There are some comments in the main thread about relative QPR of Washington, Oregon and California wines.

Here's my thought: look at a world map. Washington and Oregon are much closer in latitude to the premier wine growing regions in France like Bordeaux and Burgundy. Northern California is closest to Languedoc. The central coast is comparable to Spain and Portugal. And Southern California is like Algeria.

Special micro-climates aside, it kind of seems like Oregon and Washington have a huge advantage over much of California in producing balanced cool to warm climate wines. And California probably has way too much Merlot, Cab S and Pinot Noir planted where Grenache, Mourvedre, Carignane and Tempranillo would grow best.

gcdyersb wrote:There are some comments in the main thread about relative QPR of Washington, Oregon and California wines.

Here's my thought: look at a world map. Washington and Oregon are much closer in latitude to the premier wine growing regions in France like Bordeaux and Burgundy. Northern California is closest to Languedoc. The central coast is comparable to Spain and Portugal. And Southern California is like Algeria.

Special micro-climates aside, it kind of seems like Oregon and Washington have a huge advantage over much of California in producing balanced cool to warm climate wines. And California probably has way too much Merlot, Cab S and Pinot Noir planted where Grenache, Mourvedre, Carignane and Tempranillo would grow best.

It's not all latitude though, the jet stream and ocean currents keep western Europe warmer at higher latitudes than the west coast of the US. The northern tip of Scotland, for instance, is roughly the same latitude as Anchorage, but it's not nearly as cold.

Peter's recent blog, however, talks about the benefits of having lots of sunlight and moderate temperatures, something that you would get more of in the summer at higher latitudes.

andyduncan wrote:It's not all latitude though, the jet stream and ocean currents keep western Europe warmer at higher latitudes than the west coast of the US. The northern tip of Scotland, for instance, is roughly the same latitude as Anchorage, but it's not nearly as cold.

Peter's recent blog, however, talks about the benefits of having lots of sunlight and moderate temperatures, something that you would get more of in the summer at higher latitudes.

Don't you think the woot filters should change "Peter's Blog says" to read "The Bible says"?

andyduncan wrote:It's not all latitude though, the jet stream and ocean currents keep western Europe warmer at higher latitudes than the west coast of the US. The northern tip of Scotland, for instance, is roughly the same latitude as Anchorage, but it's not nearly as cold.

I agree, it's not just latitude. Coastal growing regions in Southern California seem to better balance alcohol and flavor. But then there are also places like Eastern Paso Robles that are not moderated by the ocean as well.

winefarm wrote:Don't you think the woot filters should change "Peter's Blog says" to read "The Bible says"?

If this weren't so close to the truth, it would be blasphemy.

Amen it's not just about latitude. If you examine things like weather patterns, temperature & humidity profiles, soil structure, you'll find NoCal is much closer to France than it might appear.

And while my initial comment was a broad brush generalization, I'm not dogging on Washington wine.

I'm just saying that I tend to be a fairly careful shopper... particularly now that my tastes include bottles that even on ww are north of $50 per (Corison Kronos anyone?... I bought 6). As such, IMO I find it easier to find QPR & selections I'll enjoy from California. Most of the offerings I've had from Washington and Oregon were good... but flat out overpriced.. again.. IMO. Some of the Cali ones were overpriced as well.

And then there were some that my palate found simply unpalatable. Now that has happened with Cali wines as well as Oregon / Washington wines... but in MY experience I'm more frequently disappointed by Washington/Oregon wines. I don't want to slag any particular offers... but lets say I've got some syrah & pinot that I received relatively recently that I'm not sure I want to give away for fear of insulting some of my friends. I'll probably end up cooking with it. I gotta admit... I'm really glad I bought those on WW... because it cost me less to find out I didn't like something than it otherwise would have.

Now... I rarely buy wines to drink immediately (other than "sacrificing" ;-) 1 bottle to judge when I think the rest will be ready to drink) anymore and prefer to get deals on wine that if I purchased it in it's prime would cost me significantly more than if I sit on it for 5 or 15 years (I brought a 1989 to NoVa/DC #12). I'm fortunate to have the space & patience to let them sit. Not all are. I'm also fortunate enough that some of my acquisitions from my younger days are hitting their windows.

I have to agree that the smaller Washington and Oregon wineries seem to be higher in price than comparable California ones. My wife and I like to say 'they are very proud of their wine' when we are tasting something we find over-priced.

But that's just a general impression. I suspect a comprehensive study of prices in all three states will show a much wider range of prices in Cali than in the other two. I see very little under $10 from the Pacific Northwest, but neither do I see a lot of three digit prices, either.

gcdyersb wrote:I agree, it's not just latitude. Coastal growing regions in Southern California seem to better balance alcohol and flavor. But then there are also places like Eastern Paso Robles that are not moderated by the ocean as well.

I will somewhat disagree. The templeton gap works like a funnel to bring the cool ocean waters breeze into east side of Paso(agreed, not as much as west). I have been in Creston in july and can get some chilly evenings.

So I've been thinking about this a bit....

I'll illustrate my point with 2 specific examples. Both wines I purchased from WW, both wines I like, both essentially the same price, same vintage & varietal, but 1 much more to my style and desires than the other. This is not to be generalized as applying to ALL Cali or Washington wines... just a specific set that I noticed from my purchases.

2006 Wellington Estate Syrah

2006 K Vinters Milbrandt Syrah

To me... again... IMO... the Wellington is a hugely better play QPR-wise. The K is fruity and good, but lacking in the structure to age much. The Wellington is fruity and drinking amazingly well, but it has the structure and balance that lead me to believe that 5 years from now it's going to be a fabulous wine. I'm pretty sure 5 years from now the K will be flat and dead.

ERMD wrote:I will somewhat disagree. The templeton gap works like a funnel to bring the cool ocean waters breeze into east side of Paso(agreed, not as much as west). I have been in Creston in july and can get some chilly evenings.

I agree with Templeton as an exception, plus there's Santa Margarita to the south which falls into the Paso AVA.

spdrcr05 wrote:I don't want to slag any particular offers... but lets say I've got some syrah & pinot that I received relatively recently that I'm not sure I want to give away for fear of insulting some of my friends. I'll probably end up cooking with it.

Kinda curious as to which offers you had in mind. Could you PM me if you don't want to post publicly?

Hope it's not the MacCallum. The Cab Franc probably is not built to age a ton, but it's well put together for its style. It'd be a bummer if the Syrah and Pinot were mediocre.

gcdyersb wrote:Kinda curious as to which offers you had in mind. Could you PM me if you don't want to post publicly?

Hope it's not the MacCallum. The Cab Franc probably is not built to age a ton, but it's well put together for its style. It'd be a bummer if the Syrah and Pinot were mediocre.

I didn't order the MacCallum. Probably because of my anti Washington QPR bias. ;-)

See my Syrah post above. Another specific example ... the Willamette Valley offering ... liked the Whole Cluster but still thinks it's overpriced. Hated the Estate ... especially for the price. I didn't enter any specific notes on the third wine in the offering but remember it to be flat, out of balance, lacking in structure, and otherwise unremarkable.

EDIT: Have a little more time to amplify my comments by adding links and comparing to wines more in my wheelhouse. If I posted notes for the wine, you should see them (CT user name is RossR .. feel free to buddie me up!).

Here are a couple of Pinots that were actually cheaper than the WV Estate but much more up my alley taste & aging profile wise:
2006 Kent Rasmussen Pinot Noir
2004 Chateau Souverain Pinot Noir
2005 Chateau Souverain Pinot Noir

It seems to me that it's not so much a QPR problem as it is a consistency problem – $50 bottles of over-extracted, borderline-flawed grape juice and hidden gems that aren't getting the attention they deserve.

I've had the problem with the (very) limited amount of WA and OR wines I've tried. Livermore, in my opinion, has a similar if not worse problem, as does Paso to a lesser extent. So many wineries just slap a big price on the bottle as if being expensive gives them credibility.

Perhaps it's the relative newness of a lot of the wineries? Too many people new to the business and haven't really figured things out? Too many rating-chasers?

I don't know. I ordered two of this current set, we'll see if it changes my mind. Here's hoping this is a wine that shows what WA can do.

spdrcr05 wrote: See my Syrah post above. Another specific example ... the Willamette Valley offering ... liked the Whole Cluster but still thinks it's overpriced. Hated the Estate ... especially for the price.

Damnit. I hated the other two pinots from that offer, and the Estate is the only one I have left.

My experience with Washington and Oregon wine is limited because of the things that are being said here. I think that WA and OR wines tend to be more expensive than CA wines. Perhaps because the wineries are smaller? I just think that CA offers more wines (of course, it's bigger) at better prices than WA and OR. I also think that CA offers more everyday, value drinkers than OR or WA, or many other countries for that matter (except Portugal and some Chilean wines).

I'm totally open to OR and WA wines though. I just haven't seen an offering that I want to jump on. Had this current offering had the PV, I would have been in right away.

kylemittskus wrote:My experience with Washington and Oregon wine is limited because of the things that are being said here. I think that WA and OR wines tend to be more expensive than CA wines. Perhaps because the wineries are smaller? I just think that CA offers more wines (of course, it's bigger) at better prices than WA and OR. I also think that CA offers more everyday, value drinkers than OR or WA, or many other countries for that matter (except Portugal and some Chilean wines).

I'm totally open to OR and WA wines though. I just haven't seen an offering that I want to jump on. Had this current offering had the PV, I would have been in right away.

I'm wondering if maybe a lot of the inexpensive, good daily drinking wine simply stays in the Northwest. California is a stronger "brand" and perhaps wineries only try to compete on the premium level outside of their region.

I'll speculate a bit as well that California is consistent, but perhaps that the Northwest can outperform Cali when there's a great vintage. Garden variety ripeness with 14%-15% ABV like you get from Spain or Southern France or much of California makes for great values year to year. The northern regions are more boom or bust, but still have to maintain prices in mediocre vintages. Maybe there's more of a risk-reward play in the Northwest. I still think the sun exposure due to the latitude is massively important, and a vintage with cooperative weather should make stunning, balanced wines.

I'm still mulling over the current offer. I'd probably be in already if they had a Merlot or Meritage blend plus the '05 Klipsun Cab. The '06 Cab sounds like it's more for early consumption, but would still be best after some bottle age.

spdrcr05 wrote:I didn't order the MacCallum. Probably because of my anti Washington QPR bias. ;-)

See my Syrah post above. Another specific example ... the Willamette Valley offering ... liked the Whole Cluster but still thinks it's overpriced. Hated the Estate ... especially for the price.

Pepper Bridge was snuggling awesome.

As was the K Vintners Cougar Hills 2005 Syrah that Cesar (not Cesare) brought for us for CWWT #3(?).

gcdyersb wrote:I'm still mulling over the current offer. I'd probably be in already if they had a Merlot or Meritage blend plus the '05 Klipsun Cab. The '06 Cab sounds like it's more for early consumption, but would still be best after some bottle age.

As am I... I'll be honest... while the Klipsun is something I'd probably take a chance on, the '06 sounds like something I'd be disappointed in. Detailed notes from the 'rats could tip me over the edge... we'll see.

PetiteSirah wrote:Pepper Bridge was snuggling awesome.

As was the K Vintners Cougar Hills 2005 Syrah that Cesar (not Cesare) brought for us for CWWT #3(?).

The Pepper Bridge was damn good. At a lower price point, we have had a number of offerings from Cathedral Ridge (in the Columbia Valley) that I thought were very good.

On the other hand, in my admittedly limited experience, I have run into a number of overpriced and/or disappointing pinot noirs from Willamette Valley in Oregon. But I have also found some exceptional PN's there that were $40 per bottle or so. The latter wines were superior to any PN I have had from California.

speedoo wrote:The Pepper Bridge was damn good. At a lower price point, we have had a number of offerings from Cathedral Ridge (in the Columbia Valley) that I thought were very good.

On the other hand, in my admittedly limited experience, I have run into a number of overpriced and/or disappointing pinot noirs from Willamette Valley in Oregon. But I have also found some exceptional PN's there that were $40 per bottle or so. The latter wines were superior to any PN I have had from California.

The Roesslers really were extraordinary, IMO. But to quote TMR, "YMMCV!"

PetiteSirah wrote:The Roesslers really were extraordinary, IMO. But to quote TMR, "YMMCV!"

Indeed. I bought one set supposing they'd be decent and bat above their weight. The Red Label was excellent, and I had the lowest expectations for that bottle. My other two are classified as do not touch.

PetiteSirah wrote:The Roesslers really were extraordinary, IMO. But to quote TMR, "YMMCV!"

Excellent news... I have been sitting on mine, basically afraid to try them because I only have 1 of each.

spdrcr05 wrote:As am I... I'll be honest... while the Klipsun is something I'd probably take a chance on, the '06 sounds like something I'd be disappointed in. Detailed notes from the 'rats could tip me over the edge... we'll see.

Exactly. I need to be convinced the '06 is going to be more than a weakly structured blend of soft fruit and oak.

Edit: I had a Hedges '06 Three Vineyards, which is mostly Merlot, and while it wasn't lacking structure and the fruit was pleasant, the oak was pretty flagrant. Similar price point here; don't need more of the same.

spdrcr05 wrote:Excellent news... I have been sitting on mine, basically afraid to try them based on my bad experience with the WV offering. If I like them, I'll be the first to chime in and give them credit.

I think Roessler is planning to return, too. I'm hoping they become the Pinot equivalent of Wellington on Woot, a regular against which all else is judged. I'll be in when they return!

gcdyersb wrote:I think Roessler is planning to return, too. I'm hoping they become the Pinot equivalent of Wellington on Woot, a regular against which all else is judged. I'll be in when they return!

If they come back, I will be in. Too much good feedback and more than one person joined their wine club after the woot offering.

PetiteSirah wrote:The Roesslers really were extraordinary, IMO. But to quote TMR, "YMMCV!"

Have not tried mine yet, but that is great to hear.

gcdyersb wrote:Indeed. I bought one set supposing they'd be decent and bat above their weight. The Red Label was excellent, and I had the lowest expectations for that bottle. My other two are classified as do not touch.

Really kicking myself for not getting more AND having missed them in the wootoff.

I note that most of you are judging WA and OR based on which wines have ended up on woot. I think that is a little unfair. I agree that we have not seen the same screaming deals and amazing QPR from the Pac NW on woot as we have seen in CA, but I attribute that to proximity. We've also had a lot more CA wine, so easier for there to be some memorable deals. I'm not entirely a WA apologist - I definitely think there are new boutique wineries charging too much for less than amazing product. I'm sometimes willing to pay it, sometimes not. But I really don't think that all of WA has a QPR problem. I don't tend to turn to WA for daily drinkers as I think CA does better in that category, though I think Columbia Crest Two Vines is still a pretty solid cheap wine. I find the Grand Estates to be overoaked. Klipsun Vineyard is amazing and I think this offer is worth it for that bottle alone.

PetiteSirah wrote:The Roesslers really were extraordinary, IMO. But to quote TMR, "YMMCV!"

not in the case of the Roesslers for my palate...

aces219 wrote:I note that most of you are judging WA and OR based on which wines have ended up on woot. I think that is a little unfair. I agree that we have not seen the same screaming deals and amazing QPR from the Pac NW on woot as we have seen in CA, but I attribute that to proximity. We've also had a lot more CA wine, so easier for there to be some memorable deals. I'm not entirely a WA apologist - I definitely think there are new boutique wineries charging too much for less than amazing product. I'm sometimes willing to pay it, sometimes not. But I really don't think that all of WA has a QPR problem. I don't tend to turn to WA for daily drinkers as I think CA does better in that category, though I think Columbia Crest Two Vines is still a pretty solid cheap wine. I find the Grand Estates to be overoaked. Klipsun Vineyard is amazing and I think this offer is worth it for that bottle alone.

tru dat, aces. all of it. peace.

aces219 wrote:I note that most of you are judging WA and OR based on which wines have ended up on woot. I think that is a little unfair. I agree that we have not seen the same screaming deals and amazing QPR from the Pac NW on woot as we have seen in CA, but I attribute that to proximity. We've also had a lot more CA wine, so easier for there to be some memorable deals. I'm not entirely a WA apologist - I definitely think there are new boutique wineries charging too much for less than amazing product. I'm sometimes willing to pay it, sometimes not. But I really don't think that all of WA has a QPR problem. I don't tend to turn to WA for daily drinkers as I think CA does better in that category, though I think Columbia Crest Two Vines is still a pretty solid cheap wine. I find the Grand Estates to be overoaked. Klipsun Vineyard is amazing and I think this offer is worth it for that bottle alone.

To the contrary... I'm judging based on the totality of wines I've had. I used WW offerings to illustrate my point.

I stand by my original statement.... in general, for what I'm looking for, you get more QPR from Cali ... at any price point. Of course there are exceptions to any general statement like that. I'm looking for those... and always hoping WD has found them.

If the current offer was a 2-fer of the Klipsun, I would have been in before the deadline.

spdrcr05 wrote:To the contrary... I'm judging based on the totality of wines I've had. I used WW offerings to illustrate my point.

Fair. Do you have other examples? I find Wellington to be extremely good QPR, much better than most other places in CA. So I would never use that as my benchmark for average CA wine. Let's throw Brian Benson into the mix...(ignoring poor tasting conditions), I thought that wine had extremely poor QPR.

aces219 wrote:Fair. Do you have other examples? I find Wellington to be extremely good QPR, much better than most other places in CA. So I would never use that as my benchmark for average CA wine. Let's throw Brian Benson into the mix...(ignoring poor tasting conditions), I thought that wine had extremely poor QPR.

I would agree with you on the '04. I liked the '05 much more ... but in general (sorry... couldn't resist) I find '05 to be a much better year across the board

Can all the proponents of WA and OR wines post some fairly available, good QPR wines? That way, we can do a taste-test. It will be difficult on my palate, but I am willing to participate.

The problem is that you're insisting on readily available, whereas the best WA state wines are mailing list only, or maybe tasting room.

These wines are from K&L online. They have 66 WA wines...I'm trying to only recommend wines I have had and that aren't uber-pricey.
2004 Columbia Crest Walter Clore Reserve - $21.99
2005 L'Ecole No. 41 Columbia Valley Merlot - $29.99, though I found this at Trader Joe's for a couple bucks less.

I like anything by Hogue, which is very readily available. Also Sagelands. These are both in the lower price point.

aces219 wrote:Klipsun Vineyard is amazing and I think this offer is worth it for that bottle alone.

I don't have room. I'm trying to resist. Why in God's name did I have to go reading this thread? I have too much respect for your opinion to ignore it.

ddeuddeg wrote:I don't have room. I'm trying to resist. Why in God's name did I have to go reading this thread? I have too much respect for your opinion to ignore it.

The 'rats have given me the strength to pass on this offer. I've sold myself on the potential of Washington, but the '06 Cab sounds like a typical $15-$20 red wine. Probably pretty good, but not all that exciting.

gcdyersb wrote:The 'rats have given me the strength to pass on this offer. I've sold myself on the potential of Washington, but the '06 Cab sounds like a typical $15-$20 red wine. Probably pretty good, but not all that exciting.

I read the rat reports and I'm definitely passing. The '06 sounds like something I can get @ TJ's for much cheaper. And neither one of the Klipsun rats said anything that makes me think it's anything special or a not to be missed value that I need to jump on either.

Does that put an explanation point ! on my initial statement? I keed ... I keed!

Seriously though, compare the rat reports for the 7 Hills with the Pedroncelli... and tell me which is a QPR play?

gcdyersb wrote:The 'rats have given me the strength to pass on this offer. I've sold myself on the potential of Washington, but the '06 Cab sounds like a typical $15-$20 red wine. Probably pretty good, but not all that exciting.

I went in on day one, thinking that the moderated alcohol and acidity in the wine would provide for a balanced and pleasant drinking experience. I'm hoping for, at the very least, to be able to enjoy the wines without experiencing the citrus nose and grapefruit peel taste in many of the overextracted west coast bottles. I'm so very tired of finding that same scent at so many price points.

As far as wine staying in the NW region (and I've actually heard this about Argentina not exporting its good juice), I think there's an analogous pride of the produce and products in the NW from the people who live there and there may, justifiably, be a reason that much of the wine stays local.

I don't have the experience out west to talk about the microclimates which seem so like they would make for such wonderful opportunities to grow different grapes in a small geographical zone, rather than the trend of planting the popular everywhere.

Lastly, I went to my favorite wine store (warehouse in ny) last week and took a look at their NW PN offerings and only one bottle of the ~20 available on their shelves came in at lower than 14% abv; and I think it was around 13.8. I'm just not seeing the elegance of new world pinot noir.

spdrcr05 wrote:Seriously though, compare the rat reports for the 7 Hills with the Pedroncelli... and tell me which is a QPR play?

In fairness to Seven Hills, RPM was one of the 'rats for Pedroncelli and another was a Ped fan from prior offers. The Seven Hills 'rats are less "known commodities" than RPM. To judge Cabs that are marketed as age-worthy, RPM levels of insight and experience are beneficial.

That said, the lack of enthusiasm on the '06 Cab talked me down since it's supposed to have a good 'drink young' profile. For my palate Cab S doesn't produce the most exciting youthful wines in the sub $20 range, anyway.

aces219 wrote:The problem is that you're insisting on readily available, whereas the best WA state wines are mailing list only, or maybe tasting room.

That does pose a problem. I don't want to wait in line for a year, then have to pay $50+ a bottle to find out whether the wine is a product of hype or actually justifies the price. While mailing list and appointment-only wineries abound in California, there are also plenty of wineries with established track records that sell to the common public. Maybe that's simply a byproduct of an older industry with more competition.