Favorite wines and wine advice!
Sep 15, 2014, 4:44 pm
#16
Suspended
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 3,445
You are committing several fallacies in your comments.
First, I haven't appointed myself as anything other than someone offering advice (as with all advice constantly provided on FT!). If you don't like the advice , you are welcome to ignore it. Yet you are arguing with me about not the advice but about posts I made on another thread. The two are not related.
Second, I do follow my own advice--but in a different price range than you might, perhaps. I said:
That doesn't mean that all expensive bottles are not good! That also doesn't mean that a more expensive wine might not be better--just that that isn't necessarily true for everyone. Just because I like some expensive wines, too, doesn't mean I'm not following my own advice.
What would suggest that I'm not following this advice is if I only drank very expensive wines relative to what I can afford. Since I can afford quite a bit, I buy very expensive wines like Harlan and Colgin (cellared so they can age a long time) and much less expensive wines like Pahlmeyer and Jaysen. That may be a more expensive range for you, but it's still quite a range--from $550 Harlan to $48 Jaysen red. Yet I rarely purchase the super expensive Bordeaux (I have 3 bottles of 2005 Chateau Margaux, for example, but also 6 bottles of 2005 Pape Clement that I got from Costco!) I love Saxum syrahs and Dehlinger pinots, costing from $35-85, and these are far less expensive than any Rhone or Burgundy wines. If I can afford $550 for Harlan, then I can also afford $300 for many Rhones and Burgundies--but I choose the cheaper US options because I prefer them (and because they're less expensive!).
I also offered:
I stand by what I said, as I follow what I've said--relative to MY experience, and maybe not yours. I have available to me First Growth Bordeaux and most of the Grand Cru Burgundies, but I rarely purchase those (I've never purchased a Grand Cru or Premier Cru Burgundy for our cellar, in fact, other than rarely at a restaurant). I choose the wines that I LIKE the most for the price points I can afford...and almost always choose the less expensive of those when I like them comparably. Your version of hype is awfully all-encompassing, but it is not global. In your experience, all of my wines might be "hyped" but in Newport Beach where I live, I am am the exception that doesn't place stock in the Bordeaux and Burgundies that everyone around me can afford and has.
You are making the mistake of judging my wine tastes as being based on hype and price when that is not the case. There often is a reason why some wines are hyped and cost more--and that doesn't make them a bad wine! You are assuming that all wines that are expensive are wastes, and that is your prerogative. But that isn't a fait accompli by any stretch of the imagination.
Opus One costs $235 per bottle. Pahlmeyer Proprietary Red costs $150 per bottle--or $85 less, the same amount less that you would pay for Opus. For us as members of the Pahlmeyer Club, it is $127.50 for every bottle. I spend less for a less hyped but better wine. You also don't like Opus One. I rest my case.
No problem! I don't encourage anyone to spend more than they're comfortably able to afford for wine--as I said originally below (and repeated above) in my advice. But the fact that we're fortunate enough to be able to afford to drink Colgin and Bryant and the like doesn't make us into hype or name, either. You're begrudging us the ability to purchase the wine that WE can comfortably afford to buy with your comments--as if somehow being able to afford such wine is obviously bereft of all reason. When you can afford such wine prices, you can either simply buy by the hype or buy by the preference, and we buy by preference. We love Colgin (and Bryant less). We can afford Colgin. So we buy Colgin--among many, many other wines, most of which is much less expensive. That doesn't mean my advice is any less sound.
First, I haven't appointed myself as anything other than someone offering advice (as with all advice constantly provided on FT!). If you don't like the advice , you are welcome to ignore it. Yet you are arguing with me about not the advice but about posts I made on another thread. The two are not related.
Second, I do follow my own advice--but in a different price range than you might, perhaps. I said:
That doesn't mean that all expensive bottles are not good! That also doesn't mean that a more expensive wine might not be better--just that that isn't necessarily true for everyone. Just because I like some expensive wines, too, doesn't mean I'm not following my own advice.
What would suggest that I'm not following this advice is if I only drank very expensive wines relative to what I can afford. Since I can afford quite a bit, I buy very expensive wines like Harlan and Colgin (cellared so they can age a long time) and much less expensive wines like Pahlmeyer and Jaysen. That may be a more expensive range for you, but it's still quite a range--from $550 Harlan to $48 Jaysen red. Yet I rarely purchase the super expensive Bordeaux (I have 3 bottles of 2005 Chateau Margaux, for example, but also 6 bottles of 2005 Pape Clement that I got from Costco!) I love Saxum syrahs and Dehlinger pinots, costing from $35-85, and these are far less expensive than any Rhone or Burgundy wines. If I can afford $550 for Harlan, then I can also afford $300 for many Rhones and Burgundies--but I choose the cheaper US options because I prefer them (and because they're less expensive!).
I also offered:
I stand by what I said, as I follow what I've said--relative to MY experience, and maybe not yours. I have available to me First Growth Bordeaux and most of the Grand Cru Burgundies, but I rarely purchase those (I've never purchased a Grand Cru or Premier Cru Burgundy for our cellar, in fact, other than rarely at a restaurant). I choose the wines that I LIKE the most for the price points I can afford...and almost always choose the less expensive of those when I like them comparably. Your version of hype is awfully all-encompassing, but it is not global. In your experience, all of my wines might be "hyped" but in Newport Beach where I live, I am am the exception that doesn't place stock in the Bordeaux and Burgundies that everyone around me can afford and has.
You are making the mistake of judging my wine tastes as being based on hype and price when that is not the case. There often is a reason why some wines are hyped and cost more--and that doesn't make them a bad wine! You are assuming that all wines that are expensive are wastes, and that is your prerogative. But that isn't a fait accompli by any stretch of the imagination.
Opus One costs $235 per bottle. Pahlmeyer Proprietary Red costs $150 per bottle--or $85 less, the same amount less that you would pay for Opus. For us as members of the Pahlmeyer Club, it is $127.50 for every bottle. I spend less for a less hyped but better wine. You also don't like Opus One. I rest my case.
No problem! I don't encourage anyone to spend more than they're comfortably able to afford for wine--as I said originally below (and repeated above) in my advice. But the fact that we're fortunate enough to be able to afford to drink Colgin and Bryant and the like doesn't make us into hype or name, either. You're begrudging us the ability to purchase the wine that WE can comfortably afford to buy with your comments--as if somehow being able to afford such wine is obviously bereft of all reason. When you can afford such wine prices, you can either simply buy by the hype or buy by the preference, and we buy by preference. We love Colgin (and Bryant less). We can afford Colgin. So we buy Colgin--among many, many other wines, most of which is much less expensive. That doesn't mean my advice is any less sound.
And frankly, your comments about what you spend, in the other thread - basically are the reason you really had no business starting THIS thread.
Very few people really care about your idea of good value in wines, if you think that $100+ Argentine Malbecs and $300+ Napa Cabs represent that for your own palette. And BTW, you STARTED this thread, and essentially presented your wine resume as a rationale for why we should give you credence on this topic - that's what I meant by being self-appointed maven of value in wine. It wasn't posted in response to someone seeking your insight.
I might add, I've spent more on the very occassional bottle of wine than a Colgin or Bryant Cab costs (Invariably, it was for a top line Grand Cru Red Burgundy from a top producer). But I would never be so presumptuous as to assume that those wines were good values - rather - they were to really try to calibrate my palette for how good it can possibly get, and to experience the very best, and see how perceptibly better they were than more reasonable, more regular wines that I drink more frequently.
Last edited by lhgreengrd1; Sep 15, 2014 at 4:55 pm
Sep 15, 2014, 5:10 pm
#17
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Southern California, USA
Programs: Marriott Ambassador and LTT, UA Plat/LT Gold, AA Gold
Posts: 8,764
But it (Opus One) is better than Colgin or Bryant. At least it has the typicity (that's a Davis word for you) of a Rutherford Bench cabernet.
And frankly, your comments about what you spend, in the other thread - basically are the reason you really had no business starting THIS thread.
Several FT members from other threads asked me so often for wine advice that I decided to start this thread. It's really that simple.
Very few people really care about your idea of good value in wines, if you think that $100+ Argentine Malbecs and $300+ Napa Cabs represent that for your own palette.
And BTW, you STARTED this thread, and essentially presented your wine resume as a rationale for why we should give you credence on this topic - that's what I meant by being self-appointed maven of value in wine. It wasn't posted in response to someone seeking your insight.
might add, I've spent more on the very occassional bottle of wine than a Colgin or Bryant Cab costs (Invariably, it was for a top line Grand Cru Red Burgundy from a top producer). But I would never be so presumptuous as to assume that those wines were good values - rather - they were to really try to calibrate my palette for how good it can possibly get, and to experience the very best, and see how perceptibly better they were than more reasonable, more regular wines that I drink more frequently.
It seems to me that you are of the opinion that I am not in a position to give wine advice because I like wines that are too expensive. I believe that my experience with wine allows me to easily give wine advice regardless of the price range of the wines I buy for myself.
Through all of this, you have yet to in any way disagree with ANY of the advice I posted originally below. Might I suggest that we continue the discussion on that advice?
Sep 15, 2014, 5:20 pm
#18
Suspended
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 3,445
It seems to me that you are of the opinion that I am not in a position to give wine advice because I like wines that are too expensive. I believe that my experience with wine allows me to easily give wine advice regardless of the price range of the wines I buy for myself.
I don't see any evidence of that at all, quite frankly.
Whether or not I had any business starting this thread is not up to you to determine for anyone but yourself. I think we all have an idea that you don't like my advice because you don't like that I have the audacity to buy expensive wine. Of course, you've yet to in any way indicate how or why any of my advice is bad. You just don't seem to like or approve that I am giving it.
In any case, I'll put an end to this now, as I have run across many folks who would suggest that they somehow have the expertise to deign to tell others what they ought to be drinking. Suffice it to say that they are all pretty amusing, but not to be taken seriously - certainly nowhere near as seriously as they take themselves.
Last edited by lhgreengrd1; Sep 15, 2014 at 5:31 pm
Sep 15, 2014, 5:57 pm
#19
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Southern California, USA
Programs: Marriott Ambassador and LTT, UA Plat/LT Gold, AA Gold
Posts: 8,764
You're changing the subject from the advice I've given to my qualifications for it--all while you're not in any way challenging ANY of the advice I've given. If you don't think I'm qualified to give advice, then I respect your ability to ignore it. The fact that you've commented incessantly here--and not at all about the advice I've given--reflects that the issue you have has nothing to do with this thread.
The winemaking program I'm completing at UC Davis has nothing to do with wine tasting/evaluation.
I don't see any evidence of that at all, quite frankly.
Second, my own bias/experience should be mentioned. We live in Orange County, California, and have visited most of the New World wine regions (Napa/Sonoma/Santa Barbara/Paso Robles in California; Margaret River and the Barossa in Australia; Mendoza in Argentina; Central Otaga/Marlborough/Martinborough/Hawke's Bay in New Zealand; Franschhoek/Stellenbosch/Paarl/Constantia in South Africa, etc) on numerous occasions. We also have visited Tuscany, Bordeaux, and Rioja. We intend to visit Chile; Burgundy, Champagne, Alsace, the Rhone (France); Hungary; and the Piedmont and Venice (Italy) in the coming years.
Finally, I am in the midst of completing the UC Davis graduate winemaking certificate program for my own personal edification. Our cellar has wines from all of the above regions, with a focus on those regions we've already visited--as I like to drink wine that reminds me of the place where the grapes were grown as much as possible.
Finally, I am in the midst of completing the UC Davis graduate winemaking certificate program for my own personal edification. Our cellar has wines from all of the above regions, with a focus on those regions we've already visited--as I like to drink wine that reminds me of the place where the grapes were grown as much as possible.
The reason your advice is bad is that you haven't any sort of qualifications to give it - and the fact that it's so blatantly colored by your obvious willingness to spend silly amounts on exclusive labels BECAUSE of their exclusivity, and without any demonstrated ability to discern between those pricey wines and other more cost-effective ones if you tasted them blind in an objective setting.
In any case, I'll put an end to this now, as I have run across many folks who would suggest that they somehow have the expertise to deign to tell others what they ought to be drinking. Suffice it to say that they are all pretty amusing, but not to be taken seriously - certainly nowhere near as seriously as they take themselves.
Sep 15, 2014, 9:18 pm
#21
Moderator Hilton Honors, Travel News, West, The Suggestion Box, Smoking Lounge & DiningBuzz
Join Date: Jun 2000
Programs: Honors Diamond, Hertz Presidents Circle, National Exec Elite
Posts: 36,027
Apparently, this
wasn't clear....
Thread closed for moderator review and consultation.
Please do not PM the co-moderators concerning this at this time.
Nothing good will come up this thread remaining open at this time.
Thank you.
cblaisd
Co-Moderator, Dining Buzz
ALL: I will never understand why threads about alcohol tend to bring out incivility and snark, but I would remind everyone who might be inclined to contribute to this thread that one can state one's thoughts, opinions, and even disagreement civilly, respectfully, and without snark.
Failure to to so will lead to thread closure and worse
Failure to to so will lead to thread closure and worse
Please do not PM the co-moderators concerning this at this time.
Nothing good will come up this thread remaining open at this time.
Thank you.
cblaisd
Co-Moderator, Dining Buzz
Last edited by cblaisd; Sep 16, 2014 at 10:03 am