TN: Sierra Car Crash tasting at Grapes

WINE TALK
21

Now that I understand!

22

At least no one found any torches. Geez, not a stellar tasting.

23

would have been fun for me - was having an annual physical which included getting very friendly with the doc [middle-finger.gif]

24

Yikes, thanks for sharing, but seemed like a real torturous exersize…

25

My public apology for not being able to attend this “event for the ages” after being cordially invited by Dan. I’m sorry I missed it, and I’m especially sorry I missed looking at the faces of the attendees while they were tasting these atrocities! It sure sounds like an exercise in s&m…

26

Daniel,

I wanted to thank you for setting up the tasting and providing lunch. [cheers.gif]

This was my first blind tasting, and an eye opener it was. The Mollydooker wasn’t as good blind as it was when I originally tasted it in June. Did blind affect the outcome, or was it a bottle variation? Beats me. It was my #3 wine. It tasted like a crowd pleaser, but a buy? My notes say not for me.

I was surrounded at the table by ITB folks and serious wine drinkers. In this group, I’m low man on the totem pole. I was surprised to find that all the experts seemed to agree with some of my notes. Am I getting smarter as I progress in my wine education, or is there something the other guys have to worry about. [stirthepothal.gif]

As for the SC, I think we all agreed that the high rating of a professional wine critic was flawed. Heck, even I know that. Just a smell of this and you’d start the points at 20. Eich.

I thought the Resalsco was a simple wine, and I was right. Retail $15.
I thought the Panarroz tasted funny. Someone said this was flawed. At $9, I’d have no problem pouring this down the drain.
My #2 wine was the Oriol. It was sweet, but not overly sweet. An easy drinker. Retail $15.

My #1 wine was the '01 Clos Fonta. A Spanish Priorat. 94 points $90. Is it worth $90? That’s for you to decide, but if I was spending $90, I’d pick up an ACV Eloge or a couple of Sojourns.


Who says good wine has to be expensive. If I paid $150 for the Espectacle, I would have been pissed. Was it good? yes. Is it worth $150? No.

27

Safe to say the Sierra is a “hot mess”… I posted my note in the other thread, still need to return my 2 remaining bottles…

28

While I can’t say I enjoyed the wines, I certainly enjoyed the tasting. I thought Daniel did a good job of choosing wines mostly from the same areas and/or same cepages to give the SCs a fair chance.

Some thoughts based on comments on eBob- As I noted, my palate preference is not towards hot climate wines. That said, these bottles were just flat out flawed IMHO. I put the CoL in my top 4 wines, despite my palate preference, just because it was so clean compared to the SCs, the Pico Madama (also from Well Oiled), the Panarroz. etc. Others who like very ripe wines more than I do were just as unhappy with those wines. I’ve never been at a tasting where some of the top positive comments were along the lines of “hey, at least this one is clean.”

I understand that Mr Parker and some other posters have had better experiences. But the 4 Sierra Carches came from separate sources (2 from PLCB, 2 from participants who bought at retail on East Coast), so I don’t think storage is the issue. I guess heat in shipping might be an issue, but I’ve tasted lots of heat damaged wines, and these didn’t strike a profile I would associate with that. I guess maybe the first SC , which had at least a less offensive nose than the others. might resemble a heat issue with its premature tiredness . I can believe the Panarroz is an off bottle, tough to judge on one, but 4 bottles from 3 or 4 different stores?

Dan and Mark, good to see you again. John and Steve, nice to meet you. Max, sorry you missed it.

29

I’ve tasted Panarroz (don’t remember what vintages) and they were good but simple wines. Certainly decent wine at that price point.

30

Paul, I also thought the Panarroz decent in earlier vintage. As noted, could just be a bad bottle
From 2006:
2004 Panarroz (Jumilla)
Jim really liked this. Super fruit-forward. A very ripe red fruit body, with a light herbal note. Very soft mouthfeel. Probably a very good value (someone had brought to a party on weekend, but I think I’ve seen at $7-8), but not a style I really go for. But probably a huge hit at a non-geek party. B-

31

Ok, I’d like to post my thoughts on the wines, I think they mirror a lot of others thoughts that day. It was great to meet everyone and put faces to names I see on this board and to see old friends again.

  1. stewed fruit, hard, tannic, chemicals, not pleasant at all - 2005 Sierre carche #15235 lot8114 - this was the best of the four Sierra Carches, which is like picking out your favorite turd in the bowl

  2. nice fruit, very ripe, loads of alcohol, spoofed - 2005 Espectacle (at $150 I would be PISSED if I had bought any of this, most of us thought this was low end shiraz or CdR

  3. tannic, tight, some spice, some fruit, might open up a bit, not too bad, but not something I want to drink again - 2004 Pico Madama

  4. loads of alcohol initially, I thought it may be a Shiraz, very fruit forward and ripe - 2008 The Pepper Pot(South Africa) Syrah/Mourvedre/Tannat blend - interesting wine and for $12?? or so not a bad wine really, my #4

  5. varnish, bad, awful - 2005 Sierra Carche - this was horrendous swill

6)nice fruit, oak, maybe a new world Cabernet?, I liked this and would drink it - 2005 Pasanau El Veil Costere Priorat - my #3 of the afternoon

  1. awful, varnish, toxic chemicals - 2005 Sierra Carche - #15236 lot 8114

  2. akin to a dry port, sweet fruit, very nice, loads of rich, ripe fruit, very Aussie - 2005 Mollydooker Carnival of love - I’ve had this wine twice in the past and have hated it, but this time, against this lot of horrific wines it was the best one going, my #1 wine of the afternoon, at lest it didn’t taste manufactured in a lab

  3. tainted or possibly cooked, - 2007 Resalso Ribera del Duero

  4. not bad, a bit tannic, good fruit, but simple - 2007 A1 Muvedre Alicante

  5. bad, stewed fruit, va, hot, actually painful to drink, aroma of overcooked cranberrys - 2007 Panarroz - This was clearly an off bottle, as I just had one of these and it was much better

  6. a little over the top, big fruit, ripe vanilla and spice, nice wine - 2008 Oriel Vines del Aspres - my #2 of the afternoon

  7. tannic, dusty, stewy fruit, oak, and alcohol, not very pleasurable - 2001 Mas de Gil Clos Forta Priorat

  8. burnt rubber, va, hot, chemicals - 2005 Sierra Carche

Thanks again Dan, this was avery informative afternoon and a load of fun.

32

Okay, my turn. Firstly, thank you everyone who attended and were good sports. I tried to keep this event small and tried to have people attend who showed a previous interest in this whole Wine Advocate embarassment. What people lose sight of here is that a few weeks ago, Robert Parker “claims” to have tasted a good btl of Carche. Previous to that, he PROMISED to taste a btl on his video blog first. Instead, he tasted it in private with his wife, who gave the wine 93 points. We tasted 4 btls yesterday, from 3 DIFFERENT sources. And all were SHIT! That is the start of an investigation, not what Robert Parker has done.

Thank you, Jack, for your comments. I have been on the Wine Advocate’s case for 2+ years now about Jay Miller and his tasting methodology. In that time, he has admitted to tasting just as Robert Parker does. This should ring serious alarm bells. Whatever Jay tasted for Carche was certainly not what anyo of us tasted yesterday and we had to do it 4 times.

On to the tasting…I selected, what I thought to be a good lineup. 15 wines served blind with a filet mignon lunch.

Lets examine the lineup, before we shit on the wines…

4 btls 2005 Sierra Carche @ WA 96 points each
2005 Pico Madama (corked, never served) WA 95+
2004 Pico Madama WA 93
2001 Clos Fonta WA 94
2007 Panarroz (Unrated by JM, but RP gave 2003-2006 all WA 90)
2007 Telmo Rodriguez A1 Murvedre
2005 Pasanau El Vell Coster WA 97
2008 Edgebaston Pepper Pot unrated
2007 Emilio Moro Resalso WA 90
2005 Espectacle (unrated, but 2004 was WA 99, 2006 WA 96)
2008 Oriol Unrated
2005 Mollydooker Carnival of Love WA 99

Is this really a bad lineup of wines? It reads like something Jay Miller might have on a riverboat cruise down the Murray River, no?

Most of these wines were very highly rated, and none were poorly rated. Before Thursday, I had never had Sierra Carche before, and all 4 btls were crap. I will never forget that smell of three of those btls. Absolutely disgusting. Panarroz must have been an off btl. I tasted that wine one week earlier and it was good.

One of the things I wanted to see was whether Pico Madama 2004 suffered like Sierra Carche 2005. It was not as bad but it was univerally panned by the group. I am curious to see where the 93 point btls of this are? Maybe Robert Parker can muster one up from another bulletin board member and taste it with his wife.

Onto Espectacle…first read this…http://dat.erobertparker.com/bboard/showthread.php?t=185381&highlight=espectacle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I had the 2004 and it sucked. 2005 was a decent wine…for $10, much like the 2004. This is another example of what happens when an importer whispers into a wine critic’s ear about 100+ year old Grenache vines in Montsant. In the 45 seconds that Jay Miller presumably spent with the 2004, he called it a 99 point wine. With the 2006, it is 96 points. Assume the 2005 would be a 97-98 pointer based on that scale. This is really a shame. I have not yet heard of anyone (besides Robert Kenney) have a full btl of this stuff and call it great. It should be noted that Robert Kenney thought the wine was crap yesterday.

Blind tasting is very revealing. Critics at the Wine Advocate should try it some time. Something is wrong with Sierra Carche. As Jay Miller first said, there was fraud somewhere. It is a shame that Robert Parker has no interest in seeing where it happened. It is a shame that Jay Miller will apparently continue to taste the portfolio of wines from Well Oiled Wine Co, when they have shown no proof that they are, in fact, innocent in all of this.

Special thanks to Steve Manzi and Robert Kenney. I worked this tasting around their schedules. I think I did right by them and the wine consuming public on these bulletin boards. I would have loved to taste a good btl of Sierra Carche. That would have made for interesting debate. Instead, we tasted 4 btls of shit. More importantly, many of these wines were shit.

So, where is the fraud really being committed? [stirthepothal.gif]

I hope someone shows this post to people like John Kight, so that they can stop apologizing for the Wine Advocate. I wish Robert Parker would do the right thing, and continue his investigation into what happened with Sierra Carche. I also wish that he would change his tasting methods to those that he has preached for decades…taste blind! If not, do not tell your subscribers and the wine consuming public that you do!

To Mrs. Robert Parker,

I do not know your palate, but for you to score this wine 93 points, I do not wish to see anymore reviews from you.

33

I will add that the SCs that we tasted at this get together, were nothing like that BAD bottles I had. The three that I opened were all drinkable, as opposed to these wines that were deeply flawed on so many levels. The earlier ones I drank, resembled a very bad mountain cab profile, without the tannins. These wines made me think that there is some sort of bacteria going on in there. As bad as the wines were earlier, these wines were atrocious.

It is just funny (sad) that parker has (so far) been unable to find a bottle like we had. The things he said on his board, about how he enjoyed it, his wife enjoyed it, and then the real scientific investigation he did that sealed that this wine was well received, was his statement that “stores in the area reported selling well, and then having happy customers coming back for more”…are just so ridiculous for a publication that pronounces itself the CONSUMER advocate. What a joke.

Again, I hope that someone with strength in the media, gets this out to others beyond these boards, to report the WHOLE story for what it really is. A sham and coverup from many angles.

34

Nice write up for a dismal tasting. neener

As an aside, I was at Costco yesterday and I counted a total of eleven Spanish red wines with 90+ points from TWA. They made no mention of BJM, but had a nice glossy sign proclaiming their points. I wish that the general populace could see something like this or even attend before being duped into buying the swill.

35

[rofl.gif] [rofl.gif]

36

Panarroz is donkey snot.

37

This is absolutely fantastic. I love it. And a great service, I think. People might say you all went in with the attitude that you wanted to trash the wines, but going with it double blind and a possibility of ringers and such should be enough to overcome such a presumption. Blind tasting is very telling. These wines sound like the kind of crap I would run from.

My quote of the year may be Dan’s … “Let’s look at the lineup before we shit on the wines.” HA!

38

Thank you one and all!

39

Thanks for the tasting notes on these, um, er, gems…yikes.

Another reason, I very rarely buy Spanish wine unless I get to taste it first or the recommendation is from a trusted wine friend or retailer. I just don’t understand most of these wines that Jay M is rating so highly.

At least I haven’t wasted money on these things.

40

I stopped buying Spanish wines years ago - I’ve had so-so luck with such “superstars” as the '94 Torre Muga and the '94 Janus Reserva, and I figured if wines that were that well thought of had issues/inconsistencies, why waste the time/effort/money to seek out drinkable Spanish vino. Based upon the results of this tasting, I really have no regrets on my earlier decision to focus elsewhere [wink.gif]