Outrage as Montalcino proposes blended Rosso

Outrage? Why outrage? Producers should have the option of making another wine from Montalcino as they see fit. It should carry a designation different from Brunello and Rosso, of course, maintaining the unique character they possess. I wholeheartedly support those wishing to increase production by introducing wine appealing to consumers...approachable, easy to drink. Is it not in the industry's interest to make wine to sell?

I agree with Nick Belfrage and others. Producers who want to blend international varieties with Sangiovese already have DOCs available that allow them to do so. Creating 2 tiers of Rosso will mean that the generic Rosso will end up as a dustbin for the worst grapes, whose defects can be disguised with a dollop (and 85% in Italy is an aspiration not an exact figure) of Merlot or Syrah.

What every wine maker of "New World" wines is trying to do, is to create an identity to their wine. I am sure it often seems like unfair competition for wine makers in the old traditional wine making areas, not being able to work as freely as their counterparts in the "New World", but I believe just that has helped the "Old World" wines to stay strong. Remember what happened after Beringer PR. Chardonnay 1994 was selected by Wine Spectator as the No 1 wine in the world. The next years after every white wine from the New World tasted like wood

The vote is to create 3 categories which are:
1) Rosso di Montalcino Sangiovese Superiore, and 2) Rosso di Montalcino Sangiovese which both remain 100% Sangiovese and are defined by differences in yield. In essence it is these wines that will retain the hierarchical relationship with Brunello.
3) Rosso di Montalcino, is to contain a minimum of 85% Sangiovese with 15% other red grapes’ in the blend.
Key positives for the consumer from this are:
• Sangiovese is now clearly identified on the label
• Winemakers will be able to in lesser Sangiovese years enhance quality by producing more of category 3 which also means less of 1) & 2).
My point of view is that whatever is best for the consumer long term is best for the industry as a whole. The consumer will in time come to understand the 3 categories.
Having tasted on various occasions the new vintages of numerous Rosso di Montalcino side by side I can attest that there is a big variation in quality from site to site. Plus already wineries produce a lot of Cabernet, Merlot, and Syrah in the Montalcino growing area.
In 2008 three of the top Montalcino estates were investigated for having added non-Sangiovese red wines in the blend. Vintage to vintage only the winemakers really know if their Rosso di Montalcino is always truly 100% Sangiovese.
Thus I see this as a positive step that provides better for the consumer and allows the individual wineries further scope to produce the wines that they want too. Given categories 1) & 2) I don’t believe that the reputation and historical significance of Montalcino wine will be harmed at all. I do belief that it will lead to better wines being produced and in a more transparent manner.

This topic has become a very 'hot topic' on acclaimed Italian wine commentator Franco Ziliani's blog website. If you are interested to see the discussion - some in English and some in Italian, please go to: http://vinoalvino.org/blog/2011/08/nicolas-belfrage-master-of-wine-prende-posizione-contro-il-cambio-di-disciplinare-del-rosso-di-montalcino.html

I don't doubt that some of the producers in favor of this change are already blending their Rossos. It seems to be an Italian tradition to make this type of change then seek approval after the fact ala Gaja with his use of cabernet sauvignon in the late 1970's and early 1980's. Nothing more than a marketing ploy.

The region already has an appellation for other grape varieties, Sant'Antimo. Some producers are simply hoping the Montalcino name will allow them to charge more for their wines, as the Sant'Antimo name doesn't carry the same prestige.

Rosso di Montalcino is a young Brunello. Brunello must be 100% Sangiovese. So should Rosso. If you wish to add other grape varieties you can make an IGT or DOC Sant Antimo.
On the international markets the problem with Rosso di Montalcino is its name. Red wine of Montalcino infers a basic red wine and an appropriate price. It is not this and the prices have escalated considerably in recent years, making it a very difficult sell. BUT adding international grape varieties will not change this and will merely degrade Rosso di Montalcino to the enormous basket of international blends around the world selling at £15 - 20 retail upwards.
A bad move and for ourpart we will only continue to import Rosso that is 100% Sangiovese of which we currently have 4 different ones all of which sell very well.

Do you buy Montalcino? I encourage you to make your thoughts known to the vintners so that they will know the fine wine consumer is against it. I would be happy to buy a good blended St Antimo if one is presented to me, but please let Montalcino be Montalcino. Thank heaven for the Piemontese who aren't trying to go the same route!

Before anyone does anything in the strongest terms it should be noted that, until BdM attained DOC&G status, BdM itself was allowed to have a small percentage of grapes other than Sangiovese in the blend. I'm not suggesting that the regs for BdM be changed but there is a precedent for blending in Montalcino.

Nicolas Belfrage is leading a campaign to resist a damaging current proposal. In this case I wrote on the Franco’s blog and on the Jeremy’s blog that I will not express still my opinion on two posts dedicated to the letter of Nicolas. I appreciate the letter of Nicolas, but at the same time condemn his call to vote “NO” and the Ziliani’s appeal to send You an email to adhesion. To me it’s completely right to express their evaluations, also welcomed the foreign guests (I encouraged some of they to write their comment), but this atmosphere of NO or YES, to divide us into good children and bad children as in asylum, it’s nonsense. I had a long correspondence with a well-known producer of Brunello, very pleasant and fruitful (as I hope); we have not concealed anything as true friends, but I do not allow its publication until voting took place and validated in order not to put now my finger in an open wound.

As well written Nelle Nuvole on Ziliani’s blog, “In pending further information, developments, messages and anything else excited I would reiterate that the greatest risk, even more dangerous to change the specification pr Rosso di Montalcino is to create a rift among the various producers . So to make them more vulnerable, insecure, fearful of the future. And have them continue to fight among themselves, instead of finding a system of union that would strengthen the importance of Montalcino wines, made with Sangiovese grapes from the hills of Montalcino “. This is the problem.

On must come to an agreement and I have proposed the following position, which is mine and I hope tey are considering.

Rosso di Montalcino must be DOCG Superiore and not stay two or three variants of the DOC as Rivella’s proposal.
My proposal is this: extract a Rosso di Montalcino DOCG Superiore from DOC Rosso di Montalcino, and this DOC will be emptied. It does not seem quite complicated, since it was adopted by Superior Aglianico del Vulture, Asolo Prosecco Superiore, Barbera d’Asti Superiore Barbera del Monferrato Superiore, Bardolino Superiore, Superiore Cesanese Piglio, Conegliano Valdobbiadene Prosecco Superiore, Dolcetto di Dogliani Higher Dolcetto di Ovada Superior, Soave Superiore, Superiore di Valdobbiadene Cartizze, Valtellina Superiore, Vermentino di Gallura Superiore and in all Italy, not only in Tuscany. It was “complicated” for they? No. Why must be complicated to Montalcino?

With this new DOCG would be more out specific areas of production, minimum number of plants per hectare, the form of new plant breeding, training system still permitted to existing plants, type of pruning of buds per hectare, maximum yield of grapes per hectare in specialized cultivation, consent to any emergency irrigation, winemaking and bottling site, maximum yield of grapes into wine, prohibition of practice of forcing, threshold increased alcohol content, standards for labeling. Exactly what was done in all other DOCG extracted from a previous DOC on the whole Italian territory.

As in those cases, moreover, even the DOC “Rosso di Montalcino” current may remain in force and therefore be deprived of the single variety (of which just only 100% Sangiovese would be included into the “Rosso di Montalcino DOCG Superiore”) and therefore would be suitable to all other types of reds that are currently included in Sant’Antimo DOC (and just extract all with the same writing, without changing a comma, only the name). The DOC Sant’Antimo then remain only for white wines and vin santo. Rivella could be content, calm down, the Banfi could sign an arbitration award in which undertakes to stop pestering (because it is quite isolated), or another election of new President and I hope that he will be a negotiator capable, out of all the parties perennial contention.

However, I do not like the proposal Rivella absolutely diction: why should it be found an inscription, a symbol, to be affixed on the label for the wine of those intending to make pure? Is not they who have to change a damn thing, if anything are those that add other varieties that should declare, such as writing, how, in what percentages, and undergo the same rules of control which is subject Brunello di Montalcino, including analysis of DNA, to verify that the addition is only one authorized, permitted, and the exact percentage is not exceeded. Furthermore, it should finally fix the downstream controls, those that allow self-control, directly between producers. This fact should have the right to buy bottles of wine on the market which they consider suspicious, analyze them, and transmit information to the Consortium. So even most of the allegations, winks, gossip about the wines of his colleagues are uniformly scaled.

Having breakfast here in NY while I was thinking about drinking a Rosso di Montalcino tonight, so I googled it to have some ideas and here I am. What can I say? I am shocked, I thought it was the greatest value for 100% Sangiovese which to my taste buds is the best grape in the world. Do you really want to take my fun out? Do you really think that I am going to stick with it no matter what just because I like the name? GET REAL

What if some of the Montalcino producers decide to make a sangiovese-plus-one-other blend and call it 'Montalcino Vino da Tavola' (maybe they already may)and and it outsells the traditional 100% sangiovese Montalcino Rosso because the public prefer it? The quality of the wine, any wine, will speak for itself and not be dictated by tradition alone.

Most of the best wines in the world are single grape variety; Burgundy both white and red, german Riesling, Barolo, Barbaresco, Pétrus, Rayas, Brunello...

This is realy stupid.
Who needs another international style wine? Montalcino is unique because it's made 100% of their authochtone grape brunello. If you dont't like it, chose for another wine or drink coca cola
Ron Andes MV

#outrage. As a fan, I must say Rosso and Brunello have a special magic. They are unique in its way.

Sluggish sales of such great wines can only mean poor marketing strategies, as quality-wise there is nothing wrong with them.

Do not pollute and cannibalize the quality and magic of the Rosso to gain more sales. That would be the wine equivalent to cutting corners on a Ferrari for it to compete with BMW for sales numbers. You Italian wine producers should know better!

Good piece Adam.
So let me get this right. Frescobaldi argues that appellation expanded too much, and Sangiovese is planted in poor sites, therefore new varieties should be allowed? Crazy argument.

Montalcino got the name recognition because of 100% Sangiovese. I have never tasted any other wine produced in Montalcino that was even close in terms of quality. Cabernet i decent but nothing to write home about (much better in Bolgheri), Merlot is awful. I remember even tasting a Sirah, the worst Sirah I ever had. Why dont you just rip these other vines up? Why don't you just concentrate on Sangiovese in those plots where it works?

You guys are just trying to exploit the successful "brand name" of Montalcino in order to unload the supertuscans sitting in your cellars that nobody wants. Problem is that consumers aren't stupid and if you allow other grapes in to Rosso di Montalcino they will not buy them. Shame on you for even thinking about such a move!

I can't help but agree with Mr Belfrage. The vote should be 'NO'. As his letter points out, if producers in the area want to make this sort of wine, they do not need to create this category since they already have St Antimo or IGT which were created to allow just the kind of blending the large producers want. But of course, IGT or St Antimo don't say 'Montalcino' on the label. So what they want is to take advantage of the name - which means that it has built up some kind of recognition for what it is - but change the nature of what it is they are offering the consumer - thus nullifying the work of building up an image based on what the wine was like, since it will no longer be like that. Brilliant strategic thinking.
It is interesting to note that it is Banfi and Frescobaldi, the large landowners with extensive plantings of 'other varieties' which are pushing for this. The motives are pretty clear from Mr Frescobaldi's statement that sales have been sluggish for a few years.
What gain a man if he inherit the earth and lose his soul?

As an importer of Montalcino wines I totally agree with Nicolas Belfrage. Having tasted a multitude of Montalcino wines over the years I feel that, currently, the Montalcino wines are losing their distinct identity without further exasperating the problem with the addition of international grape varities. The next stage will be the introduction of international grape varieties into Brunello and that would be the death knell for this wonderful wine. If the introduction of other grape varieties happen, why not then classify it as another Chianti which it is what it will be competing against because it will no longer be Montalcino.

The call for a General Assembly on September 7 surprised me. First of all it ignores an unwritten rule that says you do not call an Assembly during harvest when everybody is totally absorbed by the grape ripening.
Also surprising is the fact that the proposal is substantially the same as the one presented 6 month ago when the Board had to back down and renounce putting the changes to the vote of the producers in order to avoid being defeated.
Surprising is the fact that the numerous meetings between producers and the Consorzio held since February to address the matter with the participation of a University professor did not produce a rational, a road map for the future, a strategic plan to support the proposals of changes to the protocol of production.
I do thank Nicolas Belfrage for his intervention: I agree with his vision of the situation. As he says in his open letter, the producers of Montalcino that want or need to soften their sangiovese already have the option to do so by writing on the label of their wines Chianti or IGT Toscana or Sant'Antimo.
Let's harvest and produce great wines as we have done for many years already!