WA 193: discuss

WINE TALK
21

I stand corrected!

22

Tannins in California pinot?!?! [shock.gif]

RUN FOR THE HILLS!!!

23

I noticed that, too–interesting.

24

I was happy to see some reviews of Ridge, but surprised the 2007 was re-reviewed and the 2008 was not reviewed. I really like the 2007 Monte Bello. Surprised to not see any reviews from Mount Eden, also.

Thanks,
Ed.

25

And, if I read correct (I am pirating someone else’s login) he misrepresents the soils of Skyline. And misses the big point which is depth.

Moron.

26

He does give Kalin props. As he has done all along. So give the man that.

27

And he talks about the old Wente clone versus the new Dijon clones. Interesting. Trying to get back in the game.

28

Frankly, it is good to hear that the 2009 Rhys Bearwallow PN (RMP 87-89) is “undoubtedly a more intellectual than hedonistic style of Pinot Noir”. That right there might seem to equate to a 6 point deduction, but IMO it is good news.

In all seriousness, I’m sure that really rave reviews and high scores from Parker are a thrill for any winery, including Rhys. And Rhys has had its share of raves from Bob in recent vintages. But somehow I doubt that Kevin Harvey and his team will be loosing much sleep over reviews such as this Bearwallow one.

29

That, plus the treatment people received on the ebob board, were the reason I let my subscription lapse. And frankly, I could have ignored the rude and highhanded moderation on the board, especially now that WB is an alternative. But no burgs, no subscription.

30

Wind Gap Syrahs took it on the chin as well. Some scores in the high 80s which of course are actually not “bad”, but the prose is damning. Let’s hear it for WA regime change.

And I have to give a shout out for my favorite German winery. Donnhoff hit a home run again with Brucke (97) and Hermannshohle (96) Spatlese! and Keller did well too, but not better than Donnhoff overall…

31

Who at WA scored the Cali syrahs in this issue?

32

What’s sad is that while David’s reviews don’t sell Burgundy, his palate and mine sync up quite well, so it’s really for personal purchases. And the soon to be new guy reviewing Burg has done well by me with everything else (minus some overly quirky Champagnes he likes, which I just steer clear of anyway), so I figure Burg coverage will still be worth reading, but way after everything is gone???

33

Carlisle had a lower floor this year with 2 Acres 85-87 and 3 Birds 89-91.

34

I guess nothing met the minimum scoring criteria???

Seriously, Roy - were these wines tasted critically by RP? Or, was it just a casual try? Or, do you know he even tried them? Makes no difference to me as a consumer, just curious.

Chris

35

My first take on the CA reviews was, “predictable.” While there are a few minor surprises, RMP seems to rate the wineries more or less the same every issue. I could have told you that Marcassin would rate highly before I even saw the reviews. Are they excellent wines? I am sure they are… but they are also notoriously rich and, from what I have read from other sources, only available to taste at the winery. I realize that I am the outlier on this topic, but the fact that RMP (and others) taste at the winery for many of the “Cults” makes the scores highly susceptible to bias.

I am riding out my subscription and will lapse in August… I see little value in paying for scores I could have predicted, many of which are done in settings that make their objectivity highly suspect.

blahblah

36

He did try them while he was out. There were many people out here who made what I consider pretty good juice that he did try but did not make the issue. There are a few reasons why he might not have put various wines in. One, his knee surgery and recovery might have kept him from having time to actually get as many TNs in as he wanted. 680 reviews is actually pretty small for a regional coverage compared to the last few years. Two, maybe he did not like them. Three, as I understand it, when he tries wines for the first time, he does not always release results, and might want to try a couple+ vintages before reviewing them. He did not review Seven Stones until after the second vintage even though he had samples before that. Fourth, he might have felt that some wines were made in too small a production to include. Or finally, he simply felt he did not have enough room for everything he tasted and was forced to leave some out. It could be any one, or a combo of these.

The Parker California era is over, at least for new releases. The Galloni era has begun and now everyone is in the same boat starting with the next reviews. The power of this and other consumer boards has just increased substantially. You, me and others just like us will be able to influence wine purchases with our reviews more than ever. If you go to CellarTracker and look up any Pott wine, you see scores all from the low to high 90s, one after another. Look at how Rhys and Littorai scores with our crowd vs RMP, and it does not stop our purchases. Pott sold out his 07 and 08 without Parker or Laube reviews and now that there is NO Parker at all, will he be helped or hurt from this point out now that no one else will be getting Parker reviews either? Obviously, with many wineries relying on Parker scores to sell, some will be brought down by the absence and some brought up by the absence. And who fills that gap? You, me and the several hundred or few thousand others who post, read and lurk here and elsewhere.

There are almost half a dozen wineries I was hoping he would score on his way out the door, but he didn’t and everyone will just have to take it in stride and move on. A year from now it won’t matter one bit, as the influence from his final reviews will be history. The whole valley will have to decide upon one of two paths; trying to figure out Galloni and position oneself for him, or strike out to make what they want to make and trust that the pallets of active collectors will spread the word on excellent wines and build success that way. Or both. I know where I want to go. This is an opportunity as much as a loss.

37

He did try them while he was out. There were many people out here who made what I consider pretty good juice that he did try but did not make the issue. There are a few reasons why he might not have put various wines in. One, his knee surgery and recovery might have kept him from having time to actually get as many TNs in as he wanted. 680 reviews is actually pretty small for a regional coverage compared to the last few years. Two, maybe he did not like them. Three, as I understand it, when he tries wines for the first time, he does not always release results, and might want to try a couple+ vintages before reviewing them. He did not review Seven Stones until after the second vintage even though he had samples before that. Fourth, he might have felt that some wines were made in too small a production to include. Or finally, he simply felt he did not have enough room for everything he tasted and was forced to leave some out. It could be any one, or a combo of these.

The Parker California era is over, at least for new releases. The Galloni era has begun and now everyone is in the same boat starting with the next reviews. The power of this and other consumer boards has just increased substantially. You, me and others just like us will be able to influence wine purchases with our reviews more than ever. If you go to CellarTracker and look up any Pott wine, you see scores all from the low to high 90s, one after another. Look at how Rhys and Littorai scores with our crowd vs RMP, and it does not stop our purchases. Pott sold out his 07 and 08 without Parker or Laube reviews and now that there is NO Parker at all, will he be helped or hurt from this point out now that no one else will be getting Parker reviews either? Obviously, with many wineries relying on Parker scores to sell, some will be brought down by the absence and some brought up by the absence. And who fills that gap? You, me and the several hundred or few thousand others who post, read and lurk here and elsewhere.

There are almost half a dozen wineries I was hoping he would score on his way out the door, but he didn’t and everyone will just have to take it in stride and move on. A year from now it won’t matter one bit, as the influence from his final reviews will be history. The whole valley will have to decide upon one of two paths; trying to figure out Galloni and position oneself for him, or strike out to make what they want to make and trust that the pallets of active collectors will spread the word on excellent wines and build success that way. Or both. I know where I want to go. This is an opportunity as much as a loss.[/quote]

Roy, ever the voice of reason! [welldone.gif] Thank you for putting the proper perspective on the change! It’s easy for me to agree, as my palate preferences are pretty hit & miss with RP, but wine is a highly individualized concept: you like it, it works for you, or it doesn’t. You are ultimately the only expert whose opinion matters. I use “experts” to a certain degree to find new wines, but the information on this board and others are becoming far more influencial for me. Find people who like what you like, “follow” them, share opinions, tastings, etc., and soon, none of us will need to dole out $$$ for publications that attempt to “tell us” what to like, what’s good and what’s not, etc., and lead us to part with some significant dollars for unknown and unproven wines. [soap.gif]

38

Roy,

You should know that a few years back, he came down and tassted a few hundred wines from the Santa Barbara County area from most of the ‘main’ players here - and most did not make the publication they were supposed to . . . and there was never an explanation why. No conspiracy theory, etc . . . they just didn’t.

39

That whole issue was a major snore…

40

Here is my issue with the latest issue (sorry couldnt resist that). I am on the BB over there but do the majority of my posting and reading here. I only subscribe there for research of older vintages, but do like to see the new issues. If it were me and I was running the WA, I would be reading both the BB and this board in order to understand what readers want to see scored.For me it is not an issue of points, rather I would like to read a review and use it as a reference point much like a do with certain posters on this board. I know each person has a different palate and there is no real right or wrong when tasting wine, which is why I use Parker and others as barometers, knowing that they have tasted thousands more wines than I have. I know not every winery wants to be scored and obviously there is no way to taste every wine made, but you would think that someone who considers themselves an expert would be reaching out to some of these wineries that are constantly buzzing on boards like these in order to compare them to everything else they are tasting. Maybe this will change with the AG covering California, maybe we will begin to see the wines we all talk about get reviewed.