Nicolas Belfrage: Some query as to the soundness of the two bottles sampled. Nose rather flattened, palate stretched. Probably needs to be resampled. Decline to mark. 84

Stephen Brook: Deep red. An odd nose that’s both confected and a bit oxidative. The attack is decidedly sweet, and though tannic, it’s one-dimensional and fierce, without showing any complexity or persistence. That sweetness makes it resemble a late-picked Barbera, and not a very good one at that. 82

Andrew Jefford: Deep black-red. Bottle 1: compromised. Bottle 2: A rather strange aromatic proposition: lots of sweet fruits and a sense of lush style to it, yet with some rather dank, unattractive notes too—quality of wood? On the palate, it is smoother than many, with straightforward fruit qualities, but it does have concentration and density, and the dank notes apparent on the nose aren’t evident on the palate. On balance, this is still a wine I would be happy to drink and would enjoy, though I’d probably decant it to see if that could help refine the aromatic profile a little. 81