As I mentioned in yesterday's post about Chariot Wines' 2004 Central Coast Sangiovese, Chariot's stated goal is to "produc[e] refreshing, high-quality food-friendly wines at palatable prices." That's the sort of thing that you hear from a lot of wine producers these days, and I think that it is a worthwhile goal. There remains the perception today amongst a large section of the American drinking public that wine comsumption is pretentious, snooty, and unenjoyable for the vast majority of the population that has not studied wine extensively. Changing this perception is a key to commercial success for those wineries who do not claim to produce the great wines of the world, and it's the reason why Bonny Doon's labels are irreverent and iconoclastic and why Charles Back intentionally pokes fun at French wine naming with his Goats Do Roam series of wines. They're all selling the same concept: drinking wine with dinner is healthy and fun, and enjoyment of wine is not limited to those who can afford and enjoy attending a vertical tasting of Chateau Mouton Rothschild from 1929 to 2004. I wish them luck, although I doubt that the typical American drinker will ever prefer a glass of decent red wine to a Bud Lite.
This particular wine was more enjoyable last night than it was the night before when I first opened it, which is very unusual for me. As I have commented before, wine almost always is worse the second day of being open than it is on the first day. I don't know why that wasn't the case with this one. It had more bright cherry fruit, although I still thought that the acidity was lacking. I want my Sangiovese-based wines to make my mouth pucker, and this one just didn't. Oh, well. I'm glad I tried it.