Robert Parker and the Wine Advocate

[Rebel Rose]

One question (or rather an assumption) I'd like clarity around.  I believe he buys the wines he tastes.  Am I right?  If so, I gotta go into that business.  Imagine the tax write off. 

Eh, no.

He may buy some wines, but most of us are happy to send two bottles of our favorite releases.

When I wrote a wine column for the local newspaper a few years ago, my focus was on humorous and informative columns. I didn't feel it was appropriate to review local wines, but every once in awhile I'd get a shipment from a local winery, with all the press information included. Hmmm. What with free samples, and a tax deduction for wine, you could set youself up in business quickly!

A related thread could be the so-called wine competitions sponsored by fairs, which require much more wine, and an entry fee! We have friends who volunteer for the ****** ****** Fair competition, and they are paid in wine. They collect 10+ cases of "gold medal" wines at 50% off retail (these wines were donated) for their efforts. Huh?

[albiston]

It's all subjective, so why not go with a subjective rating system? So, I've recently adapted the TIVO rating system for judging my wines.*

1 thumb up Okay, a good weekday wine.

2 thumbs up Good, something to share with a friend once or twice a month.

3 thumbs up Mine, mine, mine! Something to drink once every three or four months.

1 thumb down Not bad, but drink only if desparate, or it's on sale.

2 thumbs down Make a note not to buy again.

3 thumbs down Pretend to have a headache and can't drink.

* This is much like the one-two-three-glass Gambero Rosso rating system for Italian wines; probably the most common-sense review system implemented in the world.

I would agree with Gambero Rosso's system being a well-thought common-sense one. It is nonetheless based on a 100 point system, different from Parker's but inspired by him. The approximate equivalent of the GR glasses is 70-79 pts, 1 glass; 80-89 pts 2: over 90 pts 3 glasses.

This point-glasses relation is not always exact: an 88-89 points wine from an emergent wine region might get a three glasses award as a recognition of excellence. What might be interesting is that quite a few Italian wine lovers are not too happy with GR's system especially regarding the 80-89 pts wines. I've often heard the complaint that there should be a way to separate wines over 85 pts from those below this score. Reminds you ofthe way some people "read" Parker, doesn't it ?

BTW, Brad: GR also gave Clelia Romano's Colli di Lapio an 87, in their last issue, they didn't like Caggiano though, too heavy and alcoholic was their comment, I think. And I couldn't agree more with you, if people won't buy Colli di Lapio even better, it's my favorite Fiano too. Mind sharing ?

[john b]

Let's face some facts:

Most American consumers like the taste of oak in their wines. They like these heavy, sweet flavors more than tart wines with high acidity. They also like a bit of residual sugar.

Most American wine producers love the taste of oak in their wines. They also like the taste of a little residual sugar.

Most American wine retailers have abdicated from their position as a wine merchant and just regurgitate scores to sell wine instead of making their own selections. (importers and restaurants are guilty here too)

Because Robert Parker also scores wines highly that have plenty of oak and fruit does not mean the entire trend is his fault. Both producers and consumers, in general, like the same thing he does. It's not his fault that most consumers agree with him. It is not his fault that retailers don't have the guts to promote their own selections.

Robert Parker has never claimed to do anything else than write about his personal preferences and communicate those preferences to his subscribers. In this regard he does an extraordinary job. To blame him for the weaknesses of the rest of the market is not reasonable.

Robert Parker should be respected for his discipline and consistency. If there are problems there are others to blame: including ourselves.

How much of the wine consuming public's opinion of over-oaked, high alcohol, big, sweet wines is the "emporer's new clothes syndrome", i.e. the "experts" like these wines so I should like them, too??

[Brad Ballinger]

How much of the wine consuming public's opinion of over-oaked, high alcohol, big, sweet wines is the "emporer's new clothes syndrome", i.e. the "experts" like these wines so I should like them, too??

That's a great question, John.

However, I don't think Craig was making a link between the public's buying habits and Parker's opinion of wines. When Craig mentions the "American" consumer, he is likely paralleling other conventional wisdom regarding American consumers. One oft-opined point is that many Americans have a "Coca-Cola palate," that is one that has been weend on sweetend soft drinks.

Hence, a preference for sweeter, lower acid, softened-by-oak wines.

But taking your question on its own, assuming the rest of this thread didn't exist, that is part of the point I was making in my first post. If Parker gave a wine 93 points, then my friend figures he should like it, too. And then if he pays a lot for a wine with high Parker points, it's harder for him not too like it -- too much cognitive dissonance to overcome.

[ctgm]

How much of the wine consuming public's opinion of over-oaked, high alcohol, big, sweet wines is the "emporer's new clothes syndrome", i.e. the "experts" like these wines so I should like them, too??

That's a great question, John.

However, I don't think Craig was making a link between the public's buying habits and Parker's opinion of wines. When Craig mentions the "American" consumer, he is likely paralleling other conventional wisdom regarding American consumers. One oft-opined point is that many Americans have a "Coca-Cola palate," that is one that has been weend on sweetend soft drinks.

Hence, a preference for sweeter, lower acid, softened-by-oak wines.

But taking your question on its own, assuming the rest of this thread didn't exist, that is part of the point I was making in my first post. If Parker gave a wine 93 points, then my friend figures he should like it, too. And then if he pays a lot for a wine with high Parker points, it's harder for him not too like it -- too much cognitive dissonance to overcome.

John, I think a lot of people do.

Brad, I think things are a little deeper than that. I agree with you that a lot of people see a high score and then think that it must be good. This is down to many consumers being very unconfident with their own choice either becuase they do not know a huge amount about wine or (and rather foolishly) that they do not want to be seen to be making a mistake when pulling a wine out in front of their friends.

I find it very depressing when people who can afford the best but are not confident enough to look past RPs scribings, only buy the top scoring wines. They seem to pretend that they are very "knowledgeable" about wine when all they are in fact good at is reading.

Here in the UK, I often get the same comment from people when discussing wine (either what we are drinking then and there or what they ususally plump for). It goes along the lines of "it's probably not very good", to which my answer is "if you like it, then it's good." But why are people sometimes so apologetic/unconfident about what they drink? Is it the same in the USA?

Edited September 2, 2004 by ctgm (log)

[ademello]

Parker offers what I call "assumed prestige," the same way that shopping at a Chanel or Louis Vuitton boutique allows the consumer to rest assured that their purchase will be viewed with taste and deference by their peers, and they will be purchasing a quality product at the same time.

Not to say that shopping at Banana Republic would not yield the same result, it's just a different type of purchase by a consumer with different needs and interests than the consumer shopping at Chanel.

Parker conferns upon wines and wine makers this sense of assumed prestige, much the same way a LV monogram transforms a well-made piece of leather into a luxury good. The only thing that has changed is the assumed prestige that the consumer is paying a premium for. Parker rating a wine 90+ is culturally the same as a well-respected celebrity favoring a certain clothing brand.

There are many issues that are being discussed in this thread that are confusing the point being made, but something to keep in mind is that the average consumer and even the sophisticated consumer simply doesn't spend as much time and effort learning about and enjoying wine as people on this board do. I'm sure I'm not alone in admitting that I don't only spend time and money drinking wine; I spend quite a bit of time, effort, and energy reading about it, bidding on wine, collecting it, cellaring, re-arranging the cellar, and generally being a wine geek. Such is not the case for 90+ of the wine-drinking population.

For these people, Parker (or the Wine Spectator) is an easy way for them to procure this assumed prestige. Being able to proudly state that the wine they are serving their guests received a high scrore from Parker allows them to confer their taste and deference for quality to their guests, who themselves are probably also wouldn't be able to know of care about the difference.

This has nothing to do with Coca-Cola palates - that's a totally separate argument. The #1 selling wine in the US (correct me if I'm wrong) is Yellow Tail shriaz. If I'm wrong, it's probably some other generic wine that may not seem great to people here, but it certainly is good enough for the tastes of the Average Consumer.

Just so everyone knows, sometimes I agree with Parker and sometimes I don't. It is completely ridiculous for anyone to think that enjoying wine is based on anything else other than personal taste, just as it is for every other type of consumed good. Parker gives people a certain sense of confidence that what they are buying is "good" - from his well-respected point of view. That's not to say that you as an individual consumer will agree with him.

Parker is good for wine and the wine industry because he gets people talking about wine. In good time I'm sure we'll see an anti-Parker that hates any kind of over-extracted full-bodied wines. Toronto alread has theirs in the form of Billy Munnelly. He is the #1 independent wine critic in Canada, and focuses primarily on under-$30 wines that are good value and, in my opinion, counter-Parker in terms of style. He also publishes an entertaining, well-presented newsletter.

It would be nice if the average person would look beyond Parker's scores to his tasting notes, which I find to be incredibly accurate. You can't blame Parker for the fact that people refer to his scores more often than his notes - that's just the way the culture is tuned.

[tommy]

But why are people sometimes so apologetic/unconfident about what they drink? Is it the same in the USA?

one reason: because there's oftentimes an air of "he doesn't know what he's talking about", or, "she doesn't know enough about wine to contribute meaningfully to this discussion" that pops up in the strangest places: dinner, social engagements, food/wine websites, etc.

[ctgm]

It would be nice if the average person would look beyond Parker's scores to his tasting notes, which I find to be incredibly accurate.

what's this underbrush that RP always goes on about? never tasted it myself

[carswell]

what's this underbrush that RP always goes on about? never tasted it myself

It's a rather prosaic translation of the French term sous-bois, defined as either the plants in a forest that grow under the trees or the part of the forest where such plants grow. IMHO, a more evocative rendering is "forest floor." Either way, it's used more often to describe a wine's bouquet than its taste. Think wet leaves, humus, downed trees, ferns, moss, etc.

[Brad Ballinger]

what's this underbrush that RP always goes on about? never tasted it myself

I've seen the word "garrigue" used to describe this sort of thing. But without seeing a specific use, it's hard to say if this is the right word or not.

[derricks]

You can't blame Parker for the fact that people refer to his scores more often than his notes - that's just the way the culture is tuned.

Certainly not. I've long argued that the Parker Effect isn't really Parker's fault, it's the fault of the people who heed him or kow-tow to him.

On the other hand, he often says that the tasting notes are the really important part of the description. So why include the scores at all? Oh, I know, I know. It's a convenient shorthand for all that comes after. But you'd think he'd want people to read the notes and encourage them to do so by leaving off the scores. Of course, then, people wouldn't buy TWA because it would be too dull

[carswell]

I've seen the word "garrigue" used to describe this sort of thing.  But without seeing a specific use, it's hard to say if this is the right word or not.

Garrigue isn't quite the same thing as underbrush.

Miriam-Webster Online defines underbrush as:

shrubs, bushes, or small trees growing beneath large trees in a wood or forest

Le Petit Robert defines garrigue as:

Terrain aride à sous-sol calcaire de la région méditerrainéenne ; végétation broussailleuse qui couvre ce genre de terrain.

[The barren soil over a limestone subsoil of the Mediterranean region ; the shrubby vegetation that covers this type of soil.]

In other words, garrigue isn't undergrowth and is region specific. The predominant odour is sun-baked earth with a resiny whiff of the plants that grow wild on it, especially herbs like rosemary and thyme.

Edited September 3, 2004 by carswell (log)

[ademello]

I find it simply smells like the forest after it rains, which is probably a good description for city folk like myself who rarely venture into nature. Personally, I call it "tree stank" which is inaccurate, but to my mind (nose), that's exactly what it smells like. You'll know it when you smell it!

Edited September 5, 2004 by ademello (log)

[Carolyn Tillie]

If you don't subscribe to Food and Wine, you might want to pick up a copy. Robert M. Parker, Jr. "the world's foremost wine guru, makes 12 bold predictions about seismic changes that will influence how we'll shop, what we'll buy, and how much we'll pay:

1. Distribution will be revolutionized.

2. The wine Web will go mainstream.

3. World bidding wars will begin for top wines.

4. France will feel a squeeze.

5. Corks will come out.

6. Spain will be the star.

7. Malbec will make it big.

8. California's Central Coast will rule.

9. Southern Italy will ascend.

10. Unoaked wine will find a wider audience.

11. Value will be valued.

12. Diversity will be the word.

Obviously, I can't reprint the article, but I think DoverCanyon will be thrilled by #8 and I'm pretty happy about a few of the others... (#1, #7, and #10 specifically).

Read -- so we can discuss more fully!

[Rebel Rose]

8. California's Central Coast will rule.

I believe he said the "Central Coast will rule America." Why not the universe??!!?

Here's a link to the full article.

Are you guys in the thick of it yet? We are SLAMMED with fruit. Totally full up. Crushing reds and pressing whites today. Have a great harvest!

[Carolyn Tillie]

I believe he said the "Central Coast will rule America."  Why not the universe??!!? 

Here's a link to the full article.

Are you guys in the thick of it yet?  We are SLAMMED with fruit.  Totally full up.  Crushing reds and pressing whites today.  Have a great harvest!

←

Arrgh! You caught me -- I didn't think the article was online! Thanks for posting it.

Our first batch of grapes are coming in tomorrow morning... The blog will be chock-full tomorrow evening as I show pics of the beginning of crush.

[docsconz]

An interesting article and generally good news for most wine consumers-the exception being the future collectors of "collectible" wines, who according to parker will be paying outrageous sums by today's standards. This, of course, is good news to those currently collecting said wines. Of particular interest to me was his emphasis on the decline of wood in most of the world's wines and the increase in diversity. i especially hope the latter comes true. I don't think he really went out on a big limb for any of these prognostications, but it is interesting to see them all in one place, espoused by a person of his stature.

[wnissen]

It's interesting that Parker believes the Web is the future, and yet his bulletin board and website are both run by third parties. I guess he doesn't find them sufficiently important just yet.

I'm curious about the argument that there will be ten times the demand for the greatest wines. Certainly this has already happened once, but (and please pardon this broad assumption) many of the new winos are Boomers. It would not surprise me to see a decline in fine wine demand as the boomers leave the market. Then again, 10% of the U.S. population drinks 85% of the wine (ish), so it wouldn't take much to increase that percentage.

Walt

[LindaJ]

I'm not an industry insider or anything, but these struck me as being pretty obvious statements, not "seismic changes." Probably cause I read eGullet every day? We talk about this kind of stuff all the time here.

The internet has obviously changed everything and darn near every statement he makes reflects that directly or indirectly. Buyers have better information about wines and better ways of buying them. Maybe I've been sipping too much Pinot Noir, but my feeling is that we are already the mainstream and Parker is a little behind the times.

[docsconz]

It's interesting that Parker believes the Web is the future, and yet his bulletin board and website are both run by third parties. I guess he doesn't find them sufficiently important just yet.

I'm curious about the argument that there will be ten times the demand for the greatest wines. Certainly this has already happened once, but (and please pardon this broad assumption) many of the new winos are Boomers. It would not surprise me to see a decline in fine wine demand as the boomers leave the market. Then again, 10% of the U.S. population drinks 85% of the wine (ish), so it wouldn't take much to increase that percentage.

Walt

←

His point about an increased demand for upper end wines is not that the demand will be driven by American boomers but by increased demand from economically emerging parts of the world such as China. this argument does indeed have some cogency to it.

[CtznCane]

I think Parker is pretty dead on with his observations. Of course living in CoCo (Contra Costa) County which is the northern edge of the Central Coast region I am most interested in that remark.

The Central Coast boom is not limited to the Paso and Santa Barbara areas. The Livermore Valley is booming as well. Regardless of which part of the Central Coast there are certainly some nice wines to be found.

Are the Central Coast wines superior in quality to the Napa and Sonoma county wines? I don't think so. Certainly they are reaching at least somewhat of a par with Napa & Sonoma but certainly not greater. The separation they have is that for the most part the Central Coast wines are more approachable price wise which gets towards the value issue.

Too many (imho) Napa Valley wines are overpriced. Hoisted on their own pitard they've jacked their prices to an elite level. While I wouldn't go so far as to say some of them are not worth the price, in general I'd say may of the higher end (for here let's call that the $40+ wines) have at least 20%+ blue sky tacked on. Even taking into consideration the higher land costs (but heck, they knew that going in) it doesn't add up.

The part about the upper echelon wines still increasing is also true. This is not unusual with many products. The top ones will always be able to command more, go up in price, and still easily obtain it.

I'd guess that the two types of wine which will be hit hardest in terms of sales are the inexpensive wines that are just a tad too high to really be inexpensive and the premium wines that try to price themselves as an ultra premium.

[Rebel Rose]

I thought I'd bump up the Parker thread now that the film Mondovino has been released on DVD. But please, let's keep reviews of the film in the Mondovino thread, and observations on the Wine Advocate here.

My review.

[jbonne]

and observations on the Wine Advocate here.

←

including or excluding Elin McCoy's new book?

[Rebel Rose]

including or excluding Elin McCoy's new book?

I feel a separate thread for reviews on the book would be appropriate. If the thread turns out to be as tiny as a Boisset, we can merge it into the Parker thread later.

[ctgm]

One thing I always think about when reading Parker's mag is "how good are the American wines"?

American wine is not vastly widespread in this country (UK) because they tend to be more expensive than other wine producing countries (and nothing to do with their taste), so your thoughts would be appreciated.

Reading the WA there are hundreds of US wines that score 90+ and plenty score 95+. It always seems to me that American wines get higher scores than other wines of the world. Is this because they are "better" or is their a certain patriotism or marketig purpose (on the WA's behalf) for this? Or is it my imagination?