'Chianti' Riserva?

OK then, lets have a "Chianti Superclassico" DOCG!

M.

ROTFL

Michael Pronay:

:-)

You see, Michael? Such is the mess they managed to produce: instead of leaving specifications like "classico" to mean what they should mean, i.e. a matter of style, they used them instead to mean what the other word was supposed to mean, that is: simply Chianti. If the Chianti area only was entitled to this name, then we could easily have a Classico (meaning a typical blend of sangiovese and other local varieties) and a modern one (meaning the blend of whatever so called "international" grape varieties one believe it to be suitable), with much better clarity for everybody and respect for the truth.

Don't you realize that many, if not most new wine drinkers, as well as many older ones, are buying wine by grape variety? Chardonnay, Cabernet, Shiraz, Pinot Noir, Merlot (cough, cough), Zinfandel are established as recognized 'brands', no matter where they are made.

Sorry to contradict you in in one point: The Chianti formula was a

M.

So? One more reason to drop this outrageous habit of abusing the name of a territory to brand wine produce outside of it.

No, I disagree here. I would say that it is a sort of simplification to account too many things to your neighbours in Barberino being part of the Chianti area. And also that perspective can lead to the risk of evading responsabilities. It is just too easy to say: "if were the only Chianti we would have a better territory". I have serious doubts that hypothetical status would have prevented the occurence of certain little disast&#.

Take that horrific thing in the historical centre of Castellina. That "mill" probably dates earlier than most of the industrial development in the W - NW areas you referred to. And also consider the future development of the Pianella industrial district in Gaiole. Not to mention the 10^3 new apartments :-/ which have just been built in the historical centre of... you know where. These episodes are primarily the outcome of choices made by the local town councils and economic interests internal to your municipalities. Is there a strong link between all that and you not being recognized as the only Chianti? Is there the influence of the bad Tavarnelle guys "stealing" the Chianti brand from you? May be there is. As well as I would not say that Pluto gravity force on Earth surface is zero ;-)

In other words I would not see the Chianti term all in your hands as a magic wand *even* for envinronmental issues.

Daniele

I do not know much about that, just read a couple of articles. Anyway that could be interesting.

Well, we can't deny that the Gaiole based "Chianti Liberation Front" has an ambitious plan. ;)

I may be dumb, but I can hardly see the contradiction, here;-) Anyway: wine from Chianti used to be very reknown in Tuscany and beyond, long before Bettino Ricasoli invented that formula. His contribution was to study the issue and devise a formula which first of all reversed the proportion sangiovese-canaiolo. In the past canaiolo used to be the most popular grape variety to produce the "vin vermiglio" in Chianti. Then he allowed the possibility to add not simply white grapes, but malvasia white grapes, and anyway he was very clear in arguing that this was not recommended for high quality wine. It was just a way to "estinguish" the sangiovese in case the season produced very strong vintages. The real problem came in 20th century, in its second half in particular, when trebbiano grape variety became popular, and quantity rather than quality was the aim. We all know what a poor and dull grape variety can be trebbiano particularly when allowed to overcrop, as it certainly was the case during the 50s and 60s of the 20th century. So, if we are to give Bettino Ricasoli the credit he deserves, historically, this concerns his "discovery" of sangiovese as the main guy to give control of the thing. Its regulation of "up to about 15%" (later stupidly fixed in "15%" no more no less) of white grapes needs to be compared with the habit of throwing whatever white grapes were available, until his time, and possibly even in higher proportions.

Nowadays, anyway, "traditional" Chianti wine would mean a wine made from sangiovese (at least 75%) and _possibly_ canaiolo (and maybe a tiny proportion of white malvasia), by this meaning that 100% sangiovese would still be considered traditional. The point, now, concerns the presence of "international" grape varieties (cab, merlot, syrah..). That is another reason I consider the name Chianti rather useless to identify wine: you can find instances of Chianti (and even of Chianti Classico) pretty variable from the above point of view. And at the same time you can have real champions of "traditional" way to make wine out of sangiovese, of outstanding quality (and maybe even coming from deep inside the Chianti area!) which are NOT branded as Chianti at all; to name just four of them: Pergole Torte of Montevertine, Fontalloro of Felsina, Flaccianello della Pieve of Fontodi, Percarlo of San Giusto a Rentennano... all of them coming from Chianti, all of them made out of pure sangiovese, all of them branded as IGT Toscana (one as IGT Colli della Toscana Centrale)

With the recently revised Chianti Classico regulations has not the minimal percentage of sangiovese risen to 80%? I also knew that starting from vintage 2006 white varieties are no more allowed.

Daniele

...and international varieties are allowed. That's right. And sure enough, I was saying a "traditional" Chianti wine. Never mind the regulations ;-) It may well be called IGT....

About international varieties and sangiovese: it was a surprise when -at a local wine festival- I was replied that the Giorgio I (Fattoria La Massa, Panzano in Chianti) bottles were without the traditional black rooster label because they decided to leave the Chianti Classico DOCG.

Huh???? Perhaps you didn't get it the first time:

MOST PEOPLE DON'T BUY WINE BY GEOGRAPHIC AREA, BUT BY GRAPE VARIETY.

I find Vino Nobile a better wine, typically, than Chianti Classico. This is a reversal from the way it used to be. The only Chianti I find appealing is Rufina. Then there's Morellino di Scansano...

The we must not evade our responsibilities is far too right. I am not saying that the culprit of environmental disasters lies in Val d'Elsa or lower Val di Pesa.... I am saying that it would be easier for us to fight for the defense of landscape and environmental integrity if the territory of Chianti was limited to Chianti, whose economic aim is more clearly rural and touristic than the industrial districts of SanCasciano, Barberino, Tavarnelle, Poggibonsi etc..

You are right, but note: because that horrific thing has been the single reason why Castellina did not get the Orange flag by Touring Club (and more than once), differently from what happened to Radda and Gaiole, maybe now we are nearly there at getting that monster down! They eventually realised that it was not worth the price...

And not by chance it is strongly adversed, and it is not so obvious that it will be built. The opposite is true. If there is a chance of avoiding that outrage, that resides in the plain of Arbia being right at the feet of a line of castles and churces belonging to the most ancient history of Chianti.

Maybe I know where.. but please go on. Do spell the name of that village, and of its municipality.

I am not saying that in the three municipalities of the historical Chianti there is no environment mismanagement. Not at all. I know there is. And by the way the municipality of Gaiole has a grim record on this respect. But now things are going to improve, I have reasons to believe.

By the way, the building of new huge wineries is one of the reasons of pressure against the environment. Do not tell me :-/ I had to suffer more than just an outrageous project being built right in front of me.

And what shall we say about the other real monster which is the management of the Montegrossi quarry? Fortunately the thing has just come out and is being discussed right now. Maybe they managed to stop it.

I am just saying that if we do not severe the nominal link between a purely rural, agricultural-touristic area like Chianti and the industrial or semi-industrial districts of the lower plains, or the area next to Florence, then it will become more and more difficult to fight this defensive battle. Even more difficult that it has been so far or is being right now. The Chianti Classico consortium is now backing a sinister approach brought forward by the "8 mayors" (headed by the Tavarnelle one), in favour of a demise of the culture of constraints imposed by landscape criteria ("superiamo la cultura dei vincoli.."). They want to get to a co-decision approach, i.e. to an acceptance of those constraints by the local businesses. That would mean the actual looting of what remeains of that fragile environment.

I can hear you, mate. I repeat: so, what? What you are saying is one more reason to drop the despicable habit of abusing the name of a geographic area for the sake of selling wine. After all, as you show me, people do not buy wine by geography but by grape. So, could they stop selling their bloody wine as Chianti, please.

I guess Giampaolo Motta has left the *Consorzio* Chianti Classico (true, I haven't seen him at the Anteprima for a few years now) - or did he change Giorgio primo from Chianto Classico DOCG to Toscana IGT?

M.

I knew that they left the DOCG, and starting from vintage 2003 Giorgio Primo is bottled as Toscana IGT.

So, Michael, were you at the Anteprima this year? Shame there was no chance to meet and chat. I think that it would be nice if usenetizens made themselves recognisable in events like these. Maybe next year, who knows?, the Consortium will allow a small meet.ing.poi.nt to be arranged..