Brad Ballinger

1996 Arns Cabernet Sauvignon, Estate Grown, Napa Valley. This is a wine that is maturing. In fact, there are some quite mature elements at present along with some brashness of youth. It’s a wine in transition, and it would be interesting to see how it responds to another year or two in the cellar. There’s an earthy funk on the nose along with blackcurrant, chocolate, spice, mushrooms, and coffee. Moderate acidity. Tannins that are starting to soften, but are none to happy about it. Some aeration was helpful to mellow the wine out a bit, and allow some of the disparate elements to come together. Not an exceptionally long finish, but an attractive one where the fruit remained lush, and didn’t dry out much. It was a decent partner to grilled NY strips, but has the capability to pair with more complex cuisine.

Yes, serve a meal. Many people open Champagne or other sparkling wines for aperitifs or appetizers only. It's a great, and underrated, food wine. And if you actually have dinner at any restaurant in Champagne, you will find nearly everyone drinking it with their dinner. Poached turbot (or other good poaching fish) in a spiced court bouillon is a great match.

Or ask to borrow one from someone you know.

I completely understand what you are saying. Please don't get me wrong. And Georg Riedel and his devotees have designed all those glass sizes not only for aeration and bouquet enhancement, but also for where the glass first deposts wine on the tongue. I'm not suggesting the difference is nominal. I am suggesting, however, that the difference is personal. Try your white wine in both a Burgundy stem (your current white wine default) and a smaller stem. If there's an appreciable difference to you then you've justified whatever decision you make. If there's virtually no difference, then you've maybe saved some money. You don't have to try every single Riedel stem manufactured, just the two you're wondering about - Burgundy v. something smaller. Yes, it's fine to defer to "experts" from time to time. But just like an expert can't tell you what wine you should or shouldn't like (but you can use an expert's palate as a calibration point for you), they can't tell you what glass you should or should not be drinking what wine from.

It all depends on whether or not you personally can appreciate a particular wine more out of one glass v. another glass. Period. If the differneces are nominal or non-existent, then it really doesn't matter. And only you can answer that question for yourself.

2001 Scarbolo Tocai Friulano, Grave DOC. This wine is a bottle full of minerals, flowers, spice, and some smoke. There's fruit there, too, of course -- carambola, longan, pear -- but the focus here is on the non-fruit components. The nose carries a heavy dose of flowers, smoke, and baking spices. The minerals are showcased on the palate, more rocky than earthy or steely. It's as if one could melt down some rocks and put that liquid in the bottle. A moderate level of acidity allows all the diverse elements to play nice with each other. The wine would be a great pairing with shellfish or Chinese food -- perhaps a Chinese dish with shellfish. Above-average complexity for only $12.

Those last prices aren't nearly the highway robbery of many places. No, they're not bargains, either. I would say there simply run of the mill for many restaurants. And typically, the higher the price of the bottle, the less the markup percentage (even though the dollar margin may be higher).

I'm reading the thread, and I see there are ten others doing the same. We're all looking for the silver bullet I guess. But I just do what some others have already posted - peel away the outer layer.

Bread - whatever is on hand. Cheese - I prefer Fontina. It's a good "melter," and one thing you want with a grilled cheese sandwich is fully melted cheese. I also have been know to mix in some colby. Other ingredients - sometimes tomato, sometimes bacon, sometimes both. Preparation - butter the bread on the outside only. Cook in a covered skillet.

I've seen recent discussions of Chateau Woltner on other boards. I still remember when the first vintage came out (was it 1888 or a year or two earlier?). I think there were three labels - a "regular," something else, and then the Titus. The Titus sold for $60+ in the Twin Cities market, and many people thought "how arrogant!" I know the price came down in subsequent vintages.

Maybe, maybe not. The bottle could've simply been a bad bottle of wine regardless of the price. Rachel is right to smell and taste the wine beforehand to make sure the bottle isn't flawed.

Labels... BV Georges Latour Staglin Whitehall Lane Jos. Phelps These come to mind as wines that should've lasted longer. Your list is also of upper-ish tier producers. But if you look at the middle-of-the-roaders (Pezzi King, Sebastiani, some Pine Ridge, Silverado, Markham, Buehler, Hess Collection, etc.), many of these slid sooner than they would have in other vintages. But, yes, perhaps the generalization was too broad (no matter how emphatic a disclaimer could be). A more accurate statement would be that some are already sliding.

Yep. Avignonesi Vin Santo. No brainer as the best Tuscan sticky.

A couple of comments here. Typically, I will drink zinfandel young. Ridge is one of the rare exceptions, producing wines that can (as Jim experienced) develop complexity rarely seen in the variety. For example, the 1992 Ridge Geyserville is positively singing right now. Vintage is, of course, also a factor. I'm confident that 1995 ageworthy zins will have a longer tail on them then their 1994 counterparts. And, as a brief aside, it's also time to drink up those 1994 Cabs. It was a great vintage upon release, but the wines have been early maturing and when they slide, they slide.

This statement bothers me, and there are a couple more like it in the article. Notice that Mr. Droesch doesn't mention anything about better wines or more food friendly wines. Rather, he assumes more expensive means better quality. And he assumes "value-oriented" to be a euphemism for "cheap." If these restaurants really want to train their staffs and educated their customers, they can start with the notion that more expensive doesn't always mean better.

Let 'em sleep.

Jim, I bought this shortly upon release, and have stored it well. Now, you've read my notes on various boards long enough to know that I'm hyper sensitive to alcohol (and that's where the imbalance showed initially -- although it did go away). The drying out isn't uncharacteristic of older Ridge wines IMO. I do agree with you that this wine was more than quintessential zin-like. I have also had the wine in its youth. Had I not, maybe I'd view it a bit differently now. And, of course, we can't rule the food pairing influence out...

pickles mustard mayonnaise dill green bell peppers I've tried and tried and tried to like them, but to no avail. Oh, yeah. And peanut butter -- especially in things (peanut butter cookies, Reese's peanut butter cups, peanut butter Rice Krispie bars, etc...)

Doesn't mean overbearing sweetness at all. The phrase appears as a song lyric on Nick Lowe's "Homewreckery" on his album, The Convincer....

For the Super Bowl, I cooked up a vat of chili using 100% ground venison. I made it more on the rich side, less on the spicy side. 1994 Ridge Zinfandel, Pagani Ranch, Sonoma Valley. 75% zinfandel in a field blend with a bunch of other black grapes. I think this wine is beginning its descent. The first glass was imbalanced toward more alcohol, but that did blow off a bit for the subsequent pours. What the wine eventually settled into was black raspberries, cinnamon, pepper, and what I can only describe as whatever else was in the field blend other than grapes – a somewhat briary character. Tannins nearly resolved, mellow acidity. Structurally, seemed loose and out of focus. The wine was definitely more “powerful” in its youth. And age, while not wholly unkind to it, didn’t do it many favors, except to add some complexity to the flavor profile.

1998 J. Niedermayr Aureus, Vino da Tavola. This is a passito wine made from chardonnay, sauvignon, and pinot bianco. It’s also not fully developed. Don’t get me wrong, the wine was stunning. But it does have the stuffing to be left alone in the cellar for a while yet. apricot, caramel apples, some honey, some tropics. High acid levels make the wine more bouncy, less cloying – even though the viscosity was quite high. Strong apricot and acid-driven finish that went on for a long time. This was a trial bottle – gotta get me more.

1995 Paul Jaboulet Aine “Les Cedres,” Chateauneuf-du-Pape. I believe this wine is something like 80% grenache with about 10% each mourvedre and syrah. It was a nice pairing for the lamb. The lamb was roasted simply with root veggies. It was studded with garlic and rosemary. The wine was on the medium-bodied side of CdP. Aromatic nose of olives, leather, spice, black pepper, blueberry, and some citrus. Tart, spicy, and lively on the palate. Some earthy notes take over, along with spice and red fruits. Tannins are resolving, but the wine has some years left. Clean fruit and olive finish. The wine stayed out of the way of the meal. Really, a nice match.

From Leo Kottke's "Jack Gets Up"...

It may be different in style from the Anselmi you enjoyed, but I am very fond of Inama. All stainless steel fermentation. Crisp, lively, acidic, but still with plenty of character. A wine similar in style to what you enjoyed would be the Gini Soave La Frosca.

Cabbage, vinegar, salt, pepper, a bit of oil, a bit of sugar. No Mayo! That would be cabbage salad, and not cole slaw.