Page 1 of 1
Should Australia 'classify' it's wines?
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 3:00 pm
by Charles Emilio
Please let me know your thoughts on the following idea:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Australia is blessed with some of the oldest vines in the world, therefore could we try and create some sort of prestige in the world market by creating some form of classification system? (Please note I use the term 'classification in a vague sense')
All old vines would be identified and once their age is scientifically proven they could be "branded" something like:
Old Growth 50+ years
Old Growth 75+ years
Old Growth 100+ years
These new old growth wines would be produced in small volumes and be terroir driven with the intention to age a very long time.
...thoughts...
Re: Should Australia 'classify' it's wines?
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 3:28 pm
by n4sir
At the moment it's more of an an idea and purely voluntary, but Yalumba has put forward a charter to accurately place just how old many "Old Vine" wines are:
Old Vine: >35 years of age
Antique Vine: >70 years
Centenarian: >100 years
Tri-Centenary: Bloody old.
http://www.yalumba.com/content.asp?p=351http://www.yalumba.com/library/YalumbaO ... harter.pdfIf people are really putting a value on the age of the vines and wineries put these terms on their labels it could catch on, but it's not the equivalent of a growth system which would be on the face of it be primarily based on
terroir or other factors. In reality, probably the closest current thing we have to the French classification system (like it or not) is the Langton's auction classification.
Cheers,
Ian
Re: Should Australia 'classify' it's wines?
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:20 pm
by Julio G
I think we should clearly define and promote sub-regions (eg, Wilyabrup in Margaret River) and let the quality of wines from those sub regions speak for themselves... it will quickly become a mark of quality (or not). Classifying based on a particular thing (eg, vine age) does not strike me as a good idea.
Re: Should Australia 'classify' it's wines?
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 4:00 pm
by Charles Emilio
Ian - thanks for the Yalumba link.
It looks like I was thinking exactly what they were.
Barossa will continue to explore sub-regionality for some time to come. It has been trying to lay down some standards for the region, and one area on which it has found agreement is a standard for classifying its old vines, launched last month under the banner 'The Barossa Old Vine Charter'. Under the Charter, vines 35 years of age or more, can be named Barossa Old Vines. Those over 70 will be Survivor Vines; 100 years will be Centurion Vines; 125 years Ancestor Vines - but there is much work still to be done before these terms begin to appear on labels. Rutherglen has requested permission to use the Charter and the Winemakers' Federation has suggested it is something the whole of Australia could consider. 'We'd like to see some sort of position that establishes old vines in a logical hierarchy around the world', says Yalumba's Brian Walsh. 'In the perception of serious wine drinkers, the Old World owns the integrity to old vineyards' suggests Yalumba proprietor Robert Hill Smith. 'To take an Old Vine Charter to the world will cause a lot of people who take Australia for granted to think again. This charter is about integrity: about hoping the wines we put in front of people express the place and variety. It's a necessary evolution that signifies a growing up of Australia'.
It would be a good project to identify all of the old vines, especially those over 70 years.
Each region could release it's Antique vine Wines at a certain date each year with the intention of building up some prestige. It might take a decade or 2 to get things going.
Julio G - good point about the sub-regions. It's been way too long.