Personally I have never been convinced over any of the scientific documentation on this. I think there are too many assumptions made. Perhaps it is using the words “breathe” "“aerate” “slo-ox” that mislead us.
If I recall correctly, you have advocated that young wines can often improve on day 2 or day 3. If so, that is subject to the wine being opened, so what is different about that then a slow ox? 6 hours at room temperature or some greater time period in the fridge could have similar effects, whether it is related to oxygen or not no?
I pour a small glass to free some surface, and to check the wines current state. If it feels open and good to go I re-cork it. If not then I let it breath in the bottle.
I had much more success with this than decanting (not that a proper decant is not required in some cases)
I think there are a lot of factors at play that could affect things.
the wine isn’t completely still, it was agitated but opening
and will take awhile to become still; that combined with air time would expose more wine than one would think.
This would be easy to test with a relatively clear bottle and food coloring; you’d just assume there would be more diffusion than that.
the improvement in the wine may be not at all related to oxygen.
As I mentioned above I’ve done this experiment blind with one bottle opened earlier and kept at cellar temp and one popped immediately before service and almost everyone preferred the bottle with air time. It’s a very easy test to do.
I think I might be misunderstanding this? But clearly opening a wine has an effect on it.
I mean, if I open a wine and let it just stand around for a few days it will most likely be shot or atleast very different to a bottle of the same wine that wasn’t opened?
This is all based on some “science” that was posted a few years ago on here to make the argument that opening bottles without decanting them doesn’t appreciably change the wine.