Spit or swallow? (for wine aficionados here!)

[Gifted Gourmet]

the article in Slate Magazine

as with so many other wine-related rituals, spitting is no simple matter. Proper technique and correct form count for a lot more than you might think in wine circles. British wine writer Jancis Robinson's latest book, How To Taste, and discovered that she devotes an entire page and then some to the topic of spitting. One sentence in particular struck a nerve: " 'Spit with pride' might well be the wine taster's motto." "there are three types of spitters: droolers, dribblers, and beeline spitters."

Please do read the article (circa 2002, as if it mattered on the topic) for some humorous yet interesting comments on spitting during a wine tasting ...

When you go to a wine tasting, do you spit or swallow?

Daniel Rogov: can you weigh in on this matter as a distinguished wine critic?

["T"]

Holy shite!!!!!

If at proper tastings you don't spit then you pass go, do not collect $200.00, skip wine lover, wine snob, wine geek and go straight to wino.

Spitting is paramount. Without spitting there is no wine appreciating.

Only drinking. Which leads to more drinking which ends up to staggering.

Great at parties, shamefull at tastings.

[Daniel Rogov]

Keeping in mind that drinking and tasting are two vastlydifferent sets of activities,

unless one has a special passion for acquiring an assortment of diseases, primarily liver and heart related, spitting is de rigueur at tastings.

As to how one does that - with all due respect to Ms. Robinson (for whom I do indeed have a high level of respect) - ain't no way to be "proud" of one's spitting for like urination and other bodily functions spitting is simply a biological necessity. Not to be ashamed of, for sure, but proud???

A simple truth of the matter is that with the exception of those few noble souls who can spit with accuracy into a bucket some 3 meters away from where they are standing, there is nothing dignified about spitting. Necessary - yes.

Aesthetically pleasing -no!

One word I always give to young colleagues at tastings where there are tv or other cameras present, is to never allow themselves to be photographed while spitting. No better way to yourself look undignified.

[jackal10]

Agreed. If you are tasting, say, 50 wines in a session you have to spit.

Professional sommeliers and the like might taste 5000 wines/year. Many of those you would not want to swallow - very young and tannic wines, for example.

Hopefully the organisers will have provided a proper spitoon, or a least a wine box with a plastic garbage gag filled with sawdust. This gives you a reasonable area to am for, and the adsorbant surface minimises back spatter.

Edited June 14, 2005 by jackal10 (log)

[MaxH]

I too am amazed at this: Why does Slate Magazine have to raise the topic? It is an ordinary one among wine tasters and, as D. Rogov pointed out, it is a mundane function.

Here's a timely note that I wrote some weeks ago elsewhere.

In my opinion, spitting is a key part of wine tasting because it allows separation between wine tasting and wine drinking, two different things if you are trying to learn about wine. (The two can be combined of course, but that should be a conscious choice I think.)

French verb is cracher, and facility at it is expected if you visit French wine producers. (Beginners are encouraged to practice in the shower.) Crachoir is a spittoon and is often found at wineries. Different producers have different customs; some provide a bucket of sand, others request cracher à bas (spit down -- on the ground outside or in a dirt-floor underground cellar). (Not long ago Anne Gros was sampling some of her Burgundies with pride and moved into her rare barrels; the first person who tasted proceeded to swallow instead of spitting, because the wine was so good; the taster bashfully called this cracher à l'interieur.) Practice is helpful whether you need to reach a certain spot on the ground, a bucket, or a spittoon at a large public US tasting.

I probably posted here earlier about the well-prepared winegeek habit of carrying wine accessories in the car trunk. An emergency tasting glass or two, temporary cork closures, and most usefully, a package of ordinary supermarket disposable opaque plastic half-liter drink cups. They make perfect personal spit cups, and we use them often in tasting groups. You can take one with you into a large public tasting and then your marksmanship is not tested severely if you are some distance from the spittoon. Though hitting a difficult target with skill is always gratifying.

[JohnL]

The only reason to "spit" is to avoid becoming inebriated.

If a tasting includes enough wine to do that then spitting is fine.

If one is tasting a total quantity of wine equal to that which would

cause one to become inebriated and that person does not want to be

inebriated then one should spit all or some of the wine.

Frankly wine tastings are more fun if the participants are a bit "buzzed."

[jayt90]

I prefer to swallow, and to avoid going to 'must spit' affairs. For one thing, the complete aftertaste of a wine can be appreciated, even two minutes after tasting.

However, my ability to differentiate fades after two or three glasses. But I would rather taste all of what a wine is offering, and enjoy the effect.

[Brad Ballinger]

I remember the Slate article when it first came out. At the time I thought it was one of the best written pieces on any aspect of wine appreciation. I still do. I think Steinberger has a gift for writing about wine that doesn't make it seem primer-like. And he doesn't take himself or the topic too seriously.

[jbonne]

Holy shite!!!!!

If at proper tastings you don't spit then you pass go, do not collect $200.00, skip wine lover, wine snob, wine geek and go straight to wino.

Spitting is paramount. Without spitting there is no wine appreciating.

Only drinking. Which leads to more drinking which ends up to staggering.

Great at parties, shamefull at tastings.

←

quite.

if you're tasting for work, or for your own rigorous evaluation, and you're not spitting ... you're dulling your ability to do your job, essentially performing the equivalent of mid-day nipping from a bottle under your desk. (disclaimer: i have occasionally had a glass of wine during a workday lunch, and an end-of-day beer for a farewell party. but i didn't expect to get as much work done afterwards.)

if you want to go to a tasting to drink a bunch of wine and get a buzz on, have at it. all i ask is: (1) be able to leave the venue standing, and (2) don't stand in front of the dump bucket.

[Phil Ward]

<<if you want to go to a tasting to drink a bunch of wine and get a buzz on, have at it. all i ask is: (1) be able to leave the venue standing, and (2) don't stand in front of the dump bucket.

>>

Here, here. The number of tastings I have attended over the years is in the thousands. Without fail, there are always attendees staggering about as well as standing in front of the crachoir just when I need to use it. And they look at you like you have committed a crime when you expectorate the fine wines. I have a job and a life to protect.

Phil

(a confirmed and devoted spitter)

[JohnL]

Phil--"in the thousands" really?

You and jbonne need to lighten up a bit-i think.

Most of the tastings I attend are seated.

They involve no more than sixteen wines poured.

Some people swallow everything some people spit everything

and some people swallow some wine and spit some.

The wines are discussed in depth.

I have never seen anyone get drunk.

I rarely go to mass tastings where hundreds of wines are poured.

I assume those are what you refer to.

In that case one should be responsible spit-- or swallow.

I also believe that many people who attend these types of "stand up" tastings are there to enjoy themselves and have fun drink some wine-find a few they like etc--not to "professionally evaluate" wines.

They shouldn't have to abide a bunch of winesnobs looking down their noses (palates) at them!!! :-)

I say live and let live--we should all be able to enjoy!!!

[PassionateChefsDie]

From a chefs point of view and the reason apperitifs shouldn't be pure spirit, I was lead to believe that Alcohol deadens the taste buds!

So surely you'd end up with more alcohol in your mouth if you kept swallowing besides the point the world becomes cloudy.

This was put to me that at a lot of the large tastings a lot off the time the wines people like, are at the begining not at the end. As a group of Wine proffesionals I'd be interested in your opinions from this point!

Stef

[Marco_Polo]

C'mon, let's not be too pious about this. There are tastings where you spit, and there are tasting where you drink... and there are tastings where you mainly spit but sometimes can't resist swallowing (for undoubtedly the full pleasure of tasting wine involves imbibing it fully).

There have been times when I've been tasting wines at 10 in the morning in cellars which are cold and damp but you are there for a reason, and it's most certainly not to swallow or to get inebriated. There have been times when I've been in a cellar with a wine producer and we've shared a tasting or two where it would be positively rude to eject the wine on to the cellar floor, for the producer himself is most certainly proudly swallowing and enjoying the fermented fruits of his or her considerable labours.

I've been a judge at tastings such as at Vinitaly and elsewhere where I've been submitted to literally over a hundred blind samples and where even with spitting each sample religiously by the end I would doubt my own ability to make much sense of anything at all, if I'm totally honest. I've been to many tasting where producers are present and crowds simply mill from one table to the next, enjoying wines, mostly swallowing, talking not about the technicalities of a wine but gaining an understanding about the soul and the spirit behind it. Sometimes that is what a wine tasting is all about: and it's equally important for it puts a wine in the context of the people and the land from where it comes.

To spit or to swallow: it all depends on the occasion, on your own needs and desires. I would bet that every professional - wine writer, wine buyer, whatever - at some point in their professional life has been tasting and rigorously spitting out samples but suddenly comes upon a wine that simply is so stunningly good that it just has to be enjoyed to its fullest. "I think I'll swallow this one,' I've heard on more than one occasion from professional tasters.

The greatest tasting I've ever attended was last year at the Gambero Rosso Tre Bicchieri tasting at the Salone del Gusto in Turin (I think I've written about this elsewhere): literally some hundreds of wines, all tre bicchieri award winners, the very best from all of Italy. The wines were arranged on the ramps of the Lingotto Fiat building and you could simply wander from one table full of wonders to another - I started at the top, at the table from Bolgheri: yes, that's right, Sassicaia, Guado al Tasso, Massetto, Ornellaia, and others. We continued in this fashion until we finally arrived (five stories later) at the bottom, where we finished by a table of great Baroli and Barbareschi. It was crowded, it was happy, it was an occasion, it was an opportunity to taste wines I'd never encountered and might never again. I started by spitting and taking a few notes. By the end, I was not taking any notes and was not spitting either (mainly because the spittoons were overflowing is my feeble excuse - but they were). I was most definitely more than a little unsteady as I made my way back to the main hall for dinner. But though I've forgotten the precise tasting details of some of those gorgeous and famous individual wines, it is most certainly a tasting I'll never forget.

MP

[JohnL]

well put marco!

as for aperitifs--i prefer a glass of white wine-i love something light clean fruity etc.

ok once in a while i order a gin and tonic or a scotch--the problem with alcoholoc drinks is not so much a palate deadening but i like to enjoy wine with food and i don't like being drunk!

also maybe it's just me --but i find that i can not "absorb" as much alcohool as i once did- is it old age???--lord knows i am much larger than i was!

[MaxH]

Most of the tastings I attend are seated.  Some people swallow everything some people spit everything

and some people swallow some wine and spit some.

...

I also believe that many people who attend ... "stand up" tastings are there to enjoy themselves and have fun drink some wine-find a few they like etc--not to "professionally evaluate" wines.  They shouldn't have to abide a bunch of winesnobs looking down their noses (palates) at them!!!  :-)

People enjoy wine; people evaluate wine. That's obvious. Most experienced "wine people" that I know do both. Most of us find that spitting is an effective route when we are out to extract the maximum information from the wine sample -- useful when making buying decisions, etc.

People go to large stand-up tastings for various reasons too. They could all enjoy the event. It isn't necessary for people to thoughtlessly block the spittoons as Phil Ward cited, any more than it is necessary for people at public tastings to crowd a tasting stable and stall there, while they sip and chat, blocking others from access; or to project a construction of "wine snobs looking down their noses" when someone cites these rude habits. -- Max

[JohnL]

max--

"project a construction?" no i was making a point with some humour!

i think it is pretty clear that we are all in agreement here.

it is fun and informative to hash these serious issue out once in a while!

[MaxH]

"project a construction?" no i was making a point with some humour!

Then please forgive me. Here in the US it is not unusual today for people to cry "snob" as soon as they see something they don't like, or don't understand. (A few online fora seem to exist mainly for that function.)

The more humour the better!

[Boris_A]

Keeping in mind that drinking and tasting are two vastlydifferent sets of activities,

Very true.

An excellent tasting method is to buy some bottles of a certain type of wine (German riesling, Bordeaux bourgeois, whatever), to cook some nice food and to invite some (hopefully nice) friends. Everyone is allowed to drink whatever he prefers, and in the end you'll have some empty bottles, some half empty bottles and some almost untouched bottles.

Swallowing is mandatory of course, and you can rate the wine by simply measuring the bottle level. Hint: the winner is not necessarily the "95+(?)" wine designed for tastings and spittings.

[JohnL]

Boris--I have done that --it is a fun and informative evening!

I also recommend it! because it puts the wine in the context of how we enjoy it (with food and friends) not in a more contrived atmosphere of a formal tasting.

Max--

You noted something I hadn't thought much about.

You are right--there is a tendency toward a "knee jerk" reaction against wine snobbery. It is often worse than the snobbery itself!

You know--I actually smell the cork in restaurants! The hell with the experts! I got my reasons!

lol

[Rebel Rose]

I should probably point out, for those not 'in the know,' that there are public walkaround tastings and there are also trade walkaround tastings, which are limited to restaurateurs, sommeliers, wine writers, wine shop buyers, etc. Trade tastings sometimes precede a public event, so a one or two hour trade-only tasting may lead into a three or four hour public event. If the tradespeople stay for the whole event, that could be six hours of wine tasting.

And wine industry people, or writers like Phil and Jon, tend to approach tastings with a more rigorous attitude because of their professional involvement.

you can rate the wine by simply measuring the bottle level

So true.

[jbonne]

Trade tastings sometimes precede a public event, so a one or two hour trade-only tasting may lead into a three or four hour public event.

←

my problem is when trade and public tastings aren't separated, as in the case of Taste Washington up here in verdant Seattle. these are usually walkaround tastings involving 100+ wineries and hundreds of wines. add in a couple thousand civilian taster/drinkers who've ponied up $75+ for the right to be there, and you've got a serious traffic jam on your hands, to say nothing of a drunkfest. they're not much fun.

You and jbonne need to lighten up a bit-i think.

Most of the tastings I attend are seated.

They involve no more than sixteen wines poured.

Some people swallow everything some people spit everything

and some people swallow some wine and spit some.

even at a tasting of 16 wines, i'd argue you need the constitution of a horse to manage a reasoned assessment beyond good-bad-crap while sucking down the vino. (not that i'm aware how much a horse can pack away, mind you.) i've been astounded to see people gulping at 9 a.m. sit-down evaluations of 16 wines.

if someone likes wine, enjoys tasting and wants to swallow (responsibly, not in that wine-geek-as-a-cover-for-boozehound way), more power to y'all. if you're doing it on the clock, though i'm gonna wonder what in the world you're up to. the one big exception, as Marco_ points out, is when spitting would offend your winemaking host.

that said, there's nothing i'm usually craving more after a tasting than a glass of wine. that group off in the corner, drinking some bubbly or Muscadet to cleanse our palates of all those steroidal 15.5 ABV red-fruit bombs? that's where you'll find me.

[Brad Ballinger]

that group off in the corner, drinking some bubbly or Muscadet to cleanse our palates of all those steroidal 15.5 ABV red-fruit bombs? that's where you'll find me.

←

Probably takes about 2-3 glasses, if not bottles, of Muscadet to do the job, eh?

[JohnL]

First--

Trade tastings should not be mixed with general public tastings when possible.

Wine tastings should have a purpose (more singular). And be organized accordingly. (I understand they sometimes can not be).

Second--

I refer you to Andrew Sharp's book "winetaster's secrets"

Sharp deals with the issue of spitting and swallowing. He notes that there is data from several reliable sources (his own organization-InterVin International is one) that indicates The impact of swallowing some of the wine tasted on alcohol blood levels and a taster's judging abilities to be negligable. (his group studied fifty one taster tasting sixty wines.).

Mr Sharp goes on to posit that a taster who spits out all of the sample and does not swallow a bit of the wine will not be able to properly judge the wine in question. He/she would miss a number of important stimulations.

This is why I am a bit skeptical of anyone who does not swallow some of a wine being able to provide an accurate assessment of that wine. I certainly can not judge a wine's finish properly. I will admit that some tasters are quite remarkable--Parker, Tanzer, Coates, Meadows etc

And I will admit that if one is trying to assess professionally one hundred fifty samples of say California Chardonnay a large number of those wines would not require swallowing to provide a thumbs up or down evaluation.

I also should say, that I take any tasting notes/evaluations performed under these circumstances with a grain of salt.

Also, in closing, let me explain a bit about those tastings I regularly attend. They are of a high level of quality overall. For example the wines of top flight producers are tasted and reviewed rated and discussed. The tastings are often led by guests like Robert Parker or Olivier Humbrecht or Becky Wasserman. In attendance are serious collectors, wine makers, trade professionals (and some just plain folks who like wine).

In this context-it is almost imperative that the wines be swallowed (at least some or the sample). If I am at a mass tasting where there are a very large number of wines --I do, in fact, spit a lot more--I try to taste a reasonable number find the two or three most promising wines and taste them "in depth".

I also take an antacid and drink a lot of water!

Do I have the constitution of a horse?

Maybe an old tired nag.

(It is soooo tempting to just say: "Naaaaaayyyyy")

[Rebel Rose]

I confess to the practice of spillowing. Or would that be spwatting?

I have an aversion to crowds, anyway (so I'm in the wrong business, eh? ) and therefore I usually look at mass tastings as an opportunity to seek out producers I am not already familiar with, and get a sense of their style. I find it very, very difficult to evaluate a wine carefully in pressing throngs, noise, perfume, variable temperature conditions, with the added distraction of people-watching, not to mention the one or two men who brush me aside so they can address the winemaker. (After two, God help you.)

I prefer sit down tastings and flights. I am one of those badly behaved attendees who rearranges the glasses at will, and doesn't follow the advised protocol. I sniff and taste before the speakers get to the wine, rearrange the glasses into clusters, manically repeat, then resniff and retaste, select a couple of clear winners, then taste and spillow.

[fifithewinecat]

We will soon be going to the Pinot Tasting in SF, and picking up a few cases of wine at Winebid.com, which will allow us some time for tasting the next day in Napa/Santa Rosa area. I drive, and my wife and I always carry large empty Starbucks containers with the lids on them, and spit into them. Does not offend others, and allows us to go on ticking happily for longer. As we leave the winery, we dump into the dump bucket, or water some of the dry vegetation with the contents of the cups.

Only problem with this way of doing things is that we have had people ask us why we were drinking coffee at a wine tasting!!!

I am also thinking of getting and modifying a large Sponge Bob Squarepants sippy cup for use at the Pinot tasting in SF.