2001 Fattoria di Fèlsina Berardenga Chianti Classico- Italy, Tuscany, Chianti, Chianti Classico DOCG (12/23/2019)
Medium garnet color. Lovely nose of cherries, leather, forest floor, damp cellar. Elegant layers of pure, modestly tangy black cherry and blackberry fruit on the nicely-structured palate complicated by leather, strawberry, and earth. Persistent, freshening acidity and smoothed tannin leading to a longer finish of savory red fruit with echoes of leather and soft earth. Beautiful wine showing well in the midst of its drinking window. (91 pts.)
Just had the '15 last night and it was delicious! Drank alongside the 2011 Produttori di Barbaresco “Rabaja” Riserva. Both were pretty delicious…but interestingly, the non-wine-geeks preferred the Barbaresco, while the wine geeks preferred the Chianti. Exactly the opposite of what I had anticipated.
In my mind, this and other Chianti Classico offerings can occupy a similar space to Kabinett bottlings in the white wine world: very fairly-priced, seem to age forever, shine with food, often fly under the radar.
I tasted it a couple of months ago. It’s as good as I expected, and it will need time. The only recent and very good vintage that I’ve found to be surprisingly open since release is the '13.
The odd thing to me is that the Rancia CCR bottling rarely seems to show well. I have no more CC or the “normal” CCR bottling, but do have a bottle or two of each of the '95, '99 and '01 Rancia. However, based on past experience, they are either “just not ready yet”, or simply aren’t that good…they always show kinda dense and without any complexity/expressiveness. I’m a little suspicious when people say these just need more time, as I haven’t really seen any examples of Chianti Classico Reserva or even Brunello which are too young to drink 20 years after harvest and which become beautiful later. That said, I did have an '85 “normal” CCR bottling about 3 years ago that was absolutely gorgeous, so it is certainly possible for these wines to age longer than expected. But I would assume the '85 would have also drank well 10 years earlier…unlike these Rancias.
I tend to agree with you. I have recorded 11 tasting notes in CT comprising the 1997, 1999, 2001, and 2004 Rancia, and the vast majority were rated in the 89-91 range. Tasted a 1997 in August of 2016, as well as a 1999 in July 2019, both scored 91. We’ll see.