Baumard "hits back" vs Jim Budd

Florent Baumard has issued a strongly worded press release in response to Jim Budd.

http://www.baumard.fr/Docs/1-WhatCanISay.pdf

Although we have been appalled by these unjust and defamatory attacks, we have remained quiet safe in the knowledge that we alone know what we have recorded during this recent harvest. Cold pressing allowed us to use the best of a crop battered by the weather, with grapes whose maturity levels were extremely heterogeneous, even by Loire standards.

http://www.baumard.fr/Docs/2-SourGrapes.pdf

Mr Budd’s ill-informed and intemperate critiscims of our business clumsily disguise the true motive of his attack: “It is high time for Baumard to waive their appeals against the Grand Cru Quarts de Chaume”.

In case you have not been following the “case of the unripe grapes.” Here is the linky…

Wow…that may be the geekiest bit of wine writing I have ever seen. Fascinating but straight outta geekville!

I think that Jim makes a pretty strong case.

http://www.baumard.fr/Docs/2-SourGrapes.pdf

Cold pressing is not a miracle, nor is it a “sham”. It has had scientific accreditationsince 1987 and is used by the world’s greatest chateaux and wine makers, including those of Sauternes and Barsac.

Would be nice to have an example…

Also, just because a winery wines awards and accolades I shouldn’t be skeptical of their practices?

Cryo-extraction or cryo-selection as the Baumard calls it is authorized by the AOC till 2019.
You can debate about it, but if someone disagrees with it has more to do with AOC regulations than the Baumard domaine.

However, the main point remains : what was the potential alcohol % from the tries, given that mother nature made it very hard to produce any high sugar grapes.
Since this is a regulatory point, I am still wondering how and who ensures that. They must have some kind of trace/files to ensures that, and if so I think it would have clarified the debate if Baumard exhibited those potential alcohol numbers.
And since I think the mustometer uses grape juice, which moult did they use ? they used a special one made before cryo selection or used the one after, in which case I believe would comply the regulations.

A lot of suppositions here…

Pierre-Yves

In fact Florent regards it simply as an additional tri, no different to workers passing through the vineyard, selecting ripe or botrytised fruit, leaving unripe or non-botrytised fruit on the vine. In cooling the fruit he looks for less ripe, less sugar-rich grapes to freeze first, and when this is achieved he presses the fruit, thereby extracting juice from the ripe and richer grapes, whereas those less ripe berries which have frozen solid contribute nothing.

From chris kissack’s write up of Baumard on thewinedoctor.com

Chris, the question I have after reading that is, how do you still get a huge yield with that system if they come in that underripe? Jim says the yield is close to max allowed and much higher per hectare than anyone else saw. Pressing only the ripe grapes in a very low potential year, if I understand this method, should result in an extremely small yield, right?

In any case, calling it an extra tri seems disingenuous.

Totally agree, Michael.

Jim Budd is on Baumard like Klapp is on Parker. He is on a mission, and I wonder how that colors his judgement and objectivity. Still, I am an old school traditionalist and do not approve of cryo-extraction. I regret that the appellation rules permit it, and glad it is being removed, albeit slowly.

The proof is in the wines, isn’t it?

And the wine is fantastic!
Well, I had one of their Cremants last week that I didn’t care much for (and I should post a TN - lazy me).

The entire thing is fascinating, but that’s from a wine geek perspective of course!

I’m good with that. But I also want “truth in advertising”, as the saying goes.

If there’s truth in what Jim Budd is alleging, then I’d argue that Florent should drop the AOC, and be very clear that he harvested grapes which don’t meet the AOC standards (overcropped and underripe), detail how he achieved his spectacular results (cryoetraction and/or other methods), be very clear about how many bottles of Baumard Quarts de Chaume were produced (which will show up on shelves here in the US for approximately the same price as bottles of Huet Moelleux 1er Trie, just by way of comparison), and let the chips fall where they may.

Lew Dawson, I don’t think your analogy to Bill is accurate. To me, it seems that Jim Budd has a reasonable and demonstrated record of investigative wine journalism, and I similarly believe that he’s largely been accurate. Although I guess if his mission is to uncover hypocrisy, then perhaps he and Bill do share some qualities.

Correct me if I’m wrong but the issue seems to be about how much Baumard declared after picking (close to the maximum allowed), and what ultimately ends up in the wine after cryo-extraction or cryo-selection which I assumed would be different. Baumard argues that the extra step of selection ensures that only the ripened grapes are used, and therefore this would reduce the yield. However, this is not what they have to declare at picking. Of course this is hardly a traditional approach, getting all the grapes in the winery and then selecting from there.
I have mixed feelings about this for sure, but then the Baumard have been doing things differently for a long time. When you drive around the area, you cannot miss the Baumard vineyards and their very tall vines. And then you have the use of screwcaps. One cannot underestimate the extent to which the Baumard stand out in the AOC for all these practices. I have a lot of respect for that.
All of this of course is happening a stone-throw away from Nicolas Joly on one side and Chateau Pierre Bise on the other (a producer for which I have the highest regard). Who said there is no diversity in the rather small area!

I’m just a guy who has enjoys Baumard wines on an occasional basis [my bias], but I have to say, having read the Jim Budd blog entry and the two response letters from Baumard, my take away is that Budd’s obsession strikes me as sort of creepy and replete with stalker-like behavior. Maybe I’ve missed something here, but shouldn’t we be happy if Baumard has sufficient technology at hand to turn what would be an otherwise lost crop in to perfectly good QdC? I know this may fly in the face of a purist’s ideal, but if we borrow the chef anology forwarded by Baumard, can we not think of this as a net positive; like what can be done in a French kitchen with a sous vide machine at the Chefs disposal?

I know enough about the science of winemaking to be dangerous, but some searching from those who really do know about such matters point to cryoextraction, or more specifically, supraextraction, as being valid methods of producing better wine. In the Handbook of Enology Volume 1: The Microbiology of Wine and Vinifications (2nd ed.), which discusses the process in Bordeaux as used in Sauternes, and they mention: “By pressing at this temperature [0 degrees C], a selected juice is obtained which only represents a part of the juice volume. The potential alcohol content of this juice, however, is higher.” More interestingly (to me), they add: “The selction of the most sugar-rich and thus ripest by cryoextraction is the primary cause of improved wine quality.”

In a book by Ronald Jackson, titled Wine Science: Principles and Applications, the author talk about supraextration. He says: "An alternative to crushing is supraextraction. It involves cooling the grapes to -4 degrees C, then followed by warming to about 10 degrees C before pressing. Freezing causes both grape-cell rupture and skin splitting. These facilitate the escape of juice during pressing. Although increasing the extraction of sugar and phenolics, supraextraction reduces total acidity and raise the pH.

At any rate, it seems like Baumard is simply leveraging technology to produce wines when others can’t. I don’t see the problem in that, but understand why others might get their knickers in a twist about it. I not sure why mutiple passes through the vineyard is a problem (if I’m understanding that it is), when the Germans commonly do so to produce better wine. I’m also not sure if the ‘truth in labeling’ argument holds, if Sauternes is produced by utilizing cryoextraction and there is no disclosure that accompanies such practices.

After reading all of this, I’m left feeling Jim Budd is conducting what amounts to a witch hunt against Baumard. Maybe he feels justified in saving the wine world here, or maybe he is just looking to make his journalistics bones at the expense of Baumard? I can’t claim to know his motives. Either way, it remains such a geeky endeavour that few outside pages like this, a few assorted wine geek blogs, or those that are local to what is being discussed, will take more a passing interest in such an undertaking.

Huge +1 to this post.

I don’t see where it says that others “can’t” make the wine this way, just that they don’t. I also don’t know if one says …sauternes is made by utilizing cryo…" When all we see is reference that some Sauternes may use the method. My main issue is that it seems a way to sell a lot of inferior wine as GC. I guess it’s their brand dilution, so whatever. I think it feels off to me.

Exactly.

Jim Brennan, this is why I referred to Bill Klapp. However, I am willing to concede Jim Budd has a greater degree of credibility.

They can’t, if they haven’t made the investment in the technology. I do wonder how many producers would choose to use the equipment, were it given to them for free. Hardcore traditionalists might have little interest, but I have to believe some protests are born out ‘can’t afford’ more than a purist’s idealism.

The reference on Sauturnes posted above came from Faculty of Enology Victor Segalen University of Bordeaux II, Talence, France. An October 2012 Decanter article mentioned: “Olivier Castéja at Chateau Doisy Védrines has reported using cryo-extraction to concentrate sugars, and is confident that he will get attractive flavours, and a reasonable quantity…” While I don’t know how many producers use cryoextraction, clearly it is ‘some’ and not ‘none’.

As for knowing if the Baumard wine in question is inferior wine posing as GC, I’ll defer judgment until I read some reviews or get a chance to taste the wine for myself.

I don’t think 2012 was a perfectly good crop, since most of winemakers there could not make any QdC.

I am not really talking about cry extraxtion here. Even Jim Budd doesn’t seem to like it, it is allowed by the AOC , so you can use it or not, you should not be blamed for it, and indeed should be seen as winemaking technique. Traditionalists don’t like it, modernist do, this is just a church matter.
Now, if they don’t follow the potential degree of alcohol of the grapes coming into the winery they should not call it AOC QdC. I would be fine by it and I am sure their wine will still be very good. Business wise, it might be a different story.

Sometimes the AOC administration seems to follow strange patterns, filing suit agains O. Cousinhttp://www.alicefeiring.com/blog/2011/10/olivier-cousin-enemy-of-the-loire-not.html but letting this one go.

By the way doing multiple tries is part of coteaux du layon and I believe late harvest wines.

Agree they won’t be able to make the investment especially since it will not be authorized in 7 years.