Parker derided them for not being syrupy and opulent enough and having too high acid.
“I purchased four Kosta Browne Pinot Noirs from one of the Mark Squires’ Bulletin Board members (who graciously offered them) since I am unable to find them in the state of Maryland and I have been wanting to taste them since they have been getting such rave reviews. To say I was disappointed is an understatement. They are not bad wines, but I had read that they were “massive,” “syrupy,” and “opulent,” and none of these wines were. In fact, three of them seemed to have unnaturally high levels of acidity as well as simple, one-dimensional personalities. With the exception of the Kanzler Vineyard, none of them had much depth.”
I don’t think that review made any more sense than calling them blueberry smoothies (and those wines were far riper, oakier and more opulent in 2004 than in recent vintages, too much so for my tastes anyways), but in both cases there was probably a different purpose in the remarks than actually evaluating and describing the wine. I think Parker was taking a shot at Laube (“I have been wanting to taste them since they have been getting such rave reviews”), and Mark appears to be trying to make a statement about his tastes versus those of people who sometimes enjoy wines like KB.
I’m not a psychic, but back when Parker said he was going to try these, I predicted to my local group that he would not score the Kosta Brown wines well. Not because of taste (though I had not liked the sole KB I tried) but because (a) WS had given high scores and (b) a bunch of fans on eBob were saying “you’re going to love these.” I figured he would show how “independent” he was. Why validate Laube or make it seem like mere mortals could predict his scores? Similarly it wasn’t hard to predict he was going to deride the box of mixed Valtellinas etc that Roberto sent (though the bat guano reference took me by surprise!).
considering the tone and that there were no vintages or designations provided in post 1, I read it as yet another uncivil salvo at the board members that enjoy big wines. this type of vitriol post is a disservice to the board, damages any sense of community here, and probably deters others from joining. one shouldn’t allow themselves to hate another style more than they like their own (to paraphrase a former TX football coach). there is nothing wrong with posting tasting notes or impressions of wines you don’t care for, but taking shots at those that do is completely uncalled for.
Even if you really think KB or SQN are “nasty red wines” that could “have been grown in a greenhouse in the Himilayas”, how do those divisive comments serve any benefit here?
“I am convinced that I will have to taste some pretty nasty red wines…”
Held down by a group of nasty ultra-ripe wine loving thugs and funneled down your throat i’m sure.
You should be thankful, as I am, that KB buyers are spending their money there and not on driving prices up further for Burgs and Italians. Let them be and you can take my opinion for what you paid for it. Drink happy…
Burgundy is by far my favorite region followed by Bordeaux and N. Rhone’s. I’ve tasted all the KB wines that Mark listed and probably have all of them in my cellar. I’m not sure why I’m posting this because I think this is a stupid thread.
We all taste our way through wines we don’t like Mark and I’ve had more than my share. How many white/red Burgs have you tasted that suck or spent $500+ on and were premox’d or brett bombs? I can go on…
There is a reason why previous generations classified the land and not the winemakers. They valued the balance of fruit, power, complexity, elegance with the ability to age. The complexity and elegance are completely missing from these wines, and I see little extra complexity gained with maturity, just a softening. This is not a paradigm I am interested in, and for the most part, I shouldn’t bother with wines like this. Unfortunately, there are great regions which have being completely obliterated by this kind of formulaic winemaking. Remember traditional St. Emilion; we are down to about three properties there; the wonderful Chateaneuf du Papes that I used to love are getting harder and harder to find. I used to enjoy California Pinots; I won’t say I bought a lot of them, but I was (am) on a few mailing lists.
But perhaps they were not selling well enough; they obliterated not only the terroir, but the grape itself. At this tasting none of us were able to identify what it was. Most of us thought the wines were new wave Chateauneufs. I am sorry if some of you are taking it personally. I certainly am as I watch wines and wineries change out of all recognition.
Sad as it is to say you are dead on target. With the styled wines, perfect packaging and deftly delivered false sense of exclusivity many of these wines shift the direction of whole regions,. And gobble up market share at a frightening pace. This does no good for the world. And I am not sure how or if there is a way to stop/slow it. To many it seems to be invisible.
As to your award, as long as the Shafer Relentless is around most other wines are looking at second place. But I am sure that the Orin Swift wines will ask for a recount.
I wish I were. It’s an experienced wine group, but these wines were really far too massive and dark to peg as Pinot. One person thought they could be Pinot, and then gave several reasons why they weren’t.
Guys, Mark tasted the wines blind, according to his first post. We had a pinot noir blind a few weeks ago, from the 2004 vintage, and we had some comments about syrah or petite sirah, from around the table. These were good palates at that table, not inexperienced people but when wines get larger in frame, when a style with one grape is applied, some of the expected traits of say pinot noir, can be blurred.
Look, I don’t drink the larger boned CA pinot anymore and Mark had the experience he did. Blind tasting can be humbling and starkly candid. As to whether we should have an award for what’s not working well or in some respects what’s wrong with wine, that’s up to Mark. For me personally, I’d rather spend time celebrating what I am enjoying, what’s bringing me joy.
Why do you persist in tasting, drinking, evaluating and posting about wines that you clearly do not like?
It would seem to me that you would derive more pleasure from spending your time and effort on wines you enjoy… you clearly know what you want so why this form of wine masochism?
He’s doing it as a service to all of the idiots, myself included, who may think they like this style and need to be shown the error of our ways. And to let winemakers know that most refined wine drinkers find flavor and alcohol offensive.
I love all of you like brothers (and a few sisters) from another mother, but you make me crazy.
There is a persisting exclusionary mindset that pervades the discourse here that grates on me to the point that I often take long breaks from wine talk. There is a huge difference between “god I hate this stuff” – a personal opinion, and by definition valid – and “this stuff is crap” – a insult, and a declaration that others who like the wine are idiots. It is the kind of thing that gives wine culture a bad name – justifiably earns it a bad name. I see it from both sides (all sides really) of the aisle. It is precisely the sort of arrogance that made many of us flee RMP’s board, or engendered deep ill-will while we were all there.
It would be boring if we all liked the same thing, but it would be far more pleasant if we could have our disagreements without purposefully insulting one another.
(Mark, this isn’t necessarily directed at you; it is something that repeatedly crops up).
I concur, and even go one step further. I feel sorry for those with what I would call, trying to come up with a non-perjorative term, narrower palates, who are unable to appreciate the wonders of the many different styles of wine made throughout the world. You can’t truly appreciate good wine that’s not quite in your wheelhouse until you’ve tried something on the fringes, like a Cabernet-Shiraz blend from India with Michel Rolland as the consultant, or a Kagor from Moldova, or a Khmer Seyval Blanc from the Finger Lakes made by Cambodian Expats. They also make a red, but at least they do not call it Khmer Rouge.
Besides, as some have said about me, Mark Golodetz really isn’t a bad guy in person.
![[tease.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/c/c5b32b76bebaa359b0452ae247b61189ffe5fa7e.gif "tease"){kind=small}