Comments on: 100 everyday wines under $15 that outscored $50 to $150 bottles http://www.thewinetrials.com/wp/2008/05/01/hello-world/ The blind tasting book by Robin Goldstein Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:01:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Marc Cleven http://www.thewinetrials.com/wp/2008/05/01/hello-world/#comment-18 Marc Cleven Thu, 28 Aug 2008 03:57:39 +0000 http://www.thewinetrials.com/wp/?p=1#comment-18 The Wine Trials brings the experience - taste, smell, impression - back to the taster. Not only does a blind tasting remove the impact of price and label, but also of "the review". Did Parker love this? Well, then I must. If I don't, it must be "my fault." Blind tasting means returning to what I really like, not influenced by review, label, price, expectation. And lo and behold, no need to spend a fortune. The Wine Trials brings the experience - taste, smell, impression - back to the taster. Not only does a blind tasting remove the impact of price and label, but also of “the review”. Did Parker love this? Well, then I must. If I don’t, it must be “my fault.” Blind tasting means returning to what I really like, not influenced by review, label, price, expectation. And lo and behold, no need to spend a fortune.

]]> By: Ed Woods http://www.thewinetrials.com/wp/2008/05/01/hello-world/#comment-14 Ed Woods Sat, 09 Aug 2008 20:11:00 +0000 http://www.thewinetrials.com/wp/?p=1#comment-14 Great book! Bought it yesterday and read it from cover to cover already. All I can say is, right on! You say what my wife and I have been thinking for a long long time. For several years now we have been conducting an annual blind wine tasting party. It's usually a mixed audience of serious and not so serious wine drinkers. It's is sometimes amazing what wins. Just a couple years ago it was a $6 bottle of Barefoot Merlot (on your list I noticed). I'm a big believer in the blind wine tasting process. I get so sick of the "hey look at me I'm drinking a $100 bottle" crowd. Big deal. I bet most of them couldn't tell it from $3 bottle of Crand Lake in a blind tasting. Great book! Bought it yesterday and read it from cover to cover already. All I can say is, right on! You say what my wife and I have been thinking for a long long time. For several years now we have been conducting an annual blind wine tasting party. It’s usually a mixed audience of serious and not so serious wine drinkers. It’s is sometimes amazing what wins. Just a couple years ago it was a $6 bottle of Barefoot Merlot (on your list I noticed). I’m a big believer in the blind wine tasting process. I get so sick of the “hey look at me I’m drinking a $100 bottle” crowd. Big deal. I bet most of them couldn’t tell it from $3 bottle of Crand Lake in a blind tasting.

]]> By: jeff rago http://www.thewinetrials.com/wp/2008/05/01/hello-world/#comment-13 jeff rago Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:30:46 +0000 http://www.thewinetrials.com/wp/?p=1#comment-13 Robin, I just got the book last night and enjoyed learning about your tastings. I can't wait to try out some of the top-scoring picks. I have a question. Why don't you list the overall set of rankings by category including all of the cheaper and more expensive wines that don't meet the $6-$15 criteria? It seems like you could have been a bit more forthcoming with your data. I find your subtitle a little confusing "100 everyday wines under $15 that outscored $50 to $150 bottles". Does this mean that each of the under $15 bottles of wine only had to beat a single bottle of higher priced wine to meet the qualification? It would be interested to know for what varieties the price had a stronger/weaker correlation to taste. Sincerely, Jeff Robin,

I just got the book last night and enjoyed learning about your tastings. I can’t wait to try out some of the top-scoring picks.

I have a question. Why don’t you list the overall set of rankings by category including all of the cheaper and more expensive wines that don’t meet the $6-$15 criteria? It seems like you could have been a bit more forthcoming with your data.

I find your subtitle a little confusing “100 everyday wines under $15 that outscored $50 to $150 bottles”. Does this mean that each of the under $15 bottles of wine only had to beat a single bottle of higher priced wine to meet the qualification? It would be interested to know for what varieties the price had a stronger/weaker correlation to taste.

Sincerely,
Jeff

]]> By: alex saliby http://www.thewinetrials.com/wp/2008/05/01/hello-world/#comment-10 alex saliby Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:26:21 +0000 http://www.thewinetrials.com/wp/?p=1#comment-10 Robin, Thank You! I bought the book Tuesday finished it last night...will conduct a blind taste with friends soon! I have long maintained that blind tasting is the only way to remove what I've termed 'attitude' that develops the moment the label is seen. I live in a region of WA state where some really wonderful wines are made by small, local (not nationally distributed) wineries. Some of them have sent their wines off to WS and returned with ratings ranging from 88 to 91...interestingly, the 91's are for wines selling in the high $20's...$27 to $29, or the low $30's, depending upon the retailer's markup. I have tasted these wines, all of them, the 88's and the 91's; I've also tasted other wines that received higher scores. These wines: a.) sell for more; b.) were made by producers in the Walla Walla AVA (though the fruit was identified as Columbia Valley not Walla Walla AVA). It was my personal contention the 88's in my region (NCW) were easily the equal (in two instances even better) than the Wine Spectator higher rated wines from Walla Walla producers. I refer to this as the Wine Spectator's 'zip code' prejudice. Steinman may not know the producer when he 'blind' tastes WA wine, but he does know: The variety, the region (aka AVA) and the year of the wines he's about to taste. That AVA identity is all he needs to set off his prejudice. Again, thanks for the book. Sincerely, a wine lover, Alex Robin,
Thank You! I bought the book Tuesday finished it last night…will conduct a blind taste with friends soon!

I have long maintained that blind tasting is the only way to remove what I’ve termed ‘attitude’ that develops the moment the label is seen.

I live in a region of WA state where some really wonderful wines are made by small, local (not nationally distributed) wineries. Some of them have sent their wines off to WS and returned with ratings ranging from 88 to 91…interestingly, the 91’s are for wines selling in the high $20’s…$27 to $29, or the low $30’s, depending upon the retailer’s markup.

I have tasted these wines, all of them, the 88’s and the 91’s; I’ve also tasted other wines that received higher scores. These wines: a.) sell for more; b.) were made by producers in the Walla Walla AVA (though the fruit was identified as Columbia Valley not Walla Walla AVA). It was my personal contention the 88’s in my region (NCW) were easily the equal (in two instances even better) than the Wine Spectator higher rated wines from Walla Walla producers.

I refer to this as the Wine Spectator’s ‘zip code’ prejudice.
Steinman may not know the producer when he ‘blind’ tastes WA wine, but he does know: The variety, the region (aka AVA) and the year of the wines he’s about to taste.
That AVA identity is all he needs to set off his prejudice.

Again, thanks for the book.
Sincerely, a wine lover,
Alex

]]>