JohnL

I said "I" would be careful. I don't wanna ruin anyone's fun! By the way--- Seems that Brunello may be helped by a really fine 2001 vintage. Most of the wines I have tasted (traditional and non) are very very tasty! Many are still around in wine shops here and are definitely worth trying.

That's the one! Thanks. It seems odd but I would put this place high up on my list of gotta visit restaurants in Paris! I have read and heard good things about both the food and the wine.

Anything from "Cowgirl Creamery" Cyprus Grove Humboldt Fog Jasper Hill Constant Bliss Laura Chenel goat cheeses Sally Jackson goat cheeses Old Chatham :"Camembert" --not really Camembert but a very fine cheese.

Well said! The most important attribute a sommelier needs to possess is an ability to determine what wine a customer would enjoy with his or her meal. (not "should" enjoy. It's not about the wine or the food, it's first and foremost about the diner! Most of these competitions focus on knowledge about wine, the key to selling anything is knowledge about the customer first then knowledge about the wines on the list and not technical knowledge but rather knowledge of how the wine tastes! Being able to identify obscure varietals blind or rattle off all the premier crus of Vosne Romanee has very little to do with ensuring a customer has a pleasurable dining experience.

There was (is?) a Vietnamese restaurant in Paris that has been celebrated for its list of Bordeaux most notably Pomerols. I have never been there but have read a number of times that the wines compliment the food very nicely! I can "see" where Chinese cuisines (most New Yorkers know there is not one monolithic cuisine of China) would work nicely with red wine (and white). There are several restaurants serving Chinese cuisine in New York that do have good wine lists. Both Shun Lee's and Chin Chin for eg. The cooking of many chefs who are strongly influenced by not just Chinese but the Pacific Rim cuisines -- Ming Tsai and Joel Robuchon as well as Asian chefs whose cooking is influenced by Western cuisines are all helping to blur the lines and also create some interesting and exciting food and wine situations. I know of a few wine "nuts" who regularly bring great Bordeaux and other wines to some of the top Japanese restaurants here. I would add that even Americans are stereotyped by snobs. "We are supposed to have palates influenced by years of drinking Coke and therefore we crave sweet wines." "We have no tradition of drinking wine with our meals so we don't get the wine and food thing." and on and on and......... I would welcome anyone from anywhere who discovers and enjoys wine just as I would hope to be welcomed when I discover and enjoy something rooted in another culture.

Truffle oils to me are what they are. They provide a flavor (really more an aroma) that approximates or evokes that of real truffles. I never thought that truffle oils provided the same gustatory experience as actual truffles. Truffle oil whether derived from real truffles or a chemical compound (and really what gives real truffles their characteristic flavor and aroma are --chemical compounds) is to me a sort of condiment. Real truffles are mostly used to transfer their flavors and aromas to other food substances as well. As for real truffles. Even when in season I have often been disappointed in what is available here. I prefer to experience them in restaurants where the quality seems to be better than that available at specialty markets. The oils? A few drops in a risotto or a chilled pea soup are fine with me regardless of the oils provenance. (I do try to buy oils that offer flavor that is not overtly harsh or ersatz).

I think there are a few issues at play here. Some of this is fueled by a resentment that an ever expanding market for fine wines is really the key factor that is driving prices and scarcity. The elites in the wine world are looking for scapegoats (a favorite seems to be some wine critics--well really only one) and so the "Russians" or the "Japanese" or the "Chinese" or nuveau riche from any place are at least partly to blame for the fact that their "anointed" wines are harder to find and more costly. Then to add insult to.... The insidious claims that "these people" do not really understand or appreciate these works of art!" So we have the stories of swimming pools filled with Petrus and Coke Cola and Cheval Blanc and Romanee Conti served with ice and Montrachet spritzers etc. Really, I personally don't have a problem with anyone anywhere enjoying any wine in any manner they chose! (ok maybe swimming in Petrus is taking things a bit too far). The upside of all these new wine drinkers is there is room for more wine to be produced. Wine Makers have new markets for their wines and many can get better prices for their hard work. A thriving wine industry is a good thing. For everyone. Unless of course, you only drink first growth Bordeaux and limited production Burgundy or...

I can see it now: A lawsuit for recovery of damages plus pain and suffering. Fifty million dollars! Jackie Childs representing the plaintiff! Maybe even a class action on behalf of all your patrons that fateful and soggy day. Headlines from court documents and trial transcripts proclaiming your establishment's shoddy practice of preparing sandwiches in advance--what they are laying around getting soggy all morning. Even worse patrons are not properly notified that all sandwiches are NOT prepared to order and may be pre made. Also no warning or clearly stated policy that any consumer complaints must be registered on the day of purchase of their food thus opening you up to everyone who may have been served a soggy sammy since your establishment has opened. You people have some nerve ruining the lives of hundreds of innocent and unsuspecting diners all because you greedy capitalists want to save time and money preparing food ahead of time! seriously, I really sympathize with anyone who has to deal with and serve the general public these days. I don't see any way this incident is being misread by you. I probably would have told the woman after sincere apologies that "we" will gladly refund her the price of the sandwich but note that the fact she has no receipt and is notifying you a day late. I also like the advice from an earlier poster to simply offer a free sandwich and beverage. The woman is clearly a disgruntled nut. You seem to be more than accommodating. I hope this kind of incident doesn't get to you too much. The service industry needs thoughtful and caring people like you!

That's a good point! The games are becoming insufferably long. Mainly due to TV--the timeouts and commercial breaks! The distractions are probably designed to fill the dead time in between plays etc as well as make more money. Fans are literally held captive for a very long time (by design yet). Just another reason to stop going. I can eat better and a lot more cheaply staying home and watching the thing on TV. (at least I have some semblance of control) If I just have to be there at the ole ballpark I am convinced it is better to bring my own food--it's gotta be cheaper to buy that Pork Sandwich outside the friendly confines--if ya know what i mean!

I would be careful when considering terms like traditional. it is simply not that easily defined in most cases. Montalcino wines have really been evolving since the seventies (the nineteen seventies that is). Many of the areas farmers abandoned the place and the land became relatively inexpensive. The notion, in general, of the small farmer making humble wines is a bit of a misconception--much of what these small farmers grew was often sent to large co-ops where the wine was actually made. The Cinzano family moved into the area in the early seventies I believe, and then the Mariani's (Banfi). There ensued an influx of wine makers like Gaja and Antinori and the Frescobaldi's among others. There are now many "gleaming" large and very modern wineries in Italy. Stainless steel vats are possibly one of the most important innovations in wine making the world over--allowing for temperature controlled wine making. Banfi makes one style of Brunello. There are other styles made as well. One's preference may be for one or the other (or all of them). as the French say, "vive la difference!"

A good lambrusco. medici is one. These sparkling red wines are great in the summer. Near perfect for grilled or spicy foods or just sipping.

I have a few chef friends and I agree that simple is best. In fact, most every instance of where a chef is asked what they cook at home or prefer to eat when they dine out the answer is almost always--simple good food nothing fancy. Roast chicken, barbeque, some clams or oysters of good quality works when I entertain chefs. They seem to want to just relax and enjoy whatever you provide. It seems pointless to try to impress a professional chef and most would be rather uncomfortable if they sensed you were trying to impress them. I also agree that trying to impress with an expensive or rare bottle of wine is often not the best idea either. Most chefs I know basically want to just hang out have some food and enjoy the company. Invariably barbeque or simple grilled stuff and beer always works well.

You hit it on the head when you asked: "Isn't the game enough?" We have such short attention spans today and it seems they become shorter with each new generation. Today, the sporting event itself is not enough. Fans are bombarded with rock music between innings or periods and during every second there is no action on the field of play. (it used to be a simple organ gently serenading fans between innings). Huge screens offer games and all sorts of diversions--almost more time is spent watching TV than the actual game. And the folks in luxury boxes actually do often spend more time on comfy couches watching the game on TV. Absurd to the point that one wonders why they bother traveling to the stadium in the first place? Food? Why do we have to eat throughout an event? The food becomes more and more elaborate and I see a lot of people at stadiums spending more time stuffing their faces and procuring food than they do watching the game. what happened to the concept of a snack. A simple hot dog and a beverage. There was a TV piece a while ago, on the marketing of sporting events that focused on a particular baseball stadium and the upshot was fewer and fewer people now attend sporting events to watch the game. Picnic areas and playgrounds and restaurants and all sorts of diversions are now part of newer stadiums. The actual sporting event is rapidly becoming a mere diversion. And an expensive one at that. Kinda like the typical shopping mall. I rarely attend professional sporting events anymore. I do have season tickets to a local NFL franchise--I tailgate before the game. This will, I fear, be disappearing when our new stadium is built (I say "our" because a lot of tax money is helping finance it--though like every other instance of my tax money going for something, I have no say in where or how) That new stadium will most likely discourage tail gating in favor of driving fans to expensive stadium food. The best seats for viewing an event in our stadia now are often situated in actual restaurants. I sat in one at the US open. It was like eating at a fine restaurant with a huge TV screen displaying a tennis match tableside! Few people at tables around me were watching the tennis action, they were eating, talking and doing business deals. Why pay the extra for the tennis match? Food and instant gratification are really more important than sports these days. Stadiums are constructed like theme parks. The most fun I had at sporting events was sitting behind a pole at Ranger hockey games or four hundred fifty feet away from home plate at Yankee stadium. Food? Not just a second thought but maybe a third or fourth--a sandwich from home or a meatball hero before or after the game. Maybe a bag of peanuts while the game was in progress. After all eating would detract from the game--the reason we were there--to be fans!

The more I consider the story, the more it reads to me like lazy reporting -- the kind that raises questions without really answering them, and that relies on implication rather than fact. Is there such a thing as real truffle oil (white? black?) and if so how can we get it? What about other preserved truffle products? Are they legit? These are the questions the good version of this article would have answered. ← and lazy editing. doesn't anyone read these things with a critical eye before they are published?

It will be nice to hear from the horse's mouth! Taber is a good reporter and interesting person. Good points re the TCA issue. Even after discounting politics clouding the issue-- the fact is, the problem remains for consumers. I will check out the threads you link (I don't remember them). My real concern at this moment is with the often poor reporting from the Wine Business folks. I would prefer Mr Taber clear up this issue (or non issue I may be wrong). Something about this article didn't work for me. At least he can clarify things.

Taber is a good reporter so i am curious about his reasearch and his conclusions. I am seeing some wines from france that are not cork sealed. A major producer (Boisset) is in fact, using an alternative closure on half of their 2005 Chambertin! Boisset also cites wines that were closed with metal enclosures forty years ago that show greater freshness than the same wines closed with corks. The full story was posted on the Wine Spectator on line dated Feb 28th this year. I tried to link it here but obviously failed--perhaps someone with a better skills can... After several bottles of 1986 and older Bordeaux from my cellar turned out to be corked when opened last and this year I am firmly in the camp of the screw top or anything other than cork! Consider that the vast majority of wines are for immediate or near term drinking the argument for cork and its supposed aging impact is moot for these wines. Considering the Boisset "test"--it may be moot for wines meant for long term aging as well! Thus, I am skeptical of Tabor's conclusion that cork is here to stay! If so--I would ask why? Another possibility is poor reporting on the part of Wine Business.com. Recently, some of their pieces are IMOP poorly written and reported and often confused and confusing. The piece states that Tabor notes that the original TCA link to corks was generally associated with the small, independent producers who lacked quality controls. This is either untrue or at best misleading. The cork taint problem has inflicted a wide range of wineries large and small. The conclusions attributed to Tabor in this article are suspect. I could be wrong but I can't help but wonder if the Wine Business folks are reporting accurately here.

Can I ask a really dumb question? what exactly is Pimms and what is the number one or two cup designation? (are there more cups?) I am a novice to this world.

That caught my eye as well. He probably should have been touring New York City pizza instead of a trip to LA! I believe that the Times is more concerned with being seen as a National newspaper not a local NY paper. They probably see bruni as a national guy and would prefer to have someone like Ed Levine or one of their other writers cover the New York pizza scene in a special feature in the food section. Clearly Bruni was covering the LA pizza effort as a Batali venture not as a pizza place. Bruni is just playing a role in the Times conquer the world strategy. At least that's how Isee it!

Isn't this really an issue of the reason people cellar wine rather than the role of scores in the purchase process?--as Brad notes. I also agree with Doc that people who collect things for whatever reasons can easily become overbearing when talking about their passions--ego really plays into this. I just think that to bring scores into it requires assumptions that may not be on target and subject to over stating things. Scores are a legitimate issue on their own. Scores aside, I was talking to a good friend at a tasting of 2000 Barolo we were enthusing about how good the wines were and which one's we would be purchasing and which one's we had already sitting in pour cellars. Mid discussion, at the exact same moment we each came to the conclusion that we would very possibly be dead when many of these wines were at their peak! We each muttered something about spending less on current vintages and opening up and drinking what we had. Wine, more than anything can make one aware of one's mortality!

I guess my point is. The lines seem to be blurred a bit. I notice the same trend as FG and others. I am somewhat uncomfortable when food items are marketed or in some way touted as to some sort of altruistic claim or claims but this now translates into items that are presented as one thing and may, in fact, not be what they are sold as. I do think that some things are , in fact, organic or healthy (ier) that "resemble" junk food items. This is a good thing if that's what it is. Am I making any sense?

Well first of all: Opus one IMOP (and that of others) can be a very fine wine! I am not sure what your problem with it is. Also, interestingly, I don't recall Opus One receiving a plethora of over praise and high scores. It does not seem to have some special status among collectors. In fact, I have found many more wine geeks who put it down without having tasted it than those who buy it based only on scores or reviews. (it seems to be fashionable to slam it these days). I love the 96! I am curious as to why you just didn't ask your professor exactly how he "sees" his cellar. Does he not drink anything from it? Maybe those "Napa Cabs" he and friends drink are from his cellar. It is pretty odd that anyone would spend thousands of dollars anything they themselves had no interest in. Perhaps a bit more probing would reveal some additional information that would shed some light here. I do know some people who have a small interest in wine for themselves but do have substantial cellars for entertaining purposes. I suppose there are some folks who are just "collectors" and have latched on to wine for one reason or another. Just as some wine geeks love to "bore" you with tales of obscure wines from tiny vineyards in wherever that they discovered and that cost fifteen dollars a bottle and their highly developed palates so too people who collect big name wines for thoudsands of dollars can bore on about the big names and big prices and big cellars. Both are IMOP insufferable snobs! In the end though, who cares? The really great thing about these "odd balls" (in fact anyone who for whatever reason maintains a large cellar of fine wines --highly scored or otherwise) is that when they die their cellars are often auctioned off and well preserved/stored old and mature wines hit the market place!

I believe that a lot of the stuff in containers contains stabilizers etc. Guar Gum and Carageenen et al. In fact, these things seem to impact the mouth feel and consistency of most dairy products which I find off putting.

What are the definitions: Junk Food Organic Sustainable ????????????????

Interesting. When the Japanese were noted as buyers of fines wines they too were slandered by tales of their mixing Lafitte with Coca Cola or brandy. I find this piece of conventional wisdom an inelegant blend of wine snobbery--envy and racism. This whole article is an indication of how the industry is a font of wrongheaded conventional wisdom.

I am sure there will be some debate but this "scores" thing is, more often than not, blown way out of any reality based proportion. First, there is often much more to a person's wine purchase decision than just a score. Most people who use scores have considered the source of the score and know something about the wine in question. If one is "collecting" wine with an eye toward having a cellar where value (resale or legacy) is important then they would be insane not to consider scores by influential critics and tasters. Oddly many of the highly "collectible" wines are relatively immune to scores in terms of supply and demand. People who buy wine for resale with little or no intention of drinking it are in essence brokers. Secondly, most "collectors" who are more intent on a cellar for their own drinking purposes consider scores as a part of their purchase decision. These folks pretty much know what they want and scores are simply another part of their criteria (to a greater or lesser degree). Let's face it. Many of these wines are expensive. Most can not be tasted prior to purchase. So why not consider what someone who has tasted these wines thinks? Again, most people who are laying out forty to a hundred bucks or more per bottle would be wise to consider what people who they trust think as part of their information base especially when there is little or no opportunity to sample these wines before laying out the money. There are few guarantees in life and even fewer in wine. Most people use a critic's scores as part of their body of knowledge in determining what they will buy. A novice can also use scores to learn about wine. It is always a good thing to try what so called experts think is a good example. Most will reduce the influence accordingly as they gain experience and knowledge about what they like and dislike. People often look to third part reviews before buying a car or going out to a restaurant or seeing a movie or a play--gathering opinion and information can help lead to an "informed" purchase decision. I no of no one who buys a wine for any reason (scores or otherwise) tastes it and finds they dislike it and returns to buy more (for any reason--other than they are "investing" in the wine for resale). A score or a review or a recommendation from a friend can help lead a person to seek out an inexpensive wine to try. So what? Even assuming that this person has not read a review and is armed only with a score they do in fact, have the knowledge that someone with expertise has noted that the wine in question is a particularly fine example of that wine and is worth trying. They try it and determine if they like it or not. How is this any different than buying a wine on anyone's recommendation? In fact, most novice or casual drinkers are not coming into wine shops driven by famous (or infamous) critics or writers-- they are unlikely to have even heard of these people let alone subscribed to expensive newsletters etc. What these folks often read are local or national newspaper columns (Times, Wall Street journal) of food magazines where wines are also rated and yes, scored. Their interest is piqued and they visit their local wine shop. Interestingly, most of these people are very amenable to a suggestion from a good sales person. Finally, let's face it. Most wine shops are staffed by people who have not personally tasted every wine they sell. Scores are placed on P.O.P and on shelves (hopefully with reviews). Even upon finding that all too rare knowledgeable sales person chances are even they have not tasted the wine they are selling and is a suggestion from someone who has not tasted the wine be any more or less valuable or reliable than an opinion (even just a score) from a well informed person who has? The customer usually figures things out for themselves. I believe that the industry itself is far more insecure than the general public. Hence it is mostly the industry that is obsessed with scores. They plaster them all over shelves and print up POP and sales materials with them. They use them when they are good and bemoan them when they are bad. They discuss and debate them endlessly. It is the industry (from wine maker to distributor to importer to wholesaler to retailers) who rail about scores and how it is a shame that consumers rely on them etc etc etc. then these same folks: --- pay sales people a pittance ---plaster scores all over the place ---jack up already high prices based on a score on shelves in shops and on wine lists in restaurants. ---over sell mediocre wine based on lame (and unbelievable) hype: "Oh it is thin and sour but that is the land and the history speaking through the wine! Fifty dollars a bottle is a bargain!" It is no wonder that critics have emerged as consumer advocates. Perhaps the industry should stop looking at wine drinkers as pathetic sheep who can't make their own decisions and decide for themselves what criteria and information they will use.