marcus

Steve, how about Bellet. I could use a pointer there.

The lamb vinadaloo was also excellent, much more complex flavoring than the usual NY Indian restaurant, and the heat sneaks up on you leaving your mouth on fire, but not too much. My tandoori wild boar chops were salty, but not overwhelmingly so. The butter chicken was poor and seemed to be missing an ingredient.

The 83 is a little tight, but drinkable. It is the only genuinely great Margaux that is drinkable today unless you were to go back to 1959, as there were no other great Margaux produced in that interim except for the 82 which is not ready. The 85 is fully drinkable and very, very good, but like most 85s is a little short on concentration.

Two key exceptions to that generalization. 1) Me 2) Max MacCalman Wine and Cheese *Sorry that I didn't wait for the new thread Cabby) Beachfan -- I accept your opinion, but Max has a deeply vested interest and I strongly question his objectivity. In addition, I very much dislike the cheese service at Picholine, but this has already been heavily hashed out on previous threads.

There are all kinds of popularity measures, McDonalds has sold billions and billions of burgers pleasing millions, if not billions. I don't think that the opinion that red wine and cheese do not go well together is affected, I think that it is quite commonly held today by serious people, and I wonder what your view is on the question. I actually do not personally make the argument for white wine and cheese, which in my opinion go better together than red and cheese, but ultimately not well enough. I specified the point re red wine without further elaboration, because I consider it to be generally accepted, but didn't want to dismiss the white wine proponents out of hand, where I feel that a real debate is still in progress.

Et voila. Wilfrid -- your subtlety transcends my understanding.

To me, this menu looks like an affectation rather than well selected pairings. Latour 61 which is rich heavy and spicy with a foie gras based dish seems particularly inappropriate and I find that red wine doesn't go with cheese at all. In my view, really great wine doesn't go with complex food and can't be successfully paired. It should only be paired with very simple food like a grilled steak which is ideal. Stepping down a few levels on the wine, as most of the early examples on this thread do, can lead to successful pairings with complex food. It is also not the bigness of the wine that inhibits pairing, but complexity. The extraordinarily complex and characteristic mineral scents of Chateau Margaux is an example.

I had a number of those dishes and I think that stark is a good description, although I found the spicing actually verging on unpleasant.

Cabrales -- On reading through this thread I noticed your comment re Roellinger. Have you posted on his restaurant and I missed it? Up to now, I've thought that I've been just about the only nay sayer on his restaurant.

I believe that smelling the wine is entirely sufficient. There are very few flaws that an expert sommelier can't detect on aroma alone, too few to worry about. I personally like to drink as much of my bottle of wine as possible, including drinking from the dregs after the decanted wine is finished. In fact, for very old wines, the dregs may be the last repositories of the wines original character. I also agree with Beechfan that when a wine is tasted, the pour should be under an ounce at most. With regard to vmilor's 95 Coche Dury, I suspect that they believed that the wine wasn't ready. I had a similar experience at Ducasse with an 89 Chave Herimitage. Some sommeliers have gigantic egos and they view not taking their advice as a major insult and then proceed to sulk for the rest of the meal.

I absolutely agree with you regarding Helene Darroze. To me this is a real shocker. I didn't even like her foie gras, and she is considered a foie gras specialist.

Although Salon is a fine wine and has a similar style, it is seveal steps down from and not at all in the same class with Krug Clos de Mesnil.

I've always found Le Tableau, Lavagna's sister restaurant down the block to be significantly better and one of the most successful restaurants at its price point that attempts some level of ambition in its dishes. I'm curious as to how others compare these two restaurants.

You are entirely missing the point. The issue is not the chef, but the farmer who raises the ducks.

A number of people on this thread have responded to a discussion of the restaurant with comments regarding the cafe. Althought there is common ownership and an overarching approach, these are different restaurants with different kitchens, cooks and menus. I don't believe that they are directly comparable and that the experience with one has great predictive value as to how one might find the other.

Although no fan of Trotter's, I applaud this decision, and not because of animal rights issues, but because I find that foie gras has become both a cliche and crutch in restaurants, both here and in France. In addition, I have never eaten great foie gras in this country, so why bother. I am much more interested to see what a fine restaurant can do with market ingredients, and I have been refusing to order foie gras dishes, except in places in France that I consider to be foie gras specialists, such as La Belle Gascogne.

In general, buying at auction is very risky, and you should anticipate that at least 25% of the bottles will be less than perfect. This is really the dirty secret of wine auctions. You need to factor this into your bids. If you get a really bad lot, the auction house will take it back, but otherwise you are stuck. I have even seen bad bottles in lots that I've bought from famous collections, and I mean oxidized, not corked, the latter being unavoidable and just needs to be considered an act of god. I have bought many lots from both Sotheby's and Christie's and see no difference in quality. To minimize your exposure slightly, I would advise not buying mixed lots, lots with 11 bottles (fewer is ok), and lots from the end of the sale in sections characterized as being from various owners. This usually means retailers, and most retail wine shops do not have proper storage facilities.

I would like to say a few words in support of Italy. With regard to strikes, going back 10+ years, the situation in Italy was really a major problem, but it has moderated significantly, and today the strike situation overall is worse in France. I actually find that logistics in Italy work quite well and there is a lot of flexibility and helpfullness, althought there are exceptions. The trains run much better than in the UK. Germany may be efficient, but it is an unpleasant place overall. I spent 2 years in the Army there in ancient times, and have been back a number of times since. In addition you need to know the rules which are non-trivial. The mealtimes are short and trying to find food outside of these hours can be a real problem, particularly in the countryside. You often can't get lunch after 1:30 or dinner after 8-8:30. I have had this extremely frustrating problem on numerous occasions.

I agree with Steve P. I've had some very poor experiences with the Pudlo. It is idiosyncratic and has a certain type of contrarian French sensibility, aimed at arbitrary differentiation, that I don't find appealing. Michelin and Gault Millau are far more objective.

The 20 point scale is really a 40 point scale because it uses half points. My primary exposure to Coates is his Bordeaux book which I find useless.

When Parker grades a wine, he doesn't just pull a number out of the air, he evaluates a number of defined attributes such as color, aroma, etc on a defined scale. There are also a number of points given for overall impression as well. I believe that this is all explained in his books. Although there is a significant level of subjectivity, there is also a good level of repeatablility and transparency. In addition, there is more to Parker than just his score, there are substantial tasting notes that he publishes, that describe his impressions. These notes are at least as important as the actual score for someone who wants to use Parker to help choose wines to purchase. Although Parker has a clear liking for wines that are highly extracted and "jammy", he appreciates other styles of wine as well and can score them highly. Chateau Palmer is one example, note his high marks for the 66 which is quite nuanced and austere and the 70, which though less austere is a beautiful wine, but not a fruit bomb by any means. Noting Craig Camp's post which slipped in ahead of me here. I find Clive Coates completely impenetrable. His ratings, on the 20 point French school system scale, bear no relationship one way or another to my own palate. I shake my head in wonder.

I own a very large number of 82s and starting to drink is just about the right view. These are very great wines that are improving all of the time. This is really why we need Robert Parker, to provide a sensible and reasonably objective point of view, and to cut through the cacophony of idiosyncratic opinions.

I'm missing a point here. Who is saying that post 82 vintage wines are less ageable. 86, 89, 90 are excellent Bordeaux vintages that produced eminently ageable wines. 95 and 96 may be a different story.

You wrote a NYT article a few years ago, which many of us remember very well, in which you criticized Emeril's television show and went on to criticize his background and abilities as a chef. However, a close reading of your article led me to believe that you may not have actually eaten at his New Orleans restaurant. I am interested in whether my interpretation is correct, and if so how you came to your opinion. Also, what are your views today.

Steve -- Aloesse and Barthelemy are definitely the top two. Patricial Wells rates Aloesse the best, but in my experience I would agree with you and give the edge to Barthelemy.