Who seems to match your PALette (in regards to their scores/recommendations) better? Gary or Robert?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Parker, because at least he uses descriptors that I can Identify with when smelling and tasting wine. Besides, Parker is a wine critic and Gary is a wine salesman. 
I trust Parker's ratings far more than Vaynerchuck, but when I'm done listening/watching Vaynerchuck taste a wine I have a far better basic sense of whether I want to buy it than when I read many of Parker's notes.
Vaynerchuck is entertainment and as such, I enjoy him but don't take him too seriously.
quote:Originally posted by Mimik:
Vaynerchuck is entertainment and as such, I enjoy him but don't take him too seriously.
Yeah but why does he have to sound so goofy with all the repetitive words like "Sniffy Sniff"? Everytime I watch him w/ my wife in the room, she has to leave cause to her - he's like fingernails on a chalkboard...
He's too over-the-top and wears wristbands(Last time I wore a wristband was back in High School) and says stupid things like: "Hizzy" "the big W for Walla Walla" and "Sniffy Sniff" and other things that just annoy the crap out of her and others I know..
quote:Originally posted by -Cp:quote:Originally posted by Mimik:
Vaynerchuck is entertainment and as such, I enjoy him but don't take him too seriously.
Yeah but why does he have to sound so goofy with all the repetitive words like "Sniffy Sniff"? Everytime I watch him w/ my wife in the room, she has to leave cause to her - he's like fingernails on a chalkboard...
Too over-the-top and wears wristbands and says stupid things like: "Hizzy" "the big W for Walla Walla" and "Sniffy Sniff" and other things that just annoy the crap out of her and others I know..
"THE OAK MONSTER!"
I don't even follow Gary so I have no basis for comparison.
I greatly respect Parker, particularly for specific varietals. Sure, he's pretty 'enthusiastic' regarding his scoring with some more than others but, with time, you can gage to his scoring system.
I just can not take Gary seriously. I respect his passion, but I draw the line at 'tasting my sweaty socks to correlate my palate to his.
I just can not take Gary seriously. I respect his passion, but I draw the line at 'tasting my sweaty socks to correlate my palate to his.
quote:Originally posted by -Cp:
Who seems to match your PALette (in regards to their scores/recommendations) better? Gary or Robert?
In spite of his antics, I’ve learned plenty from GV. About your question, my palate has not settled down into absolute preferences, as of yet. I continue to enjoy the experience across the broad spectrum of wine regions, countries and varietals.
I haven't figured out if my palate is more calibrated toward one or the other. I am one of the few who likes Parker's OZ Shiraz recommends, for the most part, but I really like GaryV, especially with his reviews of white wines. He's helping to make wine more approachable for the masses, and give it less "snob" appeal, which I agree with wholeheartedly. His Schtick doesn't bug me one bit. Heck, I talk like him a lot of the time anyways, so no big whoop.
A while back, I did part of his episode #148, just to lock in some flavors.
A while back, I did part of his episode #148, just to lock in some flavors.
I'm in the same camp as wiml, and really did not know Gary was a critic per se.
I respect Parker for Bordeaux and Rhone. I have little to no interest in his opinion for anywhere else and glad he is turning many regions over to others now.
That said, Parker is no longer my favorite critic for any region.
I respect Parker for Bordeaux and Rhone. I have little to no interest in his opinion for anywhere else and glad he is turning many regions over to others now.
That said, Parker is no longer my favorite critic for any region.
quote:Originally posted by indybob:
A while back, I did part of his episode #148, just to lock in some flavors.
A bucket of earth and sweaty socks. How'd that work for ya?
quote:Originally posted by wine+art:
That said, Parker is no longer my favorite critic for any region.
Found it difficult to correlate your palate to his on your OZ wines, eh?
quote:Originally posted by KSC02:quote:Originally posted by indybob:
A while back, I did part of his episode #148, just to lock in some flavors.
A bucket of earth and sweaty socks. How'd that work for ya?
Hey, I didn't go that far! Just the fruit, jams, nuts, and a few of the candies. It's pretty cool to nail the flavor of red Twizzlers in wine when I find it.quote:Originally posted by KSC02:quote:Originally posted by wine+art:
That said, Parker is no longer my favorite critic for any region.
Found it difficult to correlate your palate to his on your OZ wines, eh?
... if it is Spain or Oz, and it is Parker, it must be a 95+, right?
I just enjoy wine from Loire, Alsace, Burgundy ( he was always clueless) Champagne, Oregon, Languedoc, Italy, (all) and Washington, and never seek his opinion on any of these.
I do seek out his opinion on Rhone (red only) and Bordeaux. (red only)
Why anyone would pay any attention to a wine salesman's "opinions," especially as opposed to those of an "independent" critic, is beyond me.
quote:Originally posted by Board-O:
Why anyone would pay any attention to a wine salesman's "opinions," especially as opposed to those of an "independent" critic, is beyond me.
Board-O. I hear you, but if you actually watch GaryV's shows with any frequency, you'll see that he gives a great many of the wines he tastes a "pass" and does not recommend them. Almost all of them are wines he stocks. Sure, he's a wine salesman (which I'll admit does make me a bit skeptical at times), but there's no denying his palate and knowledge are excellent.
I'm not calling Gary dishonest, but if he buys a wine, he sure has to sell the wine. I don't think he can be completely objective; I don't think I could.
quote:Originally posted by Board-O:
I'm not calling Gary dishonest, but if he buys a wine, he sure has to sell the wine. I don't think he can be completely objective; I don't think I could.
I have absolutely no connection to Gary, except that of a viewer. It should be obvious to anyone who watches him regularly that he is completely objective -- I remember that once he panned a wine and said something like (I'm paraphrasing), "I wish we hadn't bought so many cases of it."
In all honesty, I believe for Gary it's all about the ego. The sheer number of shows per week, the endless request for attention in the form of the number of people he wants to post in response to his shows, etc. is certainly indicative to his need for attention and validation.
I believe his (his father's I suppose) business is truly very successful, and WLTV has provided the son an opportunity to show Dad that he can contribute, and be successful in his own right. A psychologist would probably have a field day...
He has the power over what to sell, and how much to sell, and I truly believe there is a certain sense of freedom and objectivity in his reviews (he doesn't owe a thing to anyone is probably his perspective).
That ALL said, I love the guy, and the show. It's quite addictive and I believe very unique. I get quite a bit of enjoyment out of the whole WLTV experience.
My wife and others I've exposed to the show all agree that his approach is very entertaining and puts an anti-snob spin on our favourite subject.
Let's face it - We all take this subject way too seriously considering our lives are not dependent upon it. It's just a hobby for most of us on this board.
Gary goes out of his way to stress that you should not take his word for it (and I don't), and that the only so-called critic you should listen to are those that have an alignment with your palate. For the most part, my palate has nothing in common with James Laube, however have found my 'scores' to line up quite close to James Molesworth. Hence, I tend to pay more attention.
With regards to Parker, I tend to shave at least 3-5 points off his scores, and generally that is where I will land with my own preferences.
To conclude, I personally put my 'trust' level at an equal level when it comes to both Parker and Vaynerchuk. But that's just me.
Cheers,
- Ian
I believe his (his father's I suppose) business is truly very successful, and WLTV has provided the son an opportunity to show Dad that he can contribute, and be successful in his own right. A psychologist would probably have a field day...
He has the power over what to sell, and how much to sell, and I truly believe there is a certain sense of freedom and objectivity in his reviews (he doesn't owe a thing to anyone is probably his perspective).
That ALL said, I love the guy, and the show. It's quite addictive and I believe very unique. I get quite a bit of enjoyment out of the whole WLTV experience.
My wife and others I've exposed to the show all agree that his approach is very entertaining and puts an anti-snob spin on our favourite subject.
Let's face it - We all take this subject way too seriously considering our lives are not dependent upon it. It's just a hobby for most of us on this board.
Gary goes out of his way to stress that you should not take his word for it (and I don't), and that the only so-called critic you should listen to are those that have an alignment with your palate. For the most part, my palate has nothing in common with James Laube, however have found my 'scores' to line up quite close to James Molesworth. Hence, I tend to pay more attention.
With regards to Parker, I tend to shave at least 3-5 points off his scores, and generally that is where I will land with my own preferences.
To conclude, I personally put my 'trust' level at an equal level when it comes to both Parker and Vaynerchuk. But that's just me.
Cheers,
- Ian