Fakes - what do you think Rudy and his ilk put in the bottle?

My curiosity is up. For example, what do you think fooled Neil Martin (see below and related thread)? Or was it just the label?

Wine Journal
Nov 2012 Neal Martin 99 Drink 2012 - 2030 $1708-$4505

Tasted at The White Club’s dinner in Basel. This was a brilliant performance from Pomerol’s most famous resident. Amazingly deep and lucid in colour and showing little sign of its age on the rim, the nose is immediately rivets you to the spot. Tightly wound aromas of blackcurrant pastilles, cold stones and Alpine streams, small dark cherries, terracotta and a hint of thyme. The palate is medium-bodied with perfect balance. It marries intensity with elegance like few others, a Petrus of volume and dimension, a Pandora’s box of delights. The tannins are melted and yet still provide a firm backbone, a deep foundation to this majestic wine that has an effortless quality to it. This is probably one of the finest bottles of Petrus I have encountered. Drink now-2030. Tasted September 2012.

Boones farm

At a recent tasting I had a 1983 First Growth Bordeaux that I’m quite sure was refilled. It was young and powerful and very tasty but bore no resemblance to the other 83s in the flight (including Margaux and Petrus). In addition it didn’t resemble any recent CT note - all of those indicate a more mature wine. I think it was probably a good Bordeaux but from the 2000s. Both bottle and cork looked authentic, though.

Or maybe it just proves that wine critics are full of hot air?

Frequently re-inflated too.

Now that’s funny!

It’s been reported that Rudy bought a lot of old cheap mediocre Burgundy from France. Presumably, he used that as a base for a lot of his fakes and touched it up with New World Pinot.

In December, during the trial, Don Cornwell reported this evidence being introduced:
When our fingers and minds had become numb with the rapid and unrelenting presentation of items found during the search of the Kurniawan counterfeiting factory (aka his home), the government presented additional bottles seized from Rudy’s home which contained writing on the bottles in silver or gold ink suggesting that particular bottles could be used to counterfeit certain wines. 2006 Marcassin Blue Slide Pinot bore the notation “40s/50s DRC”. 2007 Duckhorn Merlot bore the writing “40s-60s Pomerol/Graves.” 1990 Laboure-Roi Gevrey Chambertin bore the notation “40s-50s DRC.”

I need to be buying more Duckhorn.

Hmmm…do I see a business model here? Just imagine the ads!

Same thought as you Peter.

Marcassin pinot. I can see their website now: “Confused by famous critic X with 1950s DRC”. Not bad.

Cheers, Howard

great thread

Maybe this Rudy guy is smarter than we think. If they extradite him, he’ll be free to go ahead, no? Somebody was speculating that (can’t remember who) not so long ago…

So, i guess it begs the question, do those wines actually taste so similar that nobody has any real need to buy the originals?

How about: “Confused by famous critic X who wrote the book POMEROL, with Petrus 1970.”

John, thanks for adding those details.

Peter, do you mean deport him? Or is Rudy wanted in another country?

Joe, no they don’t taste that similar, but when mixed with tired old burgs they produce a convincing enough replica to fool people who have little or no recent experience tasting the real deal. Which is almost everyone, including the experts.

Wilfred, I just can’t imagine any critic posting notes on rarities these days without comments on provenance or at least a disclaimer. Maybe their egos and the excitement of the moment blind them to the possibility that they are being conned. Perhaps the recent revelation that Neal Martin was duped will give them all pause.

Chateau Great Wall and his pee.

Rudy is here on a long-expired visa. So he could be deported. There was some discussion of this, maybe on the “big” Rudy thread, sorry I don’t remember where–somebody from Asia was complaining that he would just end up back there and start a wine counterfeiting business.

I agree David. I think all this has really turned the tide of wine enthusiasts’ suspicions. I mean, look to whom its happened so far, as best as I can think of:

1. Broadbent, with the Jefferson bottles (probably the most famous and Broadbent, sadly, was such a cheerleader, largely saying in effect (my words), “these are real because of how they taste and that proves it to me,” NOT

2. Parker, with Rodenstock at an event in Germany where RMP gave the wine 100 points;

3. Meadows, where numerous references to Rudy in the tasting notes (bottles from Rudy) were scrubbed, but the tasting notes remain;

4. Martin, who literally wrote the book on Pomerol, was fooled by a fake Pomerol.

We are in a new era now and I think a lot of these “hedonistic” over the top tastings from “generous” benefactors should be viewed by a critic with caution.

An even bigger question: Has all this shown the “fallibility” of critics to the point that they are melting away, to a more CellerTracker model? I kind of think so.

Maybe a “good wine”,