Over 100 of us packed a room in a midtown hotel for the event, organized by Executive Wine Seminars. I arrived fifteen minutes early and it was already hard to find a seat at a table. Five wines were pre-poured into five ISO glasses, and there was some bread and cheese. At my table were people who had come in from Chicago, Wisconsin, Delaware and Napa. And they had paid a lot of money too: $795 each (I was fortunate enough to have gotten a ticket from someone who couldn’t attend). The air practically buzzed with anticipation.

Even though the tasting was blind, everyone knew the lineup of wines and it included some of the most heralded wines of the vintage as the Parker scores (in parentheses) indicate:
Angelus (98) • Cos d’Estournel (98) • Ducru Beaucaillou (97) • Haut Brion (98) • Lafite Rothschild (96+) • La Mission Haut Brion (97) • Larcis Ducasse (98) • Latour (96+) • L’Eglise Clinet (100) • Margaux (98+) • Montrose (95) • Pape Clement (98) • Pavie (98+) •Le Gay (95) • Troplong Mondot (99)

In addition to my excitement about tasting these wines, I was eager to see Parker engage in a blind tasting. Blind tastings are incredibly challenging, of course, and can humble even the most accomplished tasters. On the other hand, Parker is known to be a formidable taster, and he has made some impressive claims about his own tasting abilities. In the famous profile of Parker published in The Atlantic (that Parker displays on his web site) back in December 2000, the author wrote that Parker “stores the sensation of each [wine] into a permanent gustatory memory. When I asked him about the mechanical aspects of his work, he told me in a matter-of-fact way that he remembers every wine he has tasted over the past thirty-two years and, within a few points, every score he has given as well.”

2005 is a vintage that is obviously very fresh in his memory (and he has said it is the greatest Bordeaux vintage he has experienced in his storied career), and given his apparent total recall of the wines he tastes, I was obviously very keen to see how he’d fare in a blind tasting–particularly one involving his favorite wines of the vintage.

Parker himself was in good spirits, chatting and being photographed with many of the attendees. A burly man, he was wearing a black, open-necked shirt and a gray sport coat with red légion d’honneur pin on the lapel.

On his left, Parker had a “surprise” guest, Dominique Renard, a négociant from Bordeaux who Parker had been wanting to meet up with Parker so Parker invited him to join the seminar.

In his opening remarks, Parker placed the 2005 vintage in the pantheon of vintages that includes 45, 47, 59, 61, and 82. He also said that it was tough to taste Bordeaux that was so clearly meant for the long haul at this point in its evolution and praised the organizer, Howard Kaplan of EWS, for “taking time away from his family this morning” to double decant the wines (from bottle to a decanter, then back into the rinsed bottle). He said he hadn’t tasted these wines since 2007. He also touched on the probable quality of the 09 vintage (“looks superb”) as well as the 08s (”a much underrated vintage”) and the difficulties of 07 (”will be discounted very seriously”).

Finally, we dove into the first flight. It was clearly divided between two modern style wines, #1 and #3, that were quite popular (but that I didn’t really care for) and the others. The second wine was quite reticent and closed and some attendees, including Parker, dumped on it for that reason. I actually had a hard time deciding whether this was delicate or closed and, in the end, I decided on both. The fourth wine was a wall of tannins, but the tannins were elegant and the wine seemed quite like Cabernet. Parker opined after the flight that it was very definitely a Medoc and probably a first growth. The final wine in the flight was drinking the best right now, truly quite delicious. Parker suggested it was a Pomerol (on the right bank).

In his overview of the first flight, Parker discussed the powerful tannins of the wines and that these wines would likely outlive him. When he said, “the worst thing you could do is die with a full cellar,” the room burst into laughter and a smattering of applause.

Unfortunately, given that there were only five glasses, we had to dump what remained of the first flight to make way for the second. Wine number six was bursting with plump and juicy red fruits that I found to be stewy. The seventh wine had an alluring nose with just a hint of Brett (think earth and horses), and a gorgeous structure with a balance of tannin from both the barrel and the grapes. The eighth wine had a pretty nose of rose petal but, in my view, had a slightly confected quality on the palate. Parker suggested after the flight that it might be Cos d’Estournel.

The ninth wine was another beauty and, for me, the wine of the night. Although there was another big slab of tannins, the tannins were elegant undergirding a delicate layer of dark berry aromas. Tightly wound and clearly one for the long haul, I would gladly tuck this away in my basement to enjoy decades from now. Parker called the wine “virtually perfect,” and thought it was from the Medoc.

The tenth wine was another beauty, with a lovely herbal note on the aroma. On the palate, huge but graceful tannic structure proved that the best wines can have both power and elegance. Parker said it was “very Medoc and very cabernet” but likely not to be a first growth and suggested, specifically, Ducru. Overall, he called this flight a “really extraordinary” flight of wines.

The final flight started badly with a horrendously corked wine. Fortunately, Howard found another bottle and brought it to our table. I found this pour to have a sort of char brulée note, a juiciness on the midpalate but also a nice minerally quality at the core. Parker called it “shut down.” The twelfth wine was big, rich, luscious but the tannins were not a wall, rather rich, polished, and expensive, the Ferragamo loafer of tannins. I thought it was a good example of the modern style. The thirteenth wine was a lovely aromatically but on the palate had somewhat sweet tannins. Parker commented that he thought it was a first growth.

The fourteenth wine I found to be overblown, a wall of tannins with overripe fruit. Parker liked it, however, so much so that he hailed it as a first growth. The final wine was another gorgeous example of cabernet in a bit more modern style, rich, tarry but not to tarry. Parker didn’t have a comment on this wine.

The organizers of the Executive Wine Seminars like to have the participants vote on the top wines of the tasting. So we all filled in our top three choices, and with alacrity that would put many polling stations to shame, Howard ran the tallies, awarding three points to a wine for a first place finish, two for a second, and one for a third.

But before the unveiling, one of the organizers asked Parker if he cared to pick two wines out of the tasting. “Um, no,” was his immediate reply to an outburst of laughter from the room. However, he then decided to elaborate a few picks, as is the tradition at these annual EWS events. He said that his favorite wines of the evening were 9, 8, and 3 followed closely by 13, 14 and 1. As to specific picks, he ventured that wine #6 was Pape Clement, #8 was Cos, #10 Ducru, #9 Margaux, #13 Latour, #14 Lafite, saying that it was hard to confuse those last two but that they could be the other way around.

Here was the order of the wines with their popular vote tallies:
1. Pavie, St. Emilion (51)
2. Haut Brion (6)
3. Pape Clement (56)
4. Montrose (2)
5. Ducru (30)
6. Angelus, St. Emilion (57)
7. La Mission Haut Brion (43)
8. L’Eglise Clinet, Pomerol (53)
9. Le Gay, Pomerol (53)
10. Latour (86)
11. Larcis Ducasse, St. Emilion (28)
12. Margaux (40)
13. Lafite (28)
14. Troplong Mondot, St. Emilion (54)
15. Cos d’Estournel (39)

I note the appellations of the six right bank wines since they are mostly Merlot based as opposed to the Cabernet-based wines from the Medoc.

What conclusions can we draw from this? Well, for one, you could have ten bottles of Le Gay, Parker’s favorite wine of the evening, for the price of one bottle of Lafite.

A second conclusion is about the wines themselves. There are clearly some winemakers that have pushed a style of wine making that makes forceful, extracted wines, enhanced with new oak and the resulting wood tannin. Sometimes that style can obscure the grape variety or even the place to such an extent that one might confuse a cabernet for a merlot, a Medoc for a Pomerol. And in a blind tasting, a delicate and/or close wine such as Haut Brion can fare poorly when sandwiched between two opulent wines such as Pavie and Pape Clement.

A final issue is about points and the nature of blind tasting, a capricious undertaking if there ever were one. Although Parker did not rate the wines yesterday, his top wine of the evening (Le Gay) was the lowest rated in the lineup from his most recent published reviews. It goes to show that on any given night, one wine can show better than its “pedigree.” For all the precision that a point score implies, it is not dynamic, changing with the wines as they change in the bottle nor does it capture performance from one tasting to the next.

Blind tasting removes preconceptions about wines while maintaining the ability to rate wines in a peer group setting. Wednesday night, Parker upended the order of his published ratings of the wines and, in the process, could not correctly identify any of these wines. In print, he awarded L’Eglise Clinet, a Pomerol, a score of 100 points. While he did call it his second favorite wine of the night, it is interesting to note that he could not pick out this wine in the lineup (he thought the actual L’Eglise to be Cos, a wine that is not only from across the river, but from St. Estephe, an appellation known for the extreme tannic structure of the wines). In that same vein, he mistook Lafite, a Paulliac, for Troplong-Mondot, a new wave St. Emilion. Blind tasting can be ruthless in its outcomes.

Reporter David Kesmodel details the divergence between policy and practice at Robert Parker’s Wine Advocate. He acknowledges reporting on this blog that initially raised the questions (see my original correspondence with Parker and critic Jay Miller here and a follow up here).

The Wall Street Journal story adds details that Miller accepted trips to Australia and Chile paid by wine industry groups. I contacted Wines of Argentina last month and their staff in Mendoza verified that they had also had paid for two trips for Miller to visit the country. Other parties verified that he was ferried around the country by private jet on one of those trips.

The WSJ story says that Parker declined to respond to interview requests, as did Miller and Mark Squires who has admitted to taking press trips to Portugal, Israel and Greece. Joining a press trip from a regional or national association is not out of ordinary for wine writers; it’s that Robert Parker laid down ethical standards years ago that state “It is imperative for a wine critic to pay his own way” and “it is imperative to keep one’s distance from the trade.” Parker’s lack of response to the reporter seems odd since not only would it clarify the situation but he encouraged reporters to call him just last month, writing in his forum “Today…most journalists don’t even call if they want to write about me…no sense having me provide a well documented rebuttal that undermines their story line……”

“Wine Advocate Writers Spark Ethics Debate” [Wall Street Journal]

One claim that came up several times in the over 130 comments was that Mr. Miller took one or two trips to Argentina, organized and paid for by Wines of Argentina, a trade group representing over 100 wineries that also receives government funding according to their web site. I contacted Wines of Argentina and they confirmed that they paid for and organized the two trips and several people in the trade there also confirmed them. Robert Parker has also now admitted as well but referred to them as “vineyard tours.” There was apparently more to the trips than just that–multiple sources said that there were lunches and dinner at wineries, and I was also told by several people that Miller was ferried around the country by private jet during one visit.

I alerted Miller yesterday that Wines of Argentina had told me that the trips were comped and asked him for comment. Not long thereafter, Parker posted a message that indicated that Miller would no longer be able to take “vineyard tours paid by Wines of Argentina.”

Parker laid down ethical guidelines years ago–guidelines that are the source of so much of his authority and that have set the standard against which all other wine critics are judged. The divergence between the action of some contributors to the Wine Advocate and the stated policy was (and perhaps still remains) a legitimate and important issue given the power of the publication; if the Wine Advocate was bending the rules, that was something his readers had a right to know.

Over the weekend, on his web site, Parker characterized those of us raising these concerns as the work of “extremists who could care less about the truth.” On the contrary, the truth was precisely what I’ve been after. Perhaps the larger issue then is Parker seemed to resent that people wanted to know the truth. While Parker lamented the state of journalism, the examples he cites of good journalism seem to be anything that speaks well of him.

But journalism is precisely what I’ve been doing all along. I went to Parker and Miller with legitimate questions and they were evasive. I spoke with Wines of Argentina and the truth came out. That’s called journalism. Instead of lashing out with invective (”extremists” or “jihadists” or eliding wine bloggers with the Taliban) at me and others who have raised very legitimate issues, Parker should take this episode as indicative of the respect he commands and the seriousness with which the wine community takes the ethical standards he established long ago.

Since Mr. Parker has shown an affection for ending his interventions with quotes, here’s an aphorism that he might remember from his days as a lawyer: “If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither on your side, pound the table.”

In his correspondence with eRobertParker.com moderator, Mark Squires, Mike Steinberger brought up the “Weekend at Bern’s,” a road trip to the Tampa Bay wine mecca, Bern’s. Click through to read a first-hand account in the erobertparker forums. The Wine Advocate’s Jay Miller, whose editorial ambit includes reviewing the wines of Spain, Australia, and Argentina, was among the attendees. Also there were three importers whose Spanish wines Miller reviews: Eric Solomon, Patrick Mata, and Jose Pastor. Miller’s participation in this purely social event would seem to be distinctly at odds with Parker’s stated policy regarding interaction with the trade.

This isn’t the only example of Wine Advocate contributors deviating from Parker’s guidelines. Last year, Mark Squires, who reviews the dry wines of Portugal as well as the wines of Israel, Greece, Lebanon, Cyprus, Bulgaria and Romania for the Advocate, went to Israel on a trip, in his words in the forum, “”paid by the Israeli government…approved by Bob in advance.”

To the best of my knowledge, Parker has not given any indication, in print or online, that he has relaxed the Wine Advocate’s ethical standards. But in light of these examples, and given that so much of Parker’s authority derives from the perception that his integrity is beyond reproach, it seems fair to ask if the Wine Advocate has changed its policies regarding gratuitous hospitality and interaction with the trade. So I put the question to Robert Parker via email and post his reply here. I also sought clarification from Jay Miller. Further down, I post our exchange.

—–Original Message—–
From: Tyler Colman
To: wineadvocate@erobertparker.com
Sent: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 4:51 pm
Subject: request for clarification

Mr. Parker,

I have always admired your independence. I am curious about some perceived changes at The Wine Advocate and would welcome a comment from you.

In a recent thread, Jay Miller was shown to be on a road trip that included three dinners at Bern’s restaurant in Tampa Bay in the presence of, among others, three importers (Eric Solomon, Patrick Mata, and Jose Pastor) whose wine he reviews for the Advocate. [link]

Separately, Mark Squires admitted last year that he took a trip to Israel that was not paid for by the Advocate–with your approval, he says. [link]

I’m curious how these actions square with the policy in the Wine Buyer’s Guide, which reads in part: “It is imperative for a wine critic to pay his own way. Gratuitous hospitality in the form of airline tickets, hotel rooms, guest houses, etc., should never be accepted either abroad or in this country…In order to pursue independence effectively, it is imperative to keep one’s distance from the trade. While this attitude can be interpreted as aloofness, such independence guarantees hard-hitting, candid, and uninfluenced commentary.”

The recent actions of Squires and Miller have left me wondering: Has there been a change in policy for The Wine Advocate reviewers? If so, have you disclosed that to your readers? What is now allowed?

Best regards,

Tyler Colman, Ph.D.
www.DrVino.com

From: Robert Parker
Date: April 15, 2009 10:18:34 AM EDT
To: Tyler Colman
Subject: Re: request for clarification

Nothing at all has changed for me (I pay 100% of all hotel, travel, food, wine expenses), but I need to verify what the other writers (all independent contractors who don’t write exclusively for me) do..they are aware of the guidelines,…trying to control who they may be friends with and eat with is far too fascist for my taste, but they are expected to pick up their share of the costs of any meals, travel, etc. (which I believe they do, since I consistently am reimbursing them for meal and travel expenses for those articles they do for TWA)…the Berns meals had quite a few consumers as well, and I have no problem with importers wanting to attend and everyone sharing expenses..wish I had gone….RMP

From: Tyler Colman
Date: April 15, 2009 1:51:26 PM EDT
To: Robert Parker
Subject: Re: request for clarification

Thank you for your prompt reply.

I’m still not clear that you apply your stringent standards to your contributors. You didn’t respond to the fact that Squires’s trip was, in his own words, “paid by the Israeli government…approved by Bob in advance.”

And I have heard suggestions that Miller’s trip to Argentina was paid for by Wines of Argentina and that he has toured both Australia and Spain in the company of importers whose wines he reviews (Dan Philips and Jorge Ordonez, respectfully). If that is true–and I’m trying to clarify with you that it is–it could hardly be characterized as “aloofness” form the trade laid out in the Wine Buyer’s Guide.

Again, I have a great deal of respect for the independence that you have delineated as your policy. I’m just trying to clarify if there has been a change in journalistic practice by some of your independent contractors.

Best regards,

Tyler Colman

[No further reply has been received]
******
—– Original Message —–
From: “Tyler Colman”
To: Jay Miller
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 1:34 PM
Subject: Clarification

Hi Jay,

There seems to be a minor hullabaloo about your role in the Bern’s weekend dinners with three importers (Eric Solomon, Patrick Mata, and Jose Pastor). Could you set the record straight about your attendance and who paid for the event? Thanks.

Tyler

Tyler Colman, Ph.D.
www.DrVino.com

On Apr 13, 2009, at 2:56 PM, Jay Miller wrote:
Hello Tyler
First of all, where is the “hullabaloo” emanating from? I’m not going to comment on something I haven’t seen. Send me a link.
Regards, MrBigJ

From: “Tyler Colman”
To: “Jay Miller”
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification

Mostly on email but here’s a link
http://dat.erobertparker.com/bboard/showthread.php?p=2598756
I just saw Jose Pastor’s “3 Dias at Bern’s” so the only question remaining is whether you paid your share of the bill.
Separately, and again for clarification, when you went recent on trips to Argentina or Australia, for example, did the Wine Advocate pay your way?
Best,
Tyler

On Apr 13, 2009, at 3:43 PM, Jay Miller wrote:

You want me to comment on that? JM

From: Tyler Colman
To: Jay Miller
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification

Yes. And, further, I’m curious if you think that either the Bern’s dinners and trips that you have taken (perhaps also in the company of importers) are in keeping with either the spirit or the letter of the journalistic independence laid out in the Wine Buyer’s Guide:

“It is imperative for a wine critic to pay his own way. Gratuitous hospitality in the form of airline tickets, hotel rooms, guest houses, etc., should never be accepted either abroad or in this country.” “In order to pursue independence effectively, it is imperative to keep one’s distance from the trade. While this attitude can be interpreted as aloofness, such independence guarantees hard-hitting, candid, and uninfluenced commentary.”

Thanks in advance for any substantive comment; I intend to do a post on this in the next 24-48 hours.

Tyler

On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:29 PM, Jay Miller wrote:

Tyler, say whatever you want. People who know you are well aware that you predicted in print the demise of The Wine Advocate. I really have nothing to say to you.
Regards, JM

From: Tyler Colman
To: Jay Miller
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification

Jay –

Where have I predicted the demise of The Wine Advocate? I do not think I have ever made such a grand claim. I have argued that the role of traditional wine criticism may be evolving, but that is far from declaring the demise of a publication. Maybe you are confusing me with someone else?

Again, could you please clarify these issues:
* Does The Wine Advocate pay for your trips, notably trips to Argentina, Australia and Spain in the last year?
* Have you ever toured wine regions in the company of importers whose wines you review?

Thanks.

Tyler

On Apr 14, 2009, at 4:03 PM, Jay Miller wrote:

No, Tyler. You said it plain as day in The Politics of Wine [sic].
Regards, JM

Such was the case with a thread last week concerning Mike Steinberger’s recent Slate column about the state of Australian wine. Mark Squires, who moderates the Parker board, accused Steinberger of selecting “biased” retailers for the story. One of the retailers shot back with a stinging rebuttal of the bias claim. Shortly thereafter, the thread was deleted in its totality.

Subsequently, Steinberger had an email exchange with Squires. Steinberger questioned the decision to delete the thread and said it had unfairly deprived him of a chance to respond to Squires’s assertions. Squires was unmoved, and a spirited discussion followed. With Steinberger’s permission, I am posting the exchange here. Sit back and pass the popcorn.

****
From: mhsteinberger
To: msquires
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2009 11:21:34 PM
Subject:

Mr. Squires,

You made an assertion today, in the thread about my Slate article, to which I wish to respond. However, it appears that the thread has now been deleted. I would ask you to restore the thread so that I might reply, and to leave it open so that others can read the comments and weigh in. It was a perfectly civil discussion, and there was no reason to remove it. There was nothing in my article that could be construed as an attack on Robert Parker or the Wine Advocate, and I am at a loss to understand why you felt the need to delete the entire thread.

Mike Steinberger

Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 06:43:03 -0700
From: msquires
Subject: Re:
To: mhsteinberger
This decision has nothing to do with you or your article per se. Calling this a civil thread is simply astounding. It will not be restored, nor could it be as it has been deleted.

I’m still rather confused as to what you consider an unbiased source. I have a degree in journalism, summa cum laude, btw. But frankly I’m not really concerned enough about it to debate it.

From: mhsteinberger
To: msquires
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 1:48:14 PM
Subject: RE:

I have no interest in debating, either, but you made comments concerning my article and my journalism that require a response.

To the extent that the thread became uncivil, it was your doing–you immediately posted a snide comment about the article, then quickly followed up with a dig at the retailers I cited and a dig at me. The retailers can defend themselves. I would only note that your broadside against Posner and Hayward was as nonsensical as it was unjustified. Yes, retailers are in the business of selling wine. But how exactly did it profit Posner and Hayward to tell me that they were having difficulty moving high-end Australian wines? Can you explain to me the conflict of interest in this case–how their businesses stood to gain from sharing that information? If you were suggesting that Posner and Hayward have axes to grind when it comes to Australian wines, that’s demonstrably false. Posner maintains a very large Australian portfolio, and Hayward, if I’m not mistaken, was championing Australian wines when Robert Parker’s seat at the Farm Credit Banks was still warm. Are you of the opinion that journalists should just never solicit the views of retailers?

Regarding your critique of my journalism, you claimed that I went fishing for quotes that would fit my argument. To begin with, I wasn’t making an argument, and for you to suggest as much indicates that you didn’t actually read my column. The article was a reported piece; the only commentary came at the end, when I said it was a pity so many people seem to have written off Australia entirely. But the bigger issue here is that you made a damning accusation concerning my work, yet offered no proof to substantiate it. As a journalism major–a summa cum laude graduate, no less–didn’t you feel obliged to offer some supporting evidence for your assertion? It is one of the cardinal rules of journalism–if you make a claim, you have to back it up. Can you back up what you said about my reporting? If not, then you owe me a public apology.

In case you are interested, I decided to pursue this story last fall, after coming across data showing a huge drop in sales of blue-chip Australian wines and hearing from both Jeff Zacharia and Peter Gago that high-end Australia was a moribund category (do they have axes to grind?) I called Chuck because The Jug Shop is renowned for its Australian inventory, and I called Daniel because hardly a week goes by in which I’m not receiving offers on Australian wines from his store. I gather, from your remarks, that you think this story–the crisis of the Australian wine industry–is a bogus one. If you can prove that, I’d certainly be impressed, because the statistical and anecdotal evidence is pretty overwhelming. I know you write for the Wine Advocate now, but do you read it? If so, you may have noticed that your colleague Jay Miller has an essay in the current issue about–yes–the crisis of the Australian wine industry, in which he makes many of the same points that I made in my article (Jancis Robinson even cited Jay’s essay in the piece she did for the Financial Times last week on this same topic). Unless you had something substantive to add to the discussion about my article, there was no reason for you to chime in; your only contribution was snark, and your decision to delete the thread smacks of a censoriousness that is truly dismaying coming from someone who graduated journalism school summa cum laude.

Regarding unbiased sources, I must confess that I’m a little confused, too, and maybe you can help me understand something. I couldn’t help but notice that while you were busy impugning my integrity and the integrity of the retailers I cited, there was an active thread about a visit to Bern’s involving Eric Solomon, Patrick Mata, Jose Pastor, and one Jay Miller. Was this the same, aforementioned Jay Miller who covers Spain for the Wine Advocate? From the picture that was posted, it would appear to be so, and I’m thus a bit perplexed. Eric, Patrick, and Jose are importers of Spanish wines. I’ve always taken Bob at his word that the Wine Advocate scrupulously avoids potential conflicts of interest. How does Jay’s Weekend at Bern’s square with that policy? You would surely agree that there is more to journalistic independence than not accepting advertising–that conflicts of interest can arise in other ways. Bob conceded as much after he caught flak for that dinner in Bordeaux with Alain Raynaud, Gerard Perse, and Michel Rolland, and Jay’s road trip with these importers strikes me as a far more egregious ethical lapse. Can consumers continue to regard Jay as an impartial judge when it comes to wines imported by Eric, Patrick, and Jose? Since you are clearly very attuned to issues of journalistic malfeasance, I’m curious to get your take on this matter. Thanks.

Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 12:19:32 -0700
From: msquires
Subject: Re:
To: mhsteinberger

>>Can you back up what you said about my reporting? If not, then you owe me a public apology. <<

Your arguments here are as bad as your article, which was a regurgitated version of what has been circulating for the last couple of years. Like I said--I have no interest in debating this. Which you should consider a very good thing, as I'm both a pretty good debater and awfully knowledgeable about every aspect of the subject matter, in general and in specific.

But I have better things to do with my time.

Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 12:22:13
From: msquires
Subject: Re:
To: mhsteinberger

>>Can consumers continue to regard Jay as an impartial judge when it comes to wines imported by Eric, Patrick, and Jose<<

By the way, one final note. If you think this reprehensible mud-slinging intended to divert attention from yourself does you a service, or makes me want to talk you, you have seriously misjudged the situation. You change the subject and attack someone. It’s an obvious and well scorned tactic. Good luck with that.

If you have a question about ethics in the WA, you talk to Bob. I have no interest in talking to you about anything at any time.

From: mhsteinberger
To: msquires
Subject: RE:
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 21:23:52 -0400

Yes, it probably is a good thing for me that you have neither the time nor the inclination to continue this discussion. If, by debating skills, you mean an aptitude for hitting the delete button in order to make opposing views disappear, you very clearly are a master of the form. And given that you are now an eminent wine critic, I wouldn’t think to challenge your knowledge. But I do have two questions for you. You now accuse me of regurgitating a story that has been “circulating for the last couple of years,” as you put it. The data, and all the anecdotal evidence, indicate that sales of high-end Australian wines in the United States have tanked in the last 12-18 months. Can you point me to an article from, say, 2005, that claimed that the market for these wines had completely dried up? And if I am guilty of regurgitating an old story, would you agree that your colleague Jay is guilty of the same thing? As I noted in my previous email, his article in the current issue of the Wine Advocate (“Australia 2009: Into The Abyss”) makes the same points I made in my Slate piece.

Lastly, if I did indeed recycle old news, you should immediately contact the Sydney Morning Herald to let them know; they emailed over the weekend to inquire about possibly reprinting my article.

The book is called A Year of Wine: Perfect Pairings, Great Buys, and What to Sip for Each Season. In it, a collection of essays and hundreds of wine recommendations, I encourage readers to break out of their chardonnay or cabernet rut and drink different by plotting a seasonal arc to their wine consumption. Simon Spotlight Entertainment, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, will publish the book, available November 11 at a retailer near you or on Amazon.

Epicurious flagged it on their short list of books for “thirsty readers” this fall.

If you like this blog, you will love this book! Why? Because I sold the book based on this blog. But since you readers were not there in the book to post comments, I recruited 13 of America’s leading sommeliers to lend their voices to the book with their thoughts on seasonal drinking and perfect pairings.

I’ve just received some finished copies of the book and have three to sign and give away! All you have to do to qualify is post a comment on this posting saying which is your favorite season for drinking wine. And while “all” is certainly an acceptable answer, maybe there’s one that brings particular pleasure to you.

Comments will close on Thursday and Friday I’ll throw all the commenters’ names in a hat and draw three names. So check back then to see if you are among the winners!

See the listing for A Year of Wine: Perfect Pairings, Great Buys, and What to Sip for Each Season on Amazon.

Goldstein, the author of The Wine Trials, has a posting up on a new web site describing how he invented a restaurant name, Osteria l’Intrepido, a riff on “fearless.” Then he typed up a menu (”a fun amalgamation of somewhat bumbling nouvelle-Italian recipes”), put together a wine list, and submitted both to Wine Spectator–along with the $250 fee. The list was approved and given an Award of Excellence (see screenshot).

Then Goldstein decided to add a twist. To the tape:

It’s troubling, of course, that a restaurant that doesn’t exist could win an Award of Excellence. But it’s also troubling that the award doesn’t seem to be particularly tied to the quality of the wine list, even by Wine Spectator’s own standards. Although the main wine list that I submitted was made up of fairly standard Italian-focused selections, Osteria L’Intrepido’s “reserve wine list” was largely chosen from among the lowest-scoring Italian wines in Wine Spectator over the past 20 years.

Click through for the list complete with WS annotations and scores.

Reached by phone today, Goldstein said that he also presented this information at the annual meeting of the American Association of Wine Economists in Portland over the weekend.

“I didn’t have any empirical evidence of the quality of the restaurants other than my own impressions,” he said. “I wanted to see what the standards of the Awards of Excellence were. The results speak for themselves.” His experience will be part of an academic paper he is working on about standards for wine awards.

In 2003, Amanda Hesser explored the Wine Spectator restaurant awards in a piece in the Times entitled “A Wine Award That Seems Easy to Come By.” She concluded that the 3,573 restaurants that year grossed Wine Spectator $625,275. But the annual application fee then was $175 as opposed to the $250 that Goldstein and others paid for their application fee this year.

Overall, I’m disappointed with the quality of box wine here in the U.S. But the time for good box wine has come for environmental as well as economic reasons as I argue in the piece.

There are some rays of hope in the box wine landscape. Unfortunately, the $40, 3-liter D-Tour wine, made by Dominique Lafon of Burgundy and imported by Daniel Johnnes, wine director at Daniel Boulud’s restaurants, has been temporarily withdrawn from the market (search for this wine). However, the Cuvee de Pena, an old vine grenache from the French side of the Pyrenees, is still available (find this wine). And the newest and brightest star is the $11 unoaked, organically grown malbec called Yellow + Blue sold in a 1-liter TetraPak (not bag-in-box; find this wine). There’s also the Bandit from California (find this wine).

So what do you say about boxed wine? Have your say in the latest poll! And hit the comments with your preferred box selections.

poll now closed

Related: “Drink outside the box” NYT
“An open letter to Jorge Ordonez” [Dr. V]
“How I gave up bottled water and lived to tell the tale” [Dr. V]
Drinking box rosé in the south of France
The excellent image is by Grady McFerrin and ran with the story.

I don’t particularly like soft serve but just thought it was a really good picture. If you have a wine suggestion, please note which flavor makes for the best pairing. And if you had a thought about whether making ice cream at home is worth the time and money, let us know that too!

As a prize, I sent her a signed copy of the hottest (only?) wine book to be released in July, my own, Wine Politics: How Governments, Environmentalists, Mobsters, and Critics Influence the Wines We Drink. Thanks, Katie, and thanks, all, for your votes!

Mitt Romney: According to the NYT, he is so “vigilant about nutrition” (read: boring!) that he eats the same meals every day. Anathema to the wine lover! Added bonus: teetotaler. No love from wine geeks.

Mike Huckabee: He’s reputedly a charmer, plays guitar, knows (or knew) how to eat, and jogs every morning. But he’s also a southern Baptist minister, so he doesn’t dance and is a teetotaler. So close, yet so far. Wine pick: “Fre,” a de-alcoholized wine.

Rudy Giuliani: Rudy used to like Long Island merlot but 9/11 changed everything. Now he’ll drink whatever is local, as long as it is American.

John McCain: He used to be more of a loose cannon eight years ago. Now, the fire in the belly appears as mere embers. His wine is a 10 year old Turley Zinfandel, fiery in it’s youth, now sadly without vigor.

Barack Obama: This man has got style. Heck, one commentator even said he was the “wine track” candidate some time back. So he’s our man for the White House. He’s also quite a blend himself, born in Hawaii to a mother from Kansas and a father from Kenya and lived early on in Indonesia. This eloquent American blend could be none other than one of the finest wines in America, with structure and spice: Ridge Monte Bello.

Hillary Rodham Clinton: We know Hillary hearts New York but is she cold as ice? Wine pick: Standing Stone, Vidal, ice wine 2005, Finger Lakes.

John Edwards: he’s made it far on his “two Americas” theme. We know what that means–beer America and wine America. We’ll split the difference and put him down for a Franzia box wine.

The wild cards

Ron Paul: this guy may be crazy–he wants to eliminate the IRS, the Federal Reserve and a host of government departments and restore the gold standard–but if he is, then he is rich and crazy thanks to his $19 million in fund raising last quarter. Wine pick: Armand de Birgnac, Ace of Spades, “gold bottle,” non-vintage Champagne $300.

Fred Thompson: This Tennessean seems like a natural fit for Bourbon. No love from wine geeks.

Dennis Kucinich: Given his hhhhot young wife (born 1977), he clearly likes youthful reds. We’ll put him down for a California Pinot, most recent vintage available.

Christopher Dodd: His move to Iowa in a desperate attempt to score fourth place makes him seem pandering. And nothing tries harder to be a crowd-pleaser yet fails to inspire more than Merlot.

Bill Richardson: He’s big and he claims to have the most foreign policy experience. Wine pick: the brawny 2004 Numanthia from Spain.

Related: “Bush-Kerry 2004: an election guide for wine lovers“

Many wine lovers around the world have cabinets stuffed with complete sets by each varietal. But Riedel continues unabated, subdividing grapes with his just released Oregon pinot noir glass–mere grape no longer suffices as now terroir is overlaid on grape. The logically possible amount of stemware just increased exponentially.

Daniel Zwerdling burst into the wine world like a bull in a decanter shop. His story, “Shattered Myths,” in Gourmet (August 2004 and very, very unfortunately not available online), asserted that Georg was pulling the wool over discerning drinkers eyes: the reason wine in Riedel stems tastes better is not because of a tongue map–it simply tastes better because we believe it should.

So, as we contemplate adding more crystal to our collections and to give as gifts this holiday season, have your say in the latest poll!

poll now closed

My previous postings on the carbon footprint of wine made me want to determine just how much carbon is involved in the making and transporting of our favorite beverage. So I collaborated with Pablo Paster, a sustainability metrics specialist, and we ran the numbers. Our findings have just been published as a working paper for the American Association of Wine Economists, available here as a pdf.

While I welcome your comments on the whole paper, I’ll post some of the key findings here:

* Organic farming has lower greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity than conventional farming but I was surprised that the difference wasn’t greater. Clearly there may be other differences in a local ecosystem but the GHG difference was surprisingly small. But on the whole, it was the transportation that played a more significant role from a GHG perspective.

* Regarding the “food miles” debate, we find that distance does matter.

* But not all miles that a bottle travels are the same. Efficiencies in transportation make container ships better than trucks, which in turn are better than planes.

* Shipping premium wine, bottled at the winery, around the world mostly involves shipping glass with some wine in it. In this regard, drinking wine from a magnum is the more carbon-friendly choice since the glass-to-wine ratio is less. Half-bottles, by contrast, worsen the ratio.

* Shipping wine in bulk from the source and bottling closer to the point of consumption lowers carbon intensity.

* Light packaging material such as Tetra-Pak or bag-in-a-box has much less carbon intensity.

* Using oak chips is a more carbon friendly alternative than oak barrels, particularly those that are shipped assembled and empty around the world

* There’s a “green line” that runs down the middle of Ohio. For points to the West of that line, it is more carbon efficient to consume wine trucked from California. To the East of that line, it’s more efficient to consume the same sized bottle of wine from Bordeaux, which has had benefited from the efficiencies of container shipping, followed by a shorter truck trip. In the event that a carbon tax were ever imposed, it would thus have a decidedly un-nationalistic impact.

What does this mean for the green wine consumer? Drinking a wine made without agrichemicals, from larger format bottles, or wine that has traveled fewer miles is the more “green” option. Beyond these points (or in addition to them), you could perform your own carbon offsets, for example, by giving up one bottle for another and saying no to bottled water.

“Red, White and “Green”: The Cost of Carbon In the Global Wine Trade,” By Tyler Colman and Pablo Paster

UODATE: This paper was been published in the March 2009 issue of the Journal of Wine Research
image 1: istockphoto.com

Josh wins a complete set of books by my wife, Michelle, in the Urban Babies Wear Black series, including the New Baby Baby’s Journal, and the black onesie/tshirt. Do Sonoma babies wear black? Time will tell…

Thanks to everyone who submitted very cute photos. One of the other finalists, Amy, has her own winery in the Rhone and put up a posting related to this thread. Amy sez: “I can certainly tell you that here at La Gramière we couldn’t get along without kids! They are always an enormous help to us during harvest, and they add such a wonderful esprit to the whole event. So here are some of my favorite kid photos from our past 3 harvests…”

One final vignette: I was on a panel with Joel Peterson of Ravenswood Winery last week and he told a story about grape ripeness. Thirty years ago he would throw his son on his back and walk through the vineyards to check the sugar levels with his refractometer. The best measure for ripeness, he found, was simply to pass a grape back to his son, Morgan: if he ate it they were ripe, if he spit it out, the grapes had to stay on the vine a little longer.

So here’s to responsible kids and parents at wineries, something (nearly) everyone can raise a glass to!

Related:
“Kids at wineries: let the voting begin!”
“Kids at wineries, a photo contest”
“Poll: should kids be banned from wineries?”
Urban Babies Wear Black

The result was a terrific listing of many unheralded yet rewarding wines. Tannat, for example, featured prominently with no few than four bloggers tasting this burly red grape and three of them tasting it both from its native France and comparing it with versions from Uruguay. Bloggers explored many remote corers of Italy, the country that produced the most tasting notes. Even the good old USA got some grapes written up, though only one Norton and assorted hybrids and clones developed to become indigenous.

Bonus points were awarded to those bloggers who dared to compare–two versions of the grape, from the homeland and a new home. The bonus points committee also rewarded bloggers who were able to try the grape in its growing area since, they too, were going native.

Without further ado, let’s go to the roundup!

Bonus points:

Steve De Long tasted three versions of verdelho, one from the homeland of Madeira and two dry versions from France and Australia. Click through to find out which one got five stars! [De Long Wine]

Grazza, a sommelier at an English Michelin-starred restaurant, blogs about the Paso Senorans albarino from Galicia, which he calls “a really classy example of the grape.” Then he came back the next day to add a write-up of the biodynamic, Verdad Ibarra-Young Vineyard 2002, saying “I LOVE this wine – so much awsum.” [Tales of a sommelier]

Joe from Montreal tastes doubles down on tannat: Uruguay-France (specifically, 2002 Bodegas Carrau “AMAT” vs 2001 Chateau D’Aydie). Click through to see which one was made him say “mmmm, THIS is Tannat.” [Joe's wine]

Andrew Hwang also traversed the tannat axis, trying two different wines than Joe, the 2001 Château de Perron and 2000 Los Cerros De San Juan Cuna de Piedra Oak Reserve. Click through to see which was still tasting better after three days. [Rouge and Blanc]

Tannat trifecta! Markus at Weingolb also rides the France-Uruguay tannat train. He tastes the Torus Madiran 2004 (France) and the Domaine Monte de Luz Tannat 2005. Which one had “elegance” and which was “rough hewn”? Click to find out. And major props to him for pointing out that tannat is a palindrome. [Weingolb]

[We interrupt programing to reveal that in the above face-offs, France and Uruguay had a record of 1-1-1. Clearly more such taste-offs are needed!]

Doug at Nobly Rotten does the tocai two-fer: Livio Felluga versus Millbrook! He wanted to try the grape because he’d never tried it before and because it is now an endangered species going by tocai at least, after recent EU reforms. [Nobly Rotten]

Bob Gregg really threw himself into the assignment trying nine wines from unusual grapes in Quebec (some indigenous), where he was visiting. Fortunately the indigenous grapes didn’t ruin his vacation. Thanks for the great effort, Bob! [BobGregg]

Living in Spain (Catalunya), Ryan and Gabriella found this WBW assignment to be a piece of cake given the abundant local grapes. They climbed the wall (almost) in Priorat at Torres and tried the rare “Grans Muralles,” a blend of five grapes, Monastrell, Garnacha Tinta, Garró, Samsó and Cariñena. How many purple dots did they give the wine? Click through to find out. (And to find out your assignment of WBW #38) [Catavino]

Mariëlla Beukers from Holland blogs (in English!) about visiting Thierry Navarre in the Languedoc who makes a wine from ribeyrenc–wow, off-the-beaten-path! (and called a “Cépage oublié du Languedoc”) [Wijnkroniken]

Peter May from South Africa goes local with a 2001 Pinotage from Rijk’s in Tulbagh, where he recommends having lunch! [The Pinotage Club]

Tim set out to try local hybrids in his native Minnesota, but spared us the reviews after they failed to impress. But he landed on his feet with a Roussanne, his current fetish, that he gives four stars and calls “a steal.” He’s the last in the bonus round since at least he tried to go native at home. [Winecast]

McDuff writes up a Mansois aka Fer Servadou from the tiny AOC of Marcillac in Southwest France and finds two examples fro Domaine Cros, including the vielles vignes. His extremely informative post has a picture of winery, a map and two tasting notes. For this comparative approach, McDuff hereby receives bonus points! [McDuff's Food & Wine Trail]

First-timer and indigenous Italian, Andrea Gori, Trebbiano IGT Toscana 2003 from Tenuta di Capezzana. He says “something really different from international taste.” He had it at a resto in the region! [Vino da Burde]

Dezel, who covers Virginia wines and wineries extensively on his blog, tried the Horton Vineyards Norton 2003 in his and its element, Viriginia. He says, “for $12, you may just find a new grape to fall in love with!” [Virginia Vine Spot]

John tries two wines from France and America that aren’t the same variety–but, hey, the bonus point committee decided to give him da points for trying. One of the wines is made from Symphony after all! The other Picpoul de pinet. [Cork Dork]

Minette tries two wines from Pinotage in her native South Africa and compares them to rugby players in the current Rugby World Cup! [Winefly]

And other contributions:

David Baer took on the WBW theme with great enthusiasm, loading his luggage with many bottles of wine as “homework.” His week-long trip to NH includes drinking Movia Ribolla Gialla and a Jean-Claude Masson jacquere from Savoie, which he described as “texturally rich, and a real sense of alpine air about it.” Boston restos included. [Winebaer]

Neil, the Brooklynguy, tries three different chenins blancs, all from Domaine Closel in Savennieres. The 05 Clos du papillion was the winner, but what did he think about the 1995? Click through to find out. [Brooklynguy]

JB, a frequent commenter on this site, ventured to France for a sparkling rose, though not from Champagne! She tried the Bugey Cerdon Rosé made from Gamay and Poulsard. Sounds like fun–she loved the pinkyness. [Domaine 547]

First-timer, Gen, tries a “Low Yield Roussanne” and Lledoner Pelut 2003 and both get a thumbs up. [Gare aux gouts]

Alice Feiring joined the WBW fray for the first time–welcome, Alice! She goes the extra mile (or staircase?) in trying a Schiava from Georg Mumelter in Alto Adige, what sounds like an incredible value for $14. [Alice Feiring]

Alder Yarrow gets sent to Purgatory for eating eels drowned in Vernaccia. Oh no, wait, that was a Pope in Dante’s Inferno. Alder, who’s getting into the indigenous whites of Italy, tried the 2006 Vincenzo Cesani Vernaccia di San Gimignano from Tuscany. [Vinography]

Gabrio, another newcomer, tries the Ligurian Pigato, U’ Baccan from Bruna. Is this a Bruce Springsteen grape? It’s known in the local dialect as The Boss! He calls it “a white with strong character.” The Boss, indeed. [De Vino]

Tim at Cheap Wine Ratings chose to write about Negroamaro, a variety indigenous to Italy. He tried two different examples of Negroamaro, one pure and one blended with Malvasia Nera. [Cheap Wine Ratings]

Sonadora visited a new local shop (yay, shades of WBW #18!) and got the 2003 Duca Carlo Guarini Piutri Negromara Salento. She liked it so much she was glad she wasn’t able to find any Norton from her native Virginia. [Wannabe Wino]

Jack and Joanne try a Lagrein, the Porphyr, from Alto Adige made by the cooperative Kellerei Cantina Terlano. Jack calls it “the second best lagrein” he’s ever had (and, yes, he’s had more than two). [Fork & Bottle]

Catherine tries a Teroldigo Rotaliano from the North of Italy that she calls “absolutely delicious,” adding, “What a discovery! I love being off the beaten track.” Right on, Catherine! [Purple Liquid]

Marta dove into barbera for the first time, tackling the Costa di Bussia Arcapla Langhe, Vietti Barbera d’Asti Tre Vigne, and the Castelvero Piedmont Barbera, all under $20. [Marta Strickland]

Bryan took the Piedmont plunge as well, trying the 2004 Caranti Cascina Garitina Barbera d’Asti and the 2002 Monchiero Carbone Regret Langhe. [Vinilicious]

Wine Scamp tried a Cannonau di Sardegna, thinking it was native. Then she found out it’s actually grenache from Spain. No matter! She loved the Argiolas anyway. [Wine Scamp]

Jules, a new dad from New Zealand, tries the 1998 Dessilani Nebbiolo from Piedmont, a grape variety he las relatively little experience with since they are hard to find down under. His reaction: “Wow!” [The Wine Wanker

Serge tries a Nero d'Avola from Sicily, the Morgante 2005. [Serge the Concierge]

Huevos con vino enjoyed a the tongue twister that is the Godeval Godello 2005 from Galicia! [Huevos con vino]

Edward tried the 2003 Roda Reserve from Rioja, which is a tempranillo-based blend. [WinoSapien]

Deb from Good Wines Under $20 tastes the value Cristalino cava, with three native grape varieties, though none on the label. [GWU$20]

Erika Strum tastes a still xarel.lo, a component of cava, from Alert i Noya [StrumErika]

Wilf tried a dry Tinta Barocca from South Africa where it is “practically considered indigenous.” [Wilf's wine blog]

Jens tastes a Chateau Musar blanc from 1998, writing, “it doesn’t get much more indigenous than this.” [Cincinnati wine warehouse]

Richard A. goes with a tannat from Uruguay, the 2002 Vinedos de los Vientos Tannat ($23). He liked. Too bad that he didn’t also go for the tannat two-fer especially after admitting the grape is from France! [A passionate foodie]

Jeff, Indy resident, ended up trying two hybrid wines from Stone Hill winery in Missouri and writes that one is in the “Midwestern semi-sweet style”–is that a new term for labels, Jeff? [Goodgrape]

Michelle and hub wanted to go American so they chose a Charbonel from Simmons Winery in Indiana. They rated it a smiley face. [wine-girl.net]

NYCwinenotes tries a Touriga Nacional, bargain variety, from the Dao. While he liked the idea of exploration, the wine left something to be desired. [NYCwinenotes]

Lenn goes hybrid (without a Prius) by drinking the 2006 Keuka Village White from Ravines Wine Cellars in NY’s Finger Lakes area. He calls the wine “absolutely balanced, fresh and delicious”–and at $12, that would be a steal! [Lenndevours]

Lia writes about Sonoma chardonnay (whoops, violating the rule to avoid the “big six”) but she makes it a clone 4 and writes about its cultivation. Sadly, no tasting note! [Swirling Notions]

Lauren walked over to Harlem Vintage from Columbia and found the 2006 Craftsman Kiralyleanyka (Hungary, $9.99). She liked! [Walling Road]

Dave had fun with photoshop (he also did a nice mashup for this WBW) and they have another one with Stalin for their detailed write-up of Saperavi Mukuzani from Georgia. [Avenue Vine]

Paul Arthur made a sentimental choice writing up the Boutari Moschofilero 2006, since this is his first WBW and Moschofilero was the first wine he ever remembers having. [Flowerysong]

Kathleen goes with another NY wine, the Traminette, from Goose Watch Winery in Romulus, NY. She tried it with her club and liked the aromas. [Kathleen at Mayspace]

ChateauBrys also tried a pinotage the Tukulu 2001, which they describe as “intense.” [ChateauBrys]

Wine for Newbies has a podcast of their contribution–click thru to listen! [WfN]

Sure Courtney choses two wines from her native New Zealand made from “Flora,” which, by her own admission, is not indigenous but off-the-beaten path. [Sue Courtney]

Carol tries a carmenere from Chile, which, by her own admission, is not indigenous to Chile. [CelebrateWine]

Marissa tried a xinmovaro from Greece, though it was blended with merlot and syrah. [D'Vari]

Finally, I tried a Touriga Nacional–in fact three of them–in situ, the Douro! I thought two of them were excellent. [Dr. Vino]

(image)