WineSpectator.com    Wine Spectator Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Wine Conversations    WS 2012 Top 10
Page 1 2 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
WS 2012 Top 10
 Login/Join 
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by GlennK:
I also think the list is cheapened a little when something like Columbia Crest is rated number 1. Nothing against CC, but was that really the most exciting wine of the year?


If you work for Columbia Crest, then I bet it was! Smile
 
Posts: 5173 | Location: Aurora, IL | Registered: Jul 29, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
2009 Clos de Oratoire from St. Emillion at 94 for $40 would be a good bet. They have been focusing on value and accessibility.

2008 Conterno Fantino at 95 for $96 might be a good sentimental pick to make the top 100 because the patriarch passed away this year. They have a history of sentimental picks and for wineries that are celebrating big anniversaries. That might help Calera above too since their release is an annniversary (35th) release wine.

I don't buy based upon the List, but sometimes it does heighten my awareness of some wineries and make me do some research, which is fun. It's fun to speculate when the stakes are so low.
 
Posts: 117 | Location: Milwaukee, WI | Registered: Dec 29, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
I also think the list is cheapened a little when something like Columbia Crest is rated number 1. Nothing against CC, but was that really the most exciting wine of the year?


+1 - and I would add the 2011 Kosta Browne WOTY selection as another "yawn" example. We continue to purchase Kosta Browne since my wife likes the wine. However, in my opinion the wine is certainly not the most exciting wine of the year for a serious wine consumer.
 
Posts: 186 | Registered: Nov 06, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Executive Editor
Wine Spectator
 
posted Hide Post
Thanks for your comments, and your guesses. We are always interested in seeing others' thoughts about their most exciting wines of the year. That's ultimately the goal of our Top 100 list -- to stimulate conversation about the year just past, and which wines really got people excited. RedLoverJim hit the nail on the head.
 
Posts: 288 | Registered: Dec 11, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by GlennK:
quote:
Originally posted by RedLoverJim:
Maybe some would consider it point chasing, but the list can be a good way (like reading WS ratings, blog entries, etc) on picking up on new wines you might have otherwise overlooked.

Also, it can be a good way to expose friends to better wines if they like wine but don't actively pursue it as a hobby. Every year I give wine as Christmas gifts to a select group of friends and look for quality, good QPR wines, and a couple of years ago was able to tell them the Seghesio Zin in the box was among Spectator's top 10 wines of the year. It made it a little more interesting to them, and a couple of them actively sought it out at their local shops.

So while I don't go hunting down a wine just because it's on the list, that doesn't mean the list doesn't have it's uses.
It’s a very good point and one we discuss every year on this thread. Getting the average joe to put down the yellow tail and start drinking more fine wine is a good thing and I think this list helps do that to some degree. I also think the list is cheapened a little when something like Columbia Crest is rated number 1. Nothing against CC, but was that really the most exciting wine of the year?


I understand your statement about CC being #1 being a let down and am trying figure out my opinion on the matter. I think it is pretty exciting that a producer that makes 100000s of cases a year can produce a world-class, affordable wine. I am on the Kosta Browne waiting list and I work with the distributor at my restaurant and can't get any of it in an shape or form so what good is it? It doesn't make it any worse of a wine but it sucks a little. Its like when I read about a wine in WS insider that was 98 points but imported 1 case. ONE case. It might as well of been an unicorn cause there is no chance of that making its way to Michigan, that's for sure. I guess what I am getting at is that accessibility and QPR are pretty exciting sometimes.
 
Posts: 57 | Location: Traverse City | Registered: Oct 21, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by GoBlue2002:
For the last 5 years every WOTY was $80 or less, 95+ pts, and 950+ cases (but typically around 5,000). Running that screen (with 1000+ cases) for wines tasted blind this year we have 18 wines. Interestingly 5 are CdP's, and as the last French WOTY was 2007, they may go that route. However, not a single 2009 Bordeaux made that list of 18. The simple reason is that you can't buy a 95-pt Bordeaux for less than $95 (WS retail, for what it's worth anyway). I am sure some 2009 Bordeaux will make the top 100, but I doubt we'll see one at #1.


An interesting wine this year is a WA merlot, Pedestal Merlot Columbia Valley, 95 pts, 1994 cases, $55 per btl. If you search all Merlots-all prices, all years since WS kept ratings, receiving a 95 or better, you'll find only five. One received top honors(Paloma 2001) in 2003 top 100. Two others are basically blends and before that, you go back to 1992 for Leonetti.
Could crack the top 3.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: redmeatredwine,
 
Posts: 1 | Registered: Dec 05, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I still can't believe the 2003 Leoville Barton didn't get WOTY a few years back. Protesting the list ever since!! jk...

Have no idea who's going to win but maybe a Bordeaux? Another vintage of the lifetime! Are Australian wine sales lacking? Maybe WS can name an Australian wine as WOTY to give them a boost.
 
Posts: 176 | Location: San Diego | Registered: Dec 15, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Glenn - that CC wasn't the regular bottling was it? It was the Reserve. And that wasn't really a bad choice. They've never said that the WOTY has to be the very best wine they had all year; there are other factors. And the idea that CC consistently turns out good and sometimes really good wines at reasonable prices - that's not all that bad. The Guigal CdP was also WOTY once and that's basically a negociant wine. So the CC is quite defensible IMO. Setting aside of course, the entire idea of a wine of the year!


"The best part is how he said the ENGLISH language. Fine irony. Use American next time."
 
Posts: 2492 | Location: NY | Registered: Dec 09, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Bump.

I tend to think 2009 Bordeaux for number one. It's usually got to have at least a 95 score to get the one spot. The other factor with process is I bet there is some horse trading by the editors and Molesworth already has about four wines he covers in the top 9. Bordeaux is really due though and there would be a lot of candidates. Canon la Gaff or Smith Haut Lafitte.
 
Posts: 117 | Location: Milwaukee, WI | Registered: Dec 29, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I'll play along and go with an '09 left bank Bordeaux as WOTY. There were many to choose from but I'll guess Pontet Canet or Leoville Poyfrere.


Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
Posts: 5446 | Registered: Jan 11, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by GregT:
The Guigal CdP was also WOTY

I tasted the '99 Guigal CdP: Ack


"Won't someone tell me what it is they all want?"
 
Posts: 5984 | Location: Utah | Registered: Jan 15, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2  
 

WineSpectator.com    Wine Spectator Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Wine Conversations    WS 2012 Top 10

© Wine Spectator 2013