Pre Mox Caused by Clonal Selection, Pick Date, Pressing Techniques and Pre-Bottling Preparations - NOT Cork . . .

Well, this is according to the Domaine Laroche head winemaker, speaking at a conference in Portugal earlier this year put on by Laroche and Amorin, one of the biggest cork producers in the world. Interesting indeed . . .

https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2018/09/clonal-selection-to-blame-for-premox-says-laroche-winemaker/

Once again, someone claims to know what causes premox when no one really knows at this point, and the reasons given do not explain the fact that it effects different bottles differently and some not at all. Basically, they’ve discovered that it isn’t only the closure because they’ve had premoxed wines under screwcap. The comments about Champagne are interesting and further show that no one knows the cause(s).

Fun read.

Interesting read. Amazing the bullshit people will peddle if you give them a few bucks.

Er what is this “Mox” of which you speak?

But seriously, has any one been seriously suggesting it was due to the cork? Straw man.

It’s amazing to me they’re still blaming pneumatic presses, as if they suddenly appeared in 1995-96. They’ve been around since at least the '70s, and more and more wineries bought them as time went on. By 1995-96 it would be unusual for a winery not to have one for whites. No one talks about how grapes were delivered to the press and how a sudden change in that method is more to blame than gentle pressing. I’ve been saying it for years, but whole cluster pressing of whites was the biggest change in the mid ‘90s. I’ve heard that some wineries in Burgundy have gone back to crushing their Chardonnay prior to pressing as a way to get more skin contact and phenolics. It’ will be interesting to see if white Burgundies regain their ageability or not.

of course the cork is a significant factor. How else to explain why some bottles in the same case are affected and others not? That plus gentler pressing, batonnage, and lower sulfur levels during and after the winemaking. Those seem to be generally accepted factors.

Ed
A guy I know in burgundy used to say it s not the presses it s the operators.
But whereas we moved from plate presses to bladder presses and then to tank presses over a long period many of them went from old Vaslins to modern presses very quickly.

Interestingly, an importer I know who has been around Burgundy for many years said one of the tells for who was a more “tradtional” producer in the current era is a darker color in young wine for just the reasons mentioned above.

I could not agree more, Alan. That’s why I posted the link. I think it’s fairly ludicrous to assume that the closure played no part in the randomness of this issue. It is also important to note that this talk was given at a joint conference with a cork manufacturer. Coincidence?

It is BEYOND ludicrous that no one talking about the cause for “premox”…wants to focus on the three known variables: 1)the random nature of the problem and 2) the random nature of the process of putting silicone on corks 3) The timing coincidence between when premox “showed up” and when companies switched over to silicone…without letting anyone know they had changed their methods (which also affected 1 and 2).

That the guy has gone back to corks means he hasn’t anything to say for a while…until the wines age out a bit. And, I’m wondering what he was “promised” to switch back: the spongier parrafin-coated corks only…???

None of the “usual suspects” mentioned in the article for the randomness of good and bad bottles within any given number of them…as there is no variablity in those factors to speak of.

The cork industry is in denile…but the main problem is in Burgundy. Time for that industry to spread some money around to actually contribute to the analysis instead of pretending that the problem has been “solved” and it’s not them. (Which is what I was told by a higher up plugging away for the cork industry in the US., before he stopped returning my emails two years ago.)

Are you really suggesting Amorin would use their funds to financially support people who are willing to deny the inadequacies of cork? I’m shocked, shocked I tell you.

Hard to believe, isn’t it.

Still yet to see a premoxed (or even advanced) bottle under screwcap…

And you never will - since ‘serious’ wine, neither white or red, can age for a long time using screw caps. Don’t you know?

I doubt corks were the cause of premox, but that doesn’t mean screw caps might not be the solution for premox. Important to consider those two things independently.

Or Diam.

I know one is never supposed to read the comments, but I appreciated Charles Philipponnat and Tom Stevenson weighing in. That’s a pretty high signal to noise ratio for a random Drinks Biz article.

“Key to its decision to make the switch back to cork were the advances of the cork industry in removing the risk of wine spoilage taints in the stopper, although the ecological benefits of cork versus other closures were also a factor for Laroche”

So they aren’t changing because of premox risks.