PD in da house

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
I tremble to note such a thing, but there's a manifest lack of logic here. One hardly has to be 40 to taste a 20 year old wine. There are such things as buying old bottles, going to vertical tastings, etc. If you had never drunk a vintage port any older than one year old, you would have no idea how to evaluate it anymore than you can evaluate a painting without actually looking at the painting. But there are ways for people under 40 to drink older ports, older wines, maybe even older Texiers.
Click to expand...

I drink a lot of older wine - in fact, the majority of wine I drink is 10 years old+. The problem is that I have to buy the wine on Winebid or HDH or at Acker and whothehellknows if they're "representative". The handful of times I've been lucky enough to try wines bought on release and cellared by others are, IMO, very special and valuable opportunities.
 
IMO if you are going to write something inflammatory on a public forum, expect there to be blow back. When your write "Does XXXX Suck" on another related forum, expect that the reaction on a forum made up of people who like the wines made by XXXX and in many cases know XXXX, to be less than polite. So either don't do it, or just ignore attacks that result.

There really is very little point to defending yourself here.

If you want to debate people on the validity of your testing criteria go for it, but defending "Does XXXX Suck" where XXXX is Texier and you are playing on a Wine Disorder is just a losing proposition.

Even if in abstract there is a little bit of truth to what you say about people talking shit about some producers. And I think your point may be well taken about people being unable to separate personally liking someone and liking their wines.

(I say this without sharing your opinion of Texier, but I do think you have fair point)
 
originally posted by D. Zylberberg:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
I tremble to note such a thing, but there's a manifest lack of logic here. One hardly has to be 40 to taste a 20 year old wine. There are such things as buying old bottles, going to vertical tastings, etc. If you had never drunk a vintage port any older than one year old, you would have no idea how to evaluate it anymore than you can evaluate a painting without actually looking at the painting. But there are ways for people under 40 to drink older ports, older wines, maybe even older Texiers.
Click to expand...

I drink a lot of older wine - in fact, the majority of wine I drink is 10 years old+. The problem is that I have to buy the wine on Winebid or HDH or at Acker and whothehellknows if they're "representative". The handful of times I've been lucky enough to try wines bought on release and cellared by others are, IMO, very special and valuable opportunities.
Click to expand...

If you drink older wines, then you know as a matter of course that you can't judge young wines with any certainty. I'm not even sure about young wines I have a history with, though like everyone else I make guesses. Statements about young wines I have no history with really do amount to the most arrant kind of guessing. There's nothing wrong with doing that. There's something amiss about not recognizing what one's doing.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
If you drink older wines, then you know as a matter of course that you can't judge young wines with any certainty. I'm not even sure about young wines I have a history with, though like everyone else I make guesses. Statements about young wines I have no history with really do amount to the most arrant kind of guessing. There's nothing wrong with doing that. There's something amiss about not recognizing what one's doing.
Click to expand...

This is, I think a fair criticism, and believe me, I take comments from Gilman and John Morris to heart, that the wines come out of their shell in 3-5 years and that they're betting on the ageability.
 
And you draw a conclusion from those ~10 bottles? Perhaps my attempt was too subtle, so let me try again: either you are sufficiently convinced to put money where your postings are, or you are not. Let's say USD 10,000, and we'll agree on a fair trial and even odds. You might be surprised, but the human palate and memory are both quite fallible.

I think we're around the same age, so stop making me feel so bloody old.

originally posted by D. Zylberberg:
originally posted by Yixin:
This is pretty simple, let's put money where our internet mouths are.

Same wines, different venue (let's say Lyon), one year hence. If your rank ordering and notes are anywhere close to the original tasting (we'll have to agree on what the standards* are), I will pay for your flights, accommodations and meals. If not, you pay for my flights, accommodation and meals. I can be quite flexible with respect to timing. Propose a second if you wish to double down on the wager.

*Note that if your standards are insufficiently tight, you're essentially admitting that drawing conclusions from that tasting was a pretty dumb and baseless thing to do. Rank-ordering in my experience is tough once you have more than 2 wines.
Click to expand...

You did notice that my experience with the Texier wines extends far beyond that one tasting, right? I've never had them with age - which apparently is necessary to enjoy them properly (except for the bottles sealed under artificial closure, which need to be enjoyed young). But I've tasted a fair number of bottles over the years (if I had to guesstimate, ~10), in different contexts - the tasting was just the cherry on the sundae, as it were. I'm sure there are folks here that argue that 10 young bottles is hardly enough to form a view on a producer, but by that logic, you can't form a view on a producer unless you're ITB or a fan of the producer, because how else are you going to taste more than a case worth of examples?
Click to expand...
 
David,
Please, note the below post.
Have you a response?
Do you think it worthy of one?
Best, Jim

originally posted by Brézème:


Merde! Making one bottle of 2010 CR that ended 8th in a blind tasting makes me a person that sucks.
On est peu de chose. Ouais bien peu de chose...
Click to expand...
 
originally posted by Yixin:
And you draw a conclusion from those ~10 bottles? Perhaps my attempt was too subtle, so let me try again: either you are sufficiently convinced to put money where your postings are, or you are not. Let's say USD 10,000, and we'll agree on a fair trial and even odds. You might be surprised, but the human palate and memory are both quite fallible.

I think we're around the same age, so stop making me feel so bloody old.
Click to expand...

$10,000 is a Romneyan number, but $100 would do it. I do enjoy a gamble.

Again, my point above - 10 wines is a lot of exposure to a producer by most standards - its $200+ of wine. The only reason you'd drink more than that is if you liked what you've been tasting. If 10 bottles isn't enough to form a view on a producer, than there's an odd paradox; you can only determine if a producer is bad or good by tasting such a large amount of their wine that you would only have tasted that much wine if you liked what you started out tasting; meaning that the only view one could reasonably form of a producer is that you like the producer, because any other view would be illegitimate/insufficiently supported.
 
originally posted by Florida Jim:
David,
Please, note the below post.
Have you a response?
Do you think it worthy of one?
Best, Jim

originally posted by Brézème:


Merde! Making one bottle of 2010 CR that ended 8th in a blind tasting makes me a person that sucks.
On est peu de chose. Ouais bien peu de chose...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I think its a precise example of what I'm trying to convey - the conflation of the man and the wine distorts criticism/debate about the wine. When someone says Rombauer sucks, they dont mean that Mr. Rombauer, whoever he is, sucks, they mean the wine sucks. When I say "Does Texier suck?", I mean that I think the wine may suck, not anything regarding Mr. Texier. And of course, I didn't just base my post off of one wine in a blind tasting, but I've spent enough time batting down strawmen to not waste more time there.
 
I think Yixin proposes a tasting of the same wines that were in your op, not a tasting of the ten Texier's you've previously tasted.

A counter of $100 to a $1,000 proposal is absurd, just decline the offer. No reason you should be browbeat into a monetary challenge.
 
originally posted by Tom Glasgow:
I think Yixin proposes a tasting of the same wines that were in your op, not a tasting of the ten Texier's you've previously tasted.

A counter of $100 to a $1,000 proposal is absurd, just decline the offer. No reason you should be browbeat into a monetary challenge.
Click to expand...

even more absurd when its $100 countering $10,000.00

but whatever, he's finally gone....
 
originally posted by D. Zylberberg:


originally posted by Florida Jim:
David,
Please, note the below post.
Have you a response?
Do you think it worthy of one?
Best, Jim

originally posted by Brézème:


Merde! Making one bottle of 2010 CR that ended 8th in a blind tasting makes me a person that sucks.
On est peu de chose. Ouais bien peu de chose...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I think its a precise example of what I'm trying to convey - the conflation of the man and the wine distorts criticism/debate about the wine. When someone says Rombauer sucks, they dont mean that Mr. Rombauer, whoever he is, sucks, they mean the wine sucks. When I say "Does Texier suck?", I mean that I think the wine may suck, not anything regarding Mr. Texier. And of course, I didn't just base my post off of one wine in a blind tasting, but I've spent enough time batting down strawmen to not waste more time there.
Click to expand...

I should know better than wade in here, but: David, when you get your annual review, do you not consider that to be the firm's evaluation of you as an associate and not just "your work." Hard to separate the two. Ditto for a winemaker. When the work is personal and you attack the work, you attack the person. That's not to say that criticism is off limits, but that civility is required. Unless you just want to get a rise out of people.
 
originally posted by D. Zylberberg:

$10,000 is a Romneyan number, but $100 would do it. I do enjoy a gamble.

Again, my point above - 10 wines is a lot of exposure to a producer by most standards - its $200+ of wine. The only reason you'd drink more than that is if you liked what you've been tasting. If 10 bottles isn't enough to form a view on a producer, than there's an odd paradox; you can only determine if a producer is bad or good by tasting such a large amount of their wine that you would only have tasted that much wine if you liked what you started out tasting; meaning that the only view one could reasonably form of a producer is that you like the producer, because any other view would be illegitimate/insufficiently supported.
Click to expand...

Add up all your hours on this thread and others defending your stand. Unless billing rates have fallen dramatically, I think $10,000 is appropriate. I admit to being inspired by James Randi; having real money at stake often separates signal from noise, so to speak.
 
originally posted by Yixin:
originally posted by D. Zylberberg:

$10,000 is a Romneyan number, but $100 would do it. I do enjoy a gamble.

Again, my point above - 10 wines is a lot of exposure to a producer by most standards - its $200+ of wine. The only reason you'd drink more than that is if you liked what you've been tasting. If 10 bottles isn't enough to form a view on a producer, than there's an odd paradox; you can only determine if a producer is bad or good by tasting such a large amount of their wine that you would only have tasted that much wine if you liked what you started out tasting; meaning that the only view one could reasonably form of a producer is that you like the producer, because any other view would be illegitimate/insufficiently supported.
Click to expand...

Add up all your hours on this thread and others defending your stand. Unless billing rates have fallen dramatically, I think $10,000 is appropriate. I admit to being inspired by James Randi; having real money at stake often separates signal from noise, so to speak.
Click to expand...

Oh no, because I won't wager $10,000 on a wine tasting, my arguments have no merit!
 
originally posted by Jim Hanlon:
originally posted by D. Zylberberg:


originally posted by Florida Jim:
David,
Please, note the below post.
Have you a response?
Do you think it worthy of one?
Best, Jim

originally posted by Brézème:


Merde! Making one bottle of 2010 CR that ended 8th in a blind tasting makes me a person that sucks.
On est peu de chose. Ouais bien peu de chose...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I think its a precise example of what I'm trying to convey - the conflation of the man and the wine distorts criticism/debate about the wine. When someone says Rombauer sucks, they dont mean that Mr. Rombauer, whoever he is, sucks, they mean the wine sucks. When I say "Does Texier suck?", I mean that I think the wine may suck, not anything regarding Mr. Texier. And of course, I didn't just base my post off of one wine in a blind tasting, but I've spent enough time batting down strawmen to not waste more time there.
Click to expand...

I should know better than wade in here, but: David, when you get your annual review, do you not consider that to be the firm's evaluation of you as an associate and not just "your work." Hard to separate the two. Ditto for a winemaker. When the work is personal and you attack the work, you attack the person. That's not to say that criticism is off limits, but that civility is required. Unless you just want to get a rise out of people.
Click to expand...

Me as associate is not the same as me as a person. I could be (and perhaps I am) a shitty associate; I could (and perhaps I do) produce shitty work. That doesn't mean I'm a shitty person. Of course, if your argument is that EVERYONE should avoid criticizing ALL wine harshly because the winemaker might get offended, I think that's reasonable, if not necessarily a position I agree with; not offending a choice few because they're "friends" is not.
 
originally posted by D. Zylberberg:
Oh no, because I won't wager $10,000 on a wine tasting, my arguments have no merit!
Click to expand...

Perhaps the easiest $10,000 of your life if you really believed your own arguments, grasshopper.
 
David,
First, I should say that some of your various arguments have been appealing.
Second, your delivery is tough.

And while I would agree that Eric enjoys a certain deference in these parts ( something I would suggest is not un deserved), your manner of making your point begs (and IMO deserves) the kind of criticism you are now taking.
I make wine. If you tasted my wine and asked the on- line community if I sucked, I would take offense. I do not think that is an unreasonable position.

Maybe, in the name of reason, you would like to reconsider your delivery.
Best, Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top