Florid prose

There seem to be a few instances in Thor's text where he raises the spectre of a heat-damaged or underperforming bottle, and I would say that across the board, I didn't see any evidence of that at all.
 
In terms of heat, only the 2002 Ganevat, but as noted the Chambers crew thought it was correct, and I've no reason to doubt them (though David did say he's only had it here, so there was no on-site control version to compare it with). I think that if one suspects damage rather than inherent qualitative issues, it's important to include that suspicion even if it turns out to be unfounded; the alternative is trashing a wine for reasons unrelated to what the winemaker intended. But opinions can differ on this point.

As for underperformance or bottle variation, that's a difficult thing to assert unless one has had the wine before. I've had better bottles of the Equipo Navazos 15 and the Montbourgeau 1999 lEtoile Vin Jaune, though the former may have been a different bottling and the latter was not recent. It may, as repeatedly suggested in the text, be as much or more a matter of context than anything specific to the bottles; as with any tasting, it does not replicate the experience of sitting with a single bottle over time.
 
Though I cannot vouchsafe tremendous love lost for floriculture (like birdwatching, a decidedly English passtime), after wading through the entire post I have no recourse but to genuflect in deference to the sheer panache required to produce such an exhaustive account, garnished, garrisoned and caparisoned by free but not gratuitous notes. Bravo.
 
originally posted by Thor:

It may, as repeatedly suggested in the text, be as much or more a matter of context than anything specific to the bottles; as with any tasting, it does not replicate the experience of sitting with a single bottle over time.
Click to expand...

Maybe. But if you leave a sherry dinner saying "I just don't like sherry," as you did, I don't think it is the fault of having had lots of different sherries to try. Rather the opposite. You would have thought that having several in the mix would have allowed for more chances for one's mind to change.

Also, it wasn't like the number of wines to be tasted at the event was in any way kept a secret. Again, rather the opposite.

If you would prefer to experience a single bottle of wine over time, there are plenty of opportunities to do that, and there is no requirement to attend a dinner where that is not the MO and then fault the dinner because it didn't comply with your preference.
 
My friend Andr is forceful in his beliefs about Sherry and freshness. I think it is an important point when consuming Fino and Manzanilla.

Thor isn't the only one who has had posts erased and points people to his blog.
 
*sigh* See, Levi, this is why I cautioned you over email both before and after the tasting. You knew I wasn't a Sherry fan beforehand (which I told you over email), you knew I wasn't during (because I said so while you were standing behind the finos, by way of pointing out how much I liked the Valdespino in contrast), and you knew I still wasn't afterward (because, as you obviously remember, I told you then as well). You certainly knew I was going to post some form of report on the dinner. If you felt strongly that I wasn't going to write the sort of notes you'd like to see given the work you put into the event, and felt strongly that you didn't wish for that to happen, you shouldn't have accepted my request for two seats, nor should you have accepted my money. I certainly don't mind the disagreement, even on every single point if that's what you'd like to do. But now you're starting to claim I said things I never said.

Maybe. But if you leave a sherry dinner saying "I just don't like sherry," as you did, I don't think it is the fault of having had lots of different sherries to try. Rather the opposite. You would have thought that having several in the mix would have allowed for more chances for one's mind to change.
Click to expand...
You're extrapolating way beyond the very specific point I was making. I was referring to bottles I felt were underperforming vis--vis other bottles of those wines that I've had. I said that while I could be right or wrong about that underperformance, one potential cause of error was the format of the dinner. I don't see how that can be interpreted as a criticism of the dinner unless you think that I'm singling out this one dinner for the inherent and hardly unknown problems with all many-bottle tastings, which is nowhere in my text and is certainly not my intention. If it's a criticism of anything or anyone, it's me...and how much of a role palate ennui plays in assessing sets of the same style of wine in sequence.

(And really, since you didn't taste my earlier bottles with me, you can't possibly know whether I'm right or not about a comparison between the two. Maybe the previous bottles were flawed in a way I found more appealing. This is all wearily reminiscent of the "you had a bad bottle"/"no I didn't" argument, which never goes anywhere interesting.)

Obviously, one of the reasons I attended was indeed to see if my mind would change. It didn't. Don't take it personally. It's not your fault, and no one blames you, your employer, the producers of fino and manzanilla, or Bill Buckner.

Also, it wasn't like the number of wines to be tasted at the event was in any way kept a secret.
Click to expand...
I don't understand where this is coming from, Levi. I attended because I was interested in the wines and my reaction to them. I knew what the event was going to be like. Where, in anything I've written, do I suggest otherwise? Nowhere. If you want to argue with something I've actually written, please do so.

If you would prefer to experience a single bottle of wine over time, there are plenty of opportunities to do that, and there is no requirement to attend a dinner where that is not the MO and then fault the dinner because it didn't comply with your preference.
Click to expand...
Levi, Levi, Levi. Did I say I was required to attend the dinner? Did I complain (note: not "comment on," complain) about the number of wines? About the format? About your efforts to provide a solid thematic event? No, no, and no. Did I fault the event for any structural element? No, nowhere. Did I at any point say that I would have preferred an alternative to the event or its format? No and no.

I did say that the experience of tasting a dozen or so wines made in more or less the same style is different from the experience of drinking a single wine over a longer period of time. Note: no value judgment, just an assertion that the experiences are different. Do you actually disagree with that? I suspect not.

So what's your beef, here? I can see you don't like some aspect of (or maybe all of) what I wrote. You know, I'm sorry you don't...but: too bad. I didn't write it for you. Your forums for argument and redress don't seem to be limited, either. But please don't make things up and then claim that I wrote them, because then we are going to have an issue. I still have none with you, even if it seems the reverse might not be true.
 
originally posted by Cory Cartwright:
There are people who don't like sherry?
Click to expand...

Sad, isn't it. You wouldn't believe how hard it is to find a dinner where I don't feel that opening a bottle will annoy the majority of the people present.

Thor - thanks for the notes. Wish I could have been there.
 
How about the food pairings? Would love to hear the results. Seems like (compared to my sense of the orange wines...for example only mind you) these are the type(s) of wines for which food was born at the same time.

I am especially interested in how any of these wines worked or did not with the mackerel, but would love to hear any pairing thoughts from the event. The menu, from afar, looked solid for a simpleton like me.

Also...did I miss a thread where the other 24 or so attendees posted on this event?
 
Other than Alice and Robert Dentice, I don't think there were any regular or even occasional Disorderlies at the event. Some lurkers.

At the risk of being called whiny by Monkeyboy again, I'm going to decline the opportunity to comment on the food.
 
Not wrong to voice dislike, or quibbles (and even digress into definitions of why such quibbles should be, etc), just surprised that (as it appears) few Disorderlies attended....or the lurkers (I hate that term) didn't pop little heads up to say something. What that says to me is that it's possible that serious wine freaks galaxies beyond my understanding are deer in the headlights when it comes to sherry(s)....otherwise, we'd get full on ear fulls.

PS - If you do make it over to Japan, Thor.....please give me your gustatorial needs in advance. I've no intention of winning you over anything, but I could possibly kill you accidentally.
 
originally posted by Scott Kraft:
originally posted by VLM:
Sherry and freshness
My friend Andr is forceful in his beliefs about Sherry and freshness. I think it is an important point when consuming Fino and Manzanilla.
Click to expand...

Very true. But I've never taken the time to figure out how many months they hold their freshness. Any idea?
Click to expand...

Um, 375s don't usually make it through an evening at my house.
 
PS - If you do make it over to Japan, Thor.....please give me your gustatorial needs in advance. I've no intention of winning you over anything, but I could possibly kill you accidentally.
Click to expand...
Alas, not this year. We're heading farther south. But it's unlikely you'd serve anything that would kill or even bother me unless it's from the Blowfish for Dummies cookbook.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top