The summary

A run of poor vintages has contributed to a disappointing tasting, with few high points. Tread carefully, advises Peter Richards MW, especially with the 2017 vintage

WAS ThiS The most underwhelming Decanter panel tasting ever? Quite possibly. Certainly, in the judges’ view, this was one of, if not the worst Chilean panel tasting in recent memory. As one commented: ‘Rather than giving a drinking window, for many of these wines i was tempted to write: “Never!”’

Sauvignon Blanc is usually a strong point for Chile. As one of the country’s most widely planted varieties, it is produced in a range of styles across price brackets, with some world-class examples at the top end. This tasting sought samples from all over the country in the £8-£30 price bracket. What could possibly go wrong?

Lots, clearly. First, the numbers: 62 wines were tasted – itself not a huge sample size for a tasting like this,

perhaps reflective of the lack of confidence or shortage of stock. Of these, more than half (33) scored 85 points or less. Only 10 wines (16% of those entered) broached the 90-point threshold – there were only two scores of 92 and the highest a solitary 93. Tumbleweed ran through the Outstanding and exceptional categories.

So what did go wrong? Well, the timing for one. Two-thirds of the wines in this tasting (42) were from the 2017 harvest, the fourth testing year in a row for Chile (see p121). it was clear that many producers had been forced either to harvest early and underripe, making for lean, simple styles, or had waited too long. Many wines simply lacked personality or length. ‘it [2017] was one of the worst vintages for Chilean Sauvignon Blanc, and this

Entry criteria: producers and UK agents were invited to submit their latestrelease Sauvignon Blancs available in the UK for £8.99 or more. Two wines per producer were allowed

was one of the key reasons for the poor performance in this tasting,’ commented Patricio Tapia. Less than one third of the 2017 wines made it over 86 points.

‘These wines do a disservice to Chile,’ was the reaction of Dirceu Vianna Junior MW. Dilution, lack of personality, poor value for money and frequent issues with reduction (sulphide characteristics) were cited as reasons for this verdict and ascribed to overly high yields, imprecise winemaking, ambitious pricing and cutting corners in production.

Few regions emerged unscathed from the carnage. The Central Valley proved dire, as usual. Tapia identified ‘the north’, particularly Elqui and Limarí, as positives – albeit based on relatively few examples, and as wines ‘for connoisseurs’. On balance, San Antonio (including Leyda) outperformed Casablanca, the latter tending in Tapia’s view to be ‘more generic in quality and character’, while the former delivered slightly more intensity and complexity. ‘If I were to pick a Sauvignon Blanc from Chile, I’d go for San Antonio,’ was his advice.

Stylistically, the few examples using oak worked well, adding depth and roundness without falling into excess. ‘Oak was quite intelligently used when it did crop up, adding textural elegance,’ said Vianna.

So what lessons can be learned? For us drinkers, beware the 2017 vintage. There are exceptions, from Chile’s more northerly reaches in particular, but too many duds for comfort – 2016 and, when it comes, 2018 probably make safer bets. Also, don’t be afraid of oaked Chilean Sauvignon. And choose your producer with care.

For the producers, lessons need to be learned. Respect the vintage and your consumers – and adapt pricing accordingly. Don’t cut corners in winemaking, lower the yields, focus on character and quality. Above all, get Chilean Sauvignon back on track.

‘For producers, lessons need to be learned. Respect the vintage and your consumers – and adapt pricing accordingly’