Warwick Estate, Trilogy, 2009

Regular readers will know my interest in South African wines seems never-ending and that I am fortunate enough to have a good supplier nearby, so I have an almost limitless stock of the things. I gave Warwick a go based on positive comments by various distinguished boozers (the boozerati, perhaps?) and on favourable reviews by characters such as John Platter who, love him or hate him, is seen by many as the Parker of South Africa. His list of the Top 100 South African wines consistently dominates the marketing of SA wine - although people often criticise it for only plumping for already-established wines, leaving smaller vineyards largely to themselves.

Another, more superficial reason for choosing Warwick Trilogy is that I rather like the name and the bottle shape. At £20-24 it's not overly expensive and something you can cheerfully share with some friends without worrying about the bank. Might do a post on how to run successful tastings/wine events sometime, as they're a rather good way of getting into wine.

Anyway - onto the wine. Decanted for 2 hours then re-tasted after 4.

Nose: Typical Bordeaux at first - pencil shavings, graphite and cedar with an almost earthy texture to the nose. Tobacco, pepper and dark chocolate coming in from time to time, with the chocolate starting to build its intensity. Dollop of cassis in there. Peculiarly it's a rather light nose, despite the strong-seeming flavours in there. Everything is quite soft and gentle and it took some teasing to get into it. The dark chocolate has developed into a hint of chili and has a bit of bite to it. On the re-taste the nose had become much more opulent and jammy, but there was still a hefty dose of pepper in there.

Palate: Largely as above, but without the pencil shavings. The coffee is more intense and the cassis is more noticeable, but not exactly prominent. On the re-taste it was noticeably jammier, but still suffered from the slightly harsh/sharp coffee and dark chocolate. I rather wish I'd been able to decant this for longer as I think it was going really exciting places.

Body: Remarkably it was medium-light. There's plenty of tannin but there's no mouth-coating blast sense to this and it's certainly not overpowering. Rather well poised I thought - a nice weight in harmony with the clear flavours. Nice and smooth (before the tannic hit).

Finish: Quite austere and drying. Not terribly long, either. Not unpleasant, but not exactly one to write home about.

Conclusion: A nice wine, but perhaps unremarkable in some respects? I like the chocolatey-ness (almost like eating cocoa nibs - the intensity and sharpness was very interesting) but at the same time I was hoping for just a touch more fruit. I mentioned my regret that I didn't leave this out for longer, and I suspect I would have been rewarded if I had. Essentially, it tastes rather like classic claret but a little bit more accessible (especially at this age). Definitely worth a try purely to see if the construction is something you like or don't. I will try it again one day.

Points: 85/6 (note to new readers - I prefer to use a slightly broader scale than the traditional 85-100 used by most 100 point markers. By way of explanation, 85/6 is a perfectly respectable wine. Not one I would rush to put in my cellar, but one I would happily buy and drink again.)

Sula Dindori Shiraz Reserve 2010

So here's something a little bit different. Sula, the Indian vineyard that boldly claims to be 'at the forefront of the Indian Wine revolution', was founded by Rajeev Samant in 1993 after leaving his job as an engineer in Silicon Valley. Dindori Reserve was launched in 2005 and shows the experimental edge and growing flair of Sula. Aged in new oak for 1 year.

While the phrase 'Indian Wine revolution' may seem a little vainglorious, I thought it would be an interesting wine to try. I had been recommended to try Indian wine before, but I was cautious as to how well it would travel. Given the distinctly different climates of England and  India I felt its merits may be lost (especially as I tried it in mid-Winter - which was actually a rather good thing, as you will see from the notes below).

Along with experimenting across established Indian varietals, Sula also produces a dessert wine (India's first), a Sauvignon Blanc and a Chenin Blanc (also firsts for India). While I suppose this could be termed a revolution in that it has never been done before in India, the fact that these are 'firsts' for India suggests to me that this is a revolution very much in its infancy. Still, with some fairly slick marketing projects, including luxury accommodation on the vineyard, Sula may well end up being as successful as its marketing suggests. They definitely need to change the labels though...

Colour: A rather opaque, cloudy red. A hint of purple.

Nose: Peppery, spicy (cinnamon) and jammy. All characteristic Shiraz tastes. Now comes the interesting part - salt and smoke combined with distinct notes of dried black tea. For those of you familiar with Lapsang Souchong tea, this is a remarkably comparable nose! My notes say in capitals 'TEA'! How interesting.

Palate: Really really smoky fruit. Plenty of oak. Molasses and cinnamon (perhaps burnt cinnamon?) come in with some spice in the middle, giving it a rather charmingly sweet toasty flavour. Lapsang comes through again in serious quantities. Interesting. Quite heavy but not oppressive.

Body: Quite acidic and reasonable tannic. Quite austere on the back. Reasonably smooth.

Finish: The austerity really punches in here. Again, I can't help but make comparisons with slightly over-brewed Lapsang tea. Very smoky, drying and slightly sweet. Not wholly unpleasant.

Conclusion: Classifying a wine like this is extraordinarily difficult (much to my amusement I originally typed 'tea' here - reflecting just how tea-like it was!). It's hard to tell if its well-made or hideously unbalanced. The smokiness is something I quite like (for a glass or two) but I think those of you who have more refined palates may find it oppressive. I liked the sweet spiciness in the middle of the palate but was rather less fond of the austere ending, which is rather too dry for my liking.

Points: 84. Give it a go. It's an extremely interesting wine and is a great conversation-starter, especially given its provenance. Balance is an issue, but perhaps that's what makes it exciting.

Welmoed Cabernet Sauvignon 2010, Stellenbosch

Time for something a little different. While I generally focus on mid-range wines, sometimes I come across a table wine that's so good it deserves an honourable mention. Welmoed is one of those wines. At a bargain-basement £7.50 (or £5 each if you buy 2+ from Majestic), it's a real blockbuster and a massive crowd-pleaser to boot. Simple enough to enjoy on with food, it also has a degree of interest that will please the thinker-drinkers among us.

As with many South African cabernet sauvignons, it has a meatiness and smoky spiciness that appeals and is something that people may not necessarily have tried, meaning they are often under-appreciated.

Nose: Peppery and savoury. There's definite hints of tabasco in there as the sharpness comes through. The pepper strengthens and is joined by chilli before too long. Quite intense. Touch of smoke to smooth the edges. Tobacco.

Palate: Heavy fruit, spice, chilli and cheese (?!). The red fruit is jammy and intense, and well supported by the smoke and cedary tobacco. Classic cigar-box cabernet sauvignon, here. A decent development of flavour within the palate, but not overly complex. Surprisingly pleasant served slightly chilled. I would certainly recommend brining one up from the cellar and drinking it straight away and seeing how it evolves as it begins to warm.

Body: Remarkably light body given the intensity and weight of the nose and palate. Could perhaps even be called delicate, at a push.

Finish: The spice remains strong while a dollop of sweetness comes through at the end to clear the palate and leave a pleasant after-taste.

Conclusion: At £5 you really cannot go wrong with this fellow. With a good range of flavours which provide both enjoyment and interest, it's a perfect wine for any red meat and would go particularly well with a lump of grilled, peppered steak. I have since bought a case, and would heartily recommend you do the same.

Points: 84

Saint Clair Pioneer's Block 14: 'Doctor's Creek'

I mentioned in my first review that I love Saint Clair as a vinyard. In many ways Saint Clair was the first wine that I really thought about and one that got me hooked on the idea of Pinot Noir and the versatility of grapes in general. Matt Thomson has won a host of awards, including the prestigious for his work at Saint Clair and the Pioneer Block series always deliver - even their Gewürztraminer was excellent, and I am no fan of Gewürztraminer.

I tried PB 15 (as it was in its previous iteration) at approximately this time last year and have since tried several of Saint Clair's Pinot Noirs. The current vintage is 2011's Doctor's Creek, or PB 14 for short. I have now tried it on 4 occasions, 3 of which were tastings, and I feel that I'm on to a real winner with it. I would describe it as an excellent example of  how a New World beast can be tamed.

Nose: SC PB 14 has a lovely intense nose of all the great parts of Pinot Noir - it's a jammy raspberry blast with a hint of mushroom earthiness to back it up. Nutmeg dances around the aroma to give it a hint of depth. An almost ferric hint slips in there somewhere, but is elusive if you look for it. As with Pioneer Block 3, intensity is the buzzword regarding Saint Clair's wines, but don't imagine that it is just intensity. There's also great complexity and this is not a wine to be dismissed as a New World 'fruit bomb'.

Palate: Sweet with the slight sourness that characterises top Pinot Noir. The fruit is held in place and structured with this, combined with pepper and spice backing up the juiciness. This is most certainly not Burgundy - it's juicy and fruity and lacks the savoury 'barnyard' gaminess of top Burgundy, but has much to interest nevertheless. In time (approx 1.5 hours) the spice becomes more pronounced - becoming more Burgundian. Interesting. Excellent.

Body: As an inexperienced taster, this is somewhat hard to describe. In terms of flavour, this is a full-bodied mouth-filling wine but it isn't heavy in the slightest. It is in fact exceptionally smooth, suggesting it's light of body. Whatever the correct description is, it's lovely.

Finish: Is that a hint of menthol, clearing my palate for another glass? Only one way to find out...

Conclusion: With cellaring potential of 5 years from vintage (i.e. up to 2016) it is well worth buying a case or two. It is an easy-going crowd pleaser and will never fail to impress. Serve with slow-cooked paprika chicken or prawns with squid-ink linguine (contact me for a recipe if you want). I have a photo of it somewhere that I should upload... 

Points: Excellent. 91, especially after a little time exposed to the air.