Archive for the 'Connoisseurship' Category

Every year, I review Israeli wines for the April issue of our magazine. I do this because the majority of wines from Israel are Kosher, and a lot of Kosher wine is purchased and consumed in the month of April for the Jewish holiday Passover (September is also a busy season for the category with the High Holy Days including Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur). Every year, I have noticed an improvement over the previous vintage, and marvel at the fact that some fabulous winemakers are creating beautiful stuff that too many people are unfamiliar with.

Read the rest of this entry »

Like art, music and literature, the cocktails and favored beverages of an era are often intrinsically linked to the history and culture of the time. Delve into the origins of your favorite cocktails and you’ll find a fascinating glimpse into the psyche of a bygone era. The creation of mixed drinks in particular is routinely linked to events in history.

Read the rest of this entry »

They come in several variations, but the overall appearance is generally similar: old white guys in monkey suits, festooned with medallions, oversized neck chains or tastevins. Usually, you’ll hear the loud belly laughs of the alpha males first, then notice the delicate clinks of fine stemware and the slurping sounds of wine being tasted. At some occasions there’ll be a spouse or two wearing the long dark gown that’s the distaff counterpart’s uniform, but not too many. It’s obviously a boys’ club, after all. Catching a glimpse as you enter the restaurant, you might wonder “What’s going on in the private dining room?”

Read the rest of this entry »

“Dear Colleague, your wine is wild and savage but brilliant…”
-Philippe de Rothschild to Mario Incisa della Rocchetta about his wine, Sassicaia

This past Wednesday, I had the pleasure of dining with Tenuta San Guido Technical Director and winemaker Dr. Sebastiano Rosa along with his wife Elena and several other industry professionals and journalists. For those in the business of wine, no matter what area of it, dining with one of the most respected oenologists working in Italy today is like a Rolling Stone writer hanging out with Jimmy Page or Mick Jagger. To be drinking one of the most iconic Tuscan wines of all time with the winemaker, geeking out about the different vintages and nuances found within each bottling, is just the ultimate thrill for any truly passionate wino.

Read the rest of this entry »

Each year, Wine Enthusiast Magazine awards three tiers of awards (Award of Ultimate Distinction, Award of Unique Distinction, and Award of Distinction) to submitting restaurants with notable wine lists. In reviewing this year’s applicants, I started to think about how wine consumers approach wine selections when they walk into a restaurant, and what most restaurants are honestly doing right (or screwing up) in their presentation of wines.

First, based on the applicant wine lists and my own dining in Manhattan, where I live, I’d say presentation and organization tends to be schizophrenic. Some restaurants organize by wine variety, some by region, and some by style. Others get cute and clever and organize choices by criteria that are more personal and subjective (i.e. “Wines for Romantics;” “Wines for Celebrating;” or “Rebel Wines”). Some include elements of all of the above. I’m not sure anyone is really sure of what diners want, or how they actually read wine lists.

We talked about the different approaches among the judging panel, and just as restaurants varied widely in approach, we all varied widely in what we preferred. Several of us liked the “wine styles” approach—this is great for wine drinkers who know what they like as far as style or flavor profiles go (i.e. “Dry, Crisp Whites” or “Big, Fruity Reds”) but may be lacking in the more advanced wine knowledge (which probably describes 90% of the American wine drinking public). It seems to go one step further in making wine and food pairings choices easier, too. This was in keeping with our own approach to organizing wines in the Wine Enthusiast Wine & Food Pairings Cookbook; we received a lot of positive feedback from readers who connected with this way of presenting wines.

Others in the group found this approach annoying and liked the traditional approach of cataloging wines by region or variety—it seemed to be associated with more “serious” lists and higher-tiered eateries, which, it could be assumed, attract a more serious and knowledgeable wine drinker. I felt this kind of list was less user-friendly and that if you happened to be a food lover who maybe was still learning about wine (again, probably like most Americans), then you might get lost in the endless columns of wines that may not be familiar to you. One hopes these types of restaurants would employ a friendly sommelier who could help diners navigate the list, but in some cases it wasn’t true, and often, people hesitate to ask for help for fear of “looking dumb.” How many of these diners stare numbly at the list, then panic and choose something based on price alone?

Finally, the more eclectic approach of grouping wines under “clever” headings (usually handpicked and chosen by the sommelier or wine director)was deemed among our group to be charming and add a human, personal touch (like having your wine expert best friend handpick wines for you), but only in addition to a list that offered more help, like one of the approaches above.

List organization style was just one of many things we considered in judging our own awards–depth of list, creativity, food-pairing elements–all figured heavily as well, as did staff education, storage and events. There was no one “right” approach to wine lists organization necessarily, but it was an interesting topic of discussion.

What type of restaurant wine list do you prefer? Old school, practical, zany? Are restaurants doing a good job in exposing you to new wines and organizing lists in ways that are helpful, logical and stress-free?

Berry-by-berry sorting is one of the big changes at BV.

On September 15, I sat down with Beaulieu Vineyard’s head winemaker, Jeffrey Stambor, for dinner, preceded by a tasting of several vintages of BV’s flagship wine, the Georges de Latour Private Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon. With 2009 marking Stambor’s 20th year at BV, Stambor was able to offer an interesting historical perspective on the wines–one that I hope did not color my perceptions too much. Staying one step ahead of the FTC’s newly released regulations regarding wine blogging, let me make perfectly clear upfront that BV paid for the dinner and provided the wines.

Read the rest of this entry »

Over the past couple of weeks, I’ve had the opportunity to take part in three vertical tastings, where a number of vintages of the same wine are poured for the purpose of comparison. Yet regular readers of Wine Enthusiast will note that we rarely include coverage of verticals in the magazine (or online). The verticals we do cover are pretty much restricted to rare and highly collectible wines that may turn up at auction, on fancy restaurant wine lists or in some prescient collectors’ cellars. So why bother attending verticals at all?

Read the rest of this entry »

In the recent comments on our 100-point scale for rating wines, we’ve received a number of questions concerning the use of “typicity” to award points. I guess the theory goes something like, “If a wine is typical of its variety/region, it should receive extra points.” To which I call, “Bullsh*t.”

Read the rest of this entry »

We’ve all said it before, and we all know people who would say it time and time again. I know I used to be one of the worst offenders out there, hoarding away my precious bottles for the perfect opportunity for them to be consumed: the right company, the ideal food pairing, the fabulous occasion. But why, oh why, do we deem it necessary to hold on to these gems until we feel deserving of their wonder; why are we not good enough on a daily basis?

Read the rest of this entry »

One of the things the editors talked about at our just-completed editorial conference was rating wines. We even tasted a few pairs of wines to help illuminate (lubricate) the discussion. In the first pairing, we blind-tasted two wines from the same producer–one the estate wine, one the second wine. Essentially, this was a test of whether we could pick out the “better” wine.

Perhaps a more precise way of phrasing the question would be whether our critics agreed with the winery’s judgement of which was the better wine. In the end, we almost unanimously did. Why? Because even though wine rating is undeniably subjective, most critics–and winemakers–are examining the same traits of each wine.

Although each of our reviewers is free to use their own rubric, we stress the importance of evaluating balance, length, intensity and complexity as the basis for our ratings. For myself, I tend to model my scoring approach after that of Robert Parker, Jr., whose writings played a major role in my early wine education.

Appearance is not a major factor, unless it is somehow suspect (hazy) or atypical (browning in a young white) for the type and age of wine being judged; most wines receive 4 or 5 points for appropriate appearance.

Aroma is the next facet of the wine that I judge, based on balance, intensity and complexity. Balance suggests a harmony of scents, with no single overbearing component. Intensity can be a double-edged sword: superintense but unpleasurable aromas rate lower than low-intensity unpleasurable ones. Complexity mostly refers to the number of different scents detected, subject to the requirement of balance, and on rare occasions refers to the indescribability of the overall bouquet. Aromas typically account for up to 10 points of a wine’s score.

Flavors are up next, and for obvious reasons are very closely associated with a wine’s aromas. Generally, I evaluate flavors along the same lines (balance, intensity, complexity) as aromas, and wines that score well for their aromas often perform well in flavor as well. That said, certain wines are more or less intensely flavored than aromatically endowed, and some wines’ flavors don’t gracefully reflect their aromas. Length of finish is an important quality indicator, although with the same caveat as intensity: No one wants a long finish if it tastes of paint remover. Overall, flavor accounts for up to 15 points of a wine’s rating.

While the wine is on the palate, I also examine the wine’s weight and texture, or what we call mouthfeel. Although this is primarily a function of the wine’s alcohol, sugar, tannin and acid levels, it may also reflect the wine’s concentration and other components. It should be appropriately balanced with the rest of the wine’s elements; I award up to 10 points for mouthfeel.

That leaves up to 10 points I assign based on a wine’s perceived overall quality and ability to improve over time. And this–in addition to the other areas where they may not receive full marks–is where most of the world’s rosés come up short on my scorecard, as virtually none are capable of improving with age (maybe Lopez de Heredia’s Rioja Rosado, if you like the style). For similar reasons, I will probably not find many Beaujolais nearing that mystical 100-point barrier, nor several other styles of wine.

That doesn’t mean that these wines aren’t capable of excellence; many are, and make for wonderful drinking. It just means that they are subject to certain limitations imposed on them by my scoring rubric. Should they be?