What? He scored it an 87. A high-80s rating to a flawed wine? Ridge and Galloni both lost credibility on this one.
3 Likes
IMO, not all flaws are binary. Corked is pretty much binary, but there are other flaws that are measured in degrees not absolutes. I am no expert in smoke taint, or perhaps much of anything, but seems there would be a gradation from a bit of smoke to full on ashtray. Those with a higher tolerance would find this still a good wine- much as many find a touch of brett to add interest to a wine.
8 Likes
We had a very big wine tasting (15 different CA cabs) a few months ago, where one of the wines was a 2020 MB. No one mentioned smoke taint (and I did not notice any). I actually thought the bottle was drinking fine. That said, it was from a glass after tasting a LOT of wines, so palate very likely impaired a bit, maybe a lot.
2 Likes
I haven’t had the 2020 MB, but I have had wines that are genuinely and known to be smoke-tainted a few times with winemakers who kept them (and didn’t release them) as reference points for what smoke taint was like. And, man, it can vary from subtle to undeniably a smoldering campfire. So there are degrees here, as Scott noted above … it’s not a binary issue. But it’s pretty uncharacteristic, so it can quite likely stand out … and something that likely won’t resolve over time. (In the early years, for example, you might find it masked with more oak and youthful body.)
7 Likes
I’m going to make sure this is the first wine I try on Thursday.
2 Likes
It will be a much better indication than my and our group’s thoughts. I don’t remember anyone mentioning possible smoke taint for the 2020 MB, but wonder how much an affect that has when someone is aware and focusing on that part of the wine (as compared to a double blind tasting or even single blind). Sort of like, but opposite to, knowing a wine was rated 100 points and thinking it has to be good.
3 Likes
smoke taint is pretty binary. it’s just about acceptable thresholds and if people can tolerate it.
Like some people can’t detect TCA to save their lives.
Maybe ridge thought it was at acceptable levels so released it
2 Likes
Sure, but that’s a pretty big risk for such a big winery to take with its most important wine.
1 Like
I’d love to find out what the response is about this, but I’m quite sure Ridge is going to do just fine
2 Likes
Is it likely that Ridge would have run lab analysis for smoke taint? Maybe testing would not be feasible on a lot by lot basis - I have no idea.
EDIT: Looks like Alan addressed this above:
Definitely a strange situation all around. I find it hard to believe Ridge would take a chance by releasing a smoke tainted wine, even minor, but at the same time wouldn’t think Galloni would note it unless he was positive.
I’ve tasted a couple “cult” napa wines that released in 2020 and they are all smoke tainted. Part of me isn’t sure if they think their clientele won’t really notice it or they honestly thought it was ok.
3 Likes
I can’t tell if we are saying the same thing or not. Every flaw is, by one definition, binary- it either has that flaw or not… but my opinion is that not all flaws are binary (at least for all people) in that the flaw makes the wine undrinkable and I am not just talking about threshold levels of detecting the presence of the flaw.
This is a bunch of drift, but there is of course an element of YMMV for this, but I was speaking to the law of averages not just my personal tastes.
e.g. For me, personally:
Corked is binary- no amount of detectable TCA is OK. Sink juice.
Brett is a gradient- a bit is tolerable, too much is Sink juice.
VA- is a gradient, but with a fairly low tolerance.
My little experience with Smoke indicates it could be a gradient as well- but haven’t tasted enough to know.
I have no idea if I have a low sensitivity to smoke taint or not, but I tried a barrel sample when we visited Ridge last year. I did not detect any taint (I was looking for it) and the sample was delicious for such a young wine.
1 Like
Here’s my and another person’s take who tried it last night. It was decanted several hours in advance. That person said if he didn’t know about Galloni’s review and the fires, he’d be hard pressed to say it was smoke tainted. I’d have to agree. I did get a gritty feel in the rear upper sides of my palate. It definitely wasn’t tannin.
However, it’s not a very good wine, especially as it’s MB. That part was unanimous in our group (9 wine geeks).
7 Likes
I shared that bottle with Larry and others last night. I try not to drink smoke tainted wines, so it’s hard for me to tell unless a wine is obviously just smoke and ash. That was not the case, but I also picked up that gritty slightly bitter/toasty note towards the back of the palate that was not tannins. I didn’t like the wine either (and we opened a 2019 last year that was showing really well)…
6 Likes
Every couple of years Galloni picks a sacrificial lamb to prove his telling-it-straight chops, all while pumping up the vast majority of everything else. In the past Monprivato Barolo comes to mind. Looks like this year it’s Ridge’s turn in the barrel.
2 Likes
I had the same exact reaction to his review. I thought there was a 50/50 chance the was is truly tainted vs him trying to make a point when I first read it.
I don’t have the experience to say it’s tainted, but it wasn’t very good either. Power of suggestion or not.
4 Likes
This, to me, is the subtle tell for smoke taint.
5 Likes
And maybe if not smoke tainted it’s heavily treated and irregular
1 Like
from the review: “There’s no getting past smoke taint in this wine” … 87 points
this is really strange. objectively flawed, but a solid score. what’s the justification for this?
aside from actual smoke taint, given the fact that massive parts of the valley were under a smoke cloud for an extended period of time, would that not also negatively affect growth / ripening?
1 Like