|
Originally Posted by magiciansampras
(Post 13469506)
I think that's completely wrong. Most sports do involve a minority of viewers "discovering" hidden things. You think most of the public appreciates the subtle moves that defensive linemen make in the NFL? Or the peculiarities of Belichik's defensive schemes? Football is a great example of a sport that becomes infinitely more interesting as you learn more and can appreciate what both sides are trying to do.
But I guess the larger point is this: just because one cannot appreciate subtlety in a given endeavor does not imply that no one can.
Originally Posted by magiciansampras
(Post 13470580)
Wrong. It has nothing to do with the process of football, it has to do with how you understand the game. If you don't understand what the defense is doing, you don't "get it." Similar to wine. If you can't taste the diverse flavors, you don't get it.
This is all part of appreciation. I have only liked wine for a few years and am still expanding my wine horizons. Like with books, I do not care to endlessly analyze what I am drinking. I do consider everything I drink and whether I like it or not. If a reason why comes to mind I consider that too. I don't generally like reds because they feel greasy in my mouth. Won't stop me trying more. The whys are in my own words. Buttery? Notes of blackberry? Never crossed my mind. I guess I don't "get it". Does that make me worth less than someone who "gets it"? What if I never "get it"? Should I remove myself from the wine drinking population since I am not worthy? Someone mentioned curling before. I am a certified curling instructor. We get lots of people in who have never tried the game and maybe have just some vague idea of what's going on. But they try it and they love it. Sure, they can't use fancy words for the shots. Maybe they choose not to analyze everything that's going on. Maybe they can't perform that analysis. I don't care. Anybody who loves curling and keeps an open mind is fine in my book. They'll learn and they'll enjoy it in their own way. Who am I to tell them how to best get enjoyment out of their experience? |
Does that make me worth less than someone who "gets it"? The animus against the crashers here from those who "get it" or pretend to relates to their claim that "nobody gets it, because there isn't an 'it'.'" There is most decidedly an "it"; it may be smaller and of less significance than some of us would like to think, but denying its existence (by some who don't get it and feel affronted because of that) is unkind and rude, as would be crowing about and exulting in it. I happen to think that those who don't "get it" are poorer for it, but that's not a big deal. I don't get the appeal of soccer; I'm probably the poorer for that, but I don't care, and I won't get exercised about it even if someone points out the fact. |
Originally Posted by violist
(Post 13946504)
There is most
decidedly an "it"; it may be smaller and of less significance than some of us would like to think, but denying its existence (by some who don't get it and feel affronted because of that) is unkind and rude, as would be crowing about and exulting in it. You are welcome to enjoy wine tasting to a level that I do not / cannot. That doesn't make either of us a better or worse person and we should not look down on anyone who enjoys wine differently than we do ourselves. Neither way is right, neither way is wrong - they just are. |
Originally Posted by Showbizguru
(Post 13942626)
A Chilean wine beat two of Bordeaux's Premier crus, two California wines and a Super Tuscan in a blind tasting by 100 of New York's top critics, sommeliers and retailers on Monday.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddr...d-tasting.html |
Originally Posted by JumboJ
(Post 13947075)
I like that you point to a $80 bottle of Chilean wine as an illustration that cheap wine is as good as any other. Let me know when Charles Shaw pulls off a similar feat.
|
Originally Posted by Showbizguru
(Post 13949353)
I see it as a useful indication that Chilean wines - like French - can work on all cost levels.
these wines attracted the rich wine makers, who went to chile, cut down the irrigation, and jacked the prices from $2-4us(1990 dollars) to a hundred bucks today. most of the stuff from there is box wine, and carmenerie, which with adequate water, makes immense quantities of garbage wine. it is more of a surprise that the french(and italians) can make cheap wine, given the high costs of labor and land. they made some blend that they sold to Gallo as pinot noir. gallo sold it for $10 a bottle, and one of the reviewer mags gave it a 90(good score). the french govt arrested the makers for mislabeling the wine. it was not pinot. in the trial, it has come out that the makers were selling the stuff to gallo for less than €4.........a gallon!! so much for gina's golden pallet. or did she know and just want the gold. i had purchased a couple cases of this stuff. i thought it very nice wine. then, it disappeared. |
Originally Posted by Showbizguru
(Post 13949353)
I see it as a useful indication that Chilean wines - like French - can work on all cost levels.
By the way, the tasting you reference was headed and financed by Eduardo Chadwick, the owner of a Vina Errazuritz (a Chilean label). Also included on the esteemed panel were his importer, and his head wine maker. 5 of the 10 wines were Errazuritz's own (with the 5 competing wines I'm sure being chose by Chadwick as well).. which should assure at least some decent placings. The tasting included: 5 Chilean wines 2 French wines 2 Californian wines 1 Italian wine Just sayin'.. |
Originally Posted by JumboJ
(Post 13950491)
The tasting included: 5 Chilean wines 2 French wines 2 Californian wines 1 Italian wine Just sayin'.. re: to buk chuk. there is a finite possibility that the dump they get is a real thrill. way too much wine. no place to put it. |
Originally Posted by ScarletHarlot
(Post 13946365)
Does that make me worth less than someone who "gets it"?
|
I've done a lot of wine tasting in my time. I can certainly tell the difference between what I like and what I don't like. I can also taste (or smell) the hints of various fragrances in various wines, and find some of the attempts to make new wines taste differently interesting - but not as interesting as analyzing a really great book. Fortunately, I hang with people who are much like me.
What I end up liking, wine-wise, is whatever I end up liking. I have once or twice been really impressed with some inexpensive wine (usually purchased by someone else - like Far Niente), but I love finding inexpensive wines that I consider highly drinkable. I like having a range of wines on hand, because while I do appreciate hints of pineapple or some type of berry, I really prefer broad, smooth cabernets that lack some of the complexity that others find so interesting. I also watch cartoons sometimes. I do not play Farmville, but I was addicted to GeoChallenge for awhile. Everyone is different. I don't know why some people get so into wine that they buy really expensive ones that I would think are not affordable on the income the person has (while foregoing something else). But then, I buy things that other people would wonder why I buy as well. Is this really all that mysterious? Main point: wines do taste differently and people have different points of view about it. What I'll never understand is why people watch sports (except for surfing and rockclimbing). |
Originally Posted by Doug_1970
(Post 13433145)
I like wine, but I'm no wine expert. Therefore this is a genuine question rather than a statement.
If I'm in a restaurant or eating on a flight and order some wine, most of the time the waiter/waitress will pour a little bit in the glass for me to taste first. Why ? If it's to check that the wine doesn't have anything wrong with it, then surely it doesn't matter how much has been poured into the glass - it has to go back. If it's to check whether you like the wine or not, then are they implying that it's ok to request a different bottle of wine just because you don't like the first bottle ?, even though it was wine that you chose from the menu and there's nothing wrong with it (other than you don't like it) ? I could understand if you had asked for a recommendation and it was not what you expected. For example, you'd asked for a dry white and it tasted like dessert wine. So my question is; is the tasting to decide: a) if there's something wrong with the wine , or b) whether you like it or not. If it's b, then is it acceptable to return a perfectly good bottle of wine just because you don't like it ? For information, I never bother tasting the wine and usually ask them to just pour it (and yes I'm occasionally disappointed, but I can count on one hand the number of corked/bad bottles I've had - and I probably eat out around 75 - 100 times a year). I seem to be in the monority though, looking around me in a restaurant, most people seem to taste first then ask for it to be poured. I guess the waiter/waitress wanted to know what is your taste in wine. Its all in the customer service. Everyone has their personal unique taste. |
Originally Posted by Showbizguru
(Post 13433293)
Wine is the ultimate bollocks.
You've only got to read some of the cobblers on here to understand that it's a gigantic con trick to suck in the emotionally retarded. A bottle of wine is just six glasses of crushed grapes fermented. Some are better than others but rather like one car is more comfortable than another ultimately they're just a means of getting you to a certain place. The rest is just hype, marketing and BS. http://nymag.com/news/features/rudy-...-fraud-2012-5/ http://www.winespectator.com/webfeature/show/id/46509 Rudy Kurniawan, a high-flying California-based wine dealer and collector who once bought and sold millions of dollars worth of wine annually, was arrested by the FBI at his southern California home on the morning of March 8 and charged with five felony counts of wire and mail fraud. The charges center on sales of allegedly counterfeit wines. Sold over $35MM in counterfeit high end wine, quite impressive. |
particularly in today's market, one can purchase $50-75 bottles of wine that can be passed off as $150 wine. the biggest problem is in the packaging. the bottle, the cork, the label, back label and capsul must be correct.
also, there is a lot of expensive wine out there that i do not tastes so very good. i have yet to met an opus1, or a mondavi that i thought to be more than marginal. |
Having just returned from a tour of wine country, I'm reminded that some of the most pretentious people are those running the tasting sessions at wineries. My BS detector peaks often.
I'm much more likely to enjoy and buy at a session where they actually speak English instead of "Wineglish". |
Originally Posted by Bear4Asian
(Post 18599129)
Having just returned from a tour of wine country, I'm reminded that some of the most pretentious people are those running the tasting sessions at wineries. My BS detector peaks often.
I'm much more likely to enjoy and buy at a session where they actually speak English instead of "Wineglish". |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:09 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.