I have not seen anyone commenting on the scores that were given out on the Cal. Cabs. Quite interesting. I knew '03 was bad but not this bad. When the collectibles are scored at 91 and go for AT LEAST $230 & $225 there is something wrong. I have to admit I love seeing the scores and seeing how much they are asking for their wine. I'm talking to you Dominus! No Bordeaux pricing theory here.

Also WTF is up with Laube and Montelena? This is crazy, a 72 on the 2002 vintage! Stag's Leap FAY 2002, 74 points. The S.L.V. 2002 gets 83. I'm not a fan of Stag's but those are pretty low scores for the '02 vintage. The Montelena is just wrong. The '02 is not their greatest effort and I heard about problems but nowhere in the park as a 72. I just wished he didn't taste them at all.

Go Griz!

Oh no. Here we go again

I tasted a ton of 03's this weekend and I liked them.

No, I think he has been at odds with some wine enthusiasts for a while.

Osama bin Laube strikes again. You may or may not be shocked to hear just how many ITB people in Napa refer to him in that way.

He's entitled to his opinion, isn't he? If you disagree, just be happy that there will be plenty of glamour label wines in the close out bin.

I personally have not tried a Stag's Leap Wine Cellars wine that I though was even worth 1/4 the price. The Artemis is aweful.

Are you shocked with Laube?

Unless he has fathered one of Anna Nicole's children, no.

I find his ratings fairly accurate for most of the CA reds that I drink. Occasionally there's one that's seem a bit low, and very occasionally one that seems way off, but for the most part I think he's still pretty good in his evaluations, and look mainly to him when purchasing CA Cabs, Merlots, and blends.

As with any other critic, if you feel he's inconsistent or completely unaligned with your palate, look elsewhere. He's not the only reviewer of CA wines.

Of course I don't completely agree or disagree with Laube. He could be completely right with the '03 for all I know. I guess I'm tired with the whole Montelena issue and when I saw the rating I just thought why does he even bother. I mean it just looks bad. I want him to rate the wine 72 points and ask himself if it is worth putting in print. I think he should hold back instead of bringing the issue up again.

quote:

Originally posted by bigskygriz:
He could be completely right with the '03 for all I know.

You mean you're ragging on Laube & you haven't tasted the wine?

Good one.

I think Laube has certain sensitivities to things like 'barnyard'. He most certainly is sensitive to TCA. Fortunatly most drinkers don't have these. That's a good thing.

The 2001 Forman was not a 69 point wine. The '01 Mondavis were much better than he noted on. I am sure there are many others that can be mentioned. As a matter of fact, I am planning a 'Prove the Critic Wrong' tasting this winter in NYC. We just recently had the latter 90s vintages of BV GdL and there was no TCA noticed. There were other faults though. I am no fan of his and realize his notes may actually make wines I enjoy more readily available at discount since the 'flock' usually follows suit. I judge wines with my palate, not any critics.

Cheers

quote:

Originally posted by cdr11:
He's entitled to his opinion, isn't he? If you disagree, just be happy that there will be plenty of glamour label wines in the close out bin.

I personally have not tried a Stag's Leap Wine Cellars wine that I though was even worth 1/4 the price. The Artemis is aweful.

AMEN. SLWC makes good wines - for $25. Cask 23 IMHO only should be a $30 to $40 wine, at least that's how it drinks.

quote:

Originally posted by bigskygriz:
I have not seen anyone commenting on the scores that were given out on the Cal. Cabs. Quite interesting. I knew '03 was bad but not this bad. When the collectibles are scored at 91 and go for AT LEAST $230 & $225 there is something wrong. I have to admit I love seeing the scores and seeing how much they are asking for their wine. I'm talking to you Dominus! No Bordeaux pricing theory here.

Also WTF is up with Laube and Montelena? This is crazy, a 72 on the 2002 vintage! Stag's Leap FAY 2002, 74 points. The S.L.V. 2002 gets 83. I'm not a fan of Stag's but those are pretty low scores for the '02 vintage. The Montelena is just wrong. The '02 is not their greatest effort and I heard about problems but nowhere in the park as a 72. I just wished he didn't taste them at all.

Go Griz!

Were these in a new issue or something? Why the sudden uproar? Just curious...

FYI - I popped open a 2003 Etude Cab (wine club is shipping the rest out next week) and while I find the 2002 better, this is still a completely underrated Cali Cab at $71

I haven't tasted the wines in question, so I won't comment on the scores except to say that he's willing write what he thinks even knowing the reaction he may get. His scores might be completely wrong for your palate, but he doesn't take the easy way out by slapping an 87 on a big name wine he doesn't like to avoid these reactions. On the other hand, when he puts up big scores for new wines like Kosta Browne that get us to sign up for the mailer before there's a 3 year wait-list, "praise Laube" threads rarely show up. The reaction to the low scores reminds me of the joke about the difference between an idiot and a maniac: an idiot is anyone driving slower than you feel like driving at the moment, and a maniac is anyone driving faster than you feel like driving at the moment.

I pay absolutely no attention to any score Laube gives any cab.

Space- have you seen any rating on the O3 Etude ?

I have a tour set up next week and expect to taste it.

CW

quote:

Originally posted by cali wine:
Space- have you seen any rating on the O3 Etude ?

I have a tour set up next week and expect to taste it.

CW

No offense intended, but if you're already set to taste it next week, wouldn't it be better to hold off on finding a critic's score until after you've had the chance to form your own opinion?

I don't agree with Laube often but who cares?

He has been getting paid to taste wine professionally for years and I just am a lowly salesguy trying to meek out a meager existance. He obviously isn't stupid as he has held his currnet position for may years.

Regardless if your palate aligns with his or not, he has more experience than likely all of the forum members.

If you don't agree with him, don't pay attention to his ratings and/or tasting notes. What you like is much more important than what he likes IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by bigskygriz:
I mean it just looks bad. I want him to rate the wine 72 points and ask himself if it is worth putting in print. I think he should hold back instead of bringing the issue up again.

So if a big name, in his opinion, makes a poor wine WS should not note it? How is that preforming their duties to inform the consumer?

quote:

Originally posted by bigskygriz:
I have to admit I love seeing the scores and seeing how much they are asking for their wine. I'm talking to you Dominus! No Bordeaux pricing theory here.

What do you mean by the above?

I buy Dominus for about $100CAD including taxes (under $90USD) and believe it is worth the $$$. It can be as good as many of the $225+ wines at a fraction of the price.

quote:

Originally posted by The Prof:
...when he puts up big scores for new wines like Kosta Browne that get us to sign up for the mailer before there's a 3 year wait-list, "praise Laube" threads rarely show up. The reaction to the low scores reminds me of the joke about the difference between an idiot and a maniac: an idiot is anyone driving slower than you feel like driving at the moment, and a maniac is anyone driving faster than you feel like driving at the moment.

I agree completely.

quote:

Originally posted by The Prof:
the difference between an idiot and a maniac: an idiot is anyone driving slower than you feel like driving at the moment, and a maniac is anyone driving faster than you feel like driving at the moment.

And the rest are just A-holes!

The 90's really were the glory days for California wine, with new, high quality wines all over the place and the scores and price tags show it. The weather doesn't cooperate every year - it does cooperate most years in California - but not every year. Call some wineries and ask to speak with the vineyard manager (after crush, of course) and ask his impressions of the 2003 growing season. This will give you some ideas about the raw materials. Then ask some winemakers what they did/did not do with the 2003 harvest. Remedial action? Tannin?

The real story will emerge. From the folks I have spoken to, it's not inconceivable that the wines are not as flashy as before, but technology will make them taste good. Heck, in my opinion, we can go one year out of ten without the oooey-goooey-low acid-silky tannins-toasty oak Cabenets that everyone is making these days. Buy some wines and serve them with a meal and they will be delicious, Mr. Laube's scores aside.

Unfortunatley, Laube is becoming the NEW Per-Henrik, where there is NO correlation between his scores(past & present) and the quality that larger & larger percentage of HIS followers & general enthusiasts believe.

His palate seems to have changed from Cab-based to Pinot Noir-based. A cynic would charge that he has been instructed by upper mgmt to ride the "Sideways Effect" to increase magazine circulation for the NEW Pinot Noir-drinking public.

Ask Pinot Envy which kind of wine gets better scores from her-Cab or Pinot, in all its different styles. For her, it's not that the Cab is that bad; but the Pinots are so much better FOR HER PALATE.

quote:

Originally posted by Gigond Ass:
I pay absolutely no attention to any score Laube gives any cab.

GA, if I lived in the US and specifically in California, where I could try Cali-cabs all day long, then I would be of the same mind as you. But since it's very difficult to get great Cali-cabs in Toronto, and even more difficult to find those cult cabs, I defer to the experts to describe to me what I would be getting should I ever have the opportunity to purchase one of those Cali-cabs.

So, to me, its very disconcerting to hear many of my fellow forumites complaining about JL, when I personally turn to him for information. One may say "trust your own palate...don't worry about what the expert says", but how can I when I don't get the opportunity to even try the wine. Again, I live vicariously through you guys (and ladies) and JL when it comes to Cali-cabs. Who can I trust?