In my mind, in most cases a wine being named a winner in a wine tasting competition has about the same significance as an automobile being named a Car of the Year by an auto rag -

1983 Renault Alliance: Car and Driver 10 Best Cars


1980 Chevrolet Citation: Motor Trend Car of the Year

rpm wrote:More after dinner (broiled salmon).

Thanks for educating me on that pairing. It worked beautifully last week.

Initial pnp into decanter. Lighter in color and body as rpm noted. Fairly muted nose at that but hints of cherry and spice. Took a quick sip at that point and it was fairly muted on the palate as well with some slight cherry and spices. I did not, however, get any bitterness.

After 30-45 minutes in the decanter, it was time to drink with some dinner; as mentioned about braised boneless chicken thighs with cajun spices and white rice.

Definitely more on the nose at this point, almost a cherry pie filling with hints of baking spice.

Drinking without the food, it seems a little light on the palate with a decent amount of bright cherry a little spice. No earthy or barnyard flavors you would find in a oregon pinot. This is definitely Sonoma Coast. Felt slightly thin and I wasn't getting much acid or much more than a short finish.

Where this seems to go against the grain (seemingly thin and lacking in acid backbone) is with the introduction of food. This seemed to come to life with the food, which didn't make sense with what I tasting without the food. I started getting some darker cherry, peppery notes and it seemed to gain a bit of depth and some weight on the palate. The acid seems to take a slight step forward and the finish gained a bit of length.

All in all this shaped out to be a pretty pleasant wine. As I said, I don't quite understand why, but this definitely improved with a little air and with food (but seemingly not for the normal reasons). The fruit is very nice and enjoyable, but it is a little light to sip on it's own, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

ok..so some people seem to be on the critic/competition bashing thing ..whatever... really no difference between a critic and a competition is there? I like/hate Meadows I like/hate Tanzer I like/hate Laube I like/hate Robinson I like hate SF Chron I hate anyone associated with Parker, whatever that was all about.. etc.. . guess we should just stop referencing anybody really..so if you haven't tasted the wine offered on woot: Do not offer an opinion.

kylemittskus wrote:Not a critique of this wine at all. Just stating a fact to keep things in perspective.

Our perspective on entering these competitions is that they can provide a sense of "quality control" to wine drinkers that have never heard of us; and when you're as small as we are almost nobody has heard of us! I've been told many times that the accolades have given new customers the confidence to try our wine - they figure that by winning a nice medal in a professionally judged competition the wine probably won't be terrible, and might be great. Once they become fans, they appreciate that we promoted the accolades so that they had the confidence to give us a try.

jamesfamilycellars wrote:Our perspective on entering these competitions is that they can provide a sense of "quality control" to wine drinkers that have never heard of us; and when you're as small as we are almost nobody has heard of us! I've been told many times that the accolades have given new customers the confidence to try our wine - they figure that by winning a nice medal in a professionally judged competition the wine probably won't be terrible, and might be great. Once they become fans, they appreciate that we promoted the accolades so that they had the confidence to give us a try.

Your presence and participation here mean more to me as a consumer than an infinite number of consecutive gold medals.

kylemittskus wrote:Your presence and participation here mean more to me as a consumer than an infinite number of consecutive gold medals.

and SF Chron probably gets more press than Woot...so to get people to try things you put your product where people can see it...

jamesfamilycellars wrote:Our perspective on entering these competitions is that they can provide a sense of "quality control" to wine drinkers that have never heard of us; and when you're as small as we are almost nobody has heard of us! I've been told many times that the accolades have given new customers the confidence to try our wine - they figure that by winning a nice medal in a professionally judged competition the wine probably won't be terrible, and might be great. Once they become fans, they appreciate that we promoted the accolades so that they had the confidence to give us a try.

I can appreciate that.

My jadedness comes from the many times I've been in tasting rooms and sampled "award-winning" wines that were not the least bit remarkable - as well as some that haven't even been that good. At times it leaves me with a sense that are so many "competitions" out there, with so many prizes being offered that only an incompetent could produce a wine that couldn't get some kind of an award in some competition somewhere.

Please understand, I'm not saying that your wine has been made by incompetents. What I know about your wine is what is in this thread. And with ratters weighting in (including the estimable RPM) we will shortly know more about your wine than 99.999% of the wines that are in the marketplace. And in this arena those voices will mean more than having enough gold-gilt awards to cover every square inch of wall in your tasting room.

But I am saying that "look at what we've won" generally means absolutely nothing to me. And when a winery keeps reverting to "look at our awards" (and I'm not trying to imply that you are) I get more suspicious. Same thing applies when I am seeking someone for professional services in my job. I don't care about awards; that's the sizzle. Show me the steak.

noslensj wrote:I can appreciate that.

My jadedness comes from the many times I've been in tasting rooms and sampled "award-winning" wines that were not the least bit remarkable - as well as some that haven't even been that good. At times it leaves me with a sense that are so many "competitions" out there, with so many prizes being offered that only an incompetent could produce a wine that couldn't get some kind of an award in some competition somewhere.

Please understand, I'm not saying that your wine has been made by incompetents. What I know about your wine is what is in this thread. And with the estimable RPM weighing in I will shortly know more about your wine than 99.999% of the wines that are in the marketplace.

But I am saying that "look at what we've won" generally means absolutely nothing to me. And when a winery keeps reverting to "look at our awards" (and I'm not trying to imply that you are) I get more suspicious. Same thing applies when I am seeking someone for professional services in my job. I don't care about awards; that's the sizzle. Show me the steak.

What if the winery said Allen Meadows loved it? Different opinion? Just wondering.

kaolis wrote:What if the winery said Allen Meadows loved it? Different opinion? Just wondering.

Is not rpm just another "award" if you have not tried the wine?

kaolis wrote:What if the winery said Allen Meadows loved it? Different opinion? Just wondering.

Does Meadows give out platinum, gold, and silver awards for wineries to hang in their tasting rooms?

Snark aside. The likelihood of me visiting a tasting room where there is a wine that has been reviewed by Meadows is probably about 0.001% on the high side. And even if that were the case, the comments of any critic generally mean little to me until I have a sense of what that reviewer likes or doesn't like.

Thanks to the education I've received here and noting what I tend to like and not like, I got a rough gauge of my tastes versus what I guess is generally called an International style. I perceive that I'm mostly an "old world" guy, or maybe a "modern old worlder", if that makes sense.

kaolis wrote:Is not rpm just another "award" if you have not tried the wine?

No, for the simple fact that he will spend an entire evening with a bottle - as would any others of us entrusted with this responsibility. The critics and judges at wine competitions get 2-3 sips amidst dozens or hundreds of wines. Which would you rather base your wine-buying decisions on?

kaolis wrote:Is not rpm just another "award" if you have not tried the wine?

I hope you're just being Socratic - because if you have a history with RPM you should be fully aware that it's silly to equate his thoughtful review with 1000 or more words of explanation (in addition to being someone of whom I have a sense of how their tastes align with mine) with something such as "Gold Prize winner for best single vineyard Pinot Noir" (of the five entered in the competition).

Though, to be honest if I did walk into tasting room and they had posted wine.woot tasting notes by RPM on one of their wines, that is something I would certainly note.

klezman wrote:No, for the simple fact that he will spend an entire evening with a bottle - as would any others of us entrusted with this responsibility. The critics and judges at wine competitions get 2-3 sips amidst dozens or hundreds of wines. Which would you rather base your wine-buying decisions on?

I bow to rpm...respectfully of course...

klezman wrote:No, for the simple fact that he will spend an entire evening with a bottle - as would any others of us entrusted with this responsibility. The critics and judges at wine competitions get 2-3 sips amidst dozens or hundreds of wines. Which would you rather base your wine-buying decisions on?

And it's not just that he will spend an evening with a bottle; it's also that I know what appeals to him and how that aligns with my tastes.

noslensj wrote:And it's not just that he will spend an evening with a bottle; it's also that I know what appeals to him and how that aligns with my tastes.

EXACTLY!! Find a critic, find a friend, find an enemy...find someone you can trust to enjoy a wine you might as well to help you make buying choices...in your case it is rpm..nothing wrong with that..my point is not to dismiss other points of view..

kaolis wrote:and SF Chron probably gets more press than Woot...so to get people to try things you put your product where people can see it...

I would say that positive comments by respected members of this community can directly lead to more sales (through woot) than mention in the SF Chronicle. If the winery continues on to build a relationship and a reputation here with the wine.woot community they can start to move significant amounts of product through woot, as well as stimulating business in their other distribution channels from people who are serious wine drinkers.

IOW - it isn't just the number of eyeballs that see, it's the "quality" of the eyeballs. And wine.woot eyeballs are probably among the most lucrative eyeballs for a winery to get in front of.

kaolis wrote:EXACTLY!! Find a critic, find a friend, find an enemy...find someone you can trust to enjoy a wine you might as well to help you make buying choices...in your case it is rpm..nothing wrong with that..my point is not to dismiss other points of view..

It's not a matter of dismissing other points of view. But until you know what the other point of view is you have no way of knowing how seriously you should consider that point of view.

I can go to CT and get lots of comments about wine. Most of them mean nothing to me because I know nothing about the writer. Occasionally, though, I see some offering tasting notes where I can perceive what they are noting in the wine and how they are assessing the wine. Then I start to pay attention. In a similar vein, I generally don't post tasting notes unless I can provide a reader with a decent framework for my opinion. If I don't have the time or I haven't paid enough attention to the wine to write intelligently, I don't write anything at all.

noslensj wrote:It's not a matter of dismissing other points of view. But until you know what the other point of view is you have no way of knowing how seriously you should consider that point of view.

I can go to CT and get lots of comments about wine. Most of them mean nothing to me because I know nothing about the writer. Occasionally, though, I see some offering tasting notes where I can perceive what they are noting in the wine and how they are assessing the wine. Then I start to pay attention. In a similar vein, I generally don't post tasting notes unless I can provide a reader with a decent framework for my opinion. If I don't have the time or I haven't paid enough attention to the wine to write intelligently, I don't write anything at all.

Have to say, I use CT as well, but you are very correct. The reviews there are iffy..in a way, kind of what we are talking about. You have to find people with similar tastes. I get kind of tired of CT reviews that say " well, this is not very good, kind of over oaked and maybe even sweet..didn't go well with my baked horse meat..92 points" I exaggerate but you know what I mean I bet.

Cheers!

kaolis wrote:EXACTLY!! Find a critic, find a friend, find an enemy...find someone you can trust to enjoy a wine you might as well to help you make buying choices...in your case it is rpm..nothing wrong with that..my point is not to dismiss other points of view..

It's both, really. It's partly finding somebody who aligns with your taste - then all you need to do it say "person x liked it, I'm in!" For most of us, though, we don't perfectly align with others. So we want descriptions. This is where a thoughtful review after/while spending an evening with a bottle of wine is invaluable. It's how we actually drink it and experience it (unless you have dozen of bottles on hand and pour yourself an ounce of each at a time and spend no more than 30 seconds per).

rpm wrote:I opened this Pinot about an hour or so ago. I immediately looked at it carefully and found it to be relatively light in body, very very clear - the picture of limpid.

The initial impression on the nose was predominantly strawberry - fairly subtle, but distinctive. Something floral, maybe roses, something akin to vanilla. Overall very pleasant.

Entry is nice, not overwhelming with some astringency. Flavors in the entry are less distinctive than the nose.

Body continues to be light through the middle palate, with some bitterness.

The finish is medium long, with a little tannin and something that is either the bitterness continuing or a slightly acetic hint. I'm not sure at this point and will have to see as it opens up.

More after dinner (broiled salmon).

Sorry for the delay in the further report:

SWMBO came home and did the honors with the broiled salmon, green beans and tabouli.

She tasted the wine and liked it - she likes lighter Burgundies and this wine is up her alley.

The wine paired very well with the salmon - not a Zinfandel, but very nice. It was quintessentially a food wine.

So, is this a ringing endorsement? Alas, no. For two reasons:
1. this bitterness in the middle palate that lingers into the finish; and
2. the slightly acetic quality most noticeable in the finish.

With the food, the bitterness is less apparent than when sipping the wine alone, but it's still there. It's not enough to be unpleasant, but, for me at least, it detracts from an otherwise lovely wine. I sometimes find this quality in Burgundy, rarely in California. Yet, I don't find it in the Burgundies I like the best, or at the upper reaches of Burgundy.

The hint of acetic quality gives me the sense that this is a wine around it's peak, one which will probably not improve over the next few years.

I know some people, with respectable palates, who are not put off by some bitterness, and they would undoubtedly like this wine very much.

We didn't finish the bottle, and I will be curious to see how it tastes tomorrow.

kaolis wrote:Have to say, I use CT as well, but you are very correct. The reviews there are iffy..in a way, kind of what we are talking about. You have to find people with similar tastes. I get kind of tired of CT reviews that say " well, this is not very good, kind of over oaked and maybe even sweet..didn't go well with my baked horse meat..92 points" I exaggerate but you know what I mean I bet.

Cheers!

I never take CT reviews seriously.

Thank you, Wooters! With just a couple of hours to go, we want to thank you for allowing us to share our wine with you. Since our annual production is so low (600-800 cases per year), it's not often that we get to display the product of our farming and winemaking passions with such a large, and vociferous, audience. Please let us know if you have any other questions. Cheers!

jamesfamilycellars wrote:Thank you, Wooters! With just a couple of hours to go, we want to thank you for allowing us to share our wine with you. Since our annual production is so low (600-800 cases per year), it's not often that we get to display the product of our farming and winemaking passions with such a large, and vociferous, audience. Please let us know if you have any other questions. Cheers!

You've been real troopers, great to have you here, and for you to endure some of our, generally well intended, abuse.