Craig Camp

Depends totally on the reputation of the merchant - and then it is still a big risk. Listen to Steve - you better find out where those bottles have been all this time.

Thanks for the great post. I have not eaten at either but will visit both soon - I can't wait. When you describe the wines list as great to 'your taste' - what do you mean? What are you looking for in a great wine list?

I have to correct a few things here. 1. The term "german varietals" refers to grapes in the germanic region, not to the political borders of modern-day Germany. That is why german varietals are grown to this day in . . . ITALY, as well as in Austria. Also, some of the best rieslings in the world come from Austria, debunking the myth that Austians only make good GVs. 2. GV is certainly not "bone chilling dry." While it is certainly not as sweet as, say, an auslese riesling from the Mosel, well made GVs tend to be lower in acidity and therefore appeal to sweet wine drinkers looking for more food friendly wines. 3. In general, the ripeness level of the grapes in Germany are indicative of the eventual residual sugar content of the wine. 1. By Germanic varietals in Italy you must be refering to Alto Adige. Alto Adige was Austrian unitl WW1 and to this day is more Austrian in character than Italian. Traminer (Gewurztraminer) is named for the town of Tramin in this area and Tramin is considered the modern home of Traminer - not Germany. The Reisling Italico of Italy is not the same varietal as the Reisling of Germany. There is some Rhine Reisling in Italy but not much. By the way - what myth are you refering to about Austria only making good GV? I see review after review on other varietals. 2. One man's sweet is another man's dry. I'll agree with Katie here also - for me these are dry wines. 3. An Auslese in the Mosel does not have the same impact of sweetness as one from the Rheingau or Rheinhessen. There not only variations in region but from vineyard to vineyard and producer to producer. Katie's statement is correct and the legal reference on the label is based on sugar at harvest. If you doubt this just try an Auslese Trocken.

The current statistic for time between purchase and consumption is 4 hours.

This WSJ article is the subject of ridicule on more than one bulletin board. I would suggest being careful in following the contents of this article.

Be careful here - what if they have no idea what the wine is or how much it cost? They could end up not even liking the wine if they are not used to the style. Try to find out something about their preferences before you drop a hundred on something they don't like.

Ditto. I'd much rather drink San Pelligrino.

DuBoeuf Beaujolais has had a distinct banana aroma in the past because of the yeast they used for fermentation. I believe they have changed the yeast strain they are using. The Band-aid smell tends to come from brett. A perfect description of corky smells.

Nice suggestions by all. Just remember it is only in the USA we are so hung up about wine, or should I say hung up about making mistakes. If you go forward with the suggestions these people you have made you won't go wrong. In Europe most people just drink the local wines without too much thought. When you are starting in wine there is nothing wrong with staying on the cheap side. Whites are often easier to start with than reds. If you don't want to dig into the books (or even if you do) seek a a good retailer who can guide you through their selections and whom you can share your likes and dislikes with so they can guide you to wines that appeal to you. In the days before white zinfandel, the 'entry' wines for most were German. I still think inexpensive Kabinett wines from Germany with their low alcohol and light sweetness is a great place to start. If you have specific questions about wines you have tasted or taste in the future please feel free to e-mail me with questions. Most of all just have fun. Wine is about enjoyment.

Looks like your plan is working well.

OK - that might come close to perfect! On the subject of near perfect wines last night. 1985 Krug in magnums, 1970 Palmer, & 1976 Y'Quem. We had these with roasted whole fois gras. This was really!!! close to perfedtion Perfection overload. OK - there you go. Three wines that could be argued to 100 point wines on their own, but because you had them together I bet you compared them and had a favorite. Thy can't all be perfect if you prefered one of them.

OK - that might come close to perfect!

That's it exactly. Perfection implies consensus - a standard that can be measured that all agree on. Part of the excitement of wine is that no such consensus exists and the debate part of the thrill. Parker and Coates may score wines in a similar range but do so from different approaches and with a different 'ideal' or picture of perfection.

Good point Steve - the 1,000,000th thread on why Parker sucks is boring. By the way I don't think he sucks. He is the most reliable out there because you can learn his palate and then us it as a reference point. When he scores a wine high I know what it tastes like - it does not matter if I agree with him. If people follow him like cattle that's their fault. Let's get this back on track as it was just getting interesting.

i'm not sure what you mean by "statistical" in this context, but apparently there is a difference, in the eye of the reviewer. The question is not if the reviewer thinks there is a difference. The question is if you analyze a reviewers scores over time that the margin of error will spread out over a range of several points – making the difference of several points irrelevant.

Yes I think you are right, certainly a wine can be up and down during its evolution. The qualities of the finest wines should be obvious to experienced tasters at all levels of maturity - even over maturity. Scoring should be rating a wines potential at its peak - even if the peak is tomorrow or twenty years from now.

Let's not digress into yet another Parker debate. My point is there is no statistical difference in quality between 97 and 100 (maybe lower) that can be measured.

This makes absolutely no sense. Enthusiasm and excitement about what, the label design? It has to be about enthusiasm and excitement about something that he detects in the wine that is actually different. Debate all you want but in reality there is no measurable difference between 99 and 100. Do you expect us to believe that Mr. Parker is not excited about a 99 point wine?

Perfection is a tough thing to touch as it is always moving. The concept of the ‘perfect wine’ is obviously ridiculous. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The 100 point wine is a marketing mechanism designed to sell the reviewers publications. It is not possible to attain perfection when there are so many variables from bottle to bottle. Maybe one bottle, in one situation, with one meal, with exactly the right companions becomes a 100 point experience, but because a change in any of these variables (even including the weather) can change your perception of a wine from bottle to bottle to label a wine ‘perfect’ is a bit silly. In fact by labeling a wine ‘perfect’ it becomes less perfect because of the cost and difficulty of obtaining a bottle. I have seen many comment on their disappointment after going through hell to obtain one of these perfect nectars because they were let down by all wine after all the hype. One also needs to consider statistical variation. What is the real difference between a wine scored 97 or 98 compared to one scored 100? Take for instance Robert Parker. Mr. Parker is known to taste hundreds of wines in one session and has said he can fully analyze a wine in about 5 seconds. So, when he gives a wine 100 points that only means the wine is perfect to him in that situation. The only wines that can stand out in this environment are powerful blockbusters and those are the wines he scores highly and obviously personally prefers. I would also add that Mr. Parker is clearly a remarkable wine taster worthy of respect – even though I do not agree with his preference in wine style. Besides personal variables there are the variables of the wine itself, often called a living thing, wine changes (both improves and declines) with age and environment. Then there are the changes wines go through because of storage and shipment in less than perfect conditions. A bottle you drink at a restaurant in New York may have received much different treatment than a different bottle of the same wine you have in Dallas. Neither bottle may be spoiled, but there is often a difference. So yes I think you can have a perfect bottle – that is a wine in perfect condition, at its peak of maturity, with an outstanding meal and wonderful companions, but to argue that an individual wine is perfect is to ignore the realities of the chaos theory. There are just too many variables.

Peter, I confess to few visits to Torino but I have enjoyed both Torricelli and L'Agrifoglio - both top class, modern but regional trattorie. My friends give rave reviews to Lou Sarvanot and Slow Food loves it too - but I have not eaten there, yet! Enjoy the slopes!

For good regional wine lists and excellent equally regional food go to Paradisino (Via Coriolano Vighi 33 - 051 566401) and Gigna (Via Stendhal, 1 - 051 322132) don't miss the tortellini at either. When in Emilia Romagna drink the wines ofs Fattoria Zerbina - the best in the region and one of Italy's best wineries. They are in Faenza in Romagna and worth the visit (0546-400220) and they speak English.

I think it is correct and part of the sommeliers job to reject a corked bottle of wine and bring a new bottle. After all, corked bottles are not part of a wine making decision, but are the failure of the packaging system. Far too many corked bottles are consumed by people who do not recognize them as corked - they just think that producer makes bad wines. Returns of corked bottles by restaurants to wholesalers are far below even the most conservative estimates of the number bottles likely to be corked – that means those wines are being drunk. How often have you ordered a wine by the glass only to find it badly corked and the bottle mostly gone? Someone from the restaurant should have tasted and rejected that bottle before serving it. The chef rejects (hopefully) foul smelling fish or meat, why should the sommelier not reject faulted wine? For other faults like Brett, apparently beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the customer must decide.

By the way there are many Albanians living in Italy. More than a few families are now there for mulitple generations. It would not be strange to see an Albanian who worked and trained in an Italian pizzeria. Some of them must have come to the USA.

Of course - what do you call them in Louisville? Guarda, miei fratelli stanno facendo una buona pizza! Tutti italiani sono fratelli - guisto?

Isn't this the same as what they do in Sweden?