WineSpectator.com    Wine Spectator Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Wine Conversations    WOTY 2012 is a Zinfandel !
Page 1 2 3 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
WOTY 2012 is a Zinfandel !
 Login/Join 
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by GlennK:
If the top 10 was all DRC’s and Lafite, there would be outrage from the non wine geek crowd. Plus, I think the advertising thing is bogus. Not one of the wines in the top 10 is likely to actually advertise in the magazine.


How many from the non wine geek crowd reads WS? Plus, didn't Columbia Crest win it a few years ago? I think they advertise (but I could be wrong).

EDIT: Or even Mollydooker, which I think have also won.


____________________
An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools. - Hemingway
 
Posts: 1946 | Location: Ontario | Registered: Jul 23, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by WEc:
quote:
Originally posted by GlennK:
If the top 10 was all DRC’s and Lafite, there would be outrage from the non wine geek crowd. Plus, I think the advertising thing is bogus. Not one of the wines in the top 10 is likely to actually advertise in the magazine.


How many from the non wine geek crowd reads WS? Plus, didn't Columbia Crest win it a few years ago? I think they advertise (but I could be wrong).

EDIT: Or even Mollydooker, which I think have also won.
Well, the Columbia Crest was a joke. No arguments there. That was the “value” year with the economy in the tank.
 
Posts: 6546 | Location: OC, CA  | Registered: Aug 01, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by GlennK:
I do think Molesworth and Sanderson are very good tasters and often agree with their assessment of a wine...

I agree completely - two of the very best in the industry.

I would still consider it better than the WA due to the blind tasting and again I think Molesworth and Sanderson are very solid.

I have never paid any attention to the WA - although I'm sure they must have some talent on their staff. Parker is completely overrated in my opinion, and I am unable to disassociate the WA and him.

The thousands of people that love Shafer wines!

Please count me among the thousands. Smile


"Won't someone tell me what it is they all want?"
 
Posts: 6138 | Location: Utah | Registered: Jan 15, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Historically, WOTY have been from France, California and Portugal primarily. In the 80's they even broke it down into WOTY red and white wine.

There have been first growths, Cali reds and vintage port selected. Unfortunately, pricing has pretty much excluded first growths and very high end producers from acheiving this goal (too bad for DRC).

Would it make more sense to choose a white and a red WOTY?

Would people like to see WOTY country by country (or region by region including Champagne/sparkling)?

I think (personally) the readers would be more satisfied if it was broken down more. Perhaps there would be more constructive thoughts than negative criticism.

This may be contraversial, but if you're going to name a wine of the year, it ought to be the best of the best irrespective of cost. This can be said of many things i.e best car, best watch
and in sports, the highest paid athlete is not necessarily the best.

I suppose in the end, by those of us posting, the editors have achieved their goals. They've managed to create this buzz and a following.

What if the readers got to choose as they do in radio to choose the top songs of the year or the top songs of all time? That might stir up more interest and comments.

No, I am not posting while intoxicated (PWI). Rather, my wife is on holidays with her friends in Hilton Head and I'm bored sitting at home with my beautiful golden retrievers.


Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
Posts: 5789 | Registered: Jan 11, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
(Hmm...the '08 Relentless is available locally for $60.06/bottle. Perhaps I should pick up a few on the way home tonight?)

Banana


"Won't someone tell me what it is they all want?"
 
Posts: 6138 | Location: Utah | Registered: Jan 15, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by PurpleHaze:
GlennK.... is a young, yuppie jetsetter though, so perhaps his perspective is skewed..... Razz

PH

Big Grin
 
Posts: 15591 | Location: Montreal, QC | Registered: Feb 17, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:
quote:
Originally posted by hippomon:
Seghesio Zinfandel Alexander Valley Home Ranch 2009 - $95


what a joke...spectator becomes more irrelevant each day.....


Yet you continue to be here.


When in doubt, open another bottle.
 
Posts: 2620 | Location: Silver Spring MD (Near DC) | Registered: Nov 13, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by dinwiddie:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:
quote:
Originally posted by hippomon:
Seghesio Zinfandel Alexander Valley Home Ranch 2009 - $95


what a joke...spectator becomes more irrelevant each day.....


Yet you continue to be here.


BINGO! Most of his posts are unhappy or whining.


Just one more sip.
 
Posts: 36944 | Location: NY | Registered: Oct 18, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
No dog in the hunt boys, but there's a big difference between posting/lurking on the boards and being a fan of the magazine's content or wine reviews.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming!

PH
 
Posts: 15275 | Location: Maryland, USA (DC suburbs) | Registered: Nov 22, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by GlennK:|

Haha. I’m from the hood so I don’t know if I’ll ever crossover into a full yuppie, but I’ll take jetsetter!! I think the content from a producer profile, vintage profile and travel/lifestyle perspective is still really strong and especially so this year. I do not read the tasting notes though. I do think Molesworth and Sanderson are very good tasters and often agree with their assessment of a wine, but I just don’t buy based on critics notes anymore so I skip over those sections.

I am surprised though at Dave Canada and others saying that their role as wine critics is over? I would still consider it better than the WA due to the blind tasting and again I think Molesworth and Sanderson are very solid. I don’t have foundation to make much of an opinion on Laube and Steiman as I just don’t drink or like the same style of wines as they do. The top 100 is supposed to generate buzz and conversation about the year of wine and obviously sell magazines! I don’t see how that is related to not being able to take their critics serious? I think it’s a crappy choice for #1 as well based on my own tastes in wine, but guess who thinks it’s a great choice? The thousands of people that love Shafer wines!


A lot to reply to there, Glenn.

First, I think both WS and Cigar Aficionado are excellent products, and clearly both Thomas Matthews and Marvin Shanken have their finger on the pulse of their marketplace.

I'm very confident that the vast majority of true wine enthusiast are also very interested in travel, food, other adult beverages, hotel/lodging choices along to many other nuances in their lifestyle. I find the WS and CA a great resource. D and I think nothing a flying/driving to a city just to try a restaurant we read a review of, then returning home the next day.

I agree that Molesworth is an excellent critic, but think the role of the critic has changed and is ever changing in the digital world. There was a time ( pre-internet) that single voices could completely drive a market. I think of people like Clement Greenberg ( modern art) and Robert Parker (American wine market) that had clear and powerful influence. Prior to the internet, both possessed specific information in their field that was not easy for the average person to obtain. There was a time you had wait to be informed in a print format that 1973 was a dreadful vintage in Bordeaux some 2-3 years after the fact, but when a hailstorm and terrible weather wiped out most of Piedmont in 2002 we knew in real time, and today it would be a tweet.

I buy nothing off of any critics scores today, and in fact am not even aware what their score is in most cases. What I do care about are things like... general information about the overall quality of regions I enjoy, emerging new wine regions making quality wines like Priorat in the late '90's and Northeast Italy ( Friuli - Venezia Giulia) and their stellar white wines within the last 10 years. I also look towards the critic inform of major changes at wineries like winemaker, designed style changes et al. In someways, I'm looking more for a wine reporter than a wine critic.

I have much more to say in response to Glenn's post, but need to run...
 
Posts: 30215 | Location: Dallas, TX & Santa Fe, NM | Registered: Feb 21, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Board-O:
quote:
Originally posted by dinwiddie:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:
quote:
Originally posted by hippomon:
Seghesio Zinfandel Alexander Valley Home Ranch 2009 - $95


what a joke...spectator becomes more irrelevant each day.....


Yet you continue to be here.


BINGO! Most of his posts are unhappy or whining.


Wow, if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is....get a grip Board-O.
I love it, the official troll of the forum saying that I am unhappy and whining, quite rich Crazy
The only reason I stay here is to hear the thoughts of people from Ontario about the upcoming releases and various info related to the LCBO. The content of the magazine WS has nothing to do with it.
 
Posts: 1139 | Registered: Apr 28, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by PurpleHaze:
No dog in the hunt boys, but there's a big difference between posting/lurking on the boards and being a fan of the magazine's content or wine reviews.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming!

PH


In the words of the official WS Forum Troll (Board-O).....BINGO! Woot
 
Posts: 1139 | Registered: Apr 28, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:
quote:
Originally posted by DoktaP:
This is a joke, right? With all the truly amazing wines from Bordeaux and the Rhone, not to mention others, this cannot be true. As much as I adore these boards, the people, the comments and notes, the choices that WS has made the last several years are simply beyond belief. I realize the subjectivity in wine appreciation, but come on!

WS for me has become more about the articles on travel, the forum and least about their choices of wine.

That's not to say that I do not appreciate Seghesio. On my trip to Napa/Sonoma, we stopped there and I enjoyed their Zins. If I had to choose this grape, I'd put Seghesio as my producer of choice. But, WOTY? Not quite imho.


once again....ditto to Larry's comments. The magazing is now a travel and wine appreciation magazine....their role as a critic of wine is over in my opinion


So hippomon opens this thread baiting that Seghesio Zin is the WOTY and some took it hook, line and sinker, and then proceeds to diss WS. Really!? A few clicks of the mouse would've been all it took to see hippomon's real intent.

Whatever the original business model was for WS back on Day 1, it would be suicide for any publication to not change with the times. I started getting into wine back around 2004 and WS was a source of information for me and material in my learning process that continues today. Through these years, I don't find that the "wine critic" aspect of WS has declined, but rather that they added other aspects such as food and travel that IMO are relevant and associated with wine. I do my share of travel and have used WS as one of my travel sources from time-to-time to get a wine perspective.

If WS were to stick with just the singular role of critiquing wine, they'd be out of business and this board wouldn't exist because critic reviews and scores can be easily found anywhere on the Internet.
 
Posts: 1254 | Registered: Oct 17, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:
quote:
Originally posted by PurpleHaze:
No dog in the hunt boys, but there's a big difference between posting/lurking on the boards and being a fan of the magazine's content or wine reviews.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming!

PH


In the words of the official WS Forum Troll (Board-O).....BINGO! Woot

I don't whine and bitch about everything. You do. Must all that toxic Canadian plonk you drink. Go have a Vidal and wave the Canadian flag.


Just one more sip.
 
Posts: 36944 | Location: NY | Registered: Oct 18, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Board-O:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:
quote:
Originally posted by PurpleHaze:
No dog in the hunt boys, but there's a big difference between posting/lurking on the boards and being a fan of the magazine's content or wine reviews.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming!

PH


In the words of the official WS Forum Troll (Board-O).....BINGO! Woot

I don't whine and bitch about everything. You do. Must all that toxic Canadian plonk you drink. Go have a Vidal and wave the Canadian flag.


I don't tend to drink a lot of Vidal Board-O/Troll. Actually, I have never been a huge supporter of the Canadian wine scene, especially vidal.
Even after continually hearing about your old wine cellar, I am pretty sure I drink better than you do....my upcoming weekend includes, among others, ex-chateau mags of 1899 Lafite, 1900 Latour and 1971 DRC RC.....
Next time you critique the "toxic plonk" others people drink....get a clue.
 
Posts: 1139 | Registered: Apr 28, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
gentlemen! calm down.
take a valium.
Goes well with a sirah and petit sirah blend!!


99% of lawyers give the rest of us a bad name.
 
Posts: 7180 | Location: Baltimore, MD | Registered: Feb 04, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
my upcoming weekend includes, among others, ex-chateau mags of 1899 Lafite, 1900 Latour and 1971 DRC RC.....

I must have lost my invite Wink


Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
Posts: 5789 | Registered: Jan 11, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by irwin:
gentlemen! calm down.
take a valium.
Goes well with a sirah and petit sirah blend!!


Now that's irresponsible!!! LOL Banana LOL

PH
 
Posts: 15275 | Location: Maryland, USA (DC suburbs) | Registered: Nov 22, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by DoktaP:
quote:
my upcoming weekend includes, among others, ex-chateau mags of 1899 Lafite, 1900 Latour and 1971 DRC RC.....

I must have lost my invite Wink


Moi aussi.... Bow

PH
 
Posts: 15275 | Location: Maryland, USA (DC suburbs) | Registered: Nov 22, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by PurpleHaze:
quote:
Originally posted by DoktaP:
quote:
my upcoming weekend includes, among others, ex-chateau mags of 1899 Lafite, 1900 Latour and 1971 DRC RC.....

I must have lost my invite Wink


Moi aussi.... Bow

PH


well you know my thing with pre wwI wines Ack


This is my sig -> www.brownteacup.com
www.wsqwine.com
(Wine distributor)
 
Posts: 12301 | Location: NYC | Registered: Feb 16, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:
I am pretty sure I drink better than you do....my upcoming weekend includes, among others, ex-chateau mags of 1899 Lafite, 1900 Latour and 1971 DRC RC.....


1. I don;t believe you.

2. If there's any truth to that, who is supplying the wine?

3. If that is a 1971 Romanee-Conti, I'd love your opinion to go along with mine of the 1934, 1962, 1964, 1966, 1971, 1972, and 1976 Romanee-Contis I've enjoyed, most of them more than once. I've posted about these previously, so they're not fabricated, as is your wont. By the way, most of the others are better than the 1971. The 1972 was far better.


Just one more sip.
 
Posts: 36944 | Location: NY | Registered: Oct 18, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Board-O:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:
I am pretty sure I drink better than you do....my upcoming weekend includes, among others, ex-chateau mags of 1899 Lafite, 1900 Latour and 1971 DRC RC.....


1. I don;t believe you.

2. If there's any truth to that, who is supplying the wine?

3. If that is a 1971 Romanee-Conti, I'd love your opinion to go along with mine of the 1934, 1962, 1964, 1966, 1971, 1972, and 1976 Romanee-Contis I've enjoyed, most of them more than once. I've posted about these previously, so they're not fabricated, as is your wont. By the way, most of the others are better than the 1971. The 1972 was far better.


I believe that when one says ex-chateau......it means the winery supplied it Wink
I could care less if you believe me. you opinion is of 0 value. the only reason i am confronting you is that i am tired of hearing your garbage.
I can also send you notes from last year on an 1811 Yquem and 1811 Lafite if you somehow give me your email...i have photos of all the bottles to share as well.
I have nothing to hide, I am just not as eager to (or insecure enough) to brag about all the old bottles I have had the fortune of having in a public space.
Let me know if you want to take this discussion offline and I am happy to share any notes and photos with you. Otherwise, I have no more time for this pissing contest.
 
Posts: 1139 | Registered: Apr 28, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:

Let me know if you want to take this discussion offline and I am happy to share any notes and photos with you.


is this open to all?

i'd love to see notes and photos or be even better if you could post the notes on the forum.

I find it incredibly valuable to read objective notes on older wines because
1. lets me know if I taste a bottle that's too good to be true, what someone else may be tasting.
2. Seeing defining characters esp if these bottles are ex chateau
3. Looking at bottle shapes/sizes as I too have wondered about some of the pre WWI bottles I've purchased in the past.

ghiman at that google mail


This is my sig -> www.brownteacup.com
www.wsqwine.com
(Wine distributor)
 
Posts: 12301 | Location: NYC | Registered: Feb 16, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by g-man:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:

Let me know if you want to take this discussion offline and I am happy to share any notes and photos with you.


is this open to all?

i'd love to see notes and photos or be even better if you could post the notes on the forum.

I find it incredibly valuable to read objective notes on older wines because
1. lets me know if I taste a bottle that's too good to be true, what someone else may be tasting.
2. Seeing defining characters esp if these bottles are ex chateau
3. Looking at bottle shapes/sizes as I too have wondered about some of the pre WWI bottles I've purchased in the past.

ghiman at that google mail


No problem....I am away from my computer with all my photos and notes today but will get it to you tomorrow evening if that is OK.
I can also email you with how the bottles show over the weekend.
I'll fire you a test email right away to double check that I have the proper address.
 
Posts: 1139 | Registered: Apr 28, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:
quote:
Originally posted by Board-O:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Canada:
I am pretty sure I drink better than you do....my upcoming weekend includes, among others, ex-chateau mags of 1899 Lafite, 1900 Latour and 1971 DRC RC.....


1. I don;t believe you.

2. If there's any truth to that, who is supplying the wine?

3. If that is a 1971 Romanee-Conti, I'd love your opinion to go along with mine of the 1934, 1962, 1964, 1966, 1971, 1972, and 1976 Romanee-Contis I've enjoyed, most of them more than once. I've posted about these previously, so they're not fabricated, as is your wont. By the way, most of the others are better than the 1971. The 1972 was far better.


I believe that when one says ex-chateau......it means the winery supplied it Wink
I could care less if you believe me. you opinion is of 0 value. the only reason i am confronting you is that i am tired of hearing your garbage.
I can also send you notes from last year on an 1811 Yquem and 1811 Lafite if you somehow give me your email...i have photos of all the bottles to share as well.
I have nothing to hide, I am just not as eager to (or insecure enough) to brag about all the old bottles I have had the fortune of having in a public space.
Let me know if you want to take this discussion offline and I am happy to share any notes and photos with you. Otherwise, I have no more time for this pissing contest.


Wow I didn't know dry wines could go for 200 years! Pics/notes please!!! Big Grin
 
Posts: 1687 | Location: San Francisco | Registered: Jun 18, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3  
 

WineSpectator.com    Wine Spectator Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Wine Conversations    WOTY 2012 is a Zinfandel !

© Wine Spectator 2013