Again, unless you have some preconceived notion of what is “right”, not sure I see how the original article is “one-sided”.
Mike, you and I have chatted both on and off-line over the years, so I respect your opinion, but strictly IMO, I thought the Hosemaster came across as a self-serving jackass in that write-up - which I guess is why there is vanilla & chocolate.
For what it’s worth (and I will post a note later), I had a Domaine de la Cote Pinot last night. It was served blind, and the table roundly declared it overripe and sweet. It was a shock when the bag came off.
Really?
Parker is portrayed as a man in decline, both physically, economically/business-wise, and in influence, shouting polemics and spouting invective to his own choir while Raj is the new young Turk, standing up for what is True and Right in wine. I don’t think there’s much room for discussion or confusion on that point.
Please point to where you feel the article is more balanced than I’m giving it credit for.
It sounds as if Jeb Dunnock has never been interviewed for an article for which he was not the subject before. Long interviews that lead to one quote are par for the course. It sounds as if Parker referred the author to Dunnock. The author did due diligence and took from it what he needed.
Really, with all due respect to Dunnock, he isn’t really an obvious interview for this story. His beat is the Rhone and while certainly the distinction gets made with regard to those wines, they weren’t the content of this story.
Bob, both of the so called ‘sides’ certainly have had enough shots sent over to the other side and more concisely, isn’t he always? I am not usually a fan, but this one seems a bit more in-tuned with the pulse of things. Again, I like Raj and have no problem with the ‘movement’ and still eschew anyone who shyts on anyone else’s wine preferences. Just yesterday Paul J felt the need to pooh-pooh a FB thread from a CLONYC the night before. I never understand what makes a grown man take the time to throw daggers so I chalk it up to boredom. We drank 2012 Napa Cabs, of which I will not be posting notes, but it is safe to say I felt there was present a certain sameness to many of the wines, so maybe an old dog can learn a thing or two yet.
Btw, I too respect your input on all things wine.
BTW, this article reminded me that I needed to purchase a few more Domaine de la Cote Pinots and I did 20 minutes ago! Thanks LPASS!!!
What goes around, comes around. Somewhere Robert Finigan is laughing.
Up is down, moderate is extreme, balance is thin and weedy.
The article may be one sided in that the majority of the interview and comments were from Raj, but I didn’t find the tone of it to be one sided, the author seemed to be in the camp that it is all just a matter of taste. I do think the name IPOB is unfortunate and I’m not surprised some wine makers might be offended ( actually I find the name quite douchey)
I’m a Parker guy ( but not a defender, he has said some pretty stupid things) when it comes to Cabs and syrah, I’m not a fan of Arnot Roberts or Rhys syrah’s, but I’m more of a fan of AFWE pinots and Chards, including AR’s chards and Copain and Kutch’s pinots FWIW
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
+1
It will be very interesting to see where the wine collector world goes over the next 20 years. Will we like low alcohol, restrained Bordeaux in 20 years and reassess the legacy of RMP? I imagine it might happen with a 2011 Cali resurgence but I suspect that no one will want to compromise the value of their own collection and thus his legacy will live on.
(Edited for grammar)
Well said, Noah.
That’s not right. Dunnuck is the Central Coast critic for the Wine Advocate, where 2 of Raj’s projects are from (Cote and Sandhi). Coincidentally, Jeb has given the wines high marks too (something not noted in the article either.
Lew, I can assure you, having read the Premier Cru thread, that Paul is an expert on obnoxious windbag.
BTW, I’m not picking sides here either. I like what I like, and no one is going to change that. I just feel that if you are going to write about IPOB, the contrarian view should be accepted as well, and the reader should be allowed to decide. I didn’t get that vibe from reading it. Leaving out key points like the past 2 Wine Advocate critics giving high marks to Raj’s wines or other various side notes that have been pointed out creates that “one-sided-ness” of the article. That’s all.
My stance on “Parker-style” vs. “IPOB” is that they are at basically opposite ends of the spectrum, so they are going to create controversy. The truth is that the best wines are being made in middle of that spectrum. DRC isn’t a Parker wine, nor is it a IPOB, it’s just outrageously good, well made wine. Whatever happened to that??
I think you are all way overthinking this article. It’s not for you, and it’s fine for its audience. Its for a more casual wine audience than this (and btw what article is going to meet the standard of this group? I literally can’t fathom it) and I’m sure that group isn’t looking for a pro and con dissection of lighter wine styles in CA.
Ian is right in post #51. And the other things he pointed out should have been noted as well. For an article on “balance” it seemed to lack it. I am on board with much of what IPOB talks about. But really can’t stand it. Kind of strange.
ROFLMAO. That is a great line.
That’s the thing: even a lot of the IPOB wines are still clearly California. Which is why I constantly argue that there is still a very large divide between Pinot from almost anywhere in California, and Burgundy. There are some exceptions, but they are very few.
As I said on Heimhoff’s blog yammering on about the same article:
Hirsch & Kutch Pinots certainly have no shortage of big fruit.
And are often among the most talked about wines after the event…