Craig Camp
-
Posts
3,274 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Help Articles
Posts posted by Craig Camp
-
-
I have 3 bottles properly stored. Parker gushes abou the 97's and 98's but does not mention the 96's, which was supposed to be a good year for barolos. I want to open a bottle later this year but would like to know if anyone has any notes on this wine.
This 96 Cavallotto is an outstanding wine that is superior to the 98 and far better than the 97. Most producers consider 1996 the greatest of a string of great vintages only challenged by 2001. This is a classic Barolo from a classic vintage so you need to be in no hurry to drink it as most 96's are just now started to show their best. If these were my bottles I would start to drink them at about 15 years old. This all of course assumes excellent storage conditions.
-
Parker has announced his replacements and they are good ones indeed and the topic of my blog today, Advocating The Wine Advocate.
The changes are Antonio Galloni will take on Italy, Dr. J. Miller will cover the Pacific Northwest, Spain, Australia, and South America and the expansion of David Schildknecht’s role beyond Germany and Austria to include Burgundy, Champagne, Alsace, the Loire Valley and the Languedoc-Roussillon. Parker himself will refocus his considerable talents on his strong points; Bordeaux, California and the Rhone.
I think these are bold moves as each of these critics are very independent and do not necessarily mirror Parker's own likes and dislikes. Their addition will make The Wine Advocate a much stronger and more interesting publication. It will also make it a much hotter property to potentially sell.
-
Lastly,
It is ultimately amusing that all this silliness and innuendo and gossip are of interest to anyone.
Apparently you are very interested in all this silliness and innuendo.
-
The Parker forum had an interest thread just last week. One member wanted to learn more about Burgundy and asked the members for their recommendations on who to read. Except for Mark Squires it was hands down anybody but Parker.
Parker has not been welcome in Burgundy for many years. The list of wineries not wanting him there was growing every year. He hired PR because he knew burgundy but he has the same palate. Do you think RP would hire someone who would not agree with him?
Hopefully he will change his ways and hire someone who understands tradition, finesse and elegance. It will help with their burgundy reviews.
Could anything lay out the reality of the situation more clearly? On Parker's own forum, where any hint of criticism of Bob himself is met by attack dogs, criticism of Rovani and the WA coverage of Burgundy (and Italy for that matter) were everyday facts.
-
-
JohnL,
I see no need to rehash the obvious.
What we are dealing with here is mostly gossip. The wine business is rife with it. I listen to distributors and wine makers and importers and retailers all day long. I read it from critics and writers, endless sniping and innuendo.You need to hang out with a more positive group. I have to admit that means avoiding The Parker Forum, which is the essence of sniping and innuendo. However, this could be a nice place if we all play nice.
-
I am in the process of broadening my sherry drinking experience.
I would appreciate some input and opinion about palo cortado's in general.
How to serve etc
and specifically about the Hidalgo Vinicola Palo Cortado Viejo.
much thanks
ps
this will be enjoyed at Amada in Philadelphia tomorrow evening.
"Palo Cortado is a wine that couldn't make up its mind. It started growing Flor like a Fino, but after a while the Flor disappeared and it aged like an Oloroso. The style is in between Amontillado and Oloroso in style. Some of the finest wines of Sherry fall into this category. Both Palo Cortado and Oloroso should be served at cool room temperature."
you mean --even those lemmings that follow Parker won't take his advice to try sherry!!!???
maybe he's not so influential; or they are not so lemminglike!
sorry, I couldn't resist!
Seriously, though, thanks.
I am not much of a fan of blogs but I must admit, yours is well done.
You are an engaging writer.
How long would a palo cortado "keep" in unopened bottles and also
once opened?
I would also appreciate any further thoughts as to why sherry really hasn't caught
on here (and elsewhere).
thanks!
JohnL,
As I commented, there are two types of sherry those that are oxidized and those that are not. Fino/Manzanilla, which are not oxidized, don't keep at all and should be consumed on opening and, if possible within 6 or 12 months of bottling. Oloroso based wines, which are already oxidized keep very well after opening. Therefore, more oxidized Finos like Amontillado and Paolo Cortado are in-between. I would try to consume them within a week of of opening.
I will repeat that La Gitana Manzanilla is my favorite aperitif and there is always a 500 ml. in my refrigerator. It is that most rare of wines combining refreshment and complexity. I consume it like a normal white wine in a regular white wine glass.
I loved the time I spent working in Jerez and firmly believe these are the most unappreciated of the world's great wines.
Sherry has not caught on in the USA because most of it is served after it has been destroyed. Let's take a bottle of great white wine and leave a bottle open and half-full for a month and see how people like it. Sherry is not liked in the USA because we make no effort to serve it correctly and treat it with no respect. You will find my comments about how we serve Fino/Manzanilla by Click here
Thanks for your kind comments about my blog, which is a highly personal recount of a life in wine. As I say, "It's thirty years of wine trying to get out." I do not profess to be right or wrong for anyone, but myself and that is my only goal for the blog.
-
I am in the process of broadening my sherry drinking experience.
I would appreciate some input and opinion about palo cortado's in general.
How to serve etc
and specifically about the Hidalgo Vinicola Palo Cortado Viejo.
much thanks
ps
this will be enjoyed at Amada in Philadelphia tomorrow evening.
"Palo Cortado is a wine that couldn't make up its mind. It started growing Flor like a Fino, but after a while the Flor disappeared and it aged like an Oloroso. The style is in between Amontillado and Oloroso in style. Some of the finest wines of Sherry fall into this category. Both Palo Cortado and Oloroso should be served at cool room temperature."
-
Very interesting. I thought Rovani was brought in in the first place because Parker's palate appeared to be more in tune with Bordeaux and less so with Burgundy. My impression was that he needed another palate for Burgundy as he was getting a lot of criticism on his Burgundy scores. I also was under the impression that he added the other specialists because Rovani was working out relatively well. As my buying needs have diminished in recent years i have paid less attention to the Wine Advocate and other critics, so I don't really have an opinion on his specialist program outside of Rovani, who I thought did a decent job.
John - Rovani has been under attack for years by Burgundy producers and aficionados for what can only be called inaccurate reports and blatant errors. The final straw seems to have been the whole issue with the premature oxidation of white Burgundy (http://dat.erobertparker.com/bboard/showthread.php?t=162). where Rovani was clearly and publicly blown own of the water for taking an indefensible position on why and how the problem occurred. Supposedly this last issue pushed things over the top for Parker.
First, can you please provide some specific support to your statement that "Rovani has been under attack for inaccurate reports and blatant errors." What reports? What errors?
I would also love for you to please name these "producers" and "aficionados"--just a few.
Second, You note that the "oxidation issue is the final straw." The link you provide is six years old. How and where has Rovani "taken an indefensible position"? His post in the thread is quite well reasoned.
Third, would you guys at least admit that it is even remotely possible that Parker hired Rovani to cover Burgundy (he also covers other wine regions) because Parker approaching sixty at the time found it difficult to personally cover every major (and some minor) wine making regions?
And not because Parker: A) was run out of Burgundy by the wine makers, B) realized he is not competent to evaluate Burgundy and/or C) doesn't appreciate burgundy?????????????
How is it you are not criticizing Tanzer for doing the same?
Fourth, I have scanned the reviews and ratings for Burgundy by Rovani, Tanzer, Coates, Robinson and Meadows. Interestingly I find they generally agree as to a wine's quality more often than not. Can you explain this?
Fifth, as to the "Parker palate" I do agree that Parker favors wines where the grapes achieved adequate ripeness (he himself has complained about over ripe or over extracted grapes/wines.
He also looks for adequate mouth feel as well as complexity and typicity and a sense of place. If one looks at the wine makers in Burgundy that Parker promotes as making the best wines: D'Angerville, D'Auvenay,Coche-Dury,Dugat, Dugat-Py,Jadot, Comtes Lafon,Domaine leflaive, leroy, Lignier, Niellon, DRC, De Vogue, and also see that he has championed wines from Beaujolais and the Macon--please tell me where there is a monolithic palate that only likes big wines. really, the breadth of styles this small list represents is --well--breathtaking!
If you assert that Parker "doesn't get" Burgundy--I wonder If you have read what he has written about it in his book "Burgundy" and his buying guides. Show me where you disagree with anything he has written.
"Big, Brash, Blockbuster wines?
Are you saying that D'Angerville is making "Big Brash Blockbuster wines????
Parker championed Dominus for years. (I disagreed with him here) he also championed Harlan estates--would you or anyone seriously say that Dominus was/is making Big brash Blockbusters?
recently Parker was criticized for liking Aussie Shiraz--wines that were big and brash etc yet at the same time Parker wrote glowingly (and rated highly) many unoaked Clare valley Chardonnays. No one seemed to notice this. The critics only seem to select the reviews that make their case--ignoring those that do not.
While we are on Shiraz/syrah--how is it that Parker can love Australian Shiraz and Rhone wines?
Can the styles be more different?
Yes he likes Guigal but he also likes Ogier.
some people like to buy into a piece of conventional wisdom--"Parker only likes ---type of wines. They jump all over anything that supports this while totally ignoring the mass of evidence that refutes the wisdom.
I realize a lot of this debate and criticism is generated by the trade--Clive Coates called Rovani a "naive ingenue" months before Rovani had written a word.
The trade is more obsessed with Parker (and Rovani) than the general public certainly is.
I too believe that the WA has lost some of its authority in some areas. Not because Rovani or Parker are incompetent or somehow possessing palates that "don't get" some mythical paradigm.
Rather Parker is getting old--publishing notes on huge numbers of wines from an ever expanding world of wine making is a mentally and physically demanding task. There is also more competition out there/here. Just as meadows is discovering that he may have to cover more than just Burgundy, Parker is finding that one can only cover so much.
Again, I ask the question--why is it that no one seems to be questioning if Meadows with his "Burgundian" palate can possibly cover New World Pinot and Rhone wines???
Rovani (or anyone Parker hires) is walking into a hornets nest of petty sniping, jealousy, and back stabbing.
I would advise anyone who revels in the conventional wisdom to at least read Parker. His current "The World's greatest Wine Estates" opens with some wonderful insights into how Parker views all the big issues in the world of wine today (the downside is the book is very expensive).
I leave you with this:
two tasting notes:
same producer same vintage
--the first wine is "a fragrant effort exhibiting scents of tropical fruits and orange rind, crisp acidity, and a lively, medium bodied, citrusy finish."
--the second wine is '`restrained, well delineated white...(which) represents the the essence of granite liquor. There is no real fruit character, just glycerin and, alcohol and liquid stones."
the first is Chapoutier's 1999 Crozes hermitage Blanc
the second is his Hermitage Blanc l'Ermite
the first wine is scored 85 points (good)
the second is scored 93-95 points (outstanding)
by Robert Parker
so please tell me more about that Parker palate that only loves big massive fruit bombs!
(by the way--how can Parker cover Rhone whites--they are much too terroir driven--Parker likes fruit and oak!!!!)
The comparison or notes and scores by Parker is from Andrew Jefford's superb "The New France"
cheers!!!!
JonnL,
I refuse to get into yet another circular argument with you. You have your positions and that's that. I don't happen to agree with many of those positions and your arguments only convince me of the futility of arguing with you. Let's just say you're right and I'm wrong and save time, but a few points first...
If you are unaware of the controversy surrounding Rovani's coverage of Burgundy you are out of the loop. He has been ridiculed by both winemakers and Burgundy collectors for years. He has been banned from a long list of cellars - thank God the Burgundians have enough guts to make such a risky commercial decision. Even on Parker's own forum there have been ongoing howls of protest over the content, timeliness and comprehensiveness of the Burgundy coverage. Burghound has completely overwhelmed the WA as the journal of record when it comes to reporting on Burgundy. It should be noted that Allen lives there almost half the year and this depth of experience shows in his reports. If you don't understand the problem with Rovani's post on why white Burgudies are oxidizing prematurely you did not read the entire thread where he is torn apart by chemists and winemakers. This was a major embarrassment to Parker, which was widely reported in the wine world. How did you not know this? Not of these things are (or should be) news to anyone following Burgundy.
I don't think Parker hired Rovani because of age, I think he hired him because he is a very smart guy and knew his coverage of Burgundy was not stellar and because the world of wine is just too big for one person to report on in-depth four times a year. He wanted someone to come in and pick up an area he was weak on - and knew he was weak on.
As most of your post defends Parker and we are discussing Rovani and Thomases (who for some reason you don't mention) we will ignore that part. I have made clear many times my great respect for Parker at what he does. The Wine Advocate is still the wine journal of record, but only for the regions that Parker covers personally and now also for German wine as David Schildknecht's coverage is excellent. Good coverage is not defined by the palate of the writer, but by their consistency of palate and depth of knowledge. I don't agree with Parker's Bordeaux scores, but I respect them for their accuracy and ability to communicate to me exactly what the wines taste like. You don't have to agree with a critic for them to be useful to you as long as that critic is precise and consistent in their notes. No one is better than this than Robert Parker when it comes to Bordeaux.
(by the way, the e e cummings style posts are hard to read for old guys like me)
-
Very interesting. I thought Rovani was brought in in the first place because Parker's palate appeared to be more in tune with Bordeaux and less so with Burgundy. My impression was that he needed another palate for Burgundy as he was getting a lot of criticism on his Burgundy scores. I also was under the impression that he added the other specialists because Rovani was working out relatively well. As my buying needs have diminished in recent years i have paid less attention to the Wine Advocate and other critics, so I don't really have an opinion on his specialist program outside of Rovani, who I thought did a decent job.
I'm sorry but this "palate" stuff is patently ridiculous.
A good wine critic should be able to evaluate all types of wines.
Some choose to specialize--it is difficult and demanding to cover all areas of wine (especially today).
I find it very curious that this theory holding that one must have a specifically "tuned" palate to appreciate a specific type of wine persists, especially applied as it is to wine writers and critics.
John, though I very much respect your opinion, I must disagree. Parker has always favored big, brash, blockbuster wines and does an excellent job of ferreting them out. He has been especially successful with the wines of Bordeaux that are consistent with his aesthetic. He is a great critic because he is very cionsistent and one can make judgements based on his critique whether or not one shares the same aesthetic. Burgundy, however, is a bit of a different animal. Most afficionados of Burgundy that I know tend to favor less brash, more subtle wines that vary from Parker's aesthetic. His scores for Burgundies never meshed as well with that and it shouldn't be surprising. That he brought in someone else to evaluate those wines was, I thought, a tacit admission of that and something for which I respect him. I think it is impossible for one person to be the lighthouse for all wines. People have their various strengths and weaknesses as do wines and people have their biases. That doesn't mean that he cannot evaluate, enjoy or appreciate Burgundy, just that his strengths and aesthetics don't play to that wine as well as someone else's perhaps.
That's a very concise and accurate viewpoint of the history and reality of the situation when in comes to Parker, the WA and Burgundy - all pinot noir for that matter.
-
Very interesting. I thought Rovani was brought in in the first place because Parker's palate appeared to be more in tune with Bordeaux and less so with Burgundy. My impression was that he needed another palate for Burgundy as he was getting a lot of criticism on his Burgundy scores. I also was under the impression that he added the other specialists because Rovani was working out relatively well. As my buying needs have diminished in recent years i have paid less attention to the Wine Advocate and other critics, so I don't really have an opinion on his specialist program outside of Rovani, who I thought did a decent job.
John - Rovani has been under attack for years by Burgundy producers and aficionados for what can only be called inaccurate reports and blatant errors. The final straw seems to have been the whole issue with the premature oxidation of white Burgundy (http://dat.erobertparker.com/bboard/showthread.php?t=162). where Rovani was clearly and publicly blown own of the water for taking an indefensible position on why and how the problem occurred. Supposedly this last issue pushed things over the top for Parker.
-
The departures of Daniel Thomases and Pierre Rovani from Robert Parker's The Wine Advocate have finally been announced, but is it too-little-too-late? The damage they did to The Wine Advocate in the areas of Burgundy and Italy had long ago driven sophisticated consumers to other sources for their information. The appointments of replacements will be very interesting as Parker must select writers that are both highly respected and in-tune with his palate - something that may be a mutually exclusive concept.
-
-
Purple Peppers stuffed with Creole Crab Salad.. Also serving with some bitter lettuces..
Purple Basil Ravioli stuffed with a mixture of ricotta, mozzarella, and serving them with a fresh roasted tomato sauce..
with both of these a good dry Rose - Domaine Ott Bandol Rose should be easy to find in Manhattan.
I was hoping you would have suggested a Chablis or a Muscadet for the crab.. When asking the wine guy at a restaurant if there is a wine that beats a nice cold beer with shellfish, he told me these two would..
But now I am wondering how a Rose would go with the pasta.. That might be really interesting..
Thanks for your suggestions..
I suggested the Rose with the crab because of the peppers and creole style which a Muscadet might be a bit lean for - crab on its own is perfect with Muscadet - one of my favorite wines
-
Good luck finding enough interesting half-bottles. I would buy full ones and drink the remaining wine with your leftovers during the week
Goose Foie Gras w/ rasberry coulis and brioche toasts.. Will have a little frisee
Argyle Brut, Oregon or Champagne
Purple Peppers stuffed with Creole Crab Salad.. Also serving with some bitter lettuces..
Purple Basil Ravioli stuffed with a mixture of ricotta, mozzarella, and serving them with a fresh roasted tomato sauce..
with both of these a good dry Rose - Domaine Ott Bandol Rose should be easy to find in Manhattan.
Bison Tasting (Marrow and Tenderloin).. I might be serving this with a demi glace.. I also have baby fingerlings I will be roasting with garlic.. And either doing skillet scallions or wild mushrooms with sichuan peppers..
Big food deserves big wine - Napa Cabernet here like Spottswoode or Shafer. If you go with the hot peppers lean towards a power Pinot Noir from Oregon's rich 2003 vintage.
I am doing the cheese course as a salad too.. Here I have more bitter lettuce.. I am taking a stinky piece of sheeps cheese, wrapping and baking so the cheese oozes..
A good rich Sauternes for both the cheese and dessert course
I am making a blueberry vanilla custard tart..
Armagnac and Coffee
-
Alan Meadow's Burghound is more than just reviews as it offers great insight to the how-and-why of the various domaines. Most wine books are almost out-of-date when they are published, but certainly the Serena Sutcliffe and Anthony Hanson books are very useful overviews of the region. Don't forget the excellent Côte D'Or: A Celebration of the Great Wines of Burgundy by Clive Coates. I also find Bill Nanson's website, The Burgundy Report to be a very useful and up-to-date resource.
-
but there are a growing number of wineries who demand that their wines be sold on-premise exclusively
You have to be kidding me. This is hardly a "new" thing, in fact, you can trace this back over twenty years. Sonoma Cutrer was one of the first to take this approach, but that was decades ago. Few small wineries take this now old fashioned approach, although some hyper-marketing wineries pushed by big national companies may follow this now silly strategy. Please put me in touch with "boutique" distirbutors in Chicago, most of which I know personally and I sell my wines to one of them now, without one word about on and off premise splits.
I have had many discussions with a couple winery owners in Santa Rosa about this topic. It's their belief that since Illinois is a reciprocal stateEverybody in the "biz" knows that there is no longer such thing as a reciprocal state. The new court rulings killed that concept and wine producers are out there scrambling to get registered in the former reciprocal states. You are a bit behind on your regulations here. Please tell us who the producers are in Santa Rosa are that want to blow off distributors all together and sell direct. I know many of them and would like to chat with them about this clearly silly concept - unless you produce a few hundred cases a year.
When you have wineries like Blankiet, Sloan, and Pride that charge $40-$50 to ship THREE BOTTLES, then something is wrong...Nothing is wrong with the wineries here, if you have a beef you better yell at UPS. Part of the "problem" is also these top producers insist you ship their wines 2nd day air or better. That costs more, but I'm sure most of their customers would agree with this policy instead of getting cooked wines that sat in some warehouse or truck.
Most of your complaints are from times gone by, take a few moments to catch up with the industry before you make such blanket condemnations.
-
It's Southern, Charmer's, Glazer's and the rest of the club that pushs the buttons at WSWA, not flunkies like Dugan.
True, but let's just pretend for a minute.
Mary, I know these guys and there is no hope. Only the force of court orders will make them back down. This has nothing to do with wine as it is spirits that make the big money. Compared to vodka, chardonnay is nothing. Here's my take on it. I think you and Tom are being too optimistic and that the departure of Duggan will have no positive impact for the wine industry. I believe she only left because of more money and a bigger industry.
Let's see she's done tobacco, alcohol and now on to raping our forests. She's gonna have a lot of explaining to do in the next life.
-
It does not matter that Dugan is leaving WSWA, they will find someone just like her to take her place. The policies pursued by the WSWA were not those of Dugan, who is an empty shell of a person with no ethics, creed or morals and who will take on whatever role and support any position they pay her the most for and that's it. Her positions at WSWA were not fueled by her own beliefs, but those who paid the bills. Dugan will be replaced by another mercenary and things will go on as before at WSWA.
It's Southern, Charmer's, Glazer's and the rest of the club that pushs the buttons at WSWA, not flunkies like Dugan.
-
Conversely, the reviews I find most useless are the ones that simply tell me what the wine tastes like with nothing else. This tells me more about the taster than the wine. I want them to tell me more.
Are you referring to The Wine Advocate? Perhaps The Wine Spectator? Isn't this what they mostly do?
I'm really confused here!
First you write of Mr Rogov's examples "...I don't see what's wrong with any of these notes."
Then here you complain about notes that don't tell you anything about the wine.
which is it?
also what exactly is wrong with the notes in the WS or the WA? Or are you saying these publication notes are to your liking?
You seem to be confused as to the meaning of question marks. In general, these represent questions, not statements.
-
Conversely, the reviews I find most useless are the ones that simply tell me what the wine tastes like with nothing else. This tells me more about the taster than the wine. I want them to tell me more.
Are you referring to The Wine Advocate? Perhaps The Wine Spectator? Isn't this what they mostly do?
-
Antinori, Tignanello, Tuscany, 1997: From my first tasting (25 Aug 2000), I predicted this as a wine destined for greatness. Now my fourth tasting and even though it is just now becoming fully approachable, I have not a reason to regret that prediction. This full bodied wine is blessed with superb balance between smooth tannins, fruitiness (look for currants, wild berries, and stewed black cherries) and vanilla. With flavors and aromas that open in the glass and on the palate, and then linger on and on, seemingly without end…”. Drinking nicely now but best from 2005 – 2020, perhaps longer. Score 97. (Most recently tasted 4 May 2003)
Antinori, Tignanello, 1997: Fabulous.
Antinori, Tignanello, 1997: My wife loved this one. I didn’t.
Antinori, Tignanello, 1997: A nice wine but so help me I can't understand why anyone would spend more than twenty bucks for it (or any other wine)
Antinori, Tinganello (sic), 1997: Sucks!
Antinori, Tignanello, 1997: Just gets better and better. Still far from ready to drink but with several hours in decanter it gets really sweet
Antinori, Tignanello, 1997: Absolutely fantastic - will last for decades
I'm sorry, I don't see anything wrong with any of these notes. Which ones don't meet Mr. Rogov's requirements?
The last I heard, wine and food was a personal pleasure meaning that there should be a myriad of opinions (also know as tasting notes) that could and should potentially be as diverse as those doing the notes. Also, If you read these out of context it is easy to misinterpret the writers intention and message - a message that was probably clear within the context of the full post.
The varied opinions expressed in these notes reflect the power, not the weakness of blogs. Blogs communicate to all levels of experience depending on the experience of the author. That means a reader can find a blogger going through exactly what they are going through and share and expand on that experience with them.
Just because someone tastes thousands of wines on an annual basis, it does not mean that you are wrong when you disagree with them. Is this what Mr. Rogov is arguing, that because they don't agree with his opinion of the very commercial and overpriced Tignanello (the Opus One of Italy) that they are wrong?
-
another ps
Just to show I am trying to be fair here.
I finally looked at Craig Camp's site/blog--I don't know what these things are really!
To give credit where----
The tasting notes are very well done IMOP.
a good example of tating notes that are professionally executed and engaging.
(by the way Craig: what no scores?! lol)
so ok--this is a pretty good site.
the writing is very good--nice job
it's just that there are so many sites--you almost have to "stumble" upon the good one's.
Damn, I forgot to block that IP.
Actually my site provides two functions, which I frankly chose mostly for my needs. First I love to think about wine and food and the pleasures they provide and writing gives me an outlet for that process. Secondly, I have amassed quite a few words on wine over the decades and I need a place to put them - that gets automatic backups. Cataloging my past writing on various sections of my site gives them a home and, if anybody cares to, an opportunity to be read them. My blog is the lead section of my site and everything else is just a library for things I have written or interesting things I find. I suppose there is a third reason, as making and selling wine is my profession, The Wine Camp Blog gives me the opportunity to still be a passionate consumer in love with wine and food.
However, when you arrive at Wine Camp you first get a wine blog, pure and simple.
-
Finally--I guess I am asking why would anyone need to go beyond the books, magazines, journals, newsletters, established web sites and forums and wade through the wine blogs?
I am trying to think of something to say about this question, but I am left speechless.
Wine and cheese night with friends...
in Wine
Posted
Keep in mind that many (if not most) cheeses do not match very well with dry red wines. White wines, sweet wines and fortified wines are much more versatile when it comes to cheese.