“We have an infinite amount of work to do & a limited amount of time to do it in.”

Kill me. At the time, I remember Anuj laughing and going to start in on the work; I, on the other hand, was fresh meat, and terrified by the thought. Nowadays, I have an infinite amount of work which excites me and the prospects keep me driven and reassured that we have indeed created a business model that works at Cork’d. But there I go again ranting about something unrelated to wine…

The point of the story above is this: Anuj and I were enjoying a bottle of wine while talking & laughing over dinner. He always defers to me when choosing wine which I love which means I get to order something I haven’t tried before. We depleted a 2007 Muscadet Sevre et Maine “Sur Lie” Domaine de la Tourmaline made with the Melon de Bourgogne varietal.  I use this wine for illustrative purposes, to expatiate upon tasting, reviewing and scoring wines…and what might happen with the subjectivity of ratings.

Scenario UNO – You drink this wine alone on your couch. Yeah, I said it. And I do it. SO? Here’s the thing. You have no one to discuss the wine with, you’re likely not deep in conversation (except in your own MIND). Similar to seeing a thought provoking movie, you want someone to discuss with afterward, otherwise it’s not as fulfilling. This wine is fine, but that is all…it is wine, it’s in a glass. Perhaps you have it with a salad, do some work while you eat. You think about it, review it on Cork’d, but of course. You may rate it 86 points.

Scenario DOS – You imbibe this baby with a dear friend over dinner (my experience over the weekend). Mesmeric conversation not only about the wine but also about life, politics and relationships ensue giving this wine new life. You are feeling good about life, about yourself and having a remarkable time as you sip. You feel satisfied as you both agree on the backbone of this wine and debate about particular flavors. You score this sucker 88 points – see my review here.

Scenario TRES – You drink the wine with the winemaker at a restaurant. He visually brings you to the vineyard, telling you the history of the terroir, the vines, the labor that goes into the very bottle you are consuming. You hear his story, learn about his family and his passion for wine. You taste his sweat in the glass. After this encounter, you dig this wine, give it a 90.

Scenario QUATRO – Now… for the kicker! You go to Loire Valley, sojourn on the vineyard, see the vines, tour the cave with the winemaker. Feasting on an incredible meal with the most interesting people who live life the way it should be, you taste the wine again. Conversation is flowing and ever engaging. You are the life of the party and have never felt so good. You are influenced by how much everyone loves the wine. You give this baby a 92.

In my world, I often meet with the producers or folks in the industry and taste the fruits of their labor. I’m not naïve to think that knowing the winemaker and drinking his or her wine has no effect on scoring the wine. However, can I do it objectively? I’d like to think so…but relationships are powerful. The human connection is moving… and sometimes has subconscious implications.  Moreover, when it comes to wine “objective” doesn’t exist. However, I often rate wines on Cork’d right in front of winemakers and have no problem scoring a wine sub-90 points with my honest thoughts. Nothing against the person or the wine. My palate simply doesn’t LOVE the wine…doesn’t mean you won’t.

Just food for thought… or wine for reflection, as I like to say. Score a wine how you will. Just be AWARE of the surrounding situation and embrace it. Better yet, note it (in your review or tasting notes if you take them) so others know how to interpret your score.

MUCH LOVE to you all because human interactions and connections influence our thoughts and almost everything we do.

I recently went to Boston Wine School and had a lively discussion on wine prices and the cause. Well…let’s not beat a dead horse here. There are many causes. Hype, quality, raw materials / additives, marketing, good ratings (can you say Robert Parker?), vintage / climate, or just pure nonsense. I guarantee I left some out. Regardless, many of these are directly related and I am going to focus on two that resulted in somewhat of a debate.

Additives and quality. Here was the argument by the winemaker – what does and what could potentially make wine prices so high are the “additives” winemakers use to enhance the wine. Without getting too technical on you (and myself for that matter), for winemakers to get the right chemical balance of acidity, sugar, sulfites, etc., they oftentimes have to add yeast, yeast food, enzymes, sugar, sulfites, tartaric acid, other vineyards’ juice, oak chips and other substances.

Some winemakers claim they don’t use “additives” but might use color-extracting “enzymes” or corrective measures to perfect a tannin imbalance. All of these adjustments/modifications allow the winemaker to do whatever he or she can to make the wine as saleable as possible. If winemakers don’t make adjustments (for example add the right type and amount of yeast pre-fermentation), they may have hundreds of gallons of rotten eggs instead of wine on their hands. So, adjustments are important and should not be viewed as negative, but rather the science aspect of making sure wine has the right levels before bottling.

Getting back to the winemaker’s argument, one can see that the more adjustments made, the more raw materials used in the wine making process. Economics tells us this makes prices go up. Right, got it. … wait a second…

So this is where I entered the debated. What if a harvest or wine is crap, for lack of a better term. So a winemaker keeps adjusting and modifying pre-fermentation to get the levels right to compensate for poor soil and other factors. Then maybe again post-fermentation through blending with other vineyards’ juice and by adding oak chips, etc. Again, who pays? Well, we do in the end. Personally, I don’t like this idea one bit. I would much rather pay a premium for a wine that comes from the ground (terroir), using the wild/natural yeast on the grape for fermentation… and STRAIGHT to the bottle. Now how often does that happen? I’m no expert, certainly no winemaker. I imagine very rarely. But, in my opinion I think the industry should charge MORE for less modified wines (assuming they have the Brix, pH, tartaric acid levels within range). If a wine isn’t naturally rich in color, I’d prefer winemakers not add a commercial enzyme to extract that color. Enzymes along with other additives mask and affect the smell and taste of what is truly going on in the vineyard. It’s almost impossible to know how “modified” a wine is – it certainly doesn’t say on the bottle, but you can start to smell and taste for it. For example, overly oaked wine might be masking a flaw in the wine…I personally look for wine that tastes like dirt. Like soil, like earth worms crawling in the ground. Yeah, I said it.

Terroir. Of course I love to see a deep, rich color in a red wine, but don’t judge a wine by its color…eh, unless of course it’s brown. You still want all the other good flavors and those depend on the varietal, region, etc. But I encourage and challenge you to see if you can taste some of the vineyard itself in the wine. Do a little homework or leave a comment of which vineyard you’re drinking from and I’ll help with the characteristics. Is it Alexander Valley? Mendoza? Oklahoma? Here’s to you, health and happiness…