I know people around here aren’t known for having strongly held opinions, but let’s see if we can liven things up a bit. This is about opinions, but let’s please try to shy away from ‘Popular wine region is crap’ or ‘Board favorite is overrated’. I need takes hotter than that. Best I can muster is:
Stemware is generally irrelevant. Target can provide all the stemware you’ll ever need.
France, hands-down, has the greatest wine regions in the world, offering more diversity, uniqueness, value and quality than any other place on earth. No other place comes close.
On a related note, the internationalization of wine and the wine industry, spearheaded in part by critics like Parker and consultants like Rolland, are the greatest threat to my point above. Earlier in his career, Parker actually added value to the French wine industry.
Most people underestimate modern styled Bordeaux ability to age for vintages past 00 and will be surprised at its quality at the 25-30+ year mark, as the wine is unrivaled in quality via technology in the cellar and vineyard.
Afwe wines won’t ever be enjoyed by the masses because they just don’t taste good unless you essentially force yourself to like them.
Most Parker haters are criticizing him for liking the wines the masses enjoy, which is who needs his help most anyways.
Sauternes tastes best with a dash of Perrier.
There’s too much Bordeaux in the best vintages (like 59,61,82,89,90,00,05,09,10… notice no 95/96) available to drink second tier vintages, 01 and 12 not included, because life is too short and beer is such a great substitute when feeling cheap.
Champagne doesn’t taste good enough to merit paying more than $20/btl.
I’d never try to pass off those as fact while sober though… it’s like trying to tell someone root beer is better than sprite (it is!!)
WHOA! I know this is true with regard to 99% of cheap wine, but do you mean this to apply to the various $50+ wines routinely discussed on this board? All unpopular opinions welcomed, but this is a particularly spicy take.
There are lots of tasters that mischaracterize a damaged white wine (lots of different ways this can happen) as a premoxed white wine (insert white burg if you want). Knee jerk reaction… Don’t hate me !
That one made me go, “hmm” as well, but I assume the use of the term “rare” was broader than it seems. Perhaps not. I don’t think price as anything to do with whether wines are worthy of aging, though. Many modern Bordeaux are pretty pricey but IMHO do not actually benefit from long-term again. Heck, since we are spouting off opinions, I do not think they are worthy of purchasing, either. IMHO, it is the classic-structured wines, from more reknown vineyards, in solid years, that age well. For example, many classified growths in vintages like 2000, 2005, 2010, will vastly improve with aging, many likely better at age 25. Think about the 1982s, the top tier Bdx are drinking splendidly right now. That said, it is a small percentage of the wine world that goes this distance.
I had typed something about consultants but erased it before I posted.
It’s not like Rolland is busting into Chateaux with automatic weapons and demanding they convert, struggling proprietors (and I suppose some point-hungry super-wealthy satellite owners) are hiring him intentionally.
I do think tastemakers like Parker and Laube have created a demand for people like Rolland and Cambie, though.