originally posted by Thor:
Thor, I can't imagine and have never heard anyone referring to CNdPs as varietals. To me CNdPs are the antithesis of varietals as there often (usually?) is no principal grape.
There are single-variety CdPs. Quite a few, in fact. Often grenache. Occasionally mourvdre. Often pumped up in one fashion or another...in the vineyard or in the cellar...and frequently the recipients of gobs of points from critics.
Beaucastel isn't necessarily representative. Many CdPs (in fact, many Southern Rhnes) are more than half -- sometimes much more than half -- a single grape. And so, my point was that if they're blends, Geyserville is a blend. If Geyserville can be considered a varietal zinfandel, then many CdPs can be considered varietal grenache.
Since I think obscures the differentiation between "varietal" and "blend" beyond utility, I think a more rigorous definition of "varietal" is more useful. I prefer 100% (though I'd make an exception for insignificant field variation), because otherwise I'm not quite sure where to draw the line. Do we separate varietal and non-varietal Cte-Rties, for example? If so, at what percentage of viognier do we separate the two? I think that's a pointless debate, and one we can avoid if we hold "varietal" to a 100% standard.
Even if we don't, however, I'd hope that it refer to wines intended as representative of that variety. A 90% Napa cabernet sauvignon, so labeled, would qualify. A variable-composition Margaux, so labeled, would not. I'd still prefer the more rigid definition, but I probably can't win that one.
