Maybe I misread your post, but the idea I disagree with is the notion that food “effects” a wine in a way that the absence of food does not. The argument is often made that because wine tastes different with food and without, the without-food version is somehow the wine in its pure, natural state (and hence the proper subject of evaluation) while the with-food version is changed thereby, mabye distorted. I do agree with you that I feel I understand a wine best when I have some with the meal and some on its own before and after dinner - with neither one an objective view, just two different aspects of the same thing.
Agreed. I was simply pushing back on the (unstated) notion that there was a perfect way to taste wine, viz., with food. That may be in some sense the best way to taste wine, but it’s also not perfect.
Without taking anything away from Reignac or the original tasting, IMO the fact that it performed so well under these circumstances speaks well only for this particular bottle of Reignac. I think the reputation of wines is often established over time and through repetition; it is quite within the realm of possibility that the Reignac was just a fluke. I think it would be very interesting to see this particular tasting duplicated, say in 6 months to a year, by the same group of jurors (if that were possible). Only then do I think suspicions of it being a fluke could be fully dispelled.
That’s probably right (you don’t see too many other notes saying Reignac is at a first-growth level), but the instinct sort of supports the point Francois is making, doesn’t it, in that you wouldn’t be as quick to insist on a rematch for validation if Latour was judged the best.
I obviously was not clear in my posting. It was my opinion that we were talking about differences in 1st growth and Grand Crus to wines lower in the hierarchies. Maybe I misread the topic title.
European buy scores of Dolchetta, Rosso, and and co-op wine to drink for everyday. That was not the discussion point. The point was 1st growths, etc., and how those wines are handled and consumed. The European winemaker was talking about his Grand Crus. Europeans do buy 1st Growth,etc. People with money in Europe spend their money just like here in the US. His point was what he saw as a difference with his grand crus in Europe as opposed to the US. CT is full of TNs on 05 Burgs or 04 Barolos, for example that most of the winemakers will tell you should be laid down for long periods. I am often shocked when going to someone’s house and they are opening up an 05 1st Growth Bdx right on ( I have rich friends). The 05 Margaux, imho, was starting to shut down, and he was going into a conversation about whether the wine was really that good and was overrated. My thoughts were for him to drink his SE’s and leave these 05 Bdxs alone for about 15 years now.
To the point, I believe too often the discussions revolved around which is better, a very tasty drink now wine that will die in 3-5 years or a tremendous Grand Cru that isn’t ready to be drank yet, but will live drink blissfully for years 15-50.
Depends on the person, some people don’t even like older mature wines. the want big fruit and chewy tannins. But with the 1st growths, I believe that agibility should count for something. If one plans on consuming the bottle in year 1 then obviously it doesn’t.
My statements in the 1st thread did represent generalizations. I’m just not sure that they aren’t 80% correct.
Gordon,
I don’t disagree with your characterization of many American wine drinkers. It is you perpetuation of the myth of the perfect European wine drinkers, who all age their carefully chosen wines (picked by their superior innate knowledge of wine and not by wine writer scores) and drink them only when they are at the height of perfection that I have trouble with. I doubt that any more Europeans (as a percentage of wine drinkers) store their wines and only drink them when mature than there are Americans. I see plenty of tasting notes from Europeans drinking their 2005 Bordeaux and Burgundies right along with us uncultured Americans. And I have met a number of Europeans who really know wines and do age them, just like I have met a number of Americans who do so. It is not just American winemakers who are using modern techniques and making wines that can be drunk young. Read Adventures Along the Wine Route by Kermit Lynch.
Keith :
“That’s probably right (you don’t see too many other notes saying Reignac is at a first-growth level), but the instinct sort of supports the point Francois is making, doesn’t it, in that you wouldn’t be as quick to insist on a rematch for validation if Latour was judged the best.”
This is the point ! Catch it !
Besides, we make this kind of tasting at various periods : it was in the past for the vintage 1990. 3 times. Basically, what you will see in general inside repeated tastings at GJE :
a : the winners stay inside this group
b : the last one stay at the end
c : only in the middle you may notice some sensible variations.
What I do want to say ? That inside a group of Tasters, by definition and by statistic, you will have less movements that you may think, of course with bottles coming from the same place.
An other example ?
We did a Bordeaux tasting at Dutournier.
Then I fligh in Singapore with 7 Members to taste the same wines, bought at the same place in a different surrounding. Guess what ? They did issue (blind and different order) the same wines in the same ranking for the first 10 !
Well : you have the right to say it was an accident and I agree : I doubt it may be redone again !