Steve Slatcher wrote:
> >He was unclear about what he had. I think it was Sangiovese di Romagna,
> >which is one of the few ITALIAN wines that are actually CALLED
> >'Sangiovese'.
>
> FWIW I would have assumed he had tried an IGT wine

Such as?
>
> --
> Steve Slatcher
> http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

On 13 Aug 2006 09:26:56 -0700, "UC" >
wrote:

>> FWIW I would have assumed he had tried an IGT wine
>
>Such as?

Try putting sangiovese and IGT into wine-searcher or google

--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

"Michael Scarpitti", wrote .....
>
> To this I can only reply that the basic approaches to
> wine-making are different in different countries.
>

Wow, Michael, do you know what you have just done - you have made a
reasoned argument - I am really impressed - and not one insult.

>
> In France, they have some ridiculous idea that the best wines
> will always come from a few selected plots of land.
>

No, I tend to think that this is not just a French phenomenon - it is
generally held word wide.

And probably not without good reason.

When any country has a winemaking history dating back to Roman times (Italy,
France, Spain, Germany are all included) it is inevitable that experience
gained over centuries will dictate that certain sites will be better than
others.

And hey, every one of the abovementioned countries turn out more than their
fair share of crap wines.


>
> In fact, the winemaker has much more say in the final product.
>


I do not believe that you would have any argument from anyone contributing
to this forum in this respect.


>
> In Italy, crap wine and fantastic wine may be made from grapes
> grown in the same area, even in the same vineyard. What matters
> is the maker's approach and care. The really important thing worth
> knowing is the wine-maker, above all else.
>


And you believe that this is not the case anywhere in the winemaking world?
I have never read anyone here saying that just because a wine comes from any
geographic region it is automatically good - far from it - just as
occurs in Italy where there are areas which turn out zillions of litres of
rubbish, exactly the same situation exists in Bordeaux and many other
regions of Southern France.

We have had this discussion many time here on afw that the "industrial
producer" is not interest in producing a quality product - they just want
the government subsidies.

Again, I agree - the skill and passion of the winemaker is paramount -
whether you are talking about Italy or New Zealand or Chile or Spain.

I personally have been lucky enough to have visited with many wonderful
artisans in places like South Africa - where, believe me, the vast majority
of, what masquerades as "wine" is plonk for the masses.



> I recently had the pleasure of finding a fantastic wine - Avulisi -
> from Sicily. It is made from Nero d'Avola grapes by Santa Tresa, and is
> IGT. Apparently, there are not many DOC's in Sicily, so even the best
> wines carry the IGT designation.
>


The difference between you and I is that I believe that this world is such a
tiny place and is shrinking.

I have wonderful wines like (Malbec) from Argentina: or some of the most
elegant and floral Rieslings from Mosel.

Likewise, I am fortunate that with a 2 hour drive, I have access to a small
importer who does bring in to NZ a small range of Italian wines like Dedalo
Ottavianello Rosso or Villa Cafaggio Chianti or Masi Campofiorin (both
personal favourites.)

But this same company also imports Valtravieso from Ribera del Duero, Spain
and some brilliant Rioja.

But, I also love the Dom. Santa Duc they import from Gigondas - not for
any other reason than I like it - a lot!!!!!


> I have had Nero d'Avola from several different wineries (including
> Regaleali), and I can say that Avulisi is in a league of its own. It is
> very rich, extremely concentrated, intensively flavored,
> well-structured, and well-balanced. You can get low-end Nero d'Avola
> from Petraio for $5, but they don't even taste like the same grape! By
> the way, the Petraio is an outstanding buy, but Avulisi is another
> animal altogether.

NZ has a population 1/75th the size of the US - there is no way that a
wide range of these wines will ever make it downunder (although I must say
that, because Australia has a large immigrant Italian population, they have
acess to a much wider range of Italian wines than NZ.)



>
> The wine world is unfortunately dominated by what I call the "French
> model". I say 'unfortunately' because many wines from other
> wine-producing countries don't fit that mold.
>


You see, this is where you and I have a fundamental disagreement - I do
not see that French influence outside of France - I know that Australia
makes excellent Australian Shiraz - they are not trying to emulate Rhone.

And yes, there are now winemakers (in NZ and Australia) who are blending
Viognier into Shiraz - but not to make French lookalikes - they are just
expanding their winemaking horizons.

I personally know one of the most innovative young winemakers in South
Australia - Joseph Grilli is of Italian extraction. He is not trying to
make Italian wines - although he has planted Sangiovese and Nebbiolo,
they are made distinctly Australian.

His "Moda" is Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot, where the grapes are dried -
not to the same extent as Amarone, but sufficient to add a concentrated
dimension to his wine which is his expression of his little corner of South
Australia.

New Zealand is not trying to make Sancerre - our Sauvignon Blanc is so
individual that many other countries are trying to make Marlborouigh
Sauvignon.

I think that you place far too much emphasis on the influence on France
which is simply not warranted.


>
>You cannot treat Italian wines like French ones.
>
> If you say you like to 'breathe' your Pomerol or Médoc,
> go right ahead. I will <<not>> breathe my Cannonau, Barbera,
> Velletri, Primitivo, Taurasi, Nero d'Avola, or Carignano del Sulcis.
>
> To expect Italian wine to fit the French model is absurd and stupid.


But no-one has ever suggested that you should treat Italian wines like
French - or Spanish or anywhere else.

And please don't suggest that some Italian wines (Barolo springs to mind) do
not benefit from exposure to air.


> Italian wines and cooking are closely intertwined.
> The role of wine in Italy is different.


Yes, I totally agree the relationship between (regional) wine and food in
intertwined - centuries of past isolationism has seen to this - but,
that does not mean that a wonderful Chianti should not be consumed with a
nice rare sirloin and garden salad - if that is my choice!


> It is approached much less dogmatically, much less theoretically.
> It was until recent times mostly a peasant's wine, and still largely is.
> The snobbery that characterises the French is almost entirely absent.
> In the south especially, one finds bull-headed traditionalists.
>


Again, in this modern age, not all Italian winemakers are village artisans.

And believe me, I have visited wineries all over the world where snobbery
was alive and well - this is not limited to France.

Don't worry NZ has its share of snobby *******s!

In fact, the opposite is true in my experience - just last year I was in
the South of France - the reception this mere Kiwi got from several small
wineries I visited was a world away from snobbish.

The generosity of their hospitality was heartwarming - and on the couple
occasions I opened a NZ bottle of wine, their acceptance was one of wonder.

No Michael, I shall defend your right to limit your wine drinking experience
any way you choose, but ultimately, one day you may find out just how much
you have missed.

Winemaking does not start and finish in Italy, or France or the US - or
anywhere else.

It is an international journey. It is simply your choice how far you wish
to travel.

Me, I want to go all the way.

Regards

--

st.helier

st.helier wrote:
> "Michael Scarpitti", wrote .....
>> In France, they have some ridiculous idea that the best wines
>> will always come from a few selected plots of land.

> No, I tend to think that this is not just a French phenomenon - it is
> generally held word wide.

It is? Is the USA, NZ, AUS, Brazil, Chile, MX and many others part of
that world you speak of? In those and many other countries winemakers
decide whats best to grow on their land.

> When any country has a winemaking history dating back to Roman times (Italy,
> France, Spain, Germany are all included) it is inevitable that experience
> gained over centuries will dictate that certain sites will be better than
> others.

So nothing new for centuries huh? Guess again. The industry
continually learns and improves. Much through skilled winemakers
breaking from tradition. While there are failures, such innovation has
its rewards as well.

miles > wrote in news:BtSDg.898$rT5.223@fed1read01:

> st.helier wrote:
>> "Michael Scarpitti", wrote .....
> >> In France, they have some ridiculous idea that the best wines
>>> will always come from a few selected plots of land.
>
>> No, I tend to think that this is not just a French phenomenon - it
>> is generally held word wide.
>
> It is? Is the USA, NZ, AUS, Brazil, Chile, MX and many others part of
> that world you speak of? In those and many other countries winemakers
> decide whats best to grow on their land.

OK?

>> When any country has a winemaking history dating back to Roman times
>> (Italy, France, Spain, Germany are all included) it is inevitable
>> that experience gained over centuries will dictate that certain sites
>> will be better than others.
>
> So nothing new for centuries huh? Guess again. The industry
> continually learns and improves. Much through skilled winemakers
> breaking from tradition. While there are failures, such innovation
> has its rewards as well.
>

Winemaking styles change the technology changes somewhat, though the
basic process remains recognizable even if the equipment does not. I
still stand with St Helier on the issue of successful vinyards. Some
plots are just better, sure plonk can be made from good grapes, but only
the best produce the best. Garbage in garbage out. I will teke the
Hermitage or Grand Cru Chablis form Grenouilles.thank you.

--
Joseph Coulter
Cruises and Vacations
http://www.josephcoulter.com/

miles wrote:
> st.helier wrote:
>> "Michael Scarpitti", wrote .....
> >> In France, they have some ridiculous idea that the best wines
>>> will always come from a few selected plots of land.
>
>> No, I tend to think that this is not just a French phenomenon - it
>> is generally held word wide.
>
> It is? Is the USA, NZ, AUS, Brazil, Chile, MX and many others part of
> that world you speak of? In those and many other countries winemakers
> decide whats best to grow on their land.

But what we've seen in the US is that certain areas specialize in
certain grapes. Why? Because you get better wine that way. How many
Napa Valley Pinot Noirs and Santa Barbara Cabernet Sauvignons have you
had recently? ;-) That's what St. H. is talking about: with experience,
growers learn what grows well where. If you think about it, we're even
seeing the emergence of "grand cru"-type status to certain vineyards.
The Eisele and To-Kalon vineyards are renowned for cabernet (and,
formerly, Martha's Vineyard) and the Rochioli and Pisoni vineyards for
Pinot Noir. Give us another couple of hundred years of experience and
we might be able to create an 1855-type classification of properties
(not that we're likely to).

>
>> When any country has a winemaking history dating back to Roman times
>> (Italy, France, Spain, Germany are all included) it is inevitable that
>> experience gained over centuries will dictate that certain sites will
>> be better than others.
>
> So nothing new for centuries huh? Guess again. The industry
> continually learns and improves. Much through skilled winemakers
> breaking from tradition. While there are failures, such innovation has
> its rewards as well.

Don't read more into his words than what he was saying. He said that
experience is a useful teacher, not that that's all there is to know.
Don't do a Scarpitti on us, Miles.

Mark Lipton

Mike Tommasi wrote:
> UC wrote:
> > miles wrote:
> >
> >>UC wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>What area of the world has the greatest potential for wine-making?
> >>>Sicily.
> >>
> >>What other areas of the world are you knowledgeable with in regards to
> >>wine-making potentials?
> >
> >
> > I should say "untapped potential". Sicily has nearly all the ideal
> > conditions for wine-making. The troubles are largely attitudes, the
> > Mafia, and politics.
> >
>
> Untapped? HAve you been to Sicily recently? Or to a major wine fair,
> where theSicilian stand tends to be the biggest one there? I would
> hardly call Sicilian wine potential untapped...

It's beginning to show its tremendous potential.

>
> --
> Mike Tommasi - Six Fours, France
> email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail

Joseph Coulter wrote:

> Winemaking styles change the technology changes somewhat, though the
> basic process remains recognizable even if the equipment does not. I
> still stand with St Helier on the issue of successful vinyards. Some
> plots are just better, sure plonk can be made from good grapes, but only
> the best produce the best. Garbage in garbage out. I will teke the
> Hermitage or Grand Cru Chablis form Grenouilles.thank you.

The point is that good wines do not have to be produced on a particular
region of land and no other. Sure some areas are better than others for
a particular varietal. However, there are many such areas that are
ideal and not just one. Furthermore different regions often produce
different unique styles. For instance, Chardonnay produced in the Napa
Valley region of California are generally of a different style than
those produced in Oregons Willamette Valley. I like both styles. No
need for the absurd notion that good wines from a particular varietal
can only be made in a particular region.

Mark Lipton wrote:

> But what we've seen in the US is that certain areas specialize in
> certain grapes. Why? Because you get better wine that way. How many
> Napa Valley Pinot Noirs and Santa Barbara Cabernet Sauvignons have you
> had recently? ;-)

Sure thats true. But why get hung up on a single region and say thats
the only one that can produce a great wine from a particular varietal?
There are also great Pinot Noirs from Oregon. There are great
Zinfandels from Napa, Amador, Sonoma, Paso Robles etc. There are great
Chardonnays from many regions in California, Oregon, Washington and
more. Point is there are numerous regions that are ideal for a
particular varietal each producing unique styles for differing tastes.
A Pinot from Oregon is of a different style than from Santa Barbara but
both can be equally great. A purist may say only one region can produce
the correct traditional style. I disagree with that notion.

st.helier wrote:
> "Michael Scarpitti", wrote .....
> >
> > To this I can only reply that the basic approaches to
> > wine-making are different in different countries.

> Wow, Michael, do you know what you have just done - you have made a
> reasoned argument - I am really impressed - and not one insult.

I could add more than wine-making: also the combination of wine and
food.

> > In France, they have some ridiculous idea that the best wines
> > will always come from a few selected plots of land.
>
> No, I tend to think that this is not just a French phenomenon - it is
> generally held word wide.

Then why does only F_____ have the Grand Cru designation? Italy's DOCG
is not comparable. It is founded on results.

> And probably not without good reason.
>
> When any country has a winemaking history dating back to Roman times (Italy,
> France, Spain, Germany are all included) it is inevitable that experience
> gained over centuries will dictate that certain sites will be better than
> others.
>
> And hey, every one of the abovementioned countries turn out more than their
> fair share of crap wines.
> >
> > In fact, the winemaker has much more say in the final product.

> I do not believe that you would have any argument from anyone contributing
> to this forum in this respect.

> > In Italy, crap wine and fantastic wine may be made from grapes
> > grown in the same area, even in the same vineyard. What matters
> > is the maker's approach and care. The really important thing worth
> > knowing is the wine-maker, above all else.
>
> And you believe that this is not the case anywhere in the winemaking world?
> I have never read anyone here saying that just because a wine comes from any
> geographic region it is automatically good - far from it - just as
> occurs in Italy where there are areas which turn out zillions of litres of
> rubbish, exactly the same situation exists in Bordeaux and many other
> regions of Southern France.
>
> We have had this discussion many time here on afw that the "industrial
> producer" is not interest in producing a quality product - they just want
> the government subsidies.
>
> Again, I agree - the skill and passion of the winemaker is paramount -
> whether you are talking about Italy or New Zealand or Chile or Spain.
>
> I personally have been lucky enough to have visited with many wonderful
> artisans in places like South Africa - where, believe me, the vast majority
> of, what masquerades as "wine" is plonk for the masses.

> > I recently had the pleasure of finding a fantastic wine - Avulisi -
> > from Sicily. It is made from Nero d'Avola grapes by Santa Tresa, and is
> > IGT. Apparently, there are not many DOC's in Sicily, so even the best
> > wines carry the IGT designation.
>
> The difference between you and I is that I believe that this world is such a
> tiny place and is shrinking.

I don't follow you. Learning the wines of even a region takes time. How
can one expect to learn ALL the wines of the major producing countries
without spending a fortune and ruining one's liver? I therefore devote
my wine-buying to Italy alone (usually; I have had some Spanish wines
too, which were gifts). I have tried a variety of Nero d'Avola wines,
and find a great variety of styles and quality.

> I have wonderful wines like (Malbec) from Argentina: or some of the most
> elegant and floral Rieslings from Mosel.
>
> Likewise, I am fortunate that with a 2 hour drive, I have access to a small
> importer who does bring in to NZ a small range of Italian wines like Dedalo
> Ottavianello Rosso or Villa Cafaggio Chianti or Masi Campofiorin (both
> personal favourites.)
>
> But this same company also imports Valtravieso from Ribera del Duero, Spain
> and some brilliant Rioja.
>
> But, I also love the Dom. Santa Duc they import from Gigondas - not for
> any other reason than I like it - a lot!!!!!

> > I have had Nero d'Avola from several different wineries (including
> > Regaleali), and I can say that Avulisi is in a league of its own. It is
> > very rich, extremely concentrated, intensively flavored,
> > well-structured, and well-balanced. You can get low-end Nero d'Avola
> > from Petraio for $5, but they don't even taste like the same grape! By
> > the way, the Petraio is an outstanding buy, but Avulisi is another
> > animal altogether.
>
> NZ has a population 1/75th the size of the US - there is no way that a
> wide range of these wines will ever make it downunder (although I must say
> that, because Australia has a large immigrant Italian population, they have
> acess to a much wider range of Italian wines than NZ.)

See if you can get the Avulisi.

> >
> > The wine world is unfortunately dominated by what I call the "French
> > model". I say 'unfortunately' because many wines from other
> > wine-producing countries don't fit that mold.
>
> You see, this is where you and I have a fundamental disagreement - I do
> not see that French influence outside of France - I know that Australia
> makes excellent Australian Shiraz - they are not trying to emulate Rhone.

I don't mean only F_____ grapes, but the F_____ approach to wine. It is
different from the Italian.

> And yes, there are now winemakers (in NZ and Australia) who are blending
> Viognier into Shiraz - but not to make French lookalikes - they are just
> expanding their winemaking horizons.
>
> I personally know one of the most innovative young winemakers in South
> Australia - Joseph Grilli is of Italian extraction. He is not trying to
> make Italian wines - although he has planted Sangiovese and Nebbiolo,
> they are made distinctly Australian.
>
> His "Moda" is Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot, where the grapes are dried -
> not to the same extent as Amarone, but sufficient to add a concentrated
> dimension to his wine which is his expression of his little corner of South
> Australia.
>
> New Zealand is not trying to make Sancerre - our Sauvignon Blanc is so
> individual that many other countries are trying to make Marlborouigh
> Sauvignon.
>
> I think that you place far too much emphasis on the influence on France
> which is simply not warranted.

I mean the F_____ approach, not just F_____ grapes.
> >
> >You cannot treat Italian wines like French ones.
> >
> > If you say you like to 'breathe' your Pomerol or Médoc,
> > go right ahead. I will <<not>> breathe my Cannonau, Barbera,
> > Velletri, Primitivo, Taurasi, Nero d'Avola, or Carignano del Sulcis.
> >
> > To expect Italian wine to fit the French model is absurd and stupid.
>
> But no-one has ever suggested that you should treat Italian wines like
> French - or Spanish or anywhere else.
>
> And please don't suggest that some Italian wines (Barolo springs to mind) do
> not benefit from exposure to air.

Nope. NO wine benefits from exposure to air except very immature wines.

>
> > Italian wines and cooking are closely intertwined.
> > The role of wine in Italy is different.
>
> Yes, I totally agree the relationship between (regional) wine and food in
> intertwined - centuries of past isolationism has seen to this - but,
> that does not mean that a wonderful Chianti should not be consumed with a
> nice rare sirloin and garden salad - if that is my choice!

Do what you will. I am trying to learn more about Italian regional
wines and cooking, by making feats that feature numerous dishes and
wines from selected regions. One dinner will be Sicilian, the next
northern, then southern, Tuscan, etc.

> > It is approached much less dogmatically, much less theoretically.
> > It was until recent times mostly a peasant's wine, and still largely is.
> > The snobbery that characterises the French is almost entirely absent.
> > In the south especially, one finds bull-headed traditionalists.
>
> Again, in this modern age, not all Italian winemakers are village artisans.

Of course this is true, but they are still out there, and I want their
wines!

> And believe me, I have visited wineries all over the world where snobbery
> was alive and well - this is not limited to France.
>
> Don't worry NZ has its share of snobby *******s!
>
> In fact, the opposite is true in my experience - just last year I was in
> the South of France - the reception this mere Kiwi got from several small
> wineries I visited was a world away from snobbish.
>
> The generosity of their hospitality was heartwarming - and on the couple
> occasions I opened a NZ bottle of wine, their acceptance was one of wonder.
>
> No Michael, I shall defend your right to limit your wine drinking experience
> any way you choose, but ultimately, one day you may find out just how much
> you have missed.

I am missing nothing. if I am preparing regional Italian dishes, why
would I not want to match them with wines of that region ?
>
> Winemaking does not start and finish in Italy, or France or the US - or
> anywhere else.
>
> It is an international journey. It is simply your choice how far you wish
> to travel.
>
> Me, I want to go all the way.
>
> Regards
>
> --
>
> st.helier

miles wrote:
> Mark Lipton wrote:
>
> > But what we've seen in the US is that certain areas specialize in
> > certain grapes. Why? Because you get better wine that way. How many
> > Napa Valley Pinot Noirs and Santa Barbara Cabernet Sauvignons have you
> > had recently? ;-)
>
> Sure thats true. But why get hung up on a single region and say thats
> the only one that can produce a great wine from a particular varietal?
> There are also great Pinot Noirs from Oregon. There are great
> Zinfandels from Napa, Amador, Sonoma, Paso Robles etc. There are great
> Chardonnays from many regions in California, Oregon, Washington and
> more. Point is there are numerous regions that are ideal for a
> particular varietal each producing unique styles for differing tastes.
> A Pinot from Oregon is of a different style than from Santa Barbara but
> both can be equally great. A purist may say only one region can produce
> the correct traditional style. I disagree with that notion.

Tuscany is the home of Sngiovese, and all wines made from that grape
would have to use Tuscan wines as the reference point.

miles wrote:
> Mark Lipton wrote:
>
> > But what we've seen in the US is that certain areas specialize in
> > certain grapes. Why? Because you get better wine that way. How many
> > Napa Valley Pinot Noirs and Santa Barbara Cabernet Sauvignons have you
> > had recently? ;-)
>
> Sure thats true. But why get hung up on a single region and say thats
> the only one that can produce a great wine from a particular varietal?
> There are also great Pinot Noirs from Oregon. There are great
> Zinfandels from Napa, Amador, Sonoma, Paso Robles etc. There are great
> Chardonnays from many regions in California, Oregon, Washington and
> more. Point is there are numerous regions that are ideal for a
> particular varietal each producing unique styles for differing tastes.
> A Pinot from Oregon is of a different style than from Santa Barbara but
> both can be equally great. A purist may say only one region can produce
> the correct traditional style. I disagree with that notion.

Tuscany is the home of Sangiovese, and all wines made from that grape
would have to use Tuscan wines as the reference point.

miles > wrote in news:XP_Dg.907$rT5.6@fed1read01:

> I like both styles. No
> need for the absurd notion that good wines from a particular varietal
> can only be made in a particular region.
>
>

Not sure that anyone is debating that point. I love Chablis, but it is not
Montrachet which produces a great product albeit different. My point is
that terroir still influences the final product.

--
Joseph Coulter
Cruises and Vacations
http://www.josephcoulter.com/

Joseph Coulter wrote:
> miles > wrote in news:XP_Dg.907$rT5.6@fed1read01:
>
> > I like both styles. No
> > need for the absurd notion that good wines from a particular varietal
> > can only be made in a particular region.
> >
> >
>
> Not sure that anyone is debating that point. I love Chablis, but it is not
> Montrachet which produces a great product albeit different. My point is
> that terroir still influences the final product.

Of course. Some grape varieties 'travel' well; others don't. By this I
mean that they will not do well outside their home range.

>
> --
> Joseph Coulter
> Cruises and Vacations
> http://www.josephcoulter.com/

Mike Tommasi wrote:
> UC wrote:
> > Mike Tommasi wrote:
> >
> >>UC wrote:
> >>
> >>>miles wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>UC wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>What area of the world has the greatest potential for wine-making?
> >>>>>Sicily.
> >>>>
> >>>>What other areas of the world are you knowledgeable with in regards to
> >>>>wine-making potentials?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I should say "untapped potential". Sicily has nearly all the ideal
> >>>conditions for wine-making. The troubles are largely attitudes, the
> >>>Mafia, and politics.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Untapped? HAve you been to Sicily recently? Or to a major wine fair,
> >>where theSicilian stand tends to be the biggest one there? I would
> >>hardly call Sicilian wine potential untapped...
> >
> >
> > It's beginning to show its tremendous potential.
>
>
> Unfortunately not many are of real interest.

I don't follow you. It seems you are contradicting yourself:

"I would hardly call Sicilian wine potential untapped..."
>
>
> --
> Mike Tommasi - Six Fours, France
> email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail

Mike Tommasi wrote:
> UC wrote:
> > Mike Tommasi wrote:
> >
> >>UC wrote:
> >>
> >>>Mike Tommasi wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>UC wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>miles wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>UC wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>What area of the world has the greatest potential for wine-making?
> >>>>>>>Sicily.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>What other areas of the world are you knowledgeable with in regards to
> >>>>>>wine-making potentials?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I should say "untapped potential". Sicily has nearly all the ideal
> >>>>>conditions for wine-making. The troubles are largely attitudes, the
> >>>>>Mafia, and politics.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Untapped? HAve you been to Sicily recently? Or to a major wine fair,
> >>>>where theSicilian stand tends to be the biggest one there? I would
> >>>>hardly call Sicilian wine potential untapped...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>It's beginning to show its tremendous potential.
> >>
> >>
> >>Unfortunately not many are of real interest.
> >
> >
> > I don't follow you. It seems you are contradicting yourself:
> >
> > "I would hardly call Sicilian wine potential untapped..."
>
>
> First there was the potential. Then we got the actual wine.
>
> The actual wine is only rarely of real interest. So the potential for
> creating a wine industry has been amply fulfilled.

That's not the way we use those terms in English. What you're saying
makes no sense.

UC wrote:

> Tuscany is the home of Sngiovese, and all wines made from that grape
> would have to use Tuscan wines as the reference point.

The issue is not where a particular varietal originated. My point is
that there are numerous regions that can produce a great wine from a
given grape. Not just one.

Joseph Coulter wrote:

> Not sure that anyone is debating that point. I love Chablis, but it is not
> Montrachet which produces a great product albeit different. My point is
> that terroir still influences the final product.

Some countries are fixated on growing a particular varietal only in one
region. Any other region is assumed to be a lesser wine. Thats the
issue I disagree with. Some areas lesser, some areas perhaps even
better than the so called traditional region.

UC wrote:

> Of course. Some grape varieties 'travel' well; others don't. By this I
> mean that they will not do well outside their home range.

Name a popular varietal that doesn't do well anywhere else but one
region. I do not see how this is possible since a given region can have
numerous micro climates. In Napa Valley California one area can get
substantially more rain on average than another area only 1 mile away.
A generalized region in itself isn't uniform across its terrain.

miles > wrote in news:4zaEg.934$rT5.671@fed1read01:

> UC wrote:
>
>> Of course. Some grape varieties 'travel' well; others don't. By this I
>> mean that they will not do well outside their home range.
>
> Name a popular varietal that doesn't do well anywhere else but one
> region. I do not see how this is possible since a given region can have
> numerous micro climates. In Napa Valley California one area can get
> substantially more rain on average than another area only 1 mile away.
> A generalized region in itself isn't uniform across its terrain.

Not sure what your point is. The statement made by UC was that some grape
varietals don't have as much range as others and you reply that some areas
have microclimates. Some microclimates do not support all varieties equally
you might have a growing region with areas that don't provide good nurture,
farmers of all sorts are familiar with the field that just won't do a
certain crop for various climate related reasons like too much not enough
rain, frost issues etc..

--
Joseph Coulter
Cruises and Vacations
http://www.josephcoulter.com/

miles wrote:
> UC wrote:
>
> > Tuscany is the home of Sngiovese, and all wines made from that grape
> > would have to use Tuscan wines as the reference point.
>
> The issue is not where a particular varietal originated. My point is
> that there are numerous regions that can produce a great wine from a
> given grape. Not just one.

Not the point.

miles wrote:
> UC wrote:
>
> > Of course. Some grape varieties 'travel' well; others don't. By this I
> > mean that they will not do well outside their home range.
>
> Name a popular varietal that doesn't do well anywhere else but one
> region.

Nebbiolo, for one.

> I do not see how this is possible since a given region can have
> numerous micro climates. In Napa Valley California one area can get
> substantially more rain on average than another area only 1 mile away.
> A generalized region in itself isn't uniform across its terrain.

"miles" > skrev i meddelandet
news:4zaEg.934$rT5.671@fed1read01...
> UC wrote:

>
> Name a popular varietal that doesn't do well anywhere else but one region.

PMJI -
A fairly obvious example would be Nebbiolo - oh, OK, it does not do bad in
Valtellina, but, it nowhere reaches the same quality it does in Barolo and
Barbaresco (dang, that's two ... ), and I don't think it has a wide
following Overseas.

Then, that begs the question what constitutes a 'popular' varietal. To be
'popular' I suppose it has to be spread to several regions ... too
complicated.

Cheers

Nils Gustaf

Joseph Coulter wrote:
> miles > wrote in news:4zaEg.934$rT5.671@fed1read01:
>
>> UC wrote:
>>
>>> Of course. Some grape varieties 'travel' well; others don't. By this I
>>> mean that they will not do well outside their home range.
>> Name a popular varietal that doesn't do well anywhere else but one
>> region. I do not see how this is possible since a given region can have
>> numerous micro climates. In Napa Valley California one area can get
>> substantially more rain on average than another area only 1 mile away.
>> A generalized region in itself isn't uniform across its terrain.
>
> Not sure what your point is. The statement made by UC was that some grape
> varietals don't have as much range as others and you reply that some areas
> have microclimates.

My point is that just because a wine comes from a particular region
doesn't mean thats the best region for that grape. A region can cover
numerous microclimates. It's a particular plot of land that might be
ideal within that region. Furthermore there are generally numerous
regions that are ideal for a particular varietal. Not just one single
region. Some countries are fixated on the belief that the best wine for
a given varietal can only come from a single region. It's that notion I
strongly disagree with.

UC wrote:
> miles wrote:
>> UC wrote:
>>
>>> Tuscany is the home of Sngiovese, and all wines made from that grape
>>> would have to use Tuscan wines as the reference point.
>> The issue is not where a particular varietal originated. My point is
>> that there are numerous regions that can produce a great wine from a
>> given grape. Not just one.
>
> Not the point.

I realize you are saying all sangiovese must be compared to those
produced in Tuscany. Why? Just because thats where it originated
doesn't mean its the standard for comparison. It doesn't mean Tuscan
wines are better or worse. I've never seen typical blind tasting scores
that state a wines rating as compared to Tuscan wines. The ratings
stand on their own for each wine and not that its above or below Tuscan
wines.

miles wrote:
> UC wrote:
> > miles wrote:
> >> UC wrote:
> >>
> >>> Tuscany is the home of Sngiovese, and all wines made from that grape
> >>> would have to use Tuscan wines as the reference point.
> >> The issue is not where a particular varietal originated. My point is
> >> that there are numerous regions that can produce a great wine from a
> >> given grape. Not just one.
> >
> > Not the point.
>
> I realize you are saying all sangiovese must be compared to those
> produced in Tuscany. Why? Just because thats where it originated
> doesn't mean its the standard for comparison.

Yes, it does.

> It doesn't mean Tuscan
> wines are better or worse. I've never seen typical blind tasting scores
> that state a wines rating as compared to Tuscan wines. The ratings
> stand on their own for each wine and not that its above or below Tuscan
> wines.

Sangiovese originated in Tuscany or central Italy hundreds of years
ago. It has adapted itself to that area. It is the quintessential
Italian grape. To suggest that any wine made from Sangiovese grown
elsewhere should not use Chianti, Brunello, or Vino Nobile as a
reference is absurd on its face.

UC wrote:
> miles wrote:
>> UC wrote:
>>
>>> Of course. Some grape varieties 'travel' well; others don't. By this I
>>> mean that they will not do well outside their home range.
>> Name a popular varietal that doesn't do well anywhere else but one
>> region.
>
> Nebbiolo, for one.

Nebbiolo hasn't caught on that well around the world. However,
Argentina out produces Italy and Nebbiolo is grown in smaller quantities
in Australia, California, New Zealand, and South Africa and many other
countries. I think the issue is market demand which results in few
winemakers doing that much with Nebbiolo except in Italy especially the
Piedmont region.

Same thing I find with Syrah (Shiraz, Sirah). While California produces
some excellent Syrahs I find Australia to be a magnitude better. Mostly
because they have been producing it much longer. Experience plays a
large role just as finding the ideal regions. Given time and market
demand there is no reason great Nebbiolo wines couldn't be produced in
many other regions besides Piedmont.

Nils Gustaf Lindgren wrote:
> "miles" > skrev i meddelandet
> news:4zaEg.934$rT5.671@fed1read01...
>> UC wrote:
>
>> Name a popular varietal that doesn't do well anywhere else but one region.
>
> PMJI -
> A fairly obvious example would be Nebbiolo - oh, OK, it does not do bad in
> Valtellina, but, it nowhere reaches the same quality it does in Barolo and
> Barbaresco (dang, that's two ... ), and I don't think it has a wide
> following Overseas.
>
> Then, that begs the question what constitutes a 'popular' varietal. To be
> 'popular' I suppose it has to be spread to several regions ... too
> complicated.

I think popularity is the key. Nobody is going to try a varietal in a
new region if the market won't support it there. You named two regions
and forgot about Nebbilos most popular (to me) region, Piedmont.

UC wrote:

> Sangiovese originated in Tuscany or central Italy hundreds of years
> ago. It has adapted itself to that area. It is the quintessential
> Italian grape. To suggest that any wine made from Sangiovese grown
> elsewhere should not use Chianti, Brunello, or Vino Nobile as a
> reference is absurd on its face.

Absurd to you but hardly reality. Wines stand on their own and are
rated individually. Not compared as you seem to demand. You are also
implying that Tuscany Sangiovese is a matter of fact superior to
anything produced elsewhere. That is what is absurd. Just because its
older, traditional etc. does not make it better. Rating a wine based on
where it came from is absurd. Taste it on its own and judge accordingly
without prejudice. You may prefer the Tuscan style. Others may not.

"miles" > skrev i meddelandet
news:RikEg.13845$lv.5243@fed1read12...
> Nils Gustaf Lindgren wrote:
>> "miles" > skrev i meddelandet
>> news:4zaEg.934$rT5.671@fed1read01...
>>> UC wrote:
>>
>>> Name a popular varietal that doesn't do well anywhere else but one
>>> region.
>>
>> PMJI -
>> A fairly obvious example would be Nebbiolo - oh, OK, it does not do bad
>> in Valtellina, but, it nowhere reaches the same quality it does in Barolo
>> and Barbaresco (dang, that's two ... ), and I don't think it has a wide
>> following Overseas.
>>
>> Then, that begs the question what constitutes a 'popular' varietal. To be
>> 'popular' I suppose it has to be spread to several regions ... too
>> complicated.
>
> I think popularity is the key. Nobody is going to try a varietal in a new
> region if the market won't support it there. You named two regions and
> forgot about Nebbilos most popular (to me) region, Piedmont.

Did not. Barolo and Barbaresco ARE in Piemonte. Sure thing, went there this
summer, wonderful experience, highly recommended. There are other places in
Piemonte that produce Nebiolo, but Barolo is tops, with Barbaresco a close
second, and they are c 30 km apart (20 miles to the anglometrically
challenged).

Cheers

Nils Gustaf

miles wrote:
> UC wrote:
>
> > Sangiovese originated in Tuscany or central Italy hundreds of years
> > ago. It has adapted itself to that area. It is the quintessential
> > Italian grape. To suggest that any wine made from Sangiovese grown
> > elsewhere should not use Chianti, Brunello, or Vino Nobile as a
> > reference is absurd on its face.
>
> Absurd to you but hardly reality. Wines stand on their own and are
> rated individually. Not compared as you seem to demand. You are also
> implying that Tuscany Sangiovese is a matter of fact superior to
> anything produced elsewhere.

I certainly do not. I said Tuscan Sangiovese is the REFERENCE. That is
where the grape originated. You may find some place on the planet that
is 'better' but that is irrelevant. There is more to it than that.

> That is what is absurd. Just because its
> older, traditional etc. does not make it better. Rating a wine based on
> where it came from is absurd. Taste it on its own and judge accordingly
> without prejudice. You may prefer the Tuscan style. Others may not.

Mike Tommasi wrote:
> miles wrote:
> > UC wrote:
> >
> >> miles wrote:
> >>
> >>> UC wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Tuscany is the home of Sngiovese, and all wines made from that grape
> >>>> would have to use Tuscan wines as the reference point.
> >>>
> >>> The issue is not where a particular varietal originated. My point is
> >>> that there are numerous regions that can produce a great wine from a
> >>> given grape. Not just one.
> >>
> >>
> >> Not the point.
> >
> >
> > I realize you are saying all sangiovese must be compared to those
> > produced in Tuscany. Why? Just because thats where it originated
> > doesn't mean its the standard for comparison. It doesn't mean Tuscan
> > wines are better or worse.
>
>
> Yes, I agree. What's more, in good wine the varietal is not nearly as
> important as the terroir.
>
> Comparing Condrieu from Condrieu and from other parts of the world, one
> finds similarities at the most very basic level, so the comparison is
> rather pointless.
>
> Same with Sangiovese, you can get good Sangio outside Tuscany, it is
> totally different, and demanding a comparison to a REFERENCE Sangio
> (allegedly tuscan) just shows how crude one's understanding of wine is.
>
> Grenache from Sardinia is quite interesting, so is Grenache from
> Chateauneuf du Pape. Yes they have something in common, but by UC's
> ravings one should now go pay a visit to Mariano Murru of Argiolas and
> give him 3 month's written notice to get his wines in line with those of
> Chateau Rayas, or else the committee will do something to him...
>
>

Almost all grapes in wide use were first cultivated in a small area,
then transported to other areas. In cases where the tranport took place
centuries ago, the grapes have already diverged from the parent stock.
They are no longer the same grapes. Grapes taken from Greece 3000 years
ago to Italy have evolved. If Sangiovese's origins are Greek, that is
irrelevant. We don't have to use any Greek wine as a reference.
Likewise with Cannonou: it is no longer Grenache.

Now, we are talking about taking 20th c Tusacn Sangiovese stocks and
transpanting them somewhere else. Wines made from those stocks would
have to be compared to the wines from the home territory, because the
grapes have not had time to evolve.

Mike Tommasi wrote:
> UC wrote:
> > Mike Tommasi wrote:
> >
> >>miles wrote:
> >>
> >>>UC wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>miles wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>UC wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Tuscany is the home of Sngiovese, and all wines made from that grape
> >>>>>>would have to use Tuscan wines as the reference point.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>The issue is not where a particular varietal originated. My point is
> >>>>>that there are numerous regions that can produce a great wine from a
> >>>>>given grape. Not just one.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Not the point.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I realize you are saying all sangiovese must be compared to those
> >>>produced in Tuscany. Why? Just because thats where it originated
> >>>doesn't mean its the standard for comparison. It doesn't mean Tuscan
> >>>wines are better or worse.
> >>
> >>
> >>Yes, I agree. What's more, in good wine the varietal is not nearly as
> >>important as the terroir.
> >>
> >>Comparing Condrieu from Condrieu and from other parts of the world, one
> >>finds similarities at the most very basic level, so the comparison is
> >>rather pointless.
> >>
> >>Same with Sangiovese, you can get good Sangio outside Tuscany, it is
> >>totally different, and demanding a comparison to a REFERENCE Sangio
> >>(allegedly tuscan) just shows how crude one's understanding of wine is.
> >>
> >>Grenache from Sardinia is quite interesting, so is Grenache from
> >>Chateauneuf du Pape. Yes they have something in common, but by UC's
> >>ravings one should now go pay a visit to Mariano Murru of Argiolas and
> >>give him 3 month's written notice to get his wines in line with those of
> >>Chateau Rayas, or else the committee will do something to him...
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Almost all grapes in wide use were first cultivated in a small area,
> > then transported to other areas. In cases where the tranport took place
> > centuries ago, the grapes have already diverged from the parent stock.
> > They are no longer the same grapes. Grapes taken from Greece 3000 years
> > ago to Italy have evolved. If Sangiovese's origins are Greek, that is
> > irrelevant. We don't have to use any Greek wine as a reference.
> > Likewise with Cannonou: it is no longer Grenache.
> >
> > Now, we are talking about taking 20th c Tusacn Sangiovese stocks and
> > transpanting them somewhere else. Wines made from those stocks would
> > have to be compared to the wines from the home territory, because the
> > grapes have not had time to evolve.
>
>
> The grapes are not that important, terroir will reveal large differences
> that make varietal similarities irrelevant. In good wine, that is.

That's what I'm saying, Mike! Sangiovese from somewhere else is not
going to be like Brunello, Vino Nobile, or Chianti!

>
> --
> Mike Tommasi - Six Fours, France
> email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail

"Michael Scarpitti" wrote .....
>>
>> Name a popular varietal that doesn't do well anywhere else but one
>> region.
>
> Nebbiolo, for one.
>

Nope - wrong again Michael - there is some wonderful Nebbiolo produced
in Australia.

--

st.helier

"Mike Tommasi" wrote .....
>
> Comparing Condrieu from Condrieu and from other parts of the world ...
>

In the (hopefully), temporary absence of our resident pedant Ian Hoare, may
I offer the following correction..

"Comparing Condrieu from Condrieu and *Viognier* from other parts of the
world ..."

;-))))

--

st.helier

st.helier wrote:
> "Mike Tommasi" wrote .....
>> Comparing Condrieu from Condrieu and from other parts of the world ...
>>
>
> In the (hopefully), temporary absence of our resident pedant Ian Hoare, may
> I offer the following correction..
>
> "Comparing Condrieu from Condrieu and *Viognier* from other parts of the
> world ..."

Close, milud: "Comparing *Viognier* from Condrieu and from other parts
of the world ..."

Mark Lipton
pedant-in-training

Mike Tommasi wrote:
> UC wrote:
> > Mike Tommasi wrote:
> >
> >>UC wrote:
> >>
> >>>Mike Tommasi wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>miles wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>UC wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>miles wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>UC wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Tuscany is the home of Sngiovese, and all wines made from that grape
> >>>>>>>>would have to use Tuscan wines as the reference point.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>The issue is not where a particular varietal originated. My point is
> >>>>>>>that there are numerous regions that can produce a great wine from a
> >>>>>>>given grape. Not just one.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Not the point.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I realize you are saying all sangiovese must be compared to those
> >>>>>produced in Tuscany. Why? Just because thats where it originated
> >>>>>doesn't mean its the standard for comparison. It doesn't mean Tuscan
> >>>>>wines are better or worse.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Yes, I agree. What's more, in good wine the varietal is not nearly as
> >>>>important as the terroir.
> >>>>
> >>>>Comparing Condrieu from Condrieu and from other parts of the world, one
> >>>>finds similarities at the most very basic level, so the comparison is
> >>>>rather pointless.
> >>>>
> >>>>Same with Sangiovese, you can get good Sangio outside Tuscany, it is
> >>>>totally different, and demanding a comparison to a REFERENCE Sangio
> >>>>(allegedly tuscan) just shows how crude one's understanding of wine is.
> >>>>
> >>>>Grenache from Sardinia is quite interesting, so is Grenache from
> >>>>Chateauneuf du Pape. Yes they have something in common, but by UC's
> >>>>ravings one should now go pay a visit to Mariano Murru of Argiolas and
> >>>>give him 3 month's written notice to get his wines in line with those of
> >>>>Chateau Rayas, or else the committee will do something to him...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Almost all grapes in wide use were first cultivated in a small area,
> >>>then transported to other areas. In cases where the tranport took place
> >>>centuries ago, the grapes have already diverged from the parent stock.
> >>>They are no longer the same grapes. Grapes taken from Greece 3000 years
> >>>ago to Italy have evolved. If Sangiovese's origins are Greek, that is
> >>>irrelevant. We don't have to use any Greek wine as a reference.
> >>>Likewise with Cannonou: it is no longer Grenache.
> >>>
> >>>Now, we are talking about taking 20th c Tusacn Sangiovese stocks and
> >>>transpanting them somewhere else. Wines made from those stocks would
> >>>have to be compared to the wines from the home territory, because the
> >>>grapes have not had time to evolve.
> >>
> >>
> >>The grapes are not that important, terroir will reveal large differences
> >>that make varietal similarities irrelevant. In good wine, that is.
> >
> >
> > That's what I'm saying, Mike! Sangiovese from somewhere else is not
> > going to be like Brunello, Vino Nobile, or Chianti!
>
> OK, so then why use ONE as reference? Since I agree that they are different?
>
>
> --
> Mike Tommasi - Six Fours, France
> email link http://www.tommasi.org/mymail

The Tuscan wines have a certain similarity based on their composition.
Chianti is almost identical to Vino Nobile, while Brunello is much
richer. But they're all identifiably Tuscan. Right?

"Mark Lipton" > skrev i melding
...
>
> Close, milud: "Comparing *Viognier* from Condrieu and from other parts
> of the world ..."
>
Now, isn't agreed that Condrieu is way overrated? Btw, I did have a Viognier
today, from Chile. A nice little wine, with the floral characteristics, but
just a quaffing wine :-)
I don't see any reason why some region somewhere shouldn't produce a
Sangiovese surpassing the Tuscany ones - but then it would be compared to
the 'original' wouldn't it?
Anders

Thank you learned one !!!!!

--
Respond to nils dot lindgren at drchips dot se
"miles" > skrev i meddelandet
news:EgkEg.13844$lv.2347@fed1read12...
> UC wrote:
>> miles wrote:
>>> UC wrote:
>>>
>>>> Of course. Some grape varieties 'travel' well; others don't. By this I
>>>> mean that they will not do well outside their home range.
>>> Name a popular varietal that doesn't do well anywhere else but one
>>> region.
>>
>> Nebbiolo, for one.
>

> ... However, Argentina out produces Italy

Really? I just checked with Oz Clark and according to that the planted area
in Argentina is a very paltry piece of land compared even to Lombardia
(Valtellina), not to mention Piemonte. Yuo have a source for that?

>
> Same thing I find with Syrah (Shiraz, Sirah). While California produces
> some excellent Syrahs I find Australia to be a magnitude better. Mostly
> because they have been producing it much longer. Experience plays a large
> role just as finding the ideal regions. Given time and market demand
> there is no reason great Nebbiolo wines couldn't be produced in many other
> regions besides Piedmont.

According to Milord St.Helier Oz make good Nebbiolos, but I have never heard
of them - only that it is a very tough grape to make anything out of -
except in Piemonte (and somewhat, in Valtellina).

You live and learn, right?

Ceers

Nils Gustaf