Spectacular new vintage sauv blancs

[SueNZ]

The results from the wine shows are starting to come in and some of the new 2007 savvies are looking quite spectacular. I was given the enviable task of writing the wine descriptions for all the gold medal winners at the New Zealand International Wine Show (http://www.nziws.co.nz) and all the gold medal winners are excellent, but have to say my top two wines (in the sauv blanc class) were Saint Clair Block 3 Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc 2007 and Blackenbrook Nelson Sauvignon Blanc 2007.

Saint Clair Pioneer Block 3 '43 Degrees' Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc 2007
Named 43 Degrees because of the south east to north west orientation of the vines, this Single Vineyard savvie is all sweetness and brightness with classic flavours of grass, gooseberry, lime, tropical fruit, spice and zest with power and intensity. It's just delicious.

Blackenbrook Vineyard Nelson Sauvignon Blanc 2007
Daniel and Ursula's Schwarzenbach's passion has resulted in this truly remarkable Nelson sauvignon Blanc. It's spicy and smoky with a tinge of grapefruit zest, capsicum and tomato on a juicy fruit palate of richness and power. There's the slightest hint of sweat with musk and pineapple on a tropical finish with bright acidity and balance all the way through.

Craig, see you have just posted reviews of some of the gold medal wines on your website - although you don't have a review for the Block 3. Did you go to the Pick the trophies Challenge last Tuesday night? What was your favourite?

Cheers,
Sue

[Craig(NZ)]

Sue

Somehow I missed tasting the st clair block 3!!

To be honest I think about half of them could have quite easily been the trophy. The st clair wairau reserve just had a bit extra texturally, but in the end it depends what elements of the wine the judges put importance on. there were more exuberant wines than the wairau reserve there. so many of them were gorgeously light footed, detailed and balanced. the drylands was fantastic, blakenbrook, sugar loaf, the st clairs.....

A handful of them were a bit more chunky and slightly more clumsy but many of the lineup must be contenders

Yes I did pick the trophies but under that time pressure in that format it is an impossible task to be accurate. my picks were purely on impression and some were just plain educated guesses.

I picked the st clair wairau reserve as the trophy winner but im not that confident, it just depends as I say what elements weigh on the judges mind most heavily. wairau reserve must win in the textural dept and if they look for sophistication. if they look for purity, balance, expression and pure marlb a number of others could do it

[Bick]

Thanks for the notes on the Blackenbrook especially, as I've never had their wines and it will be nice to try it.

On a more general note regarding the medals given at the show, I do wonder about the difficulty in judging wine, and how inconsistencies are inevitable. An example I noticed from the website: Wooing Tree Pinot Noir 2006. I'm sure Bob Campbell has suggested this is a gold medal standard Pinot, and I've read glowing reports from others too - but it only got a bronze. Which is fine by me as I was a bit underwhelmed when I had a glass of it, but I think it illustrates the problem with marks and medals.

As a judge at this show, Sue, how much disagreement is there over the medal allocation and who has the final say?

[Craig(NZ)]

shows definitely have failing and really its impossible to try every wine on the market and make a clear ranking list of a-z. its just a physical impossibility

yes one can look through the list of silver and bronze and wonder why x got a bronze when y got a gold that is for sure.

also shows judge wines entered only which isnt always a true reflection of life.

shows are a very avg indicator alone only but all go to creating a picture.

nothing is better than the combined opinion of many sources

[SueNZ]

Thanks for the notes on the Blackenbrook especially, as I've never had their wines and it will be nice to try it.

On a more general note regarding the medals given at the show, I do wonder about the difficulty in judging wine, and how inconsistencies are inevitable. An example I noticed from the website: Wooing Tree Pinot Noir 2006. I'm sure Bob Campbell has suggested this is a gold medal standard Pinot, and I've read glowing reports from others too - but it only got a bronze. Which is fine by me as I was a bit underwhelmed when I had a glass of it, but I think it illustrates the problem with marks and medals.

As a judge at this show, Sue, how much disagreement is there over the medal allocation and who has the final say?

Hi Bick,
It is truly a matter of consensus. Panels of three senior judges (and one or two associates) assess the wines. If there is a huge discrepancy in the scores of a particular wine by the three seniors, they say what they like / don't like about it and the wine is retasted and scores adjusted up or down accordingly. So, if something like the Wooing tree only received a bronze in this competition, that is what it deserved on the day.

From each 'flight', high scoring wines are 'recalled' and are poured from a new bottle and rejudged with the three senior judges and the Chief Judge (Bob Campbell MW) and the Assistant Chief Judge joining in - at this stage you don't score, but just say 'gold' or 'silver' (or even bronze). This determines the final medal - so at this stage of the proceedings at least three judges of the five judges have to go gold, for the wine to get gold. However if a wine was judged gold by all the judges in the preliminary round, and doesn't go gold on the recall round, a third bottle is opened.

You have plenty of time to judge each wine. In the sauvignon blanc glass, for example, there is concern that the more austere wines may be overlooked, but you have plenty of time to let that aftertaste kick in and to let the flavours expand and linger on the palate. I taste the wine and write my notes and either it comes, or it doesn't. The aftertaste and length is as important to me as the aroma, the attack and the flow through the palate. Especially so with sauvignon blanc but also with other varieties. You also have to be aware of all the styles that are produced in this country - and overseas, as this is an international competition. You can't pigeon hole anything. You can't mark down a wine because it is an 'alternative' style. That said, it does have to taste like the variety is is meant to be. Above all, the wines have to have balance.

Hope that helps.

Cheers,
Sue

[SueNZ]

also shows judge wines entered only which isnt always a true reflection of life.

As do magazine tastings........

Looking forward to seeing the rest of your notes from the night.

Cheers,
Sue

[Bick]

Many thanks Sue, that's a very interesting insight to how it works. Sounds a lot of fun too!

[SueNZ]

Many thanks Sue, that's a very interesting insight to how it works. Sounds a lot of fun too!

Bick, I see you are in Auckland. Why don't you apply for a stewarding position at the New Zealand International Wine Show next year? It's the stepping stone to judging if you are really keen. NZIWS is held at the North Harbour Stadium around the beginning of Sept. They also have volunteer stewards at the Easter Show, which is held at the Showgrounds in Greenlane about the end of Feb.

[Craig(NZ)]

As do magazine tastings........

Looking forward to seeing the rest of your notes from the night.

Sue

I simply couldnt write notes on every wine. I found myself distracted from actually deciding which one was my favourite trying to pull apart every wines flavour profile!!! Time didnt allow. So I only wrote notes on a handful more which i will publish.

Although reputation (which is built from success and following) has a certain inertia to it, I think at the end it could well be the greatest indicator of long term quality. Classic wines are always classics. Trophy winners are here today gone tomorrow to a great extent

I know I would not have scored gold for every wine i tasted that night. some of the international wines i found barely drinkable - just too much of everything. Some were just obscene (especially to an already assaulted palate!!)

However that all said im only speaking from my perspective - someone who tastes quite a few and has done for years. Shows definitely have value for those just getting into wine. I can remember a decade ago i would go through results and decide what to try. Its a lot of fun at the end of the day

[SueNZ]

Although reputation (which is built from success and following) has a certain inertia to it, I think at the end it could well be the greatest indicator of long term quality. Classic wines are always classics. Trophy winners are here today gone tomorrow to a great extent

But look at how the reputation is built up. Saint Clair Wairau Reserve would have the most trophies to its name of any New Zealand sauvignon blanc. It has a remarkable show track record - but Saint Clair do herald this wine as the best of all the great savvies they make.
Even Felton Road made its reputation from it's one and only show, where it won the Pinot Noir Trophy for its 1997 Pinot Noir - and suddenly the name is on everyone's lips. They don't need to enter shows any more.

I know I would not have scored gold for every wine i tasted that night. some of the international wines i found barely drinkable - just too much of everything. Some were just obscene (especially to an already assaulted palate!!)

Yes, it is a big ask to try and taste 163 wines in just 3 hours, which was the task you had ahead of you. The judges have a much more leisurely time frame.

[SueNZ]

Have either of you had the chance to try Shaw + Smith 2007 Sauvignon Blanc (Adelaide Hills)? Certainly a niceer drop than other recent vintages of this wine in my opinion. A nice herbaceous, grassy rather than tropical-melange that seems the favoured style of far too many overworked Sauvignon Blancs.

H Rooview - Yes, I have.
It's a nice drop alright, but it was a little bit overwhelmed by several of its NZ counterparts when I lined it up in a blind tasting (although I didn't pick it as an Aussie). My notes from the end of August.

Shaw and Smith Adelaide Hills Sauvignon Blanc 2007
A sweeter citrussy style of savvy with zesty lemon on the nose and crisp apple and lime acidity in the palate with a chalky minerally texture, a dry, racy finish and hints of tropical fruit emerging on the aftertaste. Medium-bodied in style with the touch of sweetness making it quite quaffable, it seems to be screaming for a seafood accompaniment and later, when tasted alongside pan-fried, crispy skin flounder, it proved to be a very good match. There was also roasted fennel on the plate, and while this did not work with the young Wairau Valley Marlborough wines, it worked okay with the Shaw and Smith. (NZ$25)

Also tasted the M3 Vineyard Chardonnay 2006, which is absolutely delicious.

[SueNZ]

So the Blackenbrook picked up the Trophy for Champion Sauvignon Blanc at the New Zealand International Wine Show awards dinner last night. Second trophy in a row for this wine already this year. That's consistency for you.

[Craig(NZ)]

i just looked at the list sue. i only picked 3 of the trophies - gris, rose, international red.

chardonnay, merlot, fizz and sauvignon blanc winners made my 'finalists' list though so I wasnt too far off there

chardonnay i picked clearview res. impossible section to do quickly. The church rd and clearview i tasted off as a pair at the end but picked the clearview with not much configence

rose I didnt like but picked it correctly anyway as the other one lacked a bit on the mid palate.

riesling i got no where near, the st helga would have been close to bottom of my list but i prefer my riesling off dry usually. i picked framingham classic though the forrest was also very good

was surprised by the sweet wine winner, i thought the buller was clearly the best and as good as a top sauterne

also surprised by the kemblefield. I thought the lawsons was clearly better. i could be biased though as im not a kemblefield fan.

merlot didnt surprise, clearview was my 2nd pick but i thought the church rd was a more serious wine. I prefered it.

pinots i blasted through them so quickly i didnt know which way was up or down. random pick didnt come home. i think many of that line up could have laid claim to the trophy. i picked crater rim omihi just because it was a little different, also thought the villa taylors had a good shot at winning

lucked out on the fortifieds - both lovely wines of completely different styles. either could have won

not surprised by the viognier. i just thought id go left field for that one, i liked the leaner morton estate better even though common sense told me the villa would win.

i didnt even try the shiraz or cab winners!! Tried only 50% of the cabs and 90% of the shiraz. Palate was shot by then and had lost interest. For fun i picked the 05 church rd for cab and Tapastry the vincent was my shiraz pick

so no future for me as a wine judge, i will just have to keep penning independant heresy!!

[Paradox]

I found picking the trophies very tough, and was also put off by seeing the labels. And I found some of the classes too big to properly assess, esp the shiraz, sauv and chardonnay. Still, I was pleased to get 5 right, which was only 1 off the top.

I only tried 3 of the savvies and didn't taste the Blackenbrook which won, and only tasted half of the chardonnays. My favourites were the Clearview and the Squawking Magpie but what struck me was that how good all the wines were, and how it was really stylistic differences that separated them rather than quality.

Stupidly, despite being impressed by the Orlando St Helga riesling, I discounted it as it wasn't from NZ (the judges don't know that tho' - doh!). And I struggled with the Pinot Gris, which all tasted similar.

Reds were better - in the cabernet class I thought the Chapel Hill, Elderton and Taltarni were all lovely, but plumped for the Chapel Hill. Merlot - I thought the Clearview Olive Block was great and picked that one, plus I picked the international red, the Sessantanni.

I spent the longest time with the pinots. My wife adored the Julicher, which won wine of show, but again there was a wide range of stylistic preferences here and my pick was the Crater Rim Central Otago Pinot Noir, a gorgeous, perfumed, silky, sensuous wine.

I thought the hardest class was the shiraz - all the wines were excellent and many would have been worthy winners. I preferred the Thorn-Clark William Randell, and also liked the Gemtree Obsidian and Peter Lehmann Futures but the consensus of the group I was with was the Kalleske Pirathon. None were right, but we've all bought some Pirathon since

Cheers
Rob

[Craig(NZ)]

Im sure if the judges train hard, undertake some extra education and focus a bit more, they will get closer to me next time.

[mgbridges]

Bick, I see you are in Auckland. Why don't you apply for a stewarding position at the New Zealand International Wine Show next year? It's the stepping stone to judging if you are really keen. NZIWS is held at the North Harbour Stadium around the beginning of Sept. They also have volunteer stewards at the Easter Show, which is held at the Showgrounds in Greenlane about the end of Feb.

How does one go about getting involved in stewarding or judging at these events? Sounds like it could be a very interesting experience.

Martin

[bob parsons]

Have either of you had the chance to try Shaw + Smith 2007 Sauvignon Blanc (Adelaide Hills)? Certainly a niceer drop than other recent vintages of this wine in my opinion. A nice herbaceous, grassy rather than tropical-melange that seems the favoured style of far too many overworked Sauvignon Blancs.

Been away from this forum for way to long! This Shaw and Smith has had some rave reviews over here in Canada!

[Red Bigot]

Bick, I see you are in Auckland. Why don't you apply for a stewarding position at the New Zealand International Wine Show next year? It's the stepping stone to judging if you are really keen. NZIWS is held at the North Harbour Stadium around the beginning of Sept. They also have volunteer stewards at the Easter Show, which is held at the Showgrounds in Greenlane about the end of Feb.

How does one go about getting involved in stewarding or judging at these events? Sounds like it could be a very interesting experience.

Martin

I'm not sure things work the same way in Australia. Certainly at the National Wine Show stewarding is not a path to judging, but steward positions have a long waiting list and are generally by invitation from someone on the Committee. I got a gig for the first time last year only after the unfortunate death of one the long-serving team. Most of the rest of the stewards have been on the team for many years and in some cases travel as far as from Queensland or the Northern Territory (where they now live or were working) to spend the (unpaid) two weeks in Canberra for the NWS. And yes, as well as being exacting and hard work at times, it is an educational and interesting experience.

[SueNZ]

I'm not sure things work the same way in Australia. Certainly at the National Wine Show stewarding is not a path to judging, but steward positions have a long waiting list and are generally by invitation from someone on the Committee. I got a gig for the first time last year only after the unfortunate death of one the long-serving team. Most of the rest of the stewards have been on the team for many years and in some cases travel as far as from Queensland or the Northern Territory (where they now live or were working) to spend the (unpaid) two weeks in Canberra for the NWS. And yes, as well as being exacting and hard work at times, it is an educational and interesting experience.

It's really hard for consumers to get into the show thing at all. Some of the shows only take stewards from wineries (e.g. Air NZ Wine Awards, Bragato Wine Awards) or from wine industry trade. Other shows like the International Chardonnay Challenge in Gisborne and the Hawkes Bay Wine Awards use students from the wine courses at the respective Technical Institutes in those regions. But both the New Zealand International Wine Show (which has just completed its 3rd year) and the Royal Easter Wine Awards have consumers. There are a keen team of stalwarts who turn up every year. There are also those who give it a year only and find the work too hard.
The NZIWS also held a judging evaluation seminar this year and the top candidate was invited to associate judge for two days and the next four, to associate judge for one day.
However most of the shows like people to steward somewhere first, if they have never judged before, to get some insight as to how a wine show works. I think it is even a prerequisite at the Air NZ Wine Awards.

Cheers,
Sue

[SueNZ]

How does one go about getting involved in stewarding or judging at these events? Sounds like it could be a very interesting experience.

Martin

Martin,
I will PM you.

[craig loves shiraz]

FWIW......

2007 Villa Maria is very drinkable.

Typical NZ style Sav Blanc with just a little more body than most.

[Craig(NZ)]

and more length than an all black world cup campaign??