I never said i didnt own a couple bottles of less than 90 rated wine. And tonight i opened one of them
2004 chapoutier limestone coast shiraz. Australia. It scores an 87 on ct. Later years were professionally rated in the 90 plus area.
Very very nice ruby red color. Poped it open and poured it. No aeration. Sniffed it. Smelled different. Like wines i grew up with which made me not a wine lover.
Took a sip and paused. Its hard nocking this stuff back. Dry. No flavor yet i dont really want to drink any more of it. What flavor is this exactly? I cant really say, cuz its actually worse than what i grew up with.
Blick. Thank God i didnt try to serve this splunk to anyone i know.
Your bottle sounds brett-infested or cooked. Or over the hill. When 77% of the bottles have been consumed and no tasting notes in 3 years, that is a bit of a warning…
This is a good question, really. I thought about this, and I think your joke comes pretty close to the truth. Even most 2 buck chuck bottlings would get more than a 65 from me. Most of the time I think a wine is bad enough to merit something around 65 it’s actually flawed and/or damaged in some way. For a “sound” wine to garner a 65 from me, it has to be pretty darned disgusting. Luckily, I don’t plan on being encountered with this situation any time soon, or ever.
Since nobody rates wine or at leasts prints a rating under 84 it doesnt matter what score i gave it as long as it was under 84.
This wine was nasty. I did notice that on the ct one guy posted 3 different times for the same wine. An 89, a 75 and a 70. I dont think he is trustworthy. He is off my reviewers list.
![[barf1.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/3/3bc5658c317a0577c61d52d4162027a79254f7e3.gif "barf1"){kind=small}