Okay, raise your hands – who among you likes Malbec? Hmm…just about everyone. So many people love this grape,
and there are plenty of reasons why. It
has tannin and structure, like a Cabernet Sauvignon, but also sweet tannins and
the sheer drinkability of a Merlot.
Even better, there are good wines made
from Malbec at every price point; you can get perfectly acceptable bottles in
the $12 range, truly interesting wines at $20, and fascinating specimens when
you’re willing to go to $40-50. What’s
not to like?
Next question: how many of you, before
you read the title of this post, knew the name of the ancestral home of
Malbec? It seems like the number of
hands raised at this point is significantly fewer.
Although Malbec is one of the six grapes
that producers can legally put in a bottle of Bordeaux, in current practice it
very rarely makes an appearance in the wines from that region. Transported from France to Argentina in the
19th century, Malbec took an immediate liking to the dry,
high-altitude climate of the vineyards that arose in the foothills of the Andes
Mountains. The overwhelming majority of
wines that made Malbec so popular in the USA are imported from Argentina.
However, Malbec had a starring role in
Cahors, in southwestern France, long before it became a supernova in
Argentina. In Cahors, Malbec produced
what was known in times past as “Black Wine,” so named after the deeply-colored
bottlings that came out of this region.
In days gone by – including the years when I first became entranced with
wine -- it had fierce tannins to match.
Today’s Cahors is a bit less tannic than
in years gone by – or perhaps we should say that the riper tannins in
present-day Cahors are more approachable.
The intense color is still there, however, as are the aromas and flavors
of a great wine that is the foundation for the Argentinian bottles so admired
now.
Today’s Wine Face-off pits two Cahors in
current release against one another. The
initial test dish: green peppers stuffed with beef and rice.
 |
| a rich, complex winter red |
2010
Chat. de Cénac (Cahors, FR): Profoundly dark plum. Bordeaux-like bouquet; leather, cedar, pencil
lead, dark berries and spices – complex and beautiful. Blackcurrent and dark berries again on
the palate. Long finish. Nice with stuffed peppers – the dark fruit
qualities emerged even more. Serious
wine, this is drinking well now, but I’ll bet it has some years ahead of
it. Truly lovely. **** ½
 |
| a good wine, but less interesting than its opponent |
2012 Clos la Coutale (Cahors, FR): Dark plum. Red licorice,
blueberry pie, mulberry and faint hints of sour cherries. A slight medicinal note. Soft on the palate, decent balance, but
initially lacking a bit of complexity.
Darker fruit and some interesting cola notes come forth with food. Pales in comparison with the de Cénac.
***
Well, here’s
the closest thing to a knockout among the Wine Face-Offs I’ve done so far. Let me stress that the Clos la Coutale is a
fine wine – nothing wrong with it at all.The Chateau de
Cénac simply beat it in every category; it was more perfumed on the nose,
richer on the palate, and altogether more complex overall. It was one of those rare wines that combine
structure, balance and elegance. A new
favorite, and an estate I’ll be keeping an eye on in the years to come.
No comments:
Post a Comment