Here are eight new reasons to go by taste, and not by label. Trying to find a wine for pre-dinner and for my wife’s Bolognese this evening I took home from the office to taste a six-pack of different wines. First was a tired, bloated and aged 2004 Sancerre from Henry Nattier, which found itself down the drain and on the way to Werribee before I had the cork off the corkscrew. Next up was a Kiwi version, a Gravitas Sauvignon Blanc 2005 from Marlborough. Tight and chalky, but lacking length and depth of fruit, it was an acceptable wine but not enough to keep me from opening a bottle of Grolsch instead. Perhaps I would fare better with something to drink with dinner? First cab off the rank was a thin, green and herbal pinot noir grown near Dunkeld in western Victoria. Biodynamically certified it might be, but the Hochkirch Maximus Pinot Noir 2004 simply lacks the depth and richness of genuinely ripe fruit to be taken as seriously as its presentation and price would suggest. And so to New Zealand again. The William Thomas Pinot Noir 2004 from Martinborough is generously flavoured, sweetly fruited and presents pleasingly sappy pinot qualities bound by supple tannins. It’s a pretty young wine, but its lack of genuine fruit length checks its score back to low silver medal status. Similarly, the 2003 Pegasus Bay Pinot Noir delivers suppleness and sappiness, plus some delicious cherry/plum/berry fruit, but not the length and structure of a dead serious pinot. Back in Australian waters, the Richard Hamilton Hut Block Cabernet Sauvignon 2004, a wine I have enjoyed before, looked a little oak-dominant and lacking in punch. A 1994 Cape Mentelle Trinders Cabernet Sauvignon Merlot opened with an increasing sense of desperation appeared interesting, herbal and regional, but lacked the stuffing and richness to handle food. There has to be more to decent cabernet than just herbal elegance. And so to the final option, a wine opened two nights ago but still two-thirds full (before my wife tipped a solid slug into the Bolognese sauce), Zema Estate’s Cluny blend of cabernet sauvignon and merlot from 2004. It was sumptuous, smooth, flavoursome, elegant, balanced and complete. It met every requirement with its typically Coonawarra-derived combination of elegance and richness, and was easily the most complete and satisfying wine in the thoroughly mixed bag I had opened this evening. And it was also one of the less expensive, if not the very cheapest wine of the night. There’s a message in that.
