IT’S a long while since I've enjoyed a glass of Sancerre, folks, and that's not because they don't make good ones. In fact, you can't say you love sauvignon blanc if you don't enjoy Sancerre. It's just that I started to flirt with those harlots from New Zealand and I forgot about my earlier loves.
Well, after a recent tasting, I decided it was time to send suck up big style and send flowers to my old fling. Sancerre is the spiritual home of the grape and before we all fell in love with the wines of Marlborough in the 1980s and 90s it was the only sauvignon most wine lovers knew.
The wines of Sancerre are more minerally and chalky than those of Marlborough and the fruit is dialled down significantly, but many of us made the initial mistake of rating the two styles on fruit alone. Yeah, the versions from Marlborough are packed with ripe tropical fruits and display incredible gooseberry aromas but the wines of Sancerre are, for want of a better word, classy.
I know it's difficult to measure class, but it is the difference for me. Perhaps it’s an age thing but I’m getting right into the whole terroir thing that I used to tease the French about. Although it pains me to say it, they were bang on about the difference it can make to a wine. If you want an easy example, get a bottle of chablis and a bottle of unoaked New World chardonnay and taste them side by side.
What can I say, soil rocks and so do the French winemakers.
Bougrier Sancerre
I absolutely love Oddbins' description of this as so "buttock-clenchingly minerally" and I can't improve on that!
Oddbins £17.50
The Society's Exhibition Sancerre
Class, class, class. White flowers and gooseberries on the nose with a chalky palate and enticing hints of lime. Absolutely gorgeous and a cracking partner for most fish dishes.
The Wine Society £17
Gerard Richardson, @gerardfinewine
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here