clayfu


quality posts: 10 Private Messages clayfu
SonomaBouliste wrote:I didn't answer your question before. If my primary reason for making wine were to make as much money as possible, I'd sell out and make RP99 (or 95 or whatever) wines and laugh all the way to the bank. Not all musicians aspire to make million seller pop recordings either. Fortunately, I don't have someone else pressuring me to make high-score wines, and for the most part I get to be indulgent and make the kind of wines I like to drink. I'm also fortunate that there are other people who like those wines enough that I can make a living and my kids don't have to go shoeless or without an education



i forgot it was so easy to make a 95+. Maybe we should all do it.

barrymccochener


quality posts: 0 Private Messages barrymccochener
clayfu wrote:right for someone that calls someone crazy first. That makes alot of sense.



All in sarcasm my friend, although my criticism wasn't directed at you, for I don't know how much weight you put in RP's ratings and yours was straight at me... just like you criticised straight at HAK. Just like my edit note I took from you. All in sarcasm.

Please feel free to get the last word in if it's of your nature. I won't post about this again. Wasting the message board.

Ready to order again Sunday night, but impatient to see what it will be...

barrymccochener


quality posts: 0 Private Messages barrymccochener
HitAnyKey42 wrote:Looks like I'm going to have to spend a week sometime in the near future eating just Cheerios for dinner....



There are worse things in life. Plus, they're good for you.

bhodilee


quality posts: 32 Private Messages bhodilee
barrymccochener wrote:Ready to order again Sunday night, but impatient to see what it will be...



Something I shouldn't buy, but probably will anyway. This site > my finances

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

– George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)

clayfu


quality posts: 10 Private Messages clayfu
barrymccochener wrote:All in sarcasm my friend, although my criticism wasn't directed at you, for I don't know how much weight you put in RP's ratings and yours was straight at me... just like you criticised straight at HAK. Just like my edit note I took from you. All in sarcasm.

Please feel free to get the last word in if it's of your nature. I won't post about this again. Wasting the message board.

Ready to order again Sunday night, but impatient to see what it will be...



it is within my nature. You didn't see my snide remark about why i called your IDEA stupid? not you directly?

alot easier to blame others than look at yourself. *laugh* "look i can make the "i'll let you make the last comment" comment i'm so high and mighty".
If so many fun loving people weren't on this board you'd get a completely different response from me.

bhodilee


quality posts: 32 Private Messages bhodilee
clayfu wrote:it is within my nature. You didn't see my snide remark about why i called your IDEA stupid? not you directly?

alot easier to blame others than look at yourself. *laugh* "look i can make the "i'll let you make the last comment" comment i'm so high and mighty".
If so many fun loving people weren't on this board you'd get a completely different response from me.



Last word, I called it, no last word backs.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

– George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)

Gatzby


quality posts: 43 Private Messages Gatzby
bhodilee wrote:Last word, I called it, no last word backs.



Forums need trout-slappings, just like mIRC.

Did you know shirt.woot ships internationally? Get you some!
Why do my posts always get deleted? -- Noise Reduction -- Try it in podcast format.
No, you can't have our iPod, keys, or Lego. Sorry.

bhodilee


quality posts: 32 Private Messages bhodilee
Gatzby wrote:Forums need trout-slappings, just like mIRC.



Dude, this is totally not that kinda place, lines and all that.

PAAAaaaAAaaaanCAAAAAKES! is a trout slapping? And how does it pair with Cab Franc?

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

– George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)

iByron


quality posts: 40 Private Messages iByron
tkastorff wrote:Agree w/ Clay.

These two men do 2 different things entirely - one makes money selling wine on the internet and one makes money reviewing wine. To say WD is "greater than" or a "cool guy" simply because you buy wine from him on the internet, is a bit geeky. You need to get out of your momma's house a bit more bro. I am sure WD is a cool guy and all, but your argument over the ">" issue was mis-stated HAK. Both men serve their respective functions very well, and neither is greater than the other. Good ole internet discussions... back to work



Using that logic, however, if one believes that making money "selling wine on the internet" is greater than making money "reviewing wine" then one likely believes that someone who does the former is greater than someone who does the latter.

Thus, "WD > RP" is a perfectly logical statement, albeit a totally subjective one, and completely true to someone who believes as stated above.

In the absence of a statement of belief contrary to the above, we must then believe that, at least to the speaker (writer), WD is in fact > RP.

Game. Set. Match. iByron.

iByron's iCellar (I'm a reciprocal CT Cellar Buddy)

Your Private WIneaux

nematic


quality posts: 6 Private Messages nematic
SonomaBouliste wrote:. Fortunately, I don't have someone else pressuring me to make high-score wines,



cough constellation cough? Or as I like to call it, the canundaguia wine company [always nice to let the opus one folks know that they are owned by a formerly all labrusca upstate NY wine company]

otolith


quality posts: 22 Private Messages otolith
iByron wrote:Using that logic, however, if one believes that making money "selling wine on the internet" is greater than making money "reviewing wine" then one likely believes that someone who does the former is greater than someone who does the latter.

Thus, "WD > RP" is a perfectly logical statement, albeit a totally subjective one, and completely true to someone who believes as stated above.

In the absence of a statement of belief contrary to the above, we must then believe that, at least to the speaker (writer), WD is in fact > RP.

Game. Set. Match. iByron.



Your posts are always a treat to read.

If you're ever in the Twin Cities, we gotta drink some wine.

"When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the universe."
--John Muir

nematic


quality posts: 6 Private Messages nematic

So, I'm only a few chapters in, and its fawning nature is pretty one-sided, but "the Emperor of wine" gives at least an idea of where parker came from. As for ratings, well, it was only last year that I discovered that WA and WS rate on a 50-100 scale, so everything automatically seems higher - and at least at WS, if it gets below a ?70? it automatically gets retested.

As for wine competitions, there are so many, and many give medals to everyone who pays the (often pretty high) entry fee. Also, again not until last year, did I find out that many/most wine competitions will award multiple of each type of medal. Wineries will often proudly say that their wine won a gold medal in a field of XX rieslings, but it could well be the case that half of the other rieslings also won gold.

Having had lectures this year by three professional wine tasters, I more and more believe that the wine tasting and rating game is mostly a racket.

EDIT: I meant for this to be more that the book was out there and some stuff I learned about ratings and comps than a rant, but it turned out kinda like a rant . . eh, whats there is there. I bought a bottle of iron horse wedding sparkling tonight - hopefully that makes up for some of the thread hijack

Loweeel


quality posts: 5 Private Messages Loweeel
otolith wrote:Your posts are always a treat to read.

If you're ever in the Twin Cities, we gotta drink some wine.


You're in for a treat. iDrinking is a blast.

Favorites: Roessler ¬ KRPN ¬ Etude ¬ Stuart ¬ KRPort ¬ Tøøthstejnn ¬ Titus ¬ URSA ¬ InZin ¬ SBMystery ¬ SxBS&Z+4 ¬ DC3&4 ¬ TyC3&FB ¬ FeEquus ¬ PSPS ¬ Harvey ¬ SBRes&CR ¬ Corison ¬ Noceto ¬ Humbug ¬ KRSEXY3SOME ¬ PoiZin06 ¬ POLY ¬ Castoro ¬ SBCab ¬ KRPS2K ¬ HW12 ¬ GSaké ¬ הגפןCab ¬ PepBr

CT ¬ PSychos' Path
"The one difference between me and Petite Sirah is that I don't have a dumb period." - YT

nematic


quality posts: 6 Private Messages nematic
Loweeel wrote:You're in for a treat. iDrinking is a blast.



and for the spectators, iDrunk is even better

otolith


quality posts: 22 Private Messages otolith
Loweeel wrote:You're in for a treat. iDrinking is a blast.



nematic wrote:and for the spectators, iDrunk is even better



"When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the universe."
--John Muir

Hammerofthegods


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Hammerofthegods

Hammer on the soapbox:

I find it truly baffling that we can tell people to find wine that THEY like. Try this, try that, try different whites, try different reds, hell, try anything to expand your pallet, and yet we want to discuss who is the better wine taster in the wide world of wine tasting. WHO CARES?????? I, on a regular basis, do not agree with many wine tasters (opus and silver oak are way overrated in my book). Why?? Because my tastes in wine are so much different than those that are tasting the wines (I have tasted fresh cut grass-the winemaker never got that type of thing etc...). I know from personal experience that many wineries have won "gold medals" because it was their turn. If I don't like a wine, I don't like a wine. Simple as that. I could care less who has tasted it. That is the main reason I like wine woot. I can try different wines that normally would have passed me by that, after buying, I fall in love with. WD is not RP is not GV (who, by the way, needs a very big dose of Valium-but I digress) . Wine is about love, about passion, about finding what you love and what works for you. To hell with the critics..............


Hammer off the damn soapbox..............




Richard

HitAnyKey42


quality posts: 29 Private Messages HitAnyKey42

Hey guys, before I head to bed....how about ya'll take this off of Joy and David's thread? It's contaminating their CF.

My Cellar
In a Glorious Marriage.Woot with cheron98
NYC Tastings

synchrodan


quality posts: 7 Private Messages synchrodan

I know we’ve already “turned the page” on this whole silly RP vs WD discussion, but one pseudo-related comment about critics, and one amusing observation.

Every ccritic has some bias, because every ccritic is human. We all have personal preferences. Certain characteristics or attributes might be more preferable to one person to another. Do I believe that objectivism is possible in something like wine? Not any more than I think that there is objectivism in art. After all, I think it would be quite easy to argue that wine making is something of an art. With that said, I think that there may be some consensus on certain aspects of wine that makes it objectively BAD, but I think it is much harder to agree on which good wine is BEST. For example, if Robert Parker had choked on a #2 pencil when he was a child, he may have an aversion to the oakiness he instead embraces. But it didn’t happen that way. His preferences are not invalid, but neither are the preferences of RPM, SB, etc. (Okay, who can tell that philosophy was one of my majors in college??)

And now for the amusing observation – one can draw an interesting contrast between RP and WD. RP’s life has been spent engaging in activities (his reviews, rating scale, etc.) which led to the price of good wine to INCREASE for consumers. WD’s life (at least the wine.woot aspect of it) is spent trying to get the price of good wine (on Woot, in particular) to DECREASE for consumers (Wooters, in particular). While I can’t say one is “greater than” the other, because I am not (yet) rich, my personal preference is for the latter!

Note: I say "ccritic" to get past the Woot filter!

Hammerofthegods


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Hammerofthegods
HitAnyKey42 wrote:Hey guys, before I head to bed....how about ya'll take this off of Joy and David's thread? It's contaminating their CF.



nothing can contaminate their CF....................


My wife and I will be there in a couple of weeks....................



And by the way not only is their CF to die for, so is the sparklers we have been able to get our hands on.................

MaskedMarvel


quality posts: 11 Private Messages MaskedMarvel

Boy - I had an absolute SLAM busy night at work, but you guys make me feel lazy...


RP - Reviews wines offered to him.

WD - Offers wines FOR REVIEW.

Frankly, this is the reason i like it here as much as I do. While the lucky labratters are NOT (typically) wine professionals, they ARE people like most of you and me. Regular wine drinkers. No one ever said Rats had to proffer favourable reviews. It's just worked out that regular people like these offers. I chalk it up as a serious risk for WD. A bad review can make or break the offer. RP doesn't have the pressure WD has, at least in this regard.

Additionally, true wine professionals are frequently invited to give their tasting notes on, if not to actually review, the current offer. Where are you going to get that dynamic?

Seems like SB (ROUS)~wine.woot labrats>WD>RP to me...

Clayfu, basketball, and PBride's in there somewhere, but I'm not getting into that. ;)


If it hadn't been for that dynamic, I'd never have ordered this week's offer.

luckyinla


quality posts: 5 Private Messages luckyinla
Hammerofthegods wrote:nothing can contaminate their CF....................


My wife and I will be there in a couple of weeks....................



And by the way not only is their CF to die for, so is the sparklers we have been able to get our hands on.................



You must try their pinot noirs!!! They are wonderful. (Remember, I am biased.)

The wine seems to be very closed-in and seems to have entered a dumb stage. Sort of a Marcel Meursault.
Paul S. Winalski

my cellartracker
The best use of bad wine is to drive away poor relations.
French proverb

nallie


quality posts: 8 Private Messages nallie

First sucker: luckyinla
Speed to first woot: 0m 7.280s
Last wooter to woot: nallie

Not a huge fan of cab francs. Moving soon. Therefore, knowing the wine was a WD recommendation wasn't enough to make me buy this week. Knowing the vintners were invested in the thread wasn't enough to make me buy this week. Knowing two independent wine experts I respect (SB and RPM) heartily enjoyed the wine wasn't enough to make me buy this week. Here's why I caved:

Winedavid39 wrote:He's likely a better speller.

I do not technically have an alter, by standard Webster definitions, but I heart WD (no worries, WineFarm; I mean that in a strictly platonic sense).

Thanks wine.woot for another great opportunity to experience a wine I'd be unlikely to notice, or even find, in my local stores. I personally greatly appreciate the exposure you provide to many different styles and varietals. You force me out of my ‘go to’ habits, and therefore make my whole wine experience more enjoyable.

"Life is either a daring adventure or nothing at all." - h.keller
"If you can do something about it, there is no need to worry. If you cannot do anything about it, there is no use in worrying." - j.white (and also Shantideva)

MarkDaSpark


quality posts: 178 Private Messages MarkDaSpark
bhodilee wrote:Two things:

My photo of WD is surrounded by candles and chicken corpses. I gave up on that bastard Jobu. Never could hit a curve ball.

Manly man and s2000? I mean it's a nice car and all, but manly?



Does the temple face the east or west?

I'm surprised no one told you guys to take it to the pub! It's been dead, and this would have livened it up.

Anyway, I think you guys finally enough.

Anyway, long live

And I laughed so hard at Major League!


Someone has to put WD's kids thru college, but why does it have to be me!
*This post is for purposes of enabling only, and does not constitute any promise of helping pay for said enabling. It does indicate willingness to assist in drinking said wine.

subwoot


quality posts: 1 Private Messages subwoot

Not to keep this thread going but I had to chime in with two cents. I am also fairly new to wines & wine.woot. Over the past few years I have progressed from whites to merlots and now branching out to Cabs, CF's, PS's etc...finding lots of good stuff and relatively few that are not so good.

When I first started [cluelessly] buying wine [maybe I still am today] - I would read the reviews - lots of RP as well as others - and can say in practice that the reviews never meant that I would find the wine particularly appealing or interesting (unless you were willing to spend the big bucks) - though they were rarely unappealing.

To me, the critics are there if you are not looking for an adventure - instead you just need something quick, easy that does not s.uck.

So now I spend most of my wine time [read 'most of my waking hours'] cruising wine blogs - the wine.woot forum being one of my favorites and most consistently full of new information and diverse opinions.

The last part is really the key - a decent hater can tell you pretty consistently what will not s.uck. A forum with many voices and diverse opinions can inform and help you make your own decisions - challenge you to work to understand the wine better - let it age? decant for an hour before drinking? pair with blueberry ribs...etc.

I don't believe that RP will ever give me a challeging wine...not that that is bad - it is just not his purpose. Though the fact that his ratings shape the wine that is produced in the U.S...well, you get the picture...

Either way - back to the issue. WD>RP - Absolutely!

MarkDaSpark


quality posts: 178 Private Messages MarkDaSpark

It will be interesting to see how the stats for this trio compares with the stats for the Peltier Station PS trio. Same idea, a trio of excellent wine at excellent pricing, with excellent labrat reports, and most especially, excellent winery participation.

PSPS ended up at: 81% bought 1, 13% bought 2, and 6% bought 3.

Right now, it's: 79% bought 1, 17% bought 2, and 4% bought 3.


Someone has to put WD's kids thru college, but why does it have to be me!
*This post is for purposes of enabling only, and does not constitute any promise of helping pay for said enabling. It does indicate willingness to assist in drinking said wine.

subwoot


quality posts: 1 Private Messages subwoot
MarkDaSpark wrote:It will be interesting to see how the stats for this trio compares with the stats for the Peltier Station PS trio. Same idea, a trio of excellent wine at excellent pricing, with excellent labrat reports, and most especially, excellent winery participation.

PSPS ended up at: 81% bought 1, 13% bought 2, and 6% bought 3.

Right now, it's: 79% bought 1, 17% bought 2, and 4% bought 3.



So it's exactly even right now - for every 100 purchases - 125 3-packs have been sold...

gabulous


quality posts: 0 Private Messages gabulous
bhodilee wrote:
PAAAaaaAAaaaanCAAAAAKES! is a trout slapping? And how does it pair with Cab Franc?



now I'm starving

squirtbc


quality posts: 1 Private Messages squirtbc
nematic wrote:cough constellation cough? Or as I like to call it, the canundaguia wine company [always nice to let the opus one folks know that they are owned by a formerly all labrusca upstate NY wine company]



living in the upstate region i found this to be very funny. kind of puts a perspective on things.

H12, Kunde. Rasmussen,highway 12, FCC reserve,castoro,wellington, castoro woot off,

HitAnyKey42


quality posts: 29 Private Messages HitAnyKey42
MarkDaSpark wrote:It will be interesting to see how the stats for this trio compares with the stats for the Peltier Station PS trio. Same idea, a trio of excellent wine at excellent pricing, with excellent labrat reports, and most especially, excellent winery participation.

PSPS ended up at: 81% bought 1, 13% bought 2, and 6% bought 3.

Right now, it's: 79% bought 1, 17% bought 2, and 4% bought 3.



I forget, did the PSPS sell out?

I knew I personally skewed the percentages the wrong way as I only got 1 of this pack, but got 2 of the PSPS. Though I would have gotten 2 (or even 3) of these if I could have afforded them. I have a feeling I'd like this one just as much or more. And I'm gonna hate that I couldn't afford to get more.

My Cellar
In a Glorious Marriage.Woot with cheron98
NYC Tastings

smlauren


quality posts: 0 Private Messages smlauren
bhodilee wrote:This site > my finances


It's just insane to make that statement! This site and your finances are two Completely different things.
A more appropriate comparison would be, Grilled Polish Sausage > Your Plaid Converse.

EDIT: How about this one......... 11 > 10 (It's one more)

439 Bottles
$8,531.53
Avg. cost per bottle $19.43

bhodilee


quality posts: 32 Private Messages bhodilee
smlauren wrote:It's just insane to make that statement! This site and your finances are two Completely different things.
A more appropriate comparison would be, Grilled Polish Sausage > Your Plaid Converse.

EDIT: How about this one......... 11 > 10 (It's one more)



No, here's whats insane

Current numbers (updated each minute):
First sucker: luckyinla
Speed to first woot: 0m 7.280s

Last wooter to woot: bhodilee

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

– George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)

rpm


quality posts: 168 Private Messages rpm
synchrodan wrote:I know we’ve already “turned the page” on this whole silly RP vs WD discussion, but one pseudo-related comment about critics, and one amusing observation.

Every ccritic has some bias, because every ccritic is human. We all have personal preferences. Certain characteristics or attributes might be more preferable to one person to another. Do I believe that objectivism is possible in something like wine? Not any more than I think that there is objectivism in art. After all, I think it would be quite easy to argue that wine making is something of an art. With that said, I think that there may be some consensus on certain aspects of wine that makes it objectively BAD, but I think it is much harder to agree on which good wine is BEST. For example, if Robert Parker had choked on a #2 pencil when he was a child, he may have an aversion to the oakiness he instead embraces. But it didn’t happen that way. His preferences are not invalid, but neither are the preferences of RPM, SB, etc. (Okay, who can tell that philosophy was one of my majors in college??)

And now for the amusing observation – one can draw an interesting contrast between RP and WD. RP’s life has been spent engaging in activities (his reviews, rating scale, etc.) which led to the price of good wine to INCREASE for consumers. WD’s life (at least the wine.woot aspect of it) is spent trying to get the price of good wine (on Woot, in particular) to DECREASE for consumers (Wooters, in particular). While I can’t say one is “greater than” the other, because I am not (yet) rich, my personal preference is for the latter!

Note: I say "ccritic" to get past the Woot filter!



I suppose I'm laying down a marker with synchrodan when I start off by saying I'm not a philosophical relativist and that I believe in the existence of (though not necessarily our ability to accurately discern) absolute truth and so I reject his position that all preferences are equally valid (and not just for the holder of them). As more of an historian than a philosopher, I understand that all of us bring our biases to bear on our work, but I also would argue strongly for the need for making as strenuous an effort as possible towards objectivity. Perhaps we can approach objectivity only asymptotically, but the impossibility of ever knowing we can achieve it does not mean we should not even make the attempt.

While we may not be able to ever achieve an absolute understanding or objective evaluation of wine, I think that there is something that approaches being an objective standard, which is the collective judgment of serious wine professionals (and their dedicated amateur colleagues who collect and taste serious wine, but do not make a living from it) over the past 150-200 years that we have reasonable records and writing about wine that is recognizable and intelligible. By that I mean, wines made in essentially similar ways from vineyards that are still producing in climates that are essentially the same subject to seasonal and reasonable annual variations -- it's my firm view that an astute, well-trained wine maker from, say, 1800, would be able to come into a modern winery working with similar varietals and (other than purely technological innovations that essentially give the wine maker more control over what's going on) understand what a modern wine maker was doing, and could meaningfully discuss and contribute to the decision-making in the production of a modern wine. And vice versa.

Of course, that level of knowledge is the result of a combination of some talent, a lot of training over many years. And, it's a kind of judgment that may differ from the everyday appreciation of wine. It's rather like understanding fine art -- most of us are not connoisseurs of art and do not have a deep understanding of art, but we know and appreciate that there is art that is generally considered great for articulable reasons, and that there are people who are devoted to understanding great art, either as a business or an avocation. With art, most of us know what we like and don't like when we see it. Sometimes, we like great art and sometimes we don't. Similarly, many of us are fond of works or styles of art that would be considered inferior or commercial. Which is fine, as long as we understand there's a difference, and don't try to change the standards by which great art is judged.

I think wine is similar. Those of us who have been fortunate to learn about, taste, and appreciate wines generally considered great probably do consider those wines to set the standards by which we judge wine, and to in some (perhaps fleeting) sense embody a reasonably objective standard of greatness. That does not mean that we like only great wines -- I've known people who profess to drink only the highest quality of wine and they often have more money than taste or knowledge -- or that we don't value wines that doe not meet those exalted standards.

In fact most of what even professionals drink would not count as "great" wine and would include a surprising amount of pretty ordinary or 'standard' wine. Those wines need to be appreciated for what they are and should not be directly compared to great wine. When a professional or serious amateur tastes a lovely wine that's enjoyable now, he or she does not say that should be the standard for all wine, but accepts it on its own terms.

Therein lies the heart of my beef with Parker: with little understanding and no training, but a newly discovered love of wine, lawyer Parker set himself up as a wine c.ritic and began to rate wines based on is own palate. Which, as I have written often over the years, in large measure because it was untrained, was biased in favor of easily approachable and fruit forward wines that immediately delighted his senses. Of course, that is an approach that appeals to a lot of people, especially those who are not experienced, and as a result, he was tremendously commercially successful.

The problem, from my perspective, is that lots of wine drinkers, instead of taking the trouble to learn about wine (and so have their palates progress from approachable wines to those which require more understanding, but which, over time, greatly repay the effort and are the 'change your life' wines of yesteryear) continue in more or less a rut of increasingly expensive approachable, fruit forward, bold (and often heavily oaked) wines which are often not especially well balanced. Wine makers and marketers, who want to sell wine after all, have in large measure responded to the increase in demand for this sort of wine by making more of it. Initially, that occurred in the middle market, but there has been increasing pressure over the past 25 years on the high end to change the methods of vinification to produce (especially in Bordeaux, Burgundy and in California) to produce wines that will obtain high Parker ratings and hence sales. What we don't know is whether those new style wines will age well and develop in ways similar to the great wines of the past. What I suspect based on limited evidence (and I'm not the only one of this view) is that these wines will not hold up and will fade away about the time the great red (and white) wines of the past 200 years would have just been coming into their primes. And, that upsets me, I confess. I want my children and grandchildren to be able to join the great conversation of wine and experience some of the same heights I have been lucky enough to.

Now, all of that said, I do believe that most of us, most of the time, taste wines simply to find what we like and, perhaps learn a bit more in the process. And, I would agree that if you're buying wine you should buy wines that you and those you drink with will actually enjoy. I'd never counsel someone who likes sweetish, fresh tasting wine (say a NZ Sauvignon Blanc or a Mosel Riesling) to buy a bone dry Chablis or Muscadet. I think people should experiment, because I think they may discover interesting new things, but there's no obligation to experiment -- if you know just what you like, and don't want to change, that's fine. NO ONE should ever drink wine he or she doesn't like.

But, let's not pretend that whatever you or I may like is objectively as good as wines that are acknowledged by expert consensus over the past 100 years as great, or that there are no standards in wine other than our personal, totally subjective standards.

whew. end rant.

Wine-tasting in 8 words:
Pull lots of corks!
Remember what you taste!

coynedj


quality posts: 7 Private Messages coynedj

I read the ongoing brouhaha last night and found myself more than once thinking "OK everybody, stop this right now. There's no point in continuing this". But I was wrong.

I'm glad that it went on long enough for us to get rpm's comments. I may not agree with everything he said, but if anything deserves to be the last word on this topic, we now have it. And I do mean last words - no more "I'm glad we all agreed not to talk about this any more, but here's what I think" posts. Let me be the first to publicly say that I have strong opinions on this topic that I will NOT be posting here.

I started out on Burgundy but soon hit the harder stuff. Bob Dylan, Just Like Tom Thumb's Blues

How on earth did I get 7 QPs?

JOATMON


quality posts: 19 Private Messages JOATMON
Gatzby wrote:Forums need trout-slappings, just like mIRC.



Better than invoking Godwin's Law.

Can anybody come up with a good trout-slapping icon that we can use? And then, could we all please take this over to the pub? It's time to cut it off here.

Juvie: 30+24+4; Sellout: 6+7+0
Rags: 3+2+3
Drunk: 69+94+15 wine, 20+29+4 non-wine
Rugrat: 0+0+0; Refunded: 2+3+1
(as of 2011-03-02)

JOATMON


quality posts: 19 Private Messages JOATMON
rpm wrote:

(Major snippery)

whew. end rant.



OK, were done here. Nothing else to see. Move along (to the Pub).

Juvie: 30+24+4; Sellout: 6+7+0
Rags: 3+2+3
Drunk: 69+94+15 wine, 20+29+4 non-wine
Rugrat: 0+0+0; Refunded: 2+3+1
(as of 2011-03-02)

joyironhorse


quality posts: 50 Private Messages joyironhorse
nematic wrote:So, I'm only a few chapters in, and its fawning nature is pretty one-sided, but "the Emperor of wine" gives at least an idea of where parker came from. As for ratings, well, it was only last year that I discovered that WA and WS rate on a 50-100 scale, so everything automatically seems higher - and at least at WS, if it gets below a ?70? it automatically gets retested.

As for wine competitions, there are so many, and many give medals to everyone who pays the (often pretty high) entry fee. Also, again not until last year, did I find out that many/most wine competitions will award multiple of each type of medal. Wineries will often proudly say that their wine won a gold medal in a field of XX rieslings, but it could well be the case that half of the other rieslings also won gold.

Having had lectures this year by three professional wine tasters, I more and more believe that the wine tasting and rating game is mostly a racket.

EDIT: I meant for this to be more that the book was out there and some stuff I learned about ratings and comps than a rant, but it turned out kinda like a rant . . eh, whats there is there. I bought a bottle of iron horse wedding sparkling tonight - hopefully that makes up for some of the thread hijack



Thank you! Did you know that Wedding Cuvee is also know as "Love Potion"?

MarkDaSpark


quality posts: 178 Private Messages MarkDaSpark
JOATMON wrote:Better than invoking Godwin's Law.

Can anybody come up with a good trout-slapping icon that we can use? And then, could we all please take this over to the pub? It's time to cut it off here.



No trout-slapping, but how about this one?

'Cause you guys really did !!!!


Someone has to put WD's kids thru college, but why does it have to be me!
*This post is for purposes of enabling only, and does not constitute any promise of helping pay for said enabling. It does indicate willingness to assist in drinking said wine.

MarkDaSpark


quality posts: 178 Private Messages MarkDaSpark
joyironhorse wrote:Thank you! Did you know that Wedding Cuvee is also know as "Love Potion"?



No. But in previous weeks' guessing games, every time someone (sometimes me) would guess Iron Horse, many people would be in favor of your sparklings.


Someone has to put WD's kids thru college, but why does it have to be me!
*This post is for purposes of enabling only, and does not constitute any promise of helping pay for said enabling. It does indicate willingness to assist in drinking said wine.

kknipe2k


quality posts: 0 Private Messages kknipe2k

Quick question on storing on opened wine. I usually drink reds (not expensive stuff - $10-$20/bottle) - often we do not finish the bottle and end up putting the cork in and throwing in the fridge - usually drinking the next eve. A friend says do not put it in the fridge - just cork and leave on the counter (up to three days).

Are there any thoughts on the best ways to store open wine? [other than by finishing the bottle in the first place? ]

HitAnyKey42


quality posts: 29 Private Messages HitAnyKey42
kknipe2k wrote:Quick question on storing on opened wine. I usually drink reds (not expensive stuff - $10-$20/bottle) - often we do not finish the bottle and end up putting the cork in a throwing in the fridge - usually drinking the next eve. A friend says do not put it in the fridge - just cork and leave on the counter (up to three days).

Are there any thoughts on the best ways to do this? [other than by finishing the bottle in the first place? ]



I'm not an expert or even really good with wine at all (yet) but I'll repeat what pretty much everyone on these forums has said. Yes, after you've opened the bottle you want to put it in the fridge. Also suggest you buy some sort of gizmo to suck out the air, even if it's the little hand-pump suction thing with the rubber stopper. That's what I use.
Now, I'm sure some people will tell you that certain wines fare quite well being left on the counter overnight, and some even get better by doing so. But for the $10/$20 wines, this is highly unlikely.

My Cellar
In a Glorious Marriage.Woot with cheron98
NYC Tastings