You must realize this question is so broad that it doesn’t make sense at all. I don’t think there is anyone who could reasonably choose only one option for all wines. Maybe Francois Audoze…
I prefer my whites (mostly Chablis) on the young side (under 15 yrs from vintage). I need my reds to have as much as on them as possible. I love my Champagne both young and old, and everything inbetween.
There are no answers that I choose that accurately reflect my opinion. I love wine when its young and fresh and I also love wine when it has transformed into full maturity and many stages in between.
My take is a little different. Secondary being when the fruit gives way to leafy and more earthy notes and tertiary being the evolved state of leather and tea and the absence of fruit in old wines.
I believe that Michael’s definition is technically and historically correct. Peynaud and others used the terms that way. But they are used differently so often that they have lost most of their utility.
My answer to the poll is all of the above, with a special place in my heart for tertiary development. The greatest wine experiences I have had have come from aged wines that have developed great complexity from strong tertiary components. Some would call them OTH but different strokes… I have also had great wines that are young and showing a lot of fresh ripe fruit with little or no tertiary complexity.
Sorry. but questioning a thread does not seem rude to me. This thread just begs the question of why taste wine.
I fail to see why we can’t have a poll on do aromas in wine matter? or does taste matter? If one asked do you prefer young wine with fruit versus older wine with tertiary characteristics ok. But basically what does this poll show - do people on WB appreciate more complexity? Seriously?