Nobody's fault but mine

fb, thanks for checking up on hh for me.
owe you one.
but i guess i need to finish up those 97s first ?
 
originally posted by fatboy:
originally posted by VLM:
I read your response and while it was a litany of impressions, I didn't really get an explanation for our differences. Sasha came closer with the granite explanation (which has also been used to explain the unusual fruit profile).
Click to expand...

i thought sasha's description was a great piece of writing. i was with him when he drank the bottle he described. i think you have to drink the wine to understand its greatness, but i think he did capture some of it.

you told me the wines you'd tried. there are dudes out these who think that it's a good idea to lead off with a diss when they meet hot girls. if they do this often enough, and if their success rate is as it ought to be, they sometimes end up bleating about women being bitches (apologies to our female inmate). my opinion of your assertion based on your sample is that it's no more valid than this.

see, our difference of opinion is easy to explain: you don't have the experience. i know this will offend some of our "everyone has the right to an opinion" comrades, but it isn't my fault. i can't go back in time and fix that.

so i wasn't trying to convey an impression. my goal was more practical. given you've been drinking the wrong wines at the wrong times, it seemed like it might be helpful to point you to the wines you should drink now if you are interested in how donnhoff ages. i have shared all these wines on countless occasions with many of our fellow inmates, and many of our lurkers too. when any one of them has had the right donnhoff, at the right time for drinking it, i have not once failed to see the light of understanding shine in them.

if you have had these experiences, and many people here have had them, the idea that donnhoff fails to age is about as credible as the idea that marc ollivier makes bad muscadet. experience shows that it is simply not true.

so, while i respect your honesty (you didn't bullshit, and claim experience with wines that you haven't tried, as some people might), the fact that you are still bleating about this, and still wandering about claiming that donnhoff doesn't age based on the sample you described beggars my belief.

it's also worth recalling that you decided to belch this opinion -- with much implied authority -- because someone who admitted their naivete enquired. while it's all good fun to watch the deaf blinding the lame, there comes a point where even an uncouth slob such as myself will feel impelled to step in a save a poor rube from being taken for a ride.
Click to expand...

The crux of the matter is how much experience is enough? You seem to be operating under some criteria, but the end result seems to be, "when you've had enough, you'll agree with me".

Or is it, "I know it when I see it."

It may very well be that I don't have enough experience, but you can understand why this is not a satisfying answer.

I'm used to having my ideas attacked on a regular basis by people I know, like, and respect as I am sure you are. It's sort of the nature of the beast. Why should wine be any different? Are vignerons such delicate creatures that they are unable to sustain any criticisms?
Click to expand...

criticism is one thing. bullshit is quite another. as much as you feel entitled to your opinion on this one, by your own admission you have no real experience of aged donnhoff, so, uh, you decide.
Click to expand...

I think I have plenty of experience with aged Donnhoff.

Your point is that I don't have enough (or any) experience with Donnhoff that aged ENOUGH. You may very well be correct on that.

I've made judgments based on where the wines I've drunk were compared to previous, extrapolated where I saw it going based on what experience I had with this and other wines, taking into account other thing I know about wine and aging, and inferred that the wine doesn't age in an interesting way.

I think my method is sound and I think you do too.

You think that I have sample bias and that I am making an error by extrapolating to the Donnhoff population. I'm willing to deal with the error, you think it is too much. I actually think that if someone shares my tastes and thinking about wine, my comments are helpful.

And of course you realize that the flawed sampling argument could be turned on its head, but that would be argument for arguments sake.

fwiw: i was sincerely curious about your comment about the secondary notes in the 98s, since the last hh auselse i tried was anything but secondary. after our conversation, i popped a 98 hh spaet -- it was tight, and slimmer than i remembered, but again, there were no secondary flavors (like the auslese, it is both more open than one might expect at this stage, and also less evolved). to be honest, its overall smell / flavor profile hadn't much changed since release (it also made me regret going light on 98, since unlike the 97s which i think have only gotten blousier, the 98s appear to be heading towards a better, more structured place than i once thought they would end up. es tut mir leid.).

i was less than impressed with the condition of some of my skurnik shipped donnhoffs from 99. they weren't cooked in an obvious way, but they were far more advanced and generally lumpen than identical wines from a batch i flew out from europe -- based on your description of your 98s, i'd have to say that not only do i think that your sample was flawed, but it sounds like your samples may have been too.

fb.
Click to expand...

You know, I wonder a bit about it too. All of my 97-99s were purchased from Carolina Wine Company. Their storage was great as was the wholesaler. I'm under the assumption that Skurnik treated the wines properly, but I'm not sure. There was no real evidence of mistreatment, but there isn't always.

But maybe it was a root day. There are any number of unmeasured variables (the dreaded endogeneity problem) that could effect anyone's account.

I think another general problem is that I really don't like overriding lactic or diesel fuel notes. I've tried to make this clear when I talk about aged riesling in general.

There are two things that increasingly frustrate me: 1) you must have had a bad bottle, 2) that wine is XX years too young. I think those things are tied in to some of my responses and could be clouding any interaction I have wrt wine.

I know this isn't therapy, but I think we're making real progress here.
 
originally posted by Levi Dalton:
originally posted by Lee Short:
originally posted by Levi Dalton:
originally posted by Lee Short:
Perhaps you need to work on your reading comprehension...I think it's disgraceful that there are as many on this board who stand up for such comments as who oppose them.
Click to expand...

Are you making a comment about me? Should I take offense?

Physician, Heal Thyself.
Click to expand...

EDIT: BTW, I note that you have no defense of your earlier statements, but are merely attempting to change the topic.
Click to expand...

No, I just think your comment is silly.

My defense is still looking to an answer to the question I posed originally and just again now. Why is the second guy the asshole? The first guy spraypainted verbal graffiti and was called out on it. That's pretty much how I see it.

It is also far from the first time something like this has happened here, with an array of different persons involved. The first person is incredibly dismissive about a wine, as if it were nothing at all, less than nothing, actually, and a second person steps in to call them out for being so dismissive. Each time it is the second person who is made to feel that they should apologize. It does amaze me. It just goes to show how comfortable people have become with the idea of the unsupported internet takedown of a work (whatever it might be) or place. It is commonplace now. There is no guilt involved whatsoever, a little need for any evidence.
Click to expand...

I don't think fatboy has any need to apologize to me.
 
Argh, SAT-style question begone. OR (Oswaldo Respect)=4x FJR. If OR is diminished by X, what is FJR?

I am furiously scribbling in the bubble.

Though O will have to provide the value of X.
 
True indeed. However, inquiring minds dig to know the value of X independent of its having any purpose in the relationship between reactions of O and FJ.

So, I'm wondering what kind of empirical study I can do of responses to VLM accrued in order to find out the precise value of X given the dip in consideration manifested by O subsequent to this post of VLM's. I'll be back to you.
 
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:
Argh, SAT-style question begone. OR (Oswaldo Respect)=4x FJR. If OR is diminished by X, what is FJR?

I am furiously scribbling in the bubble.

Though O will have to provide the value of X.
Click to expand...

XOXO, hugs and kisses all around.

Nice to see this long, at times cacophonous thread encounter a tangent of harmony.

Happy holidays.
 
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:
True indeed. However, inquiring minds dig to know the value of X independent of its having any purpose in the relationship between reactions of O and FJ.

So, I'm wondering what kind of empirical study I can do of responses to VLM accrued in order to find out the precise value of X given the dip in consideration manifested by O subsequent to this post of VLM's. I'll be back to you.
Click to expand...

Where's Jonathan when you need him?
Best, Jim
 
Er, if I read FJ correctly, he referred to undiminished disrespect. If respect is measured on an interval between 0 and 1, then disrespect might be 1 minus respect.

Hence ODR = 1 - OR; if so, it would seem that the rest of the results would carry through.
 
originally posted by VLM:

There are two things that increasingly frustrate me: 1) you must have had a bad bottle, 2) that wine is XX years too young. I think those things are tied in to some of my responses and could be clouding any interaction I have wrt wine.

I know this isn't therapy, but I think we're making real progress here.
Click to expand...

ugh. this will be lame and frustrating for now (i can't do justice to it), but after the gazillion times i've pulled wine from the fatcave to show the difference between "not wrecked" and intact wine, i'm kind of exhausted with this one. for the rest of this, you'll either have to trust me, or come to s.f., or trust the many fuckers like sasha who have actually experienced non gang raped wine.

the only donnhoff in the fatcave that has shown diesel in the past 6 months were a couple of brucke's (93 asulese and a spaet that was either 93 or 94 -- can't fucking recall just cos it was meh). the spaet was a fucked bottle, as i said, and the auselse blew of with a couple hours in the decanter. (the non-interescting set includes other 93 auslesen, 94 hh spaet and aus. 95 hh spaet and ol kab, 96 ol kab, and 98 hh aus and spaet -- none of these wines showed diesel).

so i know you've heard the "cooked" excuse a lot; but i have played the "hey -- look! this is the difference between uncooked and intact," card more than any other fucker on the interwebs. it has wasted a lot of great wine -- again ask the people we know. and ask some of them how they now transport the shit they care a lot about.

i am so fucking tired of reading shit talk about wine that is fucked up through no fault of the maker. really.

and i'm fucking sick and tired of pronouncements based on this kind of fucked up shit.

at some point, if i can retain the energy to keep doing this, i'll write more, but for now, an anecdote: you know yaniger, and you know what an iconoclastic mother fucker he is. well, a few years back we compare two gallet cote roties from the same vintage that we'd both bought in bulk, both at the domaine.

the only difference was he had shipped his by sea (personally supervised by him, and he's, uh, picky) and i'd flown mine in. both bottles were typical of the samples, we both agreed, and his was a delish gallet cote rotie.

but compared to the air shipped bottle, his sea shipped bottle was like buttoning your shirt in mittens. the difference was that distinct. even yaniger agreed, and you know stuart, god bless him. sfjoe can provide you with a zillion such examples.

99% of wine in the us (including 99% of the wine i buy and drink in the fatcave) is like this. deal with it. and -- if anyone else is still reading at this point -- learn to deal with it when you approach wine, and when you make comments that impinge on the competence of the maker.

think i'm full of shit?

well here's a game some of you can play for yourselves to illuminate this point: a few years back, i supplied meadows with some older cros parantoux from the fatcave for one of the mega-jeebs that the pointguys like to pull just to show how little they understand about sensory adaptation (motherfucker didn't have the chops to do due diligence on that front in his write up either, iirc -- shows to go you shouldn't trust the fuckers.)

anyway, for anyone who is charitable enough to subsidize the drinking of pointsdudes and wants to play, if you consult your back issues, and read the notes (ignore the scores, the fuckers do em from memory anyway), i'm betting that from those alone most of you can identify the over-performing wine relative to its peers (great as it can be, it is one of jayer's weaker efforts).

messages only if you wanna play the game. (because i know how dorky we all are.)

fb.
 
Without tasting experience comparable to Nathan's or fb's, FWIW as a datum, we opened a Schlossbockelheimer Kupfergrube from the disparaged 99 vintage several months ago which tasted pretty crappy day 1, but sang sweetly when retasted prior to intended disposal several days later.
 
'99 was disparaged? Really?

fb, I understand how the West Coast turns one hyperbolic, but 99%? Really?

And for everyone, please check atmospheric pressure and relative humidity before pronoucing on wines. That has fucked up more bottles than I can remember out here in the East Indies, shipping aside. Ever had mute non-dosage champagne? And people wonder why it doesn't sell.
 
99 Donnhoff was disparaged in this thread, iirc, albeit not ad-hominemly.

Can you expound on the effects of atmospheric pressure and RH on wines? This is a fresh idea for me.
 
There's been more published on low atm, low RH and low temp environments, e.g. aircraft cabins. If a non-scientist is allowed to simplify (and exaggerate), both perceptual thersholds and satiation points are higher. Conversely, in a high atm, high RH and high temp environment like Singapore, or summer in Hong Kong, the thresholds seem to be lower, but one quickly gets sated and I find my sensitivity dropping off very quickly. I've always been more of a structural taster anyway, because I catch so few wines at their aromatic peak (I think), but I think it's a real problem when drinking more than a couple of bottles an hour. The larger tastings all seem wasted to me, especially for Burgundy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top