the same world-class sparkling-wine specialists for the sake of consistency and accuracy.
n A panel of three equals is better than having a panel of four and giving the chair a casting vote. This is not TV looking for drama. If the judges are the best, trust them to agree.
n When the number of entries jump, we increase how long we judge, not the number of tasters.
n A second bottle of all wines failing to win a gold or silver medal is opened by Orsi Szentkiralyi, our tasting quality-control director, who compares it to the bottle judged. If she finds any sign of bottle variation, that wine is seamlessly fed back into the judging schedule. Even if the judges have requested a second bottle, a third bottle will be opened up.
The results for 2022 It took us 11 days to taste our way through almost 1,000 sparkling wines from 21 different countries. Keeping pace the whole way was Simon Stockton, our reserve judge, who has to remain absolutely in the zone if for any reason one of three judges should drop out. With France regaining its number- one spot and Italy snapping at its heels, for the first time Australia took third place on the leader board, followed by the UK, while Spain and New Zealand were in equal-fifth position.
An ABC of entries not reviewed Argentina can certainly win golds and often does. In some years, however, such as 2022, silvers are as high as it gets. Time to enter magnums? We received entries from Belgium for the first time, with Domaine du Chant d’Eole 2019 Brut Rosé winning a silver straight out of the starting blocks, indicating, perhaps, that this country has potential. Unfortunately, Brazil is a consistent underperformer. I have tasted knockout mature sweet sparkling Moscato from Brazil in the past. Such wines might not be to everybody’s taste in the 21st century, but for their category, they are without doubt world-class, so why not submit them? Canada has not shown its best this year, while Chile plays truant more often than not, which is a pity for a former trophy-winning country.
In vino Veritas
As chairman of the CSWWC, I have no additional powers when it comes to judging. All three judges are equal in rank, and there is no (ludicrous) situation where a chair of judges has the casting vote. I am, however, responsible for how the competition is set up, and one of the most important decisions I have to make is the choice of glass. Riedel Veritas Champagne Glass is easily my first
choice for home and judging. The only glass that comes remotely close, as far as I am concerned, is also from Riedel: the Superleggero Champagne Glass, but that is handmade, hand-finished, significantly more expensive, and its stem is too long to be practical for competition use. At the table, though, Superleggero is peerless. The Veritas bowl is as elegant as it gets, with a paper- thin rim and an exquisitely slender stem that looks thinner than a Zalto. (Actually, it is an optical illusion, because Zalto’s is microscopically thinner for only half an inch [1cm] or so, from which it widens noticeably toward both the bowl and the stem, whereas Riedel’s Veritas retains its slenderness for 95 percent of the length of its stem.) The Veritas stem-to-bowl ratio is perfect for swirling, nosing, and assessing, while the bowl-to-stem and stem- to-base joints are utterly seamless, thanks a proprietary machine-pulling technology that is unique to Riedel. Other manufacturers will no doubt catch up one day, but as far as I am concerned, this machine-made glass is superior to virtually all handmade and hand-finished glasses.
With France regaining its number-one spot and Italy snapping at its heels, for the first time Australia took third place on the leader board, followed by the UK, while Spain and New Zealand were in equal-fifth position
China has underperformed again. Croatia has submitted entries for a few years now, but without much progress and should now submit magnums to determine the potential of that beautiful coastal country. Most sekt producers do not care about a global reputation, just sales on the domestic German market, so most years we see few German entries and seldom any gold-medal winners. For the most part, these producers do not appreciate that global reputations create demand and that demand drives price, whether they constrain themselves to their own market or not. Imagine if Champagne generally, and the makers of DP and Cristal specifically, had the same attitude. They would not be able to ask more than
€10 a bottle. So, come on, Germany: Try to muster up even just a fraction of the pride you have for Riesling and Pinot Noir. There was a time when I tasted 350 sekt every year, and loads of them were of gold-medal quality. India failed to shine this year. Japan produced a silver for the second year running, but if other producers entered, we might see a gold. Portugal and South Africa also failed to shine, which is very disappointing for countries that have won national trophies in the past.
Should do better (and why) In 2022, the CSWWC received 97 Prosecco entries, of which just two won gold medals and six won silvers. Compare that to Prosecco’s average of nine golds and 30 silvers for the three preceding years and you have to ask why. There was an excessive number of faulty, often smelly, wines, but even the non-faulty theoretical bronze and no-award wines lacked fruit, softness, and elegance. When tasting Prosecco, DOCG or DOC, there is always an abundance of amylic aromas, as a result of cool fermentation on extremely youthful wines that try to preserve as much primary and secondary aromas as possible, but there has to be fruit and softness. When the second flight was just as disappointing as the first, Essi
THE WORLD OF FINE WINE | ISSUE 79 | 2023 | 27
Photography courtesy of Riedel
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220
