Nicolas Belfrage: Medium depth. The nose is a bit inexpressive. On the palate the acidity seems excessive, taking over from the aromatic components. Try again in 2020, when the acid-fruit balance may have resolved itself. Note: A second bottle of Biondi- Santi Riserva was tasted open after the official tasting and was found to be distinctly superior to the first, much better balanced and less bitter and acidic. 85

Stephen Brook: Very deep to deep red. Sweet, oaky, superripe nose, with lavish fruit. Very rich and opulent, plumply fruity, with bold but ripe tannins to give grip and persistence. It does avoid jamminess and has force and drive rather than subtlety or finesse. There’s enough acidity to give length and aging potential. A tad one-dimensional and undoubtedly hedonistic and rewarding. 89

Andrew Jefford: Bottle 1: Deep black-red. Expressive and articulate, harmonious, faintly keroseney. Some different approach in the vineyards to its peers? Soft, resolved, and open. A decent Brunello, but one that seems to me to have mixed ripeness issues and in general doesn’t have any of the depth, ripeness, poise, harmony, complexity, and density of the best of its peers. There is nonetheless plenty of structure. Bottle 2: tasted sighted after a question about the first: Deep black-red. Refined, restrained, gentle, and complex aromatic profile: warm dust, dry berries, dry leaves, but for me there is still a subtle green note to the aromatic profile that some may feel brings freshness but to me betokens an element of mixed ripeness. Concentrated, deep, and long; very dry; a brighter and tighter focus on the palate than bottle 1. Open, serene, resolved, very harmonious, with ample acidity and structuring tannins, though by comparison with most of the wines in the tasting the level of flesh is very different, and it could come across as almost gaunt. It is a better bottle than the first, but there is not a great deal in it. This is of course a legendary wine, and those who are purchasing and drinking it will be familiar with its restraint and sobriety of style, which I respect and, at least intellectually, admire. But my opinion, for what it’s worth, is that this wine in the bottle is not quite as exciting a prospect as the best of its peers. Stylistically, it seems a little ungenerous, and in this splendid vintage I feel that some lessthan- fully-ripe fruit has nonetheless found its way into the blend. My feeling is that these vineyards could perform at a higher level, even within the same aesthetic vision. My score is an amalgam of bottles 1 and 2. 84