Who says Rudy can't fail?

originally posted by SFJoe:
A lurker writesTo remind me of another article with Greenberg history, here.

i'd forgotten about teh pornwinez.

the 2004 is all over cellartracker like herpes, but that's it. i know you is down with teh collektorz like: what happened next?

fb.
 
originally posted by fatboy:
originally posted by SFJoe:

I have some favorite candidates that I'd like to see go down.

shit. was my fake jayer really so bad?

fb.

He told me I faked my VCC better than you faked your Hanky.
 
originally posted by fatboy:
originally posted by .sasha:
originally posted by fatboy:
originally posted by SFJoe:

I have some favorite candidates that I'd like to see go down.

shit. was my fake jayer really so bad?

fb.

He told me I faked my VCC better than you faked your Hanky.

"cab" / "merlot."

nuff said.

fb.

Not quite.

"cabS" / "merlot"

wrong decade.
 
originally posted by VLM:
Holy shit, take a look at this.

You might not care that much, but this is going to make for some awesome schadenfreude.

Who exactly is this Greenberg motherfucker? I've heard him called a "tech entrepreneur", which means exactly zilch.

Keep reading! It gets worse. Don Cornwell's most recent post has me wondering when Greenberg will join Rudy at Club Fed.
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
A related question: So, when do we start to see published retractions of TNs and ratings from Parker, BurgHound, etc.?

In the aforementioned thread, it was shown that BurgHound had actually gone back to notes and expunged mention of Kurniawan without changing the notes.
 
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
A related question: So, when do we start to see published retractions of TNs and ratings from Parker, BurgHound, etc.?

In the aforementioned thread, it was shown that BurgHound had actually gone back to notes and expunged mention of Kurniawan without changing the notes.
Which was awfully lame or silly of him.

And rather than retracting, it would be interesting to see them reflect on which wines might have been real and why they think so. Or at least be less coded about which wines were obvious fakes.
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
A related question: So, when do we start to see published retractions of TNs and ratings from Parker, BurgHound, etc.?

I'd say when frost is forecast in Malebolge. To do so would be to hint at their own culpability in l'Affaires Görke and Huang, and I don't expect that to happen any time soon.

Mark Lipton
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
A related question: So, when do we start to see published retractions of TNs and ratings from Parker, BurgHound, etc.?

In the aforementioned thread, it was shown that BurgHound had actually gone back to notes and expunged mention of Kurniawan without changing the notes.
Which was awfully lame or silly of him.

And rather than retracting, it would be interesting to see them reflect on which wines might have been real and why they think so. Or at least be less coded about which wines were obvious fakes.
Not only is it lame but it is obfuscatory: if I want to read carefully (to avoid notes that might be false) he has just made it harder to do so.
 
originally posted by MLipton:
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
A related question: So, when do we start to see published retractions of TNs and ratings from Parker, BurgHound, etc.?

I'd say when frost is forecast in Malebolge. To do so would be to hint at their own culpability in l'Affaires Görke and Huang, and I don't expect that to happen any time soon.

Mark Lipton

Paul Wasserman has posted a very chagrined apology for his earlier defenses of Rudy.
 
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
A related question: So, when do we start to see published retractions of TNs and ratings from Parker, BurgHound, etc.?
In the aforementioned thread, it was shown that BurgHound had actually gone back to notes and expunged mention of Kurniawan without changing the notes.
Thanks, Monkey, I had missed that.
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
originally posted by SFJoe:
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
A related question: So, when do we start to see published retractions of TNs and ratings from Parker, BurgHound, etc.?

In the aforementioned thread, it was shown that BurgHound had actually gone back to notes and expunged mention of Kurniawan without changing the notes.
Which was awfully lame or silly of him.

And rather than retracting, it would be interesting to see them reflect on which wines might have been real and why they think so. Or at least be less coded about which wines were obvious fakes.
Not only is it lame but it is obfuscatory: if I want to read carefully (to avoid notes that might be false) he has just made it harder to do so.
Sure.

But it's not as though Moses brought the wines at all the other tastings down from the mountain with the stone tablets. This has been pervasive for a long, long time.
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
But it's not as though Moses brought the wines at all the other tastings down from the mountain with the stone tablets. This has been pervasive for a long, long time.

That seems a bit contortionistic for something so specific and egregious.
 
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:
originally posted by SFJoe:
But it's not as though Moses brought the wines at all the other tastings down from the mountain with the stone tablets. This has been pervasive for a long, long time.

That seems a bit contortionistic for something so specific and egregious.
Sez you!

Or rather, should I say, I can't defend the effort to rewrite history, and it is certainly noteworthy that Rudy was present and brought wine at this tasting or that, but the market for old fancy wine has clearly been highly corrupt for a very long time, and there is no reason to think that the fakes uniquely appeared when Rudy came to dinner. So all these guys have been posting notes on a mix of real and fake wines their entire careers.
 
Back
Top