The Bacci family owns three separate estates in Tuscany: Castello di Bossi, Renieri, and Terre di Talamo. The latter is located in the Tuscan Maremma and produces reds from the newly minted (2007) DOCG area, Morellino di Scansano.
Morellino is the local name for the clone of Sangiovese prevalent in this region. Wines labelled Morellino di Scansano must be at least 85% Sangiovese by law. The balance can be comprised of many other red varietals in almost any proportion. This leads to some identity issues as Morellino can vary widely in style, body, composition and frankly, quality.
Terre do Talamo lies along the Tuscan coast, in the Maremma. The third of the Bacci family’s estates, this one may be the least notable as Morellino often does not garner the same level of attention as Chianti Classico or Brunello. That said, the 2010 Terre di Talamo “Tempo” can be a workhorse of a Sangiovese. It’s a pretty medium violet color and the aroma is intense with soppresatta and various other smoked meats. There’s cherry there too, but the primary component is very meaty. On the palate, the wine is medium bodied with nice flavors of cherry and earth. It’s a good wine, but nothing more. 87 points, about $12.
 |
| Terre di Talamo’s “Tempo” Morellion di Scansano |
However, as I sat there enjoying this wine, I couldn’t help reflect upon where and how this wine fits into the DOCG hierarchy. It doesn’t approach the levels of an equivalent Chianti Classico and isn’t anything close to Vino Nobile or Brunello.
Why do I draw these comparisons? Because while this wine is enjoyable and represents a good value, it isn’t deserving of DOCG status. Perhaps I expect too much when I see that additional letter on the end of the designation? After all, there are oceans of poor Chianti that bear the DOCG label. If the law is meant to relegate the term only to govern included grapes, alcohol limits, aging requirements, etc…. then I’d suggest they are watering down the designation to the point where it’s virtually meaningless. After all, shouldn’t it be harder to attain than the arguably simpler and less prestigious DOC? Producers within DOC zones lobby and strive to be “promoted” regularly. Surely there is some perceived advantage to achieving the designation? The benchmark is set higher simply by virtue of the fact that the additional category exists in the first place.
I’ve been tasting and writing about Italian wine for over two decades. The wines that first come to mind when someone says DOCG are some of the greatest wines Italy produces: Barolo, Barbaresco, Chianti Classico, Brunello, Vino Nobile. The “G” implies a serious dedication to quality and a wine that is well made and capable of inspiring. Where has that “Guarantee”, which is exactly what the “G” implies, gone?
The Italian government needs to address this apparent lack of credibility or the DOCG designation loses it’s relevance. The Chianti Consorzio recognized this recently when they created a fourth tier of quality: their new “Grand Selezione” which comes into force next year.
However, unlike the wider DOCG issue, the Consorzio realizes that the Chianti Classico DOCG is suffering. They’ve created this higher tier as an additional reference point; a mark of quality that will elevate the wines of compliant producers. But should this be the direction they take?
Like the broader DOCG designation itself, it’s not that new tiers of quality should be created in order to elevate the designation. The designation should mean something inherently. The designation should in essence be devoid of a least common denominator. New tiers of quality shouldn’t be invented simply to distance premium wines from poor ones that bear the same DOCG designation.
As I conclude this stream of consciousness, I’m reminded of an old political quote that’s idealistically thrown about in arguing the merits of a particular politician. “Our job isn’t to pander to the least common denominator, it’s to elevate it!”
So to, with wine….
I wonder if you have decided that Morellino di Scansano isn't worth of the DOCG after having tasted a single wine. Do you know other wineries and wines, have you tasted them in different harvests? Do you know that there are different levels of Morellino di Scansano (Riserva, etc), have you been to Maremma and have you spoken to different winemakers, visited the wineries, talked to the restaurants and wine shops in Italy?
Gianpaolo,
Thanks for taking the time to comment. Of course I have done these things, with the exception of actually visiting Maremma. But in your questions, you make my very argument. "There are different levels of Morellino"… Should that be? That's my point. I've had many Morellino that were worthy of DOCG (Le Pupille's comes to mind) but applying the DOCG to the whole is just as faulty as saying all Morellino are poor therefore none should belong. That's the problem with catch all designations.
I would submit that normal "Chianti" should not be DOCG. That only Riservas and Classicos should have the designation. The same logic could apply to Morellino.
Are you the owner of Poggio Argentiera? Perhaps we can arrange to taste your Morellino? I would love to try it and write up a review.
Salute.
Giovannni
Hi John,
I understand what you are saying, but the appellation system is not designed to do such things, it is designed to ensure that a wine comes from a certain area and that is made in a certain way. The "G" in particular, doesn't guarantee the quality, but the origin, by means of a sticker added to the bottles and a series of crosschecks by the authorities. I don't know any appellation in the world, let alone the ones in Tuscany, that can ensure that all wines have the same level of quality. Even within Burgundy's Grand Crus that are differences that are sometimes quite high, in small, homogeneous plots of land no bigger than 50 Ha in the biggest crus.
The DOCG status should be given to appellation that have a recognizable a proven penetration in the market, with particular consideration for international markets, that have been established for a minum period of time as DOC, etc. etc. I'm not saying that the system if perfect or that there haven't been abuses, particularly in recent years (that is because from now on they will be granted at EU level, grabbing the power of making new DOCGs from Italian authorities hands, or at least that's what they say), but certainly Morellino is recognised by most people as not being one of those, beacause of his extreme popularity, its history, its average quality level and its importance in terms of production and market weight.
It would be nice if you tasted our Morellino, yes. Email me in private if you want to do so info [at] poggioargentiera dot com
Gianpaolo,
Thanks for the excellent insight. I definitely agree with you that the "G" is only a guarantee of origin, but I think somehow it has morphed into something more. However, I readily admit that could be my own impression and that it's not shared by others. Surely there are poor Brunello as well.
I guess I draw on the distinction that the labeling is supposed to mean something. If it's a matter only of origin and not quality, why not label everything IGT Toscana? There must be some benefit to calling attention to Morellino di Scansano, Brunello, Barolo, etc….
Good discussion, thanks again for your participation. I will email you privately.
Gianpaolo is right, of course. The G refers only to the origin, not the quality. And it's important to remember that the DOC system was designed to protect the producer and appellation… not the consumer. In the U.S., the system has been perceived as a gauge of quality. And sadly, many Italian growers associations have embraced this misunderstanding. On a totally unrelated note, I wrote about one of Bacci's wines today too!
By definition though, DOCG has extra rules, stricter on yields and minimum ageing etc than DOC, although they vary regionally. While I agree that DOCG can never guarantee consistent quality, it should imply a step up from DOC because of the extra regulation and 'Guarantee' However, every DOCG has its good and bad wines, and the best guide is in finding producer's wines you like and trust, and then trying similar examples, and following recommendations of people you trust. Attending as many tastings as possible helps too!
I agree John, that generic Chianti being DOCG is ridiculous, there is a lot of very average basic Chianti that is a mile away from good Chianti Classico. It is such a large area that a DOCG for such a vast varied zone defeats the object of a DOCG in my opinion. The new extra Grand Selezione is only likely to cause confusion though.
I also agree that Morellino di Scansano, nice as it can be, does not come close to the best wines from Montalcino, Montepulciano and Chianti Classico. I don't think it has as good a terroir for Sangiovese, in terms of climate and soils.
Hi John-
Very interesting post. And the discussion too. I will adjust my thinking.
I admit to being confounded by the DOC/DOCG classification system in part because it seems ever-changing. I always feel uncertain about the current list. I have read that DOC and DOCG will be replaced by DOP and that IGT will be replaced by IGP. How will this work and when will the change happen? References I've seen seem pretty vague.
I know it's a bit off the point, but stumbled upon your post and the discussion and thought you may know.
Thank you.
John, though I know nothing about these regulations (I understand that they are necessary), when I taste a wine and the producer fails to impress (QPR), I almost never return for more, as an overarching system, that fails, but I really don't care, because a wine can have all the pedigree and still not impress; if a winery wants to sell a quality product then in vino veritas. Winery over classification.
Just my 2 cents!
Jeremy,
Thanks for adding your thoughts. You make a great point about the perceived intention of the designation and what it actually is meant to accomplish. As they say, perception is reality and that appears to be the case by what you say regarding some of the growers associations.
Which Bacci wine did you try? I love the Bossi CC and the Renieri Brunello. And they're great values too!
The notion of terroir is interesting. I would think there is definitely something to that fact that many wines from the area are concentrated more in Bordeaux varieties than Sangiovese. I can't say what the exact number might be, but many of the "flagship" wines seem to be comprised that way. Tassinaia is one that strikes me that bucks the trend.
Hi Nancy,
I'm glad you found the site and thanks for commenting. I've not heard that the DOC/G designation will be replaced. DOP and IGP, as you may know, applies to produce: cheese, Neapolitan pizza! San Marzano tomatoes, etc.. I'm not aware of any potential change to that. Of course literally one is a "protected zone" and one is a "guaranteed zone" of origin.
I'll definitely update this post if I find out more.
Thanks for writing.
John
Dennis,
I certainly understand where you're coming from. As much as I have my favorites, the bottom line is, I'm a consumer with limited dollars to spend on wine. Like anything else, I'm trying to maximize my enjoyment. Part of the fun is finding that $12 or $15 wine that drinks like it's worth $30 or more. The discovery is part of the fun. The Talamo wine was a good one, and I didn't mean in any way to malign it or even malign Morellino specifically. This just happened to be the tasted wine when the notion popped into my head. Had I been drinking a generic Chianti, the discussion may have been very different.
Let me leave you with another thought though. This wine, as a DOCG…does it seem fair that the Poggio Antico Rosso is "only" a DOC? The grapes come from the same area as Brunello – but one is a DOCG and one is DOC. If it's the origin and NOT the quality that's being protected, shouldn't Rosso di Montalcino be DOCG too?
I'm not really arguing one way or another, but simply pointing out how the classifications can lead to misperceptions because of the inconsistency.
Ciao.
J
It is actually already possible to denominate a wine as IGP and DOP. This is what the EU have decided in order to make the appellation system of all food stuff more homogeneous. For wine, it is still possible to use the "old" system, but I increasingly see more wines with DOP or IGP. Of course, this will actually merge the DOC and DOCG system into DOP, and all we are saying now will no long matter anymore.
Ahh, that makes sense Gianpaolo, thanks for weighing in again. I don't think I've ever seen a wine labeled that way here in the US. If it's voluntary, do you think producers will stick with the old method? It kind of reminds me when the DOCG laws changed the blend for Chianti. Things like Cepparello, Fontalloro, etc could have become Chianti Classico overnight, but most producers stayed with their Proprietary name. I would think DOC and DOCG has more value than DOP, no?