Scott

Larry Elliott is the Guardian's economics editor; every tenth day he is a magistrate. His opinion column today explains what has been happening to Britain's pubs, and why. John, what are you talking about??

This sounds more like bottle variation, a wine won't slide over the hill from good condition in only 6 months.

While on the whole I do agree with your sentiment, I can imagine many things worse than this . It is a colossal waste and I daresay most if not all of the attendees will be there just to say they were. It is true that no single individual can really appreciate all these wines together or the food for that matter given what is likely to be the sheer quantity and richness of the cuisine. Nevertheless, if someone wanted to pay my way, I wouldn't mind trying just a few of the wines and morsels served with them. Actually any one dinner/tasting would likely be phenomenal, but combined they are suicidal/vinicidal. I hear you Doc, but it to me is everything that is wrong with fine wine, more idiots swanning about talking about wines they tasted as if they had a clue what was going on. the only thing worse? being sat next to one of thi slot at a dinner party any time 6 months after the event. We once had an internet geek come in an want to buy a wine cellar, he had £125,000 and wanted us to put something together. After swiftly showing him the door, we weere amazed anyone thought you could do this. it's not the wines, it's the proud possession of a cellar, which is like a garden - it is tended and cared for over many years waiting for the bloom. it cannot just be plucked out of mid air. The same way attending this tasting would not make you knowledgable, which I am sure is part of the allure for some. It might make you even more dull, but not more knowledgable. A few of my tasting buddies, some very expert, have a view that basically drinking a bottle of wine from top to bottom (not necessarily alone) is worth any number of tasting samples. Tasting is not drinking, and only drinking really gives you a feel for the wine. do you still like it, did it get more or less exciting after one glass, does your emotional reaction to the wine change over time how did you enjoy when you weren;t over analysing every sip. and similar like notions. what is truly odd, is that I have written quite a bit on this subject and kept the real venom this sort of thing inspires to myself. I hate everything represented by this tasting. there I feel better now

I couldn't imagine anything worse than attending this weekend. what a total bore, too much good wine, no balance or perspective, god knows how small shared pore is. and the people who might attend such an event... the whole idea pains me greatly. You cannot appreciate or reason with that many great wines, nor should you try in such a short time. dreadful idea, that represents the very worst in this business.

fair enough, as I said I think I certainly agree your notes on these wines.

Futronic, I think your scores are pretty close for me, but I am wondering if you didn't like them very much, was it worth going to the effort to document them all?

I think it's rather simple, bordeaux is now being made the way he would like to see, and is accusing others of preferring them in any other way. What I find perhaps most disingenous (there should be a league table on this one) is all the references to how 1947 cheval might have tasted, and in turn the implication that this wine (insert perse vintage of pavie) is of that calibre.

Scott, I would suggest you don't know which side your foie is pan-seared on! Or are you just having a grump? lol - maybe you're right

Aren't all arguments the synthesis of a number of views?? you couldn't be more wrong if you're thinking there isn't an almost industry wide push to rid the capital of the 'old man's boozer'. It's common for say a wizard inns, or original pub co., to target aforementioned old man's boozer, and look to revamp into something far more stylish, younger and profitable. I am less concerned about the loss of this piece of heritage, and I am just tired of the tedious low quality bastard children of this particular revolution.

Jim, this is becoming my big wine tip for the summer: fresh, floral, good weight and a bright deceptive acidity that matches food surprisingly well. glad you like it too !

Has the wolseley even been open long enough to have ex chef's?

It's odd, in that he is clearly trying to make a distinctive wine, and yet seems surprised that it polarises opinions. He oftens speaks about the methods and techniques he employs, yet rarely speaks about why these are appropriate for his wine. I am not saying that he is wrong, or they are not appropriate, I just find it odd for instance why he doesn't explain why the burgundian technique of cold maceration should be used at Pavie. Perhaps it should, I don't know, but his response seems to be that it is a good thing in Burgundy so... there are other examples. his indignity seems misplaced, he has great publicity, great sales, and now he wants everyone to think the same. I think you sacrifice the first for the last point don't you?

oh yes, first and foremost

John, my favourite pub, which eschews the gastro chic but qualifies on the basis of it's first class food is the Churchill Inn in Paxford. great pub, with a serious kitchen.

almost certainly not, his dogma is that he demands certain conformity, and disregards all that falls outside. I don't think he mourns the loss of what was once close to him, but that that never were. I.e. a gastropub is a place that has foregone the opportunity to appeal to him, rather than a favourite boozer gone rogue.

I have little to argue about with Gastropubs, other than the inherent lack of quality in those establishments that hide behind the name. there is nothing wrong with a gastropub in concept, but I probably object to the name. Most gastro pubs are really 'restaurants lite', and long stopped being pubs. Nothing wrong with that at all, but the name implies a certain evolving ancestory and lineage that isn't so relevant. My contention is that a pub serving decent food isn't a gastro pub, it is a pub with a decent kitchen. However a 'restaurant lite' that aspires to pub chic, merely because of the physical premises it inhabits, should have that fact wiped from consideration and be regarded as a gastropub. or restaurant lite as I imply. lemme 'splain further. 2 recent ES pubs of the year are near enough to me. The bedford, this is a pub. there is nothing than can change that, it reeks of old man smells, and traditional comforts. it is everything good about a pub, wonderful atmosphere and conviviality, very few design features, plenty of room to mingle, good beers, friendly staff and a decent bit of simple pub grub to order. it is a place to drink. Earl Spencer is a restaurant masquerading as a pub. I like the place, but it simply is not a pub in any understood definition. There is no room to drink, every inch is crammed with a table beckoning propsective diners in. The beer is good, anywhere with hook norton on draught is good. But punters pack in for meal times, and clear out afterwards. Take a look between 3 & 6 pm on saturday, prime drinking hours, you can hear tumbleweeds through there. staff almost look at you, 'with why are you here' eyes. The cooking is of very good standard and but not pub priced either. Almost no bar area, no standing room, and no real options to drink unless you jag a table from the ruck of people diving at the next empty one. As a drinker management have made a decision that you are not really wanted, the design and layout demonstrates this. It is not a problem, and it is not a pub per se. I think once a gastropub may have been an improvement on the old man boozer to many people, but it kept evolving, like a virulent mutant strain of flu, until it no longer resembles the original host organism. I won't criticise it for this, nor will I compare it backwards.

Andy, did they at least explain what it was, and why it goes with the dish when they presented each glass?

I think you needs something with freshness, that can handle the oilyness of the fish, would suggest a dry spatlese from 2002, or possibly Rosata Arneis - Giacosa?

Jim, you might be curious to know Pierre Lurton does not like 2000 cheval blanc, much preferring the 1998. He finds the 2000 too exotic and ripe, lacking cheval character; whereas the 1998 is crisp with elegant tannins and reflects the style he feels is most 'cheval' and correct. I tend to agree, though the 2000 is of course very fine wine nonetheless.

In my short experience, she is certainly not the sort of person you'd want to pick a fight with. As an example, during the meal last Monday, I had to take a short call from the better half who I'd taken into hospital that morning for an op under general anaesthetic (hence why I was unusually had an opportunity for lunch). My phone was on vibrate, and when it rang I immediately walked outside as I usually do to take the call rather than subject the other diners to my phone call. Missus Aikens was not overly amused and was rather blunt about telling me that my sea bass was ready and what should they do with it. I don't know what the fuss was about - it was a cold course anyway. I hate to say it but I ended up finding myself apologising to her. I don't think she knows how to deal with things tactfully. Not the sort of lady I'd contemplate messing with at all. Cheers, Howard Howard, given the wine you ordered, and their likely profit from that, she should have been holding the phone for you!!

Craig, this is of course correct, you lose primary aromatics the longer it is exposed to air. how long is too long, well that depends... You also certainly lose the crisp snap as the fruit loses it's vibrancy, which is one of the things I think burgundy is all about. ========== I think the debate began thus, "8 hours for a middling grade 90 burg is too long" "No it's not, some need up to 24 hours" personal preference and moderation developed later on. For me, and the literally hundreds of burg's I taste each year the former statement ties more closely with my experience and understanding of conventional wisdom.

cheers. I like the part where NO ONE ever complains, I think that's because Mrs Aikens bought her hearing aid from Brilliant Industries...

Well, if the wine keeps drinking better and better over such a long period of time, then it obviously "needs" that amount of time to open up. Believe whatever you want. I'm comfortable with my position on this matter, based not only on quite a bit of personal experience, but also on that of others who've reported similar findings. do tell?

Disagree strongly. They can need as much as 24 hours of air before opening up when they're not yet fully mature. That's insane, a sure fire way to destroy a good wine. I should correct that, and say that it's one thing to observe how a wine develops over time and another entirely to suggest a wine 'needs' such a long time to breathe.

You describe one like we had last September, though it wasn't given time to open in a decanter as it deserved. The wine we tasted last week was nothing like the one you describe. It was very nice indeed. No forgiveness, just the facts, man. };^)> I could happily believe that there is bottle variation, but the 1989 reserve and the Laurence's of both years share similarities in all the bottles I have had. Hard, firm, and lacking generousity, I have always preferred these wines young. I can't really believe that decanting is going to help as much as you suggest. Fact is this wine (1990 CR) disappoints too often to deserve the accolades often bestowed upon it.