Bordeaux: Spoofy v. Non-Spoofy

originally posted by SFJoe:
A friend wrote me today to say that he'd been offered LMHB futures in London today for ~$10,000 the case.

He said it didn't sell out quickly.
Click to expand...

This kind of information seems like a report from another universe. It's hard to process. Roughly $825 for a bottle of 2009 bordeaux. Wow.

And I looked on one large store's website and noted 2006 and 2007 LMHB for $600 and $350 a bottle. I just had no idea prices were like this.
 
I love how the most outspoken trash-talkers admit to having limited (or none at all!) experience with that which they insult. Why let lack of experience get in the way of having a strident opinion, eh? Fucking hilarious, indeed.
 
originally posted by JSchwartze:
Hilariously PredictableI love how the most outspoken trash-talkers admit to having limited (or none at all!) experience with that which they insult. Why let lack of experience get in the way of having a strident opinion, eh? Fucking hilarious, indeed.
Click to expand...
Y'know, J, this contribution talks about humor but isn't actually funny.

You should work on your material.

And which of us did you have in mind?
 
I don't even see the logic of the charge. People have either said that certain wines - that they've tried - are spoofy or not, or that others - that they haven't tried - are outlandishly priced. Do the latter need experience with the wines to connsider the prices absurd?
 
Perhaps the most shocking price to me was an offer of $70 for '09 Chateau St Pierre futures.

For traditionally made Bordeaux it is unfortunate that the OP limited discussion to the 1855 classification, as, perhaps somewhat ironically considering the Right Bank is the home base of Rolland and Valandraud, both Pomerol and St Emilion offer many great examples of traditionally made beauties. La Conseillante, Vieux Chateau Certan, Lafleur, Figeac. For slightly more affordable bottles, the neighborhood of Cheval Blanc offers many lesser-known wines that are traditionally made and quite good. Chateau Chauvin comes to mind. The '98 is good. I haven't opened any of my 2000s or 2002s so can't comment directly on those vintages, but have always enjoyed wine from this producer.

I am not one who finds much joy in the on-going "Bored-O" or spoofilization debate. Traditionally made claret still has a place in my cellar and even if we lament the passing of Pape-Clement (especially Pape-Clement) to the modern, rather generic school of full-bodied reds, it is still easy enough to cellar claret. Domaine de Chevalier, old La Tour Haut Brion (RIP), Leoville-Barton, Langoa-Barton, Haut-Bages-Liberal, Margaux and Palmer, to name some of my favorites, still taste to me as they always have.
 
originally posted by JSchwartze:
Hilariously PredictableI love how the most outspoken trash-talkers admit to having limited (or none at all!) experience with that which they insult. Why let lack of experience get in the way of having a strident opinion, eh? Fucking hilarious, indeed.
Click to expand...

This comment strikes me as recursive, in that you don't seem to know much about the folks you are criticizing. Lyle, for example, whose comment Sharon called hilarious, knows quite a lot about wine. Many who post here work in the wine business and are well-informed.

The best trash talkers I've ever known, while we're on the subject, were chess hustlers, who would beat you down mercilessly with their monologues while filching dollar after dollar from you in blitz games.
 
Ignore the Schwartze person or this will turn into one of those endless threads with position papers and the position papers will not be on cool things like chemistry or Kant or even on what spoof means and where to find it, but on the rationality or irrationality of taking certain positions within debates about wine, and that way silliness lies.
 
originally posted by JSchwartze:
Hilariously PredictableI love how the most outspoken trash-talkers admit to having limited (or none at all!) experience with that which they insult. Why let lack of experience get in the way of having a strident opinion, eh? Fucking hilarious, indeed.
Click to expand...
Why don't you cite an example or two? Use the quote function. It isn't that hard.
 
originally posted by JSchwartze:
Hilariously PredictableI love how the most outspoken trash-talkers admit to having limited (or none at all!) experience with that which they insult. Why let lack of experience get in the way of having a strident opinion, eh? Fucking hilarious, indeed.
Click to expand...

"Trash talking"? Are you referring to me for some reason -- because I've said previously that LMHB is worth drinking? I think Haut Brion and LMHB are generally outstanding wines as I bought '80s and '90s vintages. And it is a shame if wine geeks are priced out of tasting it. And most are now.

Is that really that hard to understand?
 
Lord knows I'm no arbiter of good posting taste, but I think this thread is taking a somewhat insupportable turn.
 
originally posted by Keith Levenberg:
originally posted by Thor:
Monbousquet is quite the spoof-fest too, is it not?

Eventually it turned into caricature, as I imagine Pape-Clement likely has as well.
Click to expand...

It has :(

The 1998 was a bit spoofy but I still liked it. By 2000 it was gone.
Click to expand...
 
originally posted by Mark Davis:
Keith- there are a lot of good German rieslings with asterisks on the bottle :)
Click to expand...

That was good. Did Parker realize there was a confusing asterisk system already in place when he decided to use the asterisk? Did he consult with the VDP?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top