Rate of corked wines

Well, an '03 Ridge Geyserville opened on Saturday was corked, albeit fairly subtly, and before that was a mildly corked bottle of rosé from the boys at SM opened earlier in the week. Overall, though, I'd say that our incidence of corked bottles has dropped, though it still seems higher than 1%.

A decade ago I'd say that we were experiencing closer to 10%, so the numbers have dropped significantly. As Lord Beaverbrook said to the visiting actress, now we're just quibbling over the numbers.

Mark Lipton
 
I eat out in restaurants in Italy maybe 20 times per year and often order recent vintage stuff off the list and have gotten two corked versions of the same wine a few times (after which I switched to something else). I do not open much young wine in the US so I cannot comment about that, but my Italian experience differs.
 
originally posted by Cole Kendall:
I eat out in restaurants in Italy maybe 20 times per year and often order recent vintage stuff off the list and have gotten two corked versions of the same wine a few times (after which I switched to something else). I do not open much young wine in the US so I cannot comment about that, but my Italian experience differs.
Click to expand...

Cole -- My understanding is that corked bottles are not completely random: one corked bottle is more likely than random to indicate one or more others in the same case -- whether because of lack of or inadequate testing for corkinkess or otherwise. So the fact that you had two corked versions of the same wine is not of much significance. Beyond that, I'll leave it to VLM to fill in the details.
 
originally posted by Cole Kendall:
I eat out in restaurants in Italy maybe 20 times per year and often order recent vintage stuff off the list and have gotten two corked versions of the same wine a few times (after which I switched to something else). I do not open much young wine in the US so I cannot comment about that, but my Italian experience differs.
Click to expand...

There's a fair amount of QC work on corks being done at the importer/distributor and winery level in the U.S. too, so the decline in TCA affliction may not be universal, at least not to the same degree.

FWIW, my impression is similar to many here, I'd have guessed (didn't keep numbers) a 3-4% rate in the worst days, down to less than 1% now.
 
I have not had any problems of late, but only open 1/2 bottles a week. A winestore where I help out downtown has seen a few problems with higher end Italian wines I believe.
 
originally posted by Yixin:
It's a bit lower than 1% for me, although I only got up to 4/5% about a decade ago. I also get fewer offensively corked bottles, which I find interesting; i.e. both incidence and severity seem to have been reduced.
Click to expand...
That would be in line with laboratory test results following the investment in new facilities, the implementation of new processes and certified QMS by the major cork producers i.e. the new processes eliminate the gross examples and testing ensures a further filter so greatly reduced levels where any remains plus more with none - or at least below the ability of the forensic-quality machines and technicians to detect it.

Of course not all natural cork producers have been able to afford the same facilities and processes as the majors so some users of lower quality cork will be running the risk of corked wine. However even there new understanding of what to avoid in harvesting and pre-production storage and new processes should have reduced the incidence.
 
originally posted by .sasha:
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
The rate soared in the late 1990s.
Click to expand...

in Germany for sure

but where else ?
Click to expand...

Australia, mate!

Based on anecdotal experience, the problem peaked with the 1996-99 vintages, where it seemed as if the cork producers were testing for a 50% rate. I worked one event where we had 11 flawed bottles of 98 Henschke Hill of Grace out of the 18 provided for the seminar. Other dinners featuring a variety of wines from around Oz from that era were equally disappointing in terms of TCA prevalence.

Consumers paid attention when the Clare Valley winegrowers all moved to Stelvin for the 1999 vintage, and then the cork industry began to pay attention. Quality of corks supplied to Australia improved greatly, although Henschke now bottles their entire lineup under screwcap, as do other premium producers.

I've also noticed a severe drop in TCA incidence in young wines here in the USA. Working seminars at events such as Pebble Beach Food & Wine, World of Pinot Noir, and Hospice du Rhône, Where once we might have had 20-30 corked bottles (out of 300-700 opened for the weekend), it's now down to 5-10, and those are often flawed in ways other than TCA. This bodes well for the future, but doesn't do anything for those time bombs of 1980s Henri Jayer that seemed to have a higher-than-normal incidence of taint.

-Eden (I drink lots more Oz Shiraz than Jayer Echezeaux, but I can't explain why about 30% of the Jayer wines I've ever opened have been corked, other than maybe my sample group hasn't been big enough)
 
originally posted by Eden Mylunsch:
-Eden (I drink lots more Oz Shiraz than Jayer Echezeaux, but I can't explain why about 30% of the Jayer wines I've ever opened have been corked, other than maybe my sample group hasn't been big enough)
Click to expand...

absurd, dumb luck here
hopefully not all front loaded
fatboy??
 
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
originally posted by Peter Creasey:

It is hard for me to imagine that the rate ever reached 8 - 10%. I'm even skeptical of the 4 - 5% that is typically quoted.

. . . . . Pete
Click to expand...

The rate soared in the late 1990s. If you didn't experience it, that just says something about your sensitivity to TCA (not that that's bad; it is what it is, and more power to you if you can enjoy a wine, as can a good friend of mine, that I can't get near) -- but I know many, many people who independently arrived at the same conclusion (dramatic increase in the late 1990s) that I did.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with Claude, there was a time a few years ago that I thought myself lucky if I opened 12 samples with none corked.

Now it's lower, but still (for me) over 1%.

I note that the 'Cork Quality Council' appears to use 2ppt as their 'safe' number. This is above my threshold, so who knows what the 1 ppt rate is. (In '06 they were reporting '96% of corks under 2ppt,' ie they were conceding that 6% of their corks were defective.)

Reported thresholds can vary widely, I was at a UC Davis Brett seminar where they showed wines that had only 10 ppm 4 EP that were detectably bretty. Threshold is often reported as 200 ppm.
 
originally posted by .sasha:
originally posted by Eden Mylunsch:
-Eden (I drink lots more Oz Shiraz than Jayer Echezeaux, but I can't explain why about 30% of the Jayer wines I've ever opened have been corked, other than maybe my sample group hasn't been big enough)
Click to expand...

absurd, dumb luck here
hopefully not all front loaded
fatboy??
Click to expand...

see joe's comments above. my mean for jayer is ok, but the variance by vintage makes me suspect that the distribution is not normal. my best guess in this case is that if it is only 30%, the sample is either small, not just 85, or else dumb luck.

fb.
 
originally posted by Oliver McCrum:
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
originally posted by Peter Creasey:

It is hard for me to imagine that the rate ever reached 8 - 10%. I'm even skeptical of the 4 - 5% that is typically quoted.

. . . . . Pete
Click to expand...

The rate soared in the late 1990s. If you didn't experience it, that just says something about your sensitivity to TCA (not that that's bad; it is what it is, and more power to you if you can enjoy a wine, as can a good friend of mine, that I can't get near) -- but I know many, many people who independently arrived at the same conclusion (dramatic increase in the late 1990s) that I did.
Click to expand...

I note that the 'Cork Quality Council' appears to use 2ppt as their 'safe' number. This is above my threshold, so who knows what the 1 ppt rate is. (In '06 they were reporting '96% of corks under 2ppt,' ie they were conceding that 6% of their corks were defective.)
Click to expand...
I assume you mean 4% were above 2ppt in 2006.

As for the percentage below 1ppt their 2011 report [I am looking for the 2012 version] shows 94% below 1ppt and 98% below 2ppt. In that report they say their guideline is to report any samples that score over 1.5ppt.

Reported thresholds can vary widely, I was at a UC Davis Brett seminar where they showed wines that had only 10 ppm 4 EP that were detectably bretty. Threshold is often reported as 200 ppm.
Click to expand...
Thresholds need to be defined carefully since they vary for more than just individual physiological differences. Experience is a significant factor as is the wine with e.g. in certain major studies thresholds for red wine appeared to be [of the order of] double those for white at the lower levels of the range. In that same study involving an expert panel more than 10% of the samples called positive for TCA were tested negative.

However for TCA the 2011 CQC report gives 2-20ppt as the threshold range for the majority of the population although I have seen nothing that attempts to allocate a specific distribution to that range.

Nevertheless the report did provide additional information on the level at which 50% of panels in their studies sensed TCA - 6ppt. A measurement was made at a restaurant maintained by the Culinary Institute of America where wines were apparently not returned until TCA exceeded 10ppt.

Major exceptions to the 2-20ppt general range would presumably include those with specific anosmias at the top end and experienced supersensitives at the bottom.

However, in support of Claude's original post and congruent with Yixin's, an important directional statistic is the claimed reduction between 2001 and 2008 from 4ppt to 0.8ppt - the 80% I mentioned earlier. The 2011 report claims an 84% reduction from 2001 levels and adds that those figures include test scores from rejected bales as well as those accepted.
 
We are in the Palm Springs area and our condo has an erratic wi fi system setup, so I've avoided the internet. I know everyone in the cold midwest or east feels very sorry for my inconvenience. Anyway, we've noticed fewer corked bottles lately in our store. I can the same for my experience at home.
 
No, sorry, it was 94% less than 2ppt, so 6% bad. Reported as if it were an achievement.

I still think hacking off sheets of tree bark, cutting it into plugs, and sticking it into bottles of wine is an odd behavior in 2013. In a sense it's amazing if it only ruins 2% (we haven't included cork failure to seal properly, of course, which would bring the number up substantially).

I'd love to see how the statistics are managed on the '80% reduction.' I imagine there are all kinds of ways of massaging this problem statistically; for example, they may have reduced the incidence of real howlers with very high TCA, but that isn't really the point, it doesn't make any difference *how* corked a bottle is once it's over threshold.
 
originally posted by Lou Kessler:
Lo MismoWe are in the Palm Springs area and our condo has an erratic wi fi system setup, so I've avoided the internet. I know everyone in the cold midwest or east feels very sorry for my inconvenience.
Click to expand...

Our hearts go out to you at this time, Lou.

Though we do miss your contributions.
 
originally posted by richard slicker:

see joe's comments above. my mean for jayer is ok, but the variance by vintage makes me suspect that the distribution is not normal. my best guess in this case is that if it is only 30%, the sample is either small, not just 85, or else dumb luck.

fb.
Click to expand...

WHAT?!

I guess I am either luckier or dumber than I thought. Or both.
 
originally posted by Oliver McCrum:
No, sorry, it was 94% less than 2ppt, so 6% bad. Reported as if it were an achievement.

I still think hacking off sheets of tree bark, cutting it into plugs, and sticking it into bottles of wine is an odd behavior in 2013. In a sense it's amazing if it only ruins 2% (we haven't included cork failure to seal properly, of course, which would bring the number up substantially).

I'd love to see how the statistics are managed on the '80% reduction.' I imagine there are all kinds of ways of massaging this problem statistically; for example, they may have reduced the incidence of real howlers with very high TCA, but that isn't really the point, it doesn't make any difference *how* corked a bottle is once it's over threshold.
Click to expand...
"I still think hacking off sheets of tree bark, cutting it into plugs, and sticking it into bottles of wine is an odd behavior in 2013."

But surely in you righteous anger against 'tree bark' you might acknowledge that the claim is now 94% below 1ppt with a further 4% below 2 ppt both presumably less than even your, apparently, below 2 ppt threshold.

Would you mind sharing how many SPME/GC-MS measurements were made and the circumstances [colour of wine etc] that were used to establish your threshold :)?

And while you might logically argue "it doesn't make any difference *how* corked a bottle is once it's over threshold" I think the key is that clearly it isn't over anyone's threshold anything like as often as it used to be and, if Claude and apparently many others are not exaggerating, the percentage wine quality [of all sorts] failure for the vast majority of wine drinkers is now not very different for natural cork to the failure level of screwcaps due to mechanical problems at bottling or due to knocks during transportation.

Of course one can then get into whether there is a preference for how wine develops under cork for those wines that require or benefit from considerable age although wines that are to be consumed promptly seem to survive equally well with roughly the same [low] fault issues under any seal. As result there has been a marked fall off in threads on seal failures generally.

Instead of "imagining there are all kinds of ways of massaging this problem statistically" perhaps you might take a look at the 2011 CQC report which shows how the 84% reduction has been measured and achieved based on the very extensive results of the US laboratories.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top