon blanc hasn’t found its Marlborough yet. But it has found a comfortable home in the Adelaide Hills. Like Marlborough the Adelaide Hills region is far from homogenous climatically. But selected sites do bring home the bacon.

And at Margaret River in the west, where sauvignon blanc seldom makes it on its own, semillon steps in to fatten out the mid palate and add a lovely citrus note without detracting from the racy freshness of sauvignon blanc.
These range from ever popular ‘classic dry white’ styles like those from Evans & Tate and others at modest prices to the seamless glory of Cullens or Cape Mentelle Sauvignon Blanc Semillon (among others) – in the Bordeaux style praised by Jancis Robinson.

With a few exceptions like the Cullens wine, though, these are wines to chill, quaff and enjoy by the bucketful. Then back up for the new vintage as soon it hits the shelves.

This very big swing in popular taste, however, spells trouble for local chardonnay growers, especially in the face of collapsing export demand.

But the Kiwi sauvignon blanc growers won’t have it all their way either.  The amazing twenty-year boom appears to be at an end.  The variety now accounts for two thirds of all whites produced in New Zealand.

But economic weakness in its biggest export markets, Britain, Australia and America (in that order), combined with rising production, suggests that prices will fall this year. Retailers expect the price of branded Marlborough sauvignon blanc to decline and that we’ll see a rising number of bargain-basement clean skins from the region.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2009

Dear Santa,

Thanks so much for your letter. We’re really pleased that you can make the Chateau Shanahan Boxing Day lunch. And thanks, too, for offering to bring the wine. As promised, I’ve put the wine list together, including prices and where to buy.

Thanks, especially, for offering to visit those nice Krug people in Reims on your way south. But we won’t need their new $5,000-a-bottle, Clos d‘Ambonnay Champagne after all.

I’ve found a cheaper alternative that ought to be very close to it in quality. Like the Krug it’s also sourced from old pinot noir vines in Ambonnay – and it’s also barrel fermented and bottle aged for many years. But it costs only $140 – so we can get three-dozen bottles for the same budget. Perhaps you could stay for dinner, too?

The Champagne’s called Egly-Ouriet Grand Cru Blanc de Noirs Grand Cru Vieilles Vignes NV. Just call Bibendum Wine Company on 03 8415 0070 for the pick-up address in Melbourne.

I can’t think of a lovelier starter, Santa – just imagine all the freshness and delicacy of Champagne but with the amazing flavour and power of top-notch pinot noir.

It’ll be a hard act to follow. But we’ll try. We’re air freighting half a dozen live crayfish from Robe, South Australia. They’re firm fleshed and luxurious and a great match with fine-boned, equally luxurious chardonnay.

I thought originally of white Burgundy – a Corton Charlemagne or Le Montrachet. But since the Krug visit’s off, you might as well skip France and pick up a bottle of Penfolds Yattarna Chardonnay 2005 here in Canberra.

It’s as good as any chardy I’ve tasted this year and has that nice bit of bottle age that the best wines need. It’ll cost about $150.

The duck and mushroom main course calls for a juicy, soft, earthy wine – something supple, smooth and elegant. Cool-climate shiraz is a possibility. But pinot’s the classic match and there’s a beauty down on the Mornington Peninsula.

If you visit Nat and Rosalie White at Main Ridge Estate, they should be able to fix you up with a few bottles of Half Acre Pinot Noir 2006 at $62 each. This is a beautiful Aussie pinot. And could you ask Nat to reserve a couple of 2007s for next year? There’s not much of it, but it’s sensational. Best to look at www.mre.com.au for the details.

After all that, Santa, I reckon we might enjoy summer pudding with a new round of Egly-Ouriet Champers.

Merry Christmas from all at Chateau Shanahan.

Copyright  © Chris Shanahan 2008

Predictions are generally wrong, sometimes dramatically so, as 2008 proved for the wine industry. An expected end to the wine glut was stymied by two unrelated forces – a bumper grape crop and a dramatic decline in exports.

The bumper crop caught the industry by surprise, prompting a press release from the Winemakers Federation of Australia. The 1.83 million crop, they said, ‘was almost double some early predictions’.

Veteran commentator, James Halliday, attributed Foster’s write down in the value of its bulk wine stocks to the large harvest, adding that it had left ‘all the major companies floating in a sea of excess chardonnay’.

Meanwhile exports had been hammered by our strong dollar and a mood swing in our major markets as the credit crisis bit. After a decade and a half of steadily rising volumes, Australia’s year on year exports to August 2008 declined by 103 million litres.

At the same time domestic sales of Australian wine declined by about 21 million litres. And on the back of a strong dollar, imports reached an historic high of 53.3 million litres (representing 11.1 per cent of domestic sales) in the year to June 2008.

Presumably the collapse of our dollar in the second half of the year might restrain imports and boost exports – although there’s no sign of the latter in export approvals for the year to October. They were down by 113 million litres on the previous year.

However, there’s anecdotal evidence of a turnaround, albeit tempered by tough economic conditions in the UK and USA, our two biggest export markets. Word is that British supermarkets in particular are looking to squeeze extra profit from the situation while meeting local demand for ever lower wine prices.

Turmoil in our local industry, particularly in the actions of two of our biggest producers, Foster’s and Constellation Wines Australia (CWAU), seem to be driving a hurricane of rumours in 2008, including several predicting either the demise of wine casks or the exit of some major producers from the segment.

But, as they say, rumours of their death are greatly exaggerated. Wine casks are too important to die. In the year to June 2008, they accounted for 48 per cent of locally made wine consumed in Australia – 37 per cent of the red and rosé total and 54 per cent of whites.

The rumours grew partly from a report by Citigroup Analysts predicting that two major producers, including CWAU, were giving up on casks. But on 13 November, John Grant, President of CWAU, issued a press release denying the report.

Grant said that casks were a ‘significant component’ of CWAU’s business and that his company had ‘no intention of withdrawing from the category’.

However, a source from one of our two major retail chains told me that CWAU was ‘not actively promoting casks’ and that this would lead inevitably to a decline in volumes.

This same source predicted that another major producer really would exit the market next year – but that privately owned De Bortoli, already a major soft-pack player, would probably seize the opportunity to expand. The cask will live.

The rumours about CWAU reflect its dramatic shift in focus from beverage wines, to regional specialisation, driven by its new boss John Grant and sanctioned, no doubt, by the American owners.

The strategy dovetails with Australia’s new official export thrust – moving from a simple ‘Brand Australia’ to a focus on our specialised wine regions. It’ll be a long haul, because the world seems barely aware of names like Coonawarra, Barossa or Margaret River.

But the regional push is where value lies for producers and where drinkers will find the best quality. Fortunately for Australia, the regional theme is no artifice. We have the regions. We have the specialties. And we have the quality. It’s a story that’s been told by our many small, regional producers but not so well by our larger makers.

2008 might therefore be remembered as the year when one of our largest producers, American owned, finally decided that its greatest Australian asset in the long run was the tremendous suite of regional vineyards and brands it owns in Tasmania, Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia – and not its cheaper, cross-regional blends.

A growing regional focus by big makers can only help small makers. Small makers are invariably regional specialists and most of them focus on the Australian market. Their numbers more than doubled in the ten years to 2008, a period in which we’ve seen new quality heights achieved.

2008 goes down in my tasting notes as a year when quality peaked for small makers – a year of highlights, featuring wonderful bubblies, chardonnays, pinot noirs, shirazes, cabernets, semillons and many exotic, new-to-Australia varieties.

It’s also been a year where in mature regions, most notably the Barossa, restless, passionate makers subdivided regional boundaries to individual vineyards and to little plots within vineyards – much as Burgundy’s vignerons have done for a thousand years – to give us the most subtle expressions of shiraz, grenache and mourvedre.

This regional subdivision will be the future for fine wine in Australia. It can be glimpsed now in the better retail stores and it’s reflected even in multi-regional blends that draw on regional specialties to bolster blander components. But to savour all the shades of delight, you need to visit the makers, even virtually, and taste the uniqueness of Canberra shiraz, Mornington pinot noir, Macedon bubbly, Tasmanian chardonnay, Barossa shiraz grenache mourvedre blends, Hunter semillon, Clare riesling, Margaret River or Coonawarra cabernet and dozens of other very fine drops.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2008

There’s something missing from Canberra’s National Wine Show of Australia. It’s touted as the grand final of Australia’s wine show season. But if you look to it as a guide to the best of the best, then you’ll be disappointed. There are gaping holes across most varieties, but particularly in the ranks of sauvignon blanc, chardonnay and pinot noir.

Plugging those holes is a challenge for all wine shows and, to some extent, beyond their control. Shows can’t, for example, coerce a producer to exhibit. And when the maker of a definitive style choses not to, the absence diminishes the benchmarking value of the show – particularly if it’s a regional event. Canberra’s regional show would be enriched, for example, if its organisers could persuade Tim Kirk to enter Clonakilla Shiraz Viognier, Australia’s leading example of its style.

But if the National is to maintain its status, it really needs to entice some of Australia’s and New Zealand’s best small makers to join the fold – particularly those making sauvignon blanc, chardonnay and pinot noir. That’s where I see the biggest gaps among exhibitors and in the honours list.

Make no mistake, the honours list makes an overall exciting shopping list. Who can argue when judges tell us that Tyrrell’s Belford Semillon 2004 is about as good as Aussie semillon gets, or that riesling doesn’t get better than Peter Lehmann Reserve Eden Valley 2002.

These are credible results and gel with long-term experience. And with a few exceptions, the other wines taking awards this year are recognised regional specialties. Just look at this list of trophy winners, noting their varieties and origins (where known):

Leasingham Bin 7 Clare Valley Riesling 2008, Peter Lehmann Reserve Eden Valley Riesling 2002, Hunters Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc, Tyrrell’s Hunter Valley Belford Semillon 2004, Penfolds Reserve Bin A Chardonnay 2007, McWilliams Limited Release Riverina Botrytis Semillon 2006, Hardys Sir James Tumbarumba Cuvee 2000, Goundrey Cabernet Tempranillo 2007, Villa Maria Cellar Selection Marlborough Pinot Noir 2007, Langi Ghiran The Langi Grampians Shiraz 2005, Chateau Reynella McLaren Vale Cabernet Sauvignon 2006, Wyndham Estate George Wyndham Shiraz Grenache 2005, Oranje Tractor Wine Albany Riesling 2003, Morris Rutherglen Premium Liqueur Tokay, Tyrrell’s Hunter Valley Stevens Semillon 2004, Brookland  Valley Margaret River Chardonnay 2005, Evans and Tate The Reserve Margaret River Cabernet Sauvignon 2005 and Balthazar Barossa Valley Shiraz 2005.

When you look into the catalogue of results (you can download it from www.rncas.org.au) you’ll notice that many of the big names are missing from every category. That’s partly understandable. Obviously no single show is likely to feature every notable name in every wine style.

But where the representation was good enough in the National to ensure that top-notch examples won in the riesling and semillon classes, gaps are more apparent in the shiraz, cabernet and sauvignon blanc classes and even more so for chardonnay and pinot noir.

The award winning wines in these classes are extremely good. But what struck me when I looked through, say, the list of pinot noirs was the absence, or under representation, of top regions and top makers.

And their absence raised doubts. Would Villa Maria Reserve Marlborough have won the pinot noir trophy had the judges been able to compare it with the best from Yarra, Mornington, Tasmania, Macedon, Martinborough and Central Otago?

It’s such an important variety that the organisers of the National, known for its innovations, need to address the dearth of top pinots. They might also look at the gaps in other varieties at the same time.

Copyright  © Chris Shanahan 2008

What do wine shows mean? What goes on behind all those white-coated judges we’ve seen recently on TV news – in September’s Canberra Regional Show, October’s International Riesling Challenge and this month’s National Wine Show of Australia?

Who are the judges? What attracts them to serve without pay, not just in our three high-profile local events, but also in the dozens of Aussie and international wine shows, challenges and awards conducted every year?

Can we rely on their judgement? Are the award-winning wines that we buy exactly the same as those tasted by the judges? And does anyone judge the judges? What’s in a wine show for producers? And what’s in it for drinkers?

The answers we get sometimes depend on whom we ask. The late Len Evans, perhaps the most influential figure in modern Australian show judging, believed that wine shows existed primarily to improve the breed – a view consistent with the origin of our wine shows in agricultural societies.

If we ask producers, we’ll get a mixed response. They’ll say they’re in it for the medals, for benchmarking against other wines – or perhaps a combination of both.  Of course, desiring medals and wanting to promote award winners probably enhances the  ‘improving the breed’ argument.

The important question from a drinker’s perspective is the reliability of show results. Do they make a good shopping guide? My answer, with a few caveats, is that the best Aussie shows are pretty good but, as there are anomalies in any one show’s results, a little scepticism is healthy.

Thankfully, Australia’s shows have been free of major scandal and to my knowledge no one has ever been convicted of outright fraud. But there have been rumours in the past, some from good sources, of ‘award winning’ wines being different from the ones tasted by judges.

Aware of the potential damage that such scams might cause, the industry has this decade attempted to boost judging and auditing standards. The move has been driven by a wine show committee established in 2001 by the Australian Society of Viticulture and Oenology.

The committee (chaired by Canberra-based Nick Bulleid MW has made recommendations on audit protocols, the impartiality of judges, trophy judging, wine show standards and how awards should be used. The ASVO also maintains a register of judges giving details of their credentials. This is now a crucial tool for wine show organisers. See www.asvo.com.au/wineshows for more details.

So, who are the judges? They’re mainly winemakers. But in the past decade we’ve seen increasing numbers drawn from the media and the retailing, wholesaling and wine-waiting trades.

While there’s no formal qualification system for judges, there’s an apprenticeship of sorts. Those aspiring to come on board need considerable tasting experience before becoming ‘associate’ judges – assessing wines alongside judges and being mentored and assessed for their ability. Their scores are not counted. The apprenticeship might last for years or for one or two shows, depending on ability.

Aspiring judges these days increase their chance of success by completing the Australian Wine Research Institute’s four day advanced wine assessment course. And their chances rise again if they can win one of the 12 places on offer for the annual Len Evans Tutorial (see www.lenevanstutorial.com.au for details).

Len established the tutorial to give judges and aspiring judges an international perspective and an appreciation of the world’s great wines. Len died two years ago, but the tutorial lives on, guided by his closest disciples. And the ‘scholars’ from past tutorials are now key judges in the major shows.

While the tutorial is clearly a force for good in the show system, it’s not, on its own, going to perfect show judging standards. Perhaps its biggest contribution comes from preaching a global perspective, as Len did. More on wine shows, and the results of the National, next week.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2008

Figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics shed light on our wine-drinking habits and on our performance as a wine-exporting nation. And they make us think beyond the averages, reminding us, as W.I.E. Gates noted, of the man ‘who drowned crossing a stream with an average depth of six inches’.

We know, for example, that we drink about 480 million litres of wine annually, averaging well over 20 litres per capita. But the stats don’t show the spread of consumption through the population. We can only guess, therefore, at where the metaphorical wine stream flows deepest (some people consume 140 to 280 litres a year – half to one bottle a day) or where it flows not at all. As Len Evans once quipped, when he commenced writing about wine in the sixties, Australians drank only a few litres a head – leading him to the conclusion that statistically he’d been consuming the equivalent of a small village at the time.

In another sense, there’s an extraordinary precision in the ABS figures. I’m thirsty even thinking of the 479,732 million litres that we enjoyed in 2007–08. Most of that – 426,421 million litres – came from Aussie makers. But spurred no doubt by the then strong dollar, imports hit a record 11 per cent of the total at 53,311 million litres.

Even with the favourable exchange rate, though, we can see that some exporting countries fared better than our exporters did in their terms of trade. And behind those favourable terms of trade lies the benefits of regional specialisation.

This is well illustrated in the figures from France and New Zealand. In the year to June 2008, we imported a bit over seven million litres of French wine worth $142.9million. That’s equivalent, by my calculation, to $20.16 a litre – and that’s before the addition of wholesale and retail margins. While we don’t have a breakdown of French wines by style, we do know that imports of sparkling wine from all countries averaged $16 a litre. Presumably much of this is France’s great regional specialty Champagne.

The value of French imports is undoubtedly boosted, too, by other high-priced regional classics from Burgundy, Bordeaux and the Rhône Valley.

By far our largest volume of imports in the year, though, were from New Zealand – 23.9million litres worth $209.4million. The average price of $8.77 a litre is more than double the $4.18 per-litre value of our exports to them. With that sort of advantage, they don’t need to win the rugby. Give or take a little high-priced pinot noir, the Kiwi charge was led by sauvignon blanc from Marlborough. This has gone from zero a generation ago (the first vines were planted there in1973) to being one of the world’s great wine specialties.

Indeed, our average price of $3.75 per exported table wine litre compares poorly against Italian and Spanish imports averaging $5.69 and $6.23 per litre respectively. South Africa, though, seems to be our new source of cheap wine with an average price of just $2.19 a litre.

As a nation we prefer local white wine (203.9 million litres) to local reds and rosés (150.2 million litres). But red and rosé drinkers appear to be somewhat fussier than white drinkers. In 2007–08 Chateau Cardboard accounted for 37 per cent of red and rosé sales compared to 54 per cent for whites.

If that’s all a little too dry, I’ll leave you with one more thought, attributed to Mrs Robert A. Taft, ‘I always find that statistics are hard to swallow and impossible to digest. The only one I can remember is that if all the people who go to sleep in church were laid end to end they would be a lot more comfortable’.

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2008

Like Canberra, Victoria’s Macedon region sits high on the Great Dividing Range. It stretches roughly from Gisborne in the south to Baynton in the north; and from Kyneton in the west to Kilmore in the east – very roughly 40 kilometres by 40 kilometres, about half way between Melbourne and Bendigo.

Macedon’s vineyards sit mainly at around 600 metres above sea level, dropping down by a few hundred metres to the north and therefore providing a range of climates – from the icy, southern slopes of Hanging Rock Winery’s Jim Jim vineyard, at just under 700 metres, to the lower, warmer Granite Hills Winery site near Baynton.

The cooler sites, like Jim Jim, produce intense, complex sparkling wines made from pinot noir and chardonnay; while Granite Hills, on the warmer northern fringe of the region makes peppery, fine-boned shiraz.

But shiraz is an outrider now in a region whose sweet spot has shifted decisively to pinot noir and chardonnay – expressed as sparkling wines from the cooler sites and table wine from the warmer sites.
These styles dominated the recent Macedon Ranges Wine Exhibition – the bubblies and pinots in particular putting on a dazzling display.

We judged 18 sparkling wines and awarded 14 medals (three gold, five silver, six bronze) – an extraordinary strike rate of 78 per cent. These were delicious wines showing the full spectrum of bubbly styles.

The most delicate were a pair of sparkling chardonnays from Mount William – a beautifully fresh, fine version from the 2001 vintage and the more complex and mature 1998. These are hard to find but worth trying. See www.mtwilliamwinery.com.au

The more traditional sparkling pinot noir chardonnay blends varied in style from the intense and taut Macedon Ridge Chardonnay Pinot Noir 2004 to the idiosyncratic, deep, rich, mature Hanging Rock Macedon Cuvée VIII LD.

And our top sparkler was the brilliant Hanging Rock Brut Rosé NV – made from estate-grown pinot noir. It’s as good as this style gets in Australia and offers great value at $27 cellar door – see www.hangingrock.com.au

The chardonnay class produced a lower medal strike rate (52 per cent) but included some appealing, complex, barrel-fermented styles, including gold medallists Cobaw Ridge 2007 (www.cobawridge.com.au) and Lanes End 2005 (phone 03 5429 1760). My personal favourite was the silver-medal winning Williams Crossing 2006, followed closely by its cellar mate, Curly Flat 2006 (www.curlyflat.com) and Midhill Romsey 2005 (phone 03 5429 5565).

And if you like good pinot noir, Macedon is now unquestionably one of our leading regions for the variety. Even with the conspicuous absence from the show of two outstanding producers, Bindi and Rochford, the medal strike rate was 71 per cent, with 20 of 28 wines winning awards.

While we awarded only one gold medal in the class – to the beautiful Curly Flat 2005 – I rated two other wines, Curly Flat 2006 and Williams Crossing 2006, at the same level. Given the price difference between Curly Flat ($46) and Williams Crossing ($22), it’d be hard not to rate the latter as the best value pinot noir in the country.

I’ve tasted and enjoyed it on several occasions now. It’s a blend of barrels that didn’t make the cut for the Curly Flat label – and the margin of difference is not all that wide.

My other highly rated pinots, all worth trying, were Lanes End 2006, Big Shed 2005 (www.bigshedwines.com.au), Portree 2005 (www.portreevineyard.com.au) and Chanters Ridge Back Paddock 2005 (www.chantersridge.com.au).

Copyright © Chris Shanahan 2008