The thing is, there is no note. The “note” reads as follows: “if you’ve trusted me in the past, you’ll buy these wines based on the number of points I’m giving them, because I can’t be annoyed to actually write a tasting note”.
That’s why, as one person commented in this thread, it reads more like somebody pushing a sale rather than somebody trying to inform you about the wine.
I’ll take a case!!
It seems lazy and inappropriate at first glance, but not after reading Ken’s post #15 above, IMO. As with many things, stripping away the context tends to distort what the real deal is.
But why should we pay attention to Ken’s post when we can just piss and moan about Parker in self-congratulatory ways? Isn’t that more fun?
yawn…
Fun would be watching you have a root canal. 
I blame eRP. They SHOULD make it very easy to see the full note in context with a single click, but for a decade now they have ignored that most basic of requirements.
Scores alone can still provide guidance. Among the wines in my cellar for which I have both WA & IWC scores logged:
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
This is fantastic. ![[welldone.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/f/fc9709a841aa9379fd892a9cf0b535b05f473b86.gif "[welldone.gif]"){kind=small}
The thing is, two people have quoted the same TN for vintage 2010 of this wine, and none of them has shown anything that even barely resembles a tasting note. Even the “quick impression” part that Ken mentioned is missing for this wine. It’s just points and a disclaimer.
I like the idea, but would implement it this way:
I don’t get your point. If you read this note on erp.com it says it is from the Northern Rhone article, so you can see the context. It is the store that sent Todd the email that removed the context and included the fairly meaningless note.
Compare the layout of the print to the online. In print there is a block per-producer with an intro and usually some progression and context. This is all largely lost in the online version. Trivial coding tricks to more faithfully reproduce the print in a way that makes sense online but well beyond the abilities of that crew.
More like lack of interest combined with irrationally extreme fear of copyright infringement. (or if we want to go all conspiracy theory, they refuse to do things that ex-members or perceived competitors suggest)
I have been a fan of Chapoutier’s Languedoc project since it was launched. I met Michel for the first time at Vinexpo, when it was in Chicago, and he was very excited about introducing the wines. I am a bit surprised at the high scores for the 2010’s but regardless of what Parker says, I have enough confidence that the track record will continue, and I will enjoy the them. I did bite on the JJ Buckley offer, as I thought the pricing to be pretty good.
I did find the basic 2010 at a grocery store last week, and while I didn’t take notes, I thought that it was very good quality for the $14 tab. But, absolutely ridiculous to award this up to 94 pts (and further evidence for me that I cannot use RMP as a guide any longer). However, given the step up to the Occultum Lapidem, I can see the 2010 version being an outstanding wine to my taste, and I have no regrets on my purchase.
Todd,
I think it is time for you to let go of the Parker hate. You have a very successful board here and you dont’ NEED to keep whining on about RP. Take the high road. You have earned it. This Parker rant stuff seems to me that is beneath you now. Just one man’s opinion.
Byron
BILA HAUT (MICHEL CHAPOUTIER) 2010 ROUGE COTES DU ROUSSILLON VILLAGES
WA 92-94
$10.99
Robert Parker writes in Wine Advocate: “These Chapoutier wines are sometimes reviewed by my colleagues David Schildknect in his Languedoc-Roussillon report and Lisa Perrotti-Brown in her reviews of Australian wines, so I will just list the wines, my score, and the region from which they emerge. They are of very high quality and deserve readers’ attention. Hopefully my prose has convinced more than a handful of readers to try these remarkable wines from one of the most fascinating and compelling personalities in the entire wine world, and one dedicated to the highest quality.”
So. Much. To. Admire. Here. 
I can see leaving some space around your colleagues and I’m no RP basher generally.
But I can sure see why Todd threw it up here.
If you’re RP, you opt score it yourself beside their scores, you hang a market moving 92-94 on an $11 bottle, I think you should probably speak personally and at some length about why.
I had the wine yesterday. It’s a tasty, ripe and forward picnic red with some faint garrigue notes. I thought it worth the $14 I paid and would score it well into the upper 80’s. Nice house wine, but for the season. I’d consider a case or so when the long winter resumes for casual consumption.
I was doing a search of Chapoutier, to see if a thread had been started on another subject, and read this thread. I know it’s been some time, but what the hell, if I can post an onion article as real, why not post this. 
I think to call it a hatred of Parker is pretty beneath someone who is a regular on the Pxxxxxxxxxxxxxr board. 
In all honestly, I see nothing wrong with what Todd is trying to say here. Parker has been showing a pattern over the years of not thinking about what he is writing or how people (novices AND experienced) might take and USE his comments. He owns the WA, he has a wine board, he writes about his restaurant exploits, etc etc. He knows, or should know, that people take his comments and use them, or worse, a wine store uses them.
This whining about every thread about parker has died down, but I see some still like to take it for a spin now and again.