To verify my impression I decided to conduct a comparison between the Lucciolaio and another red at hand, a 2004 Château Caronne Ste Gemme Haut-Médoc (60% Cabernet, 37% Merlot, 3% Petit Verdot). My host took out a scale and I hauled the Lucciolaio from the dinner table to the kitchen counter for the weigh-in:  These were the results:

Château Caronne Ste Gemme 1.312 kilos (2 lb 14 ounces)
Lucciolaio 1.522 kilos (3 lb 6 oz)

So why was the Tuscan red over 15 percent heavier than the Bordeaux? It surely wasn’t the wine. All wines weigh about the same – 750 grams for 750ml of water plus a few grams for the wine solids. The balance was determined by the weight of the bottles.

Whereas the average bottle weighs 500 grams, about the same as the one used for the Château Caronne Ste Gemme, heavier ones can weigh over twice that. (The Lucciolaio bottle, though hefty enough at roughly 750 grams, would not even qualify for the uppermost weight classification.) To their growing legion of critics, the heavyweight bottles are environmentally irresponsible. They waste glass, leave a larger carbon footprint and are more expensive to ship. Wine writer Jancis Robinson worries they may also pose a health hazard to those lugging cases of them in warehouses and wine stores. (Click here for a discussion of the heavy bottle issue.)

I’m sceptical about claims by producers that thicker, heavier glass helps their wines age more gracefully. But I do see an analogous benefit to those who drink them. The heavy lifting, performed in a sufficient number of repetitions, may tone their pouring arms and invigorate their thirst for greater wine-drinking enjoyment.