MW dissertation claims screwcaps worse than corks?

WINE TALK
1

http://www.wineanorak.com/wineblog/wine-science/mw-dissertation-claims-that-screwcaps-cause-more-wine-damage-than-cork

2

I have opened many screwcaps, and never found the damage and oxidation that she mentions. Many of the wines I import under screwcap do use the Lux version, which she thinks is better, but still.

The machine does have to be set correctly; I’ve had a couple of bottles that didn’t open easily due to producer inexperience with the technology, but even those bottles were fine to taste.

3

If I read the dissertation correctly, she reports only on the “damaged” bottles she examined.
It does not explain how she ascertained which screwtop btls were “damaged”. By “damage”, I presume she
means they were dinged during the process going from producer to consumer. I presume she selected
the “damaged” goods just by visually inspecting the screwtops for dings/nicks/banged up to select…obvious
visual damage. When I buy a screwtop in a store, I usually examine the screwtop for damage. I very/very seldom
find one w/ obvious dings/nicks/bangs. OTOH, I’ve opened screwtops when it did not pop w/ the seal was
broken, indicating it may not have been properly sealed, either by the bttlg line, or during transit. In none that I
can recall, could I tasted oxidation or otherwise damage in the wine. OTOH, the damage from cork taint
is usually pretty obvious.
I guess I’m still in the screwtop camp on this one.
Tom

4

So, you can get your MW with a dissertation consisting of junk science? Doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in the MW degree.

5

Let me lighten the mood a bit with this.
https://twitter.com/ShitMySommSays

Gilman will fly off the handle when he sees producers like Donnhoff using screw cap on their base wines. Check out this review.

2011 Dönnhoff Riesling QbA
The 2011 Estate Riesling QbA had already been bottled- all under screwcap. The wine was already showing the ill effects of this closure, with an overtly metallic minerality already beginning to develop where the slate should be in the wine (Helmut Dönnhoff was quite surprised to observe this when it was pointed out to him, so perhaps this wine will escape the yoke of screwcap next year!). It is too bad, as there was a very nice wine here under the closure, with notes of apple, grapefruit, petrol and wild yeasts to go along with the minerality. On the palate the wine is medium-full, crisp and slightly angular from the SC, with good acids and nice focus on the backend. I would not buy this wine under this closure, as it is already showing early signs of trouble and it had only been in bottle for a couple of weeks! But, if one is intrepid enough to purchase (what was after all a very good wine before its closure) the wine, drink it up quickly. 2012-2014? 85.

6

I DON’T BUY THIS STUDY NOT ONE BIT… no way … not in a heartbeat … I have studied over 15 years and have concluded by practical use and testing that the screwcap Stelvin works… best … end of story… my Gold Metal Winning Grand Cru Calli 2012 vintage in 2013 enjoys this closure … I stand by it for 30 years when my wine will peak and I will be older and dustier than I am… Cheers !!! [thankyou.gif] newhere

7

Gad Zuccs…he’sback!

8

Well Gilman, there is a phenomenon known as “bottle shock.”

And as everyone else has posted so far, the study is shit. Glad that an MW means so muc. . . Oh, right.

9

I know this has been brought up before, but do you guys store them upright or laying down?

10

Huh? A correctly closed Stelvin will not allow the wine to come in contact with any metal materials in the closure. A seal is created by the glass lip of the bottle and the liner underneath the cap… [scratch.gif]

11

I think he was referring to reduction, not metallic because of contact with metal. I don’t agree with his prejudice, though.

The one technical problem that some people have raised about screwcaps is that they don’t allow enough oxygen in for the wine to avoid reduction. If this is a problem, it is being dealt with by screwcap producers by making different closures with different degrees of oxygen transmission; there is some good information at http://bit.ly/HeF17F (for the hypergeeks out there, you know who you are).

12

It doesn’t matter, I don’t think.

13

I store them at a 25 degree angle from the vertical.

14

Gilman’s credibility just went into negative digits with me. Thanks for that post.

15

I don’t make the news here, I only report it. Kind of a long diatribe about how it’s under screw cap, right?
Still love John though, if there is no screw cap in play, he’s dead on with Riesling.

If you missed the Twitter page, it seems to work with the theme of this thread. I had several good laughs.

16

Here, here. (I hereby incorporate all of my previous blasting of the entire silly, clubby MW phenomenon by reference.) You can get your MW with a lot less. If the work product of MW candidates is read and evaluated only by the keepers of the MW secret handshake, why should it have any credibility, or even be worthy of discussion? (Well, except for my abuse, of course!)

As an aside, keep an eye on the interviews of Becky Gibb, the self-proclaimed “World’s Youngest MW Candidate” on the Wine-Searcher junk journalism section. I believe that over half of her interviews so far are with MWs. Do ya think that she is in line for the handshake? The whole thing is ludicrous…

17

I thought 55-58 degrees was ideal. Improper storage is an acute problem.

BTW #shitmysommsays is really witty.

18

So, you can get your MW with a dissertation consisting of junk science? Doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in the MW degree.

Nate - there’s no science involved. The “MW” is an honorific, it’s not like a masters degree in biology or somethihg. It’s a title conferred by a private club. You have to taste a lot of wine and I’m not dismissing that at all, but people in the business taste a lot of wine too. You have to memorize a bit of chemistry and some geography, but people elsewhere do the same.

Having read a few of the dissertations, I’m not overly impressed - they’re like really good posts right here on this forum or good blog posts. That’s not to belittle blogs either, but the good and informative blogs are far outnumbered by the fluff blogs “demystifying” wine or talking about the author’s discovery of some new grape that nobody ever heard of in the world like Mazuelo or something of that nature. But because there is no peer review or standard to be met, you end up with a whole spectrum of writing, ranging from utter nonsense to articulate and revelatory works.

In any event, unless we can see the study and methodology, the dissertation is just an opinion piece by someone of unknown expertise.

19

Interesting - and quite faulty at best.

The comment section asks some great questions - including my Jamie Goode. Yep, the study appears to be quite faulty, and one of my biggest pet peeves in any study that looks at screw caps and ‘faulty’ wines due to closure is that without seeing how the same wine has developed under other closures, you’ll never know whether any ‘faults’ discovered are due to closure or faulty winemaking . . .

It is important to note that she was looking at wines in supermarkets in Australia and specifically at the damage rate or screw cap bottles she encountered. If not handled ‘correctly’, it is quite possible to have both cosmetic damage as well as more ‘serious’ damage to these bottles that can, in some instances, lead to oxidation of the wines . . . it does happen.

Cheers

20

Then comes the question: this person is allowed to make a faulty analysis of screwcap supermarket wines in Australia…WHY??? If the IMW wants to be taken seriously, it needs to set the bar a hell of a lot higher…