A dozen wines from the New World’s two best producers of sauvignon blanc – South Africa and New Zealand – are tasted by panels in both countries. Angela Lloyd reports.

Consolidated results
*****
Saint Clair Wairau Reserve

****(*)
Fleur du Cap Limited Release
Cloudy Bay
Stoneleigh

****
Villa Maria Clifford Bay
Wither Hills
Zondernaam
Palliser
Cape Point Vineyards
Havana Hills
Neil Ellis Groenekloof
Springfield ‘Life from Stone’

These are the results of averaging the scores of the two teams of tasters.

British opinion was well summed up recently by Giles Kime in the Daily Telegraph: ‘South African Sauvignon Blanc is fast becoming the region’s finest export, thanks to the local knack of squeezing every last drop of vibrant flavour from the grape. The French might make Sauvignon Blanc with more finesse, New Zealanders might extract more startling zinginess, but South Africans combine both qualities, creating wines much greater than the sum of their parts.’ Others also mention value for money as a big plus.

If we and the New Zealanders lead the New World sauvignon pack, what do we think of each other’s wines? Last year, Grape initiated a first comparative taste-off of some of both countries’ finest examples from the 2001 vintage; the two panels, in Stellenbosch and Auckland, enjoyed them pretty much in equal measure: Steenberg Reserve came a pip behind overall winner, Saint Clair Wairau Reserve, with the rest well mixed.

How would the 2002s, from different harvest conditions, measure up when we repeated the internal double tasting? The Cape’s harvest had started wet and cool, causing problems with downy mildew and rot. A late and lingering heat-wave followed, but those who were meticulous were happy with the concentrated flavours they’d captured. New Zealand wasn’t entirely let off the hook: the growing season saw heavy rain and only with a late summer came warm days and cool nights, allowing fastidious growers to harvest very good grapes. In short, 2002 produced some ordinary as well as promising sauvignon blancs in both countries.

In this tasting, with the scores of the two panels aggregated, South Africa’s competitiveness showed best though newcomer Fleur du Cap Unfiltered, which placed close behind Saint Clair Wairau Reserve, once again the overall winner. The Cape’s poorer overall performance in this year’s confrontation perhaps indicates less success in dealing with difficult vintage conditions.

In contrast, New Zealand seems to have a greater depth of quality at the top end. Relevant also is that all bar one of the New Zealand wines tasted were from the famous Marlborough region – a fairly cohesive terrain at the northern end of South Island, allowing for a deal of certainty over quality, given the right conditions and producer approach. Although there is some pattern as to origin of the Cape’s top sauvignons, areas where quality examples can be produced are scattered, and every vintage seems to reveal yet another site or area with potential. This keeps returning us to lower stages of the learning curve; the Kiwis, who do not have these variations, are able to improve at a faster rate. Of course there are other regions producing quality sauvignon there, Martinborough (Palliser’s origin) at the southern end of North Island, and Nelson west of Marlborough being the main ones.

But scores and rankings don’t tell the whole story. The three (out of five) New Zealand judges who had also participated last year noted that this time it was more difficult to distinguish between the two countries’ wines. This closing of the stylistic gap was also noted by Christine Rudman: ‘Five years ago there was more difference between the styles; now it’s more blurred.’ Many local winemakers used to believe a leaner palate was part of the variety’s crisp, zesty nature; they also lacked experience of how to harvest riper grapes and still capture full flavour. Today, their sauvignons are riper, with more fruit richness and weight in the mouth as well as characteristic zing. There are improvements on the Kiwi side too: they are making wines with more mouthfilling fruit richness, with less reliance on residual sugar to balance acid and create mouthfeel (sugar is still there, but mostly less obvious than in the past).

Philip van Zyl put another spin on the contrast. He had imagined he would easily recognise the New Zealand wines through their crystalline acid structure, and admitted afterwards that ‘it proved more difficult than I anticipated. I think the local winemakers, perhaps through differential picking, are now achieving better acid structure.’

Members of the local panel who had judged last year were also more positive about the local wines. For Michael Fridjhon, ‘There was a good, dense group of high scoring wines and fewer with overt faults.’ Gyles Webb also remarked on the better overall standard; ‘Phenolics in particular were less evident, which was a pleasant surprise, as 2002 was a horrible year, with high malic acid, giving hard wines.’

Controversial pungency

One major distinguishing difference between the wines was the controversial odour of ‘sweaty armpits’. ‘Pungency equals New Zealand,’ suggests Rudman. Despite dividing the two panels, the South African judges, who had rejected it out of hand last year, were more tolerant this time – within certain parameters.

According to Australian wine-writer and -judge, James Halliday, this aroma derives from a group of sulphur molecules belonging to the mercaptan (thiol) family, developing in sauvignon blanc under reductive fermentation conditions. Halliday says mercaptans at too high a level are considered faults, but judges have now come around to the idea that, at lower levels, this particular one can add complexity to sauvignon blanc. The NZ$64 000 question is, where does it tip over from the acceptable to the unacceptable?

Both groups obviously agreed on its acceptability in the Saint Clair. Here it forms part of the aromatic balance and textural richness the South African judges found wanting in the Palliser. If this latter wine drew some grimaces here, the New Zealanders smiled in happy recognition. It is a major trophy winner on its home turf, yet for Webb the sweaty pungency was ‘artificial, giving more flavour than body,’ something I found exaggerated by the residual sugar. It was our least-liked wine. In contrast, none of the Kiwis placed it lower than fourth.

It seemed useful to turn to an outsider for a third opinion, so I asked British winewriter and judge Anthony Rose. He agrees that ‘it’s one of those wines you either love or hate’. ‘I have liked it’, he added on a personal level, ‘but the more I come across it, the more I find this character stridently one-dimensional.’

Palliser’s character doesn’t appear to be origin-specific within New Zealand. It not only appears in this Martinborough wine but also, to varying degrees, in those from Marlborough.

Detecting origin in the Cape wines proved equally difficult: the Fleur du Cap, Neil Ellis and a portion of Havana Hills are from vineyards in close proximity on the West Coast, yet none had any obvious commonality of character. Of the other three, only the Springfield is sufficiently different to be picked out.

Despite their quieter nature, the local wines did show interesting layers of flavour. This, together with good mouthfeel, made them both pleasant drinking and food-friendly (as indeed we thought the Saint Clair). Fridjhon described them as capturing ‘more Sancerre finesse – and that’s exciting territory’.

THE JUDGES

New Zealand
Sue Courtney – Editor www.wineoftheweek.com
Sam Kim – Wine Consultant, Master of Wine candidate
Brent Marris – Wither Hills Managing Director and winemaker
Kay Morganty – Wine consultant
Simon Nunns – Chief winemaker, Coopers Creek, Obsidian