originally posted by scottreiner:
write about the monsecco, please. i love the more current wines, but have never tried anything more than a few years old!
Eden wrote favorably about them (in general) some time ago.
This one had nicely evolved aromas, free of infirmities. Rather opaque red fruits, tar, and an unexpected citric note that had me doing nasal double takes. The fruit was still quite vibrant, but the slightly throat-burning acidity even more so. Not quite balanced, but close enough. With a bit of time in the glass, the telltale violets began to bloom, completing, with the tar, the set of classic markers. Gave us a lot of pleasure, though certainly not in the same league as the Tondonia. The 720 ml really pissed me off; a crime of less majesté.
Overall, the tempranillo stood the test of time best, followed by the nebbiolo, then the pinots. That is, perhaps, as one might expect (perhaps not if the nebbiolo were a good Barolo), but a cursory search showed that Decanter considers 1970 a 5 star vintage in Rioja, 4 star in Piedmont, and 3 star in Burgundy. So, not too much room for conclusions. Except, maybe, that while I'd rather watch Nureyev than Anderson Silva, it's better to have the latter in your corner were one to participate in a survival reality show.
