tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5011946245768794903.post7370164643192148844..comments2009-03-08T14:20:09.735-07:00Iron Chevskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05241149967997845671noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5011946245768794903.post-88916286226602630912009-03-08T14:20:00.000-07:002009-03-08T14:20:00.000-07:00My personal insight (having spent all of four hours with Gary:)<BR/><BR/>He is crafting himself into a serious wine critic, and for that craft, being able to tell what other critics will like may be the most important skill of all!<BR/><BR/>As for myself, I enjoy vanilla and soft tannins so Parker and Rolland already have me pegged...and my favorite of this tasting was the San Leonino Chianti (much less expensive than either Brunello, if you could find ANY of these 1990s today, thank you Ross Bott)Bertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5011946245768794903.post-82737873183755725412009-03-08T12:03:00.000-07:002009-03-08T12:03:00.000-07:00Good questions, Eric.<BR/>Still working on the sangiovese vs nebbiolo, but to me Italian wines and Sangiovese in particular have the zingy acidity that just begs pasta with red sauce, or osso-buco, or veal parmigiana and a slew of other italian cuisine. Though truth be told, I think most Italian reds (particularly not from the South) share that bright acidity. That tingly zinginess of the is what sets them apart for me from other wine countries of the world. Even Super-Tuscans have that, though they add a dimension and roundness of Cab/Merlot. Not sure about buying Brunellos at their high price points ($50+), after having tasted impressive barolos and barbarescos lately, as well as some unexpectedly delicious, deep, and round barberas. If I want something zingy to go with my mid-week italian meal, I am likely to reach for a $15-20 Chianti than a Brunello. I am looking forward to trying more Brunellos at wine dinners to refine my appreciation for them, and especially to pin them against great Barolos/Barbarescos and Barberas. Let's see if Hector and Krishna are up to the challenge!<BR/><BR/>Regarding not wanting to deviate from the group... I do score the wines the way I see, smell, and taste them. The group score helps me calibrate my palate retrospectively against other experienced people (many far more experienced than myself).<BR/><BR/>Hard to tell, all in all, whether those pre-WS era wines were "better" or "worse", since at 19 years of age, they are clearly ain't what they used to be. Would I look for these 1990 bottlings now - not really. As crazy as I am about aged Burgundies, Bordeaux, and Rieslings, these aged wines did not blow me away by any stretch of the imagination. Would I turn away, if offered at a dinner - no way - bring them on!Iron Chevskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05241149967997845671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5011946245768794903.post-23837584887317104512009-03-08T11:35:00.000-07:002009-03-08T11:35:00.000-07:00What is your overall impression of the sangiovese grape compared to grapes like nebbiolo, pinot, cab and merlot? Do you see yourself buying those wines? Where do they fit at the table?<BR/><BR/>Interesting comment about not wanting to deviate from the group in your evaluation. What the #$%&amp;! Can&#39;t understand the reasoning behind that. Maybe you could do two scorings: yours and a prediction of the group&#39;s.<BR/><BR/>My experience is that Italian wine of that period is rarely characteristic of recent wines, just as an &#39;85 Special Select is completely different from current releases. They are from the pre-WS era.Eric Lecoursnoreply@blogger.com