
Steve Plotnicki
legacy participant-
Posts
5,258 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Help Articles
Everything posted by Steve Plotnicki
-
I guess that some people know more about spelling then they know about food and wine. (rimshot please. you guys need a rimshot icon)
-
How about saying something about the merits of the original discussion and not the invective that has become a sideshow?
-
The problem is you didn't do anything of the sort. You just made yourself look foolish and resentful to anyone who knows anything about wine.
-
Yes it is that bad and worse. Not only isn't it a number one, it shouldn't even be number 501. That's how bad it is. In fact among 1999 Chateuneuf-du-Papes that are not luxury cuvees, but which are made by reputable producers, I wouldn't be surprised if the Guigal came in dead last. It isn't about disagreeing with Robert Parker, I disagree with him all the time. You can go to his chat room eRobertparker.com and disagree with him online. But the thing about Robert Parker is that there is a reason why he says one wine is 91 and another is 89. But the WS has no discernable reason for why they chose their list. It makes no sense to anyone who has any expertise in wine. You actually have this backwards. You are the one who is being arrogant when you say call people with more expertise then you are arrogant just because they are stating their knowledge. It's people like you who force the quality of food and wine items down for everyone else because they want to insist there is a correlation between what they like and items of quality. But in reality, and it is plain for everyone here to see, there is no correlation at all.
-
Well let me try and answer that question outside of the context of my own usage and ownership of wine, but in the context of my experience as a taster who has been privilaged to drink wines from all sources. Currently, as today's market is situated, $300 is the maximum amount anyone ever needs to spend on a bottle of wine. I assure you that within that price point you can find (at retail, not in a restaurant,) wines that are, or are within spitting distance of, the greatest wines of the world. And in my opinion, starting at the $10 price point and steadily increasing to $300, depending on the region, the quality of the wines increases to the extent that I think they are worth the money. But I think that once you pass the $300 threshold, the incremental uptick in quality starts to diminish. Of course this doesn't address the issue of the fact that there are $40 bottles of wine that blow away bottles that cost 2-3 times as much. I mean last night we drank a 1997 Sandrone Barbera d'Alba that cost me $18 and it rocked more then certain Barolos which sell in the $60 price range would. Of course there are certain wines and regions that have a ridiculous factor built into them. And indeed d'Yqueem is one of those wines. But for some reason, the price of d'Yqueem is reasonable (if you can call $200 a bottle reasonable) until it reaches 15 years of age when the price can double. So I say yes it's worth buying at $200 but not at $400. That's because you can buy 1976 Suiduraut for $200 or less and that's a better buy (we actually drank that wine last week and it was phenomenol.) If $200 gives a sufficient amount of pleasure. Why pay the $400 for the '76 d'Yqueem? But if it doesn't and you want to have it......
-
The foundation point I was trying to make (which appears from your response I at least made in part,) is that at the lower end wine is priced like consumer goods and at the high end it is priced like art. Starting at the low end, somewhere as the price point keeps going up it switches tracks. Exactly where that is is hard to put your finger on and there are a number of factors both personal and qualitative that go into the exact spot it happens. But then my ultimate point is that how much drinking 1967 d'Yqueem (which should sell for around $500) is worth is incalculable by your methodology because it isn't priced like a consumer good. And the reason it isn't priced like a consumer good is that funny money is chasing the wine. By that I mean, the people who want to drink it don't care about the money, they only care about the experience. So the concept of worth gets distorted. And the flip side of your question, is one where you are asked, if you had unlimited funds at your disposal (or enough to make a bottle of $500 sauternes easily affordable,) would you still drink the Guirard with the same frequency? And depending on who else was asked that question, the answer would vary widely depending on which peer group was asked. But if one assumes that the market is efficient enough to take all the different peer groups into consideration, the market price based on supply and demand should be a good bellweather for what the wine is actually worth. I also think it's a mistake to look at big spenders as proof of anything including market inflation. There are people in every economic class who are ignorant about wine and who end up with that Guirard becaue the sommelier recommends it at the price point they are interested in. Of course none of this is to say that the most expensive bottle will be the most enjoyable. In fact I drink lots of Chateauneuf-du-Pape and I more often then not prefer the regular cuvees to the luxury bottlings. But while that might be the case when I'm talking about wines from Roger Sabon, it isn't the case when I'm talking about Bonneau or Rayas. And I would say that spending $500 to be able to drink 1989 Rayas as my house wine is money well spent. Providing the money didn't matter to me. Then the wine certainly would.
-
You don't really mean batch variation do you? Because that would imply that there was something wrong with the curing and smoking process for an entire batch. You just had a tough schtik of fleish which is how it goes sometimes. The next piece of pastrami from the same batch could have been silky with melt in your mouth ribbons of fat attached. But it's like my father the butcher used to say when I would complain that the meat he brought home from his shop was tough, "you can't crawl into the meat." As for Jewish style rye bread, there must be a place in either the Flatbush section of Bkln or the Kew Gardens section of Queens that makes a good rye bread. Whether kosher or even an old school not kosher but Jewish style bakery. Or how about in Riverdale?
-
The list at Daniel is pretty pricey. There were two wines that we thought were worth it, the Meo and a second I can't remember now. Not that the Meo wasn't pricy at $290. But it's a wine that sells for $200-$250 at auction and in relation to other wines there that were priced at twice the auction price or more, it was a bargain if you are from the price is relative school. And I don't know if you want to spend that kind of money but if you do, the wine is a mind boggler. About the best balance of power and purity I've had in a Burgundy in a long while. But it needs air and if you are going to punt, I'd call that afternoon and get them to decant it. If I remember correctly, the Italian section was priced better then the other regions of the world were priced.
-
Thanks Dave. I really don't see it happen very often. And when it does, it revolves around unimformed choices like your sister and the Opus one. Most of the "really good wine" is bought by, and drunk by, people who really care about it. Because while you can be at a place like Daniel and a businessman will swoop in on a ridiculously priced bottle of old Petrus, only people with a high level of expertise are going to order the 1996 Meo-Camuzet Vosne-Romanee Brulees they have on their list. And in the contexct of this thread, if Britcook was buying wines at a higher price point, he wouldn't be buying Opus.
-
I did say generally you know. I didn't say it never happens.
-
Well let me ask you this question. If the cost of visiting museums varied based on the quality of the art on display, would you pay more to see the great artists then you would pay for lesser ones? I ask it that way because you have described wine as a consumable (nothing wrong with that mind you) but if you were to describe it purely as a matter of aesthetics, and you were interested in experiencing that aesthetic, you might take a different view. And that gets you to whether a $500 bottle of d'Yqueem is worth the money? And the answer is, it depends on how much you want to have the experience? There is no law of diminishing returns on aesthetic experiences. Each one is priceless because they aren't about money, they are about quality. As for people drinking better wines then you because they can afford to, rather then because they know about wine, I can attest that from my own experience that it is generally not true. Sure of course you have guys who are flashing their wads for their dates with big hair but, for the most part that is a fallacy and fine wine is consumed by people who have an appreciation of it. There is no reason for someone who knows nothing about wine to order an expensive bottle to a table full of others who know nothing. He isn't impressing anyone.
-
Unfortunately the Pourcels didn't have the time or the inclination to say. But I heard through the grapevine that they are hockey fans.
-
Liz - While there are restaurants who practice a cuisine I might describe as "bistro moderne," I think there isn't a defined term that is universally understood. Just look at how Marcus needed to probe what I meant. So what I was saying in my last post is that I wish there was a universally recognized cuisine called bistro moderne with dishes that were as famous as cassoulet and pot au feu.
-
That sounds yummy. I don't think I've ever met a dish with chestnuts in it that I didn't like. And it'a a typical three star meal as well with the mains being less interesting then the middle courses. I would have liked to have been there.
-
They don't charge for tap water and the service effort isn't that much different then wine.
-
For the record, Kensington Place, Launceston Place and The Chiswick all allow BYO. Can't remember how much they charge though.
-
You know exactly what I'm talking about. It has to do with a certain wager.
-
Macrosan - If you don't tell the truth about what happened here I will out you.
-
The Coste Brothers are bad guys how? Are you speaking about food or them? I always enjoyed their places (lousy food though) but found them to be charming guys and nice hosts that made everyone feel comfortable. Of course that might have changed over the last few years as their business has become rather large. How about the yiddische mama pastrami at Korovo? Who is Jewish, Herme or his wife? The thing about Korovo is that it was French tacky. Only the French would think that sixties moderne style using plastics would be something that people would find chic. The place was like an airport lounge from a science fiction movie. And as "cute" as they thought things like the coke chicken and pastrami were, the hipness factor in those dishes is zero. It would be like going to a trendy place in Rome and they were serving "Pasta ala Heinz Ketchup." Good or not good, to anyone reading the menu on its face, it's just one more example of the French not getting it.
-
Nina - Haven't been to the boroughs in a while and haven't gone with mom for boots yet so nothing to write about. Can I write about the boots? On this sensual/intelectual issue (I'm trying not to take the bait from NickN's comment about taste and subjectivity. Nick, I suggest you read the WS Top 100 Wine's thread on the wine board to understand the difference between taste being a matter of preference as opposed to it being a function of quality,) I think it's personal. Some people intelectualize the dining experience because they are not built in a way that allows them to be moved on a sensual level. But some people enjoy a sensual experience first and then intelectualize what it is that moved them that way. It's sort of like the difference between a person laughing at something funny and someone not being able to laugh and saying, "that's funny." Haven't you met people like that? I never take notes at meals. And the few times I've tried I hated it. I even hate it when others at the table do it. I've been at wine tasting dinners with two dozen bottles of wine and some of the people have their heads buried in little pads for as much of the time as they are paying attention to the food, wine and company. Fortunately I have a good memory so I don't really need to take the notes and if I forget something I can usually call the people I ate with to get the information.
-
Well this is what I had in mind. But I think there was an earlier article on this subject many years ago when the phenomenon first hit. I can't remember what magazine it was in. I want to say Gault Millau but I could be wrong. I can remember a group picture of about 15 chefs who had opened this type of restaurant. I always thought the marketplace could use an in depth analysis of what they cook in these places in the form of a cookbook that included their better recipes. But I guess the phenomenon never caught on in a big enough way to provoke a publisher into doing it. Ultimately the best that could come from this movement is a "moderne bistro cuisine" that is as identifiable as traditional bistro cuisine. Why that never happened is probably a good subject for discussion. Although I have to admit that my own experience with this category is limited to only eating in a few of the places so I would need to go to France for 3 or 7 weeks and do lots of taste testing .
-
Monsieur Regime - I just wanted to say that you have some amazing posts on this thread. Any other places you can free associate about?
-
Based on my one meal at this restaurant last year, I think it's one of the best restaurants in the country. It's clearly the best Asian fusion restaurant I've been to. Those macadamia nut lamb chops are good aren't they?