the elephant in the room...old wine at a tasting

WINE TALK
21

I’ve been there…hanging with the 1st team all american wine enthusiasts…the one’s with the deeeep cellars, cracking their old gems…a bit smug…they sit…sniff…swirl and wax poetically in awe of what they are tasting [scratch.gif] …me?..I’m looking for its coffin…D.O.A

22

When you drink really old wine , you are tasting history and because of that , you will be much more inclined to forgive the flaws .

23

Rating at a tasting is as much about “quality of the experience” as it is about “quality of the wine.”

The rarity and uniqueness of an experience can easily overwhelm any objective assessment of the wine.

The wine I open every Tuesday may be an objectively better wine than the rare old bottle I will only taste once in my life. But the experience of the rare bottle can make this irrelevant.

I don’t see anything wrong with this.

24

Great post Joe. Tough to separate the wine from the experience. [cheers.gif]

25

Just curious, but what do folks think an old wine is? How old are we talking?

26

And if you normally serve wines 20-40 years old, would a young wine be the Elephant
(To Leve: Old wine = 20 years plus)

27

Yes, Jeff’s question is more than fair, makes me think actually, because an “old” German Riesling or Barolo may have a different year attached for me than an “old” Aussie Shiraz or CaliCab, e.g.

Or Port, of course…

28

I think Jeff’s question is one of the variables in this discussion. Many of us have a different definition of old. To me, it’s pre 1979.

29

No idea why this is an elephant in the room. In any case, I would think that a wine over 20 years can start to be classified as old. Most wines won’t make that mark and those that do will generally be showing some notes of maturity. Of course some wines can age far, far longer and be good. In blind tastings I’ve mistaken some wines as being 20-30 years younger than they actually were. Not young in the sense of just released but more like guessing something from the 1990s that was really from the 1960s.

And then there is the question as to what point on the aging curve you like. That’s not the same as “do you like old wines” but more like how old. One friend of mine gets accused of being a necrophiliac but a lot of his wines are really good beyond the curiosity factor.

And it’s not only because they’re aged - it’s because they really are just delicious. Some wines I’ve had going back to the 1920s have been interesting, but mostly on an intellectual level. But I haven’t had that many of them. I’ve had plenty of wines from the 50s however, that have been flat out wonderful, and that was at 60 years in.

Of course, then you get some like a few we’ve had this past week that were only from 1990s and were DOA. And as others have said, that’s often the case.

It really depends a lot on the specific wine and a lot on what you tend to like. I like them before they’ve reached the point where they’re no longer evolving, just fading. Some people like them farther along that curve. And some like them way before those times. None of the preferences are correct, they’re all valid.

30

In blind tastings, my experience has been that most of the time, unless the older bottle is spectacular, I find younger, more vibrant, richer wines come out on top.

For me, old wine means 35 years of age or older. Old is not the same as mature, as 35 years for almost every wine is well past its drink through date IMO. Very few wines are better at 35 than they were at 25 or even 15 years of age.

Of course, this varies on a wine by wine, and vintage by vintage basis. For example, 10 years of age is too old for many, if not most wines. And it’s far too young for the best, (age-worthy) wines.

I have noticed that as I age, “Old” has become older. Years ago, I would have thought 20 years was old. Today, that is no longer the case. I imagine based on various what is the oldest wine tasted threads on this board, that more than 15-20 years of age is old for the majority of posters on this board.

31

Let’s take Bordeaux for example : for my taste , 2000 is still young , 1990 is mature , 1961 is old but not too old . Even 1982 is not " old " in my book , even if it is 37 years old . Agree to call it mature .
The best wines I ever had in my life were old wines . Yquem 1945 , La Chapelle 1961 , Lafite 59 , Petrus 1950 , … these wines have so much complexity and are still fresh , it’s the real deal .
The most spectacular bottles I drank were 19th century wines , not because they are as good as the ones above but because they are still good .
What Jeff says in his last sentence is something I also notice : my definition of old changes . When I was 20 years old , I thought somebody who was 30 was old… Now that I am getting close to 60 , I don’t think that is old any more… 80 is old .

32

I don’t even think this is true. I’ve been at way too many blind tastings where a wine that is simply very different is chosen as the favorite. Not necessarily because it is a qualitatively superior wine, but because the wine stood out from the others. Even if not for a great reason. For instance, if you drink a dozen Napa cabs on the lush side, a strongly structured and slightly more acidic wine will be an outlier that will grab attention. The similarities of the other wines blur their qualitative distinction. The result is folks keep going back to that one thing. I’ve seen the inverse many times as well. The qualitative analysis is just lost in favor of a clear differentiation of the blind wines.

33

I agree there.

34

Yes but it kind of depends on who is in the tasting no? In other words, people who don’t do it for a living but like wine vs people who do it all day long. It’s somewhat akin to the argument that big fruity wines grab attention and “win” blind tastings or come out best when tasting many wines at one sitting. That’s just not true at all in my experience but I can see how someone who doesn’t taste multiple wines in close sequence might find that to be the case.

35

I think Anton is on the money.

And to agree with what Greg has said, I’ve been to dozens of blind and non-blind dinners/tastings. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a scenario as you describe where an acid driven wine outshined a crowd of “lush” wines. Cuz I’ve been to lots of tastings where it was lots of lush wines. I would often be the one telling people to pay attention to this other more interesting wine to no avail.

What you have to remember is that if it’s a group of people bringing bigger wines, then they are likely people who gravitate towards those. So unless we are talking about a bunch of mid to low end, fruit forward Napa Cabs and someone sneaks in a great vintage of some near top Burgundy, I cannot really see how your scenario is going to happen. No one sneaking a Foillard into into a Paso Zin tasting is going to win best wine unless it’s some AFWE doing some tasting tourism.

36

How about I sourced all the wines, or there were mixed palates with a single theme. But obviously you’ve experienced different results. Non-blind certainly changes the game and social signaling undoubtedly comes into play. Hell, how many wines “open up” magically after the reveal in blind tastings and “change over time” to a top wine of the night?

37

“How about I sourced all the wines, or there were mixed palates with a single theme.”

This is exactly how we tasted for many years, mostly all people in the business and there were very few occasions where an outlier would “win” just because it was different. The thing about those tastings is that there was no discussion of the wine at all until everyone had tasted and scored every wine and those notes had been collected. So it’s not like there was any social signaling.

38

For blind tastings, yes. Stories change rather quickly. Many people are uncomfortable tasting blind for these reasons. Many vaunted and hallowed wines have been ruined for me by blind tastings. I like it that way. Many people hate it.

But in general no matter whether it’s single sourced wines or a ‘pot luck’ it’s difficult to find instances where an outlier in terms of style wins a tasting. It CAN happen but it’s unlikely it will. In the instances it does I’m betting there is something to the structure of the tasting like palates of a feather tasting wines outside of their normal likes. Or a high end ringer in a group of lesser wines.