Bottom line: in a blind trial, wine enthusiasts were unable to distinguish RP’s great vintages from his mediocre vintages outside of Bordeaux.
The study has some obvious limitations–(1) sample size may have been too small, (2) wines were all moderately priced, so may not speak to better wines, (3) maybe RP’s tastes just didn’t match the participants’–but it got me thinking whether I pay too much attention to vintages…
I view the concept of a vintage chart as a rough guideline to help me understand when I will enjoy a vintage’s output. Sometimes, the answer is never, but most of the time it is not that extreme. As a shorthand reminder of what the growing season and harvest were like, I find the idea of a vintage chart useful as a guide. With that said, I can’t remember the last time I consulted one.
None in rating terms. A little in character terms, i.e. it’s useful to know 2003 was a very hot year and so the wines in the regions I care about were ripe to overripe and fairly low in acid. I’d agree with the basic premise of the piece, that the range between different vintages is less about absolute quality and more about character.
Agree. I don’t really like scores for vintages. Though a nice paragraph about the general season allows me to choose those cooler high acid years I love.
I think in an era of widely accessible wine ratings and databases of commentary, available even by smartphone, vintage charts, which are at best a rough approximation are increasingly less useful.
In an era when one was choosing blind between several bottles of bordeaux I could see a much greater use.
So true, honestly I’m not swayed by the critics positive vintage reviews. Eg. My favorite Bordeaux vintage from 99-08 is the '04 (Have not tasted enuff 09’s yet) In fact the '04 smith haut lafitte not only destroys its '05 highly rated counterpart, but it is also one of the greatest bottles to Bordeaux I’ve ever tasted.
IMO, for higher quality wines, more people should use them. I can’t count the multiple times that I have read a vintage reports that says blah, blah, blah, 92 points, HOLD: versus one that says blah, blah, blah, 91 points, DRINK.
What will people do? Buy the recommended 92 pointer vintage and drink it immediately, then bitch about the wine not being approachable. Why don’t they buy the 91 rated vintage wine, if they want to drink now, and be happy with the wine?
Example,( without hopefully starting a peeing contest), I believe that the 08 Oregon pinot vinatge is significantly better than the 07 or 09 vintage. I also believe that for many of the higher quality wines, a person wanting to drink a bottle of wine tonight for supper may be far happier with buying one of the lower rated vintages (especially if they don’t believe in decanting). If the purpose is to cellar the wine for consumption in the coming years, then the 08 is the best choice.
I don’t put a lot of weight in them personally. They’re useful as a general overview as some people have already said, but I think they get applied too heavily across the board and people write off a lot of very good wine because of it. I think the average consumer (ie, people not obsessed by wine) would do better to learn a few good producers in a region as opposed to vintages since most good producers tend to make good wines even in off years. I agree with Gordon that too often the ratings get used on a strictly numerical basis and I think that’s a bad strategy for buying wine.