nouveau / liquid assets / preview / review
Clearly, for Guffens the objective is to maintain the reductive character they have nurtured in the wine during the bottle maturation, affording the potential for extended bottle aging. This was surely less successful under screwcap Sarantex than they hoped, but SaranTin and Diam have given a much more satisfactory result, and there was not much to choose between them. Julien commented, “Since 2012, the difference between the Diam and the screwcap is very small, when there is one. Since 2011, the quality of our wine has increased every year. Managing the closure is the last step for us before the customer, and it seems now that it doesn’t detract from the quality of our wines!” Avoiding cork taint was what most motivated the Brajkovich family to move to screwcap. Paul Brajkovich recounted to me the TCA nightmare of the 1999 Maté’s Chardonnay. “The previous year we had also had an incident where we had to bring back 600 cases of 1998 Estate Chardonnay from the US due to high incidents of cork taint. When we first started to use screwcap, we did bottle some under cork so we could do our own comparison. What became very clear early on was the screwcaps were consistent and the corks variable. If you managed to find a good cork, it was similar to the screwcap bottle. With that sort of variation and probability of failure, we wondered
Above: Bottles aging in the cellar as part of a cork vs Diam trial at Domaine P & M Jacqueson, Rully.
32 | THE WORLD OF FINE WINE | ISSUE 87 | 2025
why anyone would want to use natural cork at all! Each to their own.” But before we dismiss natural cork... the biggest surprise of this tasting was the quality and expression of the wines closed that way. The natural assumption coming into this tasting would be that mature wines would be fresher under screwcap than under cork. Well, that, at least was mine. Putting aside the Antipodeans’ problems accessing decent corks, and focusing on Guffen’s wines where quality cork has certainly been used, I preferred the wine under cork to screwcap, as did many of the panel. “The notion that wines under cork would develop faster, and wines under screwcap would age slowly, was pretty much disproved,” remarked Stephen Browett. Although admittedly he added, “Screwcap was slightly unlucky on the day, in that we didn’t have any corked, tainted, or oxidized wines from the bottles with corks.” To which I would add that cork benefited from being compared with the inferior Sarantex screwcap, since there was no overlap of SaranTin and cork. Julien Desplans told me, “I expected to see a big difference between screwcap and cork—fresher wines with screwcaps, some oxidation or corked flavors with natural cork, and more open wines with Diam. But as we had very good natural corks during this tasting, often the wines with corks were more intense. Our wines, I think, are more powerful (than New Zealand Chardonnays) and less fruity. They have more tannins, so they can support a little oxidation without problem.” When I cast my vote for the wines under cork, it was not for same reason for each wine. Some wines under cork were fresher, while others were more evolved but in a more attractive way than under screw cap. As a Burgundy enthusiast, I am looking for terroir definition, and it was my impression that wine under cork seemed more expressive of the climat. This is all very subjective though, and the panel’s votes clearly indicate that tasters are looking for different qualities. When all is said and done, however, this tasting was a sneaky triumph for cork. To paraphrase Longfellow’s poem, “When cork is good, it is very, very good. And when it is bad, it is horrid.”
TASTING Kumeu River 2002 Estate Chardonnay
Under cork, the wine was pretty oxidized, while under screwcap it was hanging on, with citrus and beeswax on the aroma, then toasted hazelnuts and a touch of Marmite on the palate. Clearly, I preferred the screwcap, but even this was bit past it for my palate. As someone said to me in Canada recently, “I like old wines but I don’t want a glass of roasted nuts.” Panel vote: screwcap 17, cork 0.
Kumeu River 2002 Maté’s Vineyard Chardonnay
The screwcap wine was still palate in color and showed citrus and brioche aromas. Quite attractive up-front and much more youthful than the Estate Chardonnay, but it became a little bitter to finish. Under cork, however, the wine was flat and oxidized. Someone remarked, “If this was Burgundy, we’d be speaking of pre-mox.” Screwcap for me. Panel vote: screwcap 14, cork 3.
Felton Road Chardonnay 2001
Nicola Greening from Felton Road recalled that this was a hot vintage and the vines were young, planted in 1992. It was barrel-fermented, with a higher proportion of new oak than is currently used. Both cork and screwcap were very evolved, but not quite as evolved as the Kumeu River’s slightly younger wines. Both versions had a tinned asparagus aroma. On the palate, the wine under cork was heading toward toffee apple, with a hint of burned caramel on the finish. Any fruit had fled the bottle, leaving an impression of oak. I preferred the screwcap, which seemed softer and purer. Panel vote: screwcap 15, cork 2.
Verget Chablis Bougros 2009
While the results for the New World wines seemed predictable, this next duo of cork and screwcap shook things up. The wine under cork was clearly more engaging and fresher wine, in which the warm vintage was reflected in the aroma of sweet hay with a touch of honey, while the palate was rich up-front, but tightened to a firm and extended, steely finish. The screwcap, by contrast, had a more evolved honey into toffee apple aroma and the palate was fuller and looser with a shorter finish. I liked the way the cork kept the wine trimmer, brighter, and much more youthful. The screwcap was the inferior Sarantex. Panel vote: screwcap 2, cork 10, tie 2.
Château des Tourettes Tinus Chardonnay Vin de France 2017
A Guffens au Sud wine from a vineyard on a limestone plateau. In this, the first Diam vs screwcap face-off, both wines were quite closed. I marginally preferred the screwcap, but it was a close-run thing. The Diam wine had a smoky, reductive aroma, with a straight, fresh, and tight palate, while the screwcap had Riesling-like kerosene characters and a lime- fresh finish. Both were still looking youthful, but the screwcap seemed a touch more evolved. This was a Diam 10 and the screwcap the superior SaranTin version, since the switch to it had been made from 2014. You might suppose the SaranTin screwcap would be more reductive, but it was not the case. Panel vote: screwcap 10, Diam 4, tie 3.
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
