Barolos Are Back

After bad stretch from 2002-03, pricey Italian red worth shelling out for again
By Kate Seamons,  Newser Staff
Posted Feb 4, 2009 1:09 PM CST
"Like all great wines, Barolo appeals both to the head and to the heart," writes Eric Asimov.   (©mararie)
camera-icon View 1 more image

(Newser) – A bottle of Barolo doesn’t come cheap, writes Eric Asimov in the New York Times, “but put that aside for a moment for these very good reasons: Barolo is a great wine, and it is a wine that I love.” Asimov sampled 25 bottles—limiting himself to ones under $100—from 2004, and declares the varietal back after nature crippled its 2002-2003 vintages.

“Even at Barolo’s lower tier, it was clear to us that 2004 is indeed a fine year,” Asimov and a group of tasters found. The typically tannic wine was riper than the ‘01 vintage but captured the structure lacking in the approachable ‘00. “By accessible I don’t mean, ‘Drink it now!’” he cautions. “They will be far better and more rewarding if you can put them aside for 5 years or longer.”