So I rarely have lunch away from desk, but today was too good to pass
up. Daniel Posner at Grapes in N. White Plains invited me to join a
group of geeks for lunch and a blind tasting, with the only knowledge
that it would include the 2005 Sierra Carche. If anyone isn't familiar
with this story, this was a "brand" wine that got a very high score
from Dr Jay Miller at WA, and subsequently has led to some major
disappointment among a lot (though not all) buyers.* There has been
some controversy and confusion re lot numbers, production figures, and
what the wine actually is.

Lunch was hamburgers for appetizers and steak for main course, a real
guy lunch (there was potato salad, vegetables, and cheese too). Lineup
was 14 wines (a 15th, the 2005 Pico Madama, was corked). Daniel knew
the lineup, but had employees blind the bottles, so single blind for
him, for the rest of us it was double blind (though we knew there was
at least one 2005 Sierra Carche). About a dozen foks attended, some
ITB, a couple consumers who had bought SC, and a few interested
observer winegeeks.

As a disclaimer, I don't drink much Spanish wine except some Rioja, so
maybe not the best judge.

Flight One - Not an auspicious start

#1 Menthol, slightly weedy, tired. Not good. C-

#2 Grenachey, jammy/hot B-/C+

#3 Porty slightly lifted nose , alcoholic, heavy in mouth but thin
flavors C

Ugly flight

Flight Two

#4* Light, cherry fruit, a touch of frizzante at first, some people
really hated, I thought* a simple quaffer but not awful B-/C+

#5* Horrible nose, VA meets turpentine meets weedy greenness, really
terrible, Kenney (who has had Sierra Carche a number of times)* says
"this is it!"* D/F

#6* Ripe, jammy, dark red fruit, sweeter than my preferred style but
at least not flawed. B-

Some talk of stoning Dan and raiding the store downstairs for
something to drink

Flight Three

#7 Green , some VA/shoe polish, not quite as bad as 5, but similar
nose makes us think we found a second Sierra Carche. D

#8 Jammy, sweet, rich, low low acid, a charred oak component. Not my
style, but at least not flawed. Actually a bit of a relieft after #5 &
7 B-/B

#9 Muted fruit, a little burnt rubber, I come around to agreeing it's
corked.
NR

We're beginning to resemble the villagers in Frankenstein, luckily the
upstairs of Grapes is devoid of torches.

Flight Four
#10* A bit of black fruit, a little brett, but comparatively
straightforward and not flawed by my standards. C+/B+

#11 OK, I thought #5 was bad, till I tasted this. Burnt rubber and
sewagey brett. Horrible wine, we tried to one-up each other with
descriptors. "tires leaving skid marks as the car slides off road into
the waste pond at the pig farm" was my contribution (Tyler informed me
the wastepond is called the "lagoon", I'll use that next time).
Fatally flawed wine. F

#12 Red berries, a bit plain but clean, one of my faves of the lunch
(admittedly a bit of faint praise). It's a rare tasting where "it's
clean" is one of the top superlatives of the event. B

Flight Five

#13 Red fruit, very sweet, but some balancing acids, one of the best
of the day (again, faint praise).* I thought this or maybe #12 was an
01 Embruix I expected to be in lineup. B/B-

#14 Hot, disjointed, off nose (I think Adam nails it with"rotting
hay." ) C-

Thank God, it's over!

Then we sent in our votes for top 3 faves, and Howard totalled while
Daniel unveiled.

#1 2005 Sierra Carche (lot 8114)
#2 2005 Espectacle (Monsant) - Dan says $150
#3* 2004 Pico Madama
#4 The Pepper Pot (South Africa) missed vintage, $14
#5 2005 Sierra Carche (lot 8114)
#6 2005 Pasanau (El Vell Coster) Priorat
#7 2005 Sierra Carche (lot 8114)
#8 2005 Mollydooker Carnival of Love
#9 2007 Resalso (Ribera del Duero)
#10 2007 A1 Mouvedre $12
#11* 2007 Panarroz (Jumilla)
#12 2008 Oriol (Emporda) $12
#13 2001 Clos Fonta (Priorat)
#14 2005 Sierra Carche (lot 8113)

Vote totals
#2 1 1st Place Vote
#6 1 1st Place Vote, 1 2nd Place Vote, 2 Third Place Votes
#8* 4 1st Place Votes, 6 2nd Place Votes, 1 Third Place Votes
#12* 4 1st Place Votes, 2 2nd Place Vote, 3 Third Place Votes
#13 2 1st Place Votes, 3 2nd Place Vote, 6 Third Place Votes

OK, so #11 wasn't Sierra Carche (this was a terrible bottle, but a
couple of people who know the* Panarroz* said bottle wasn't
representative).

I'm surprised that Carnival of Love was one of my top wines, but it
was a relief to have something that seemed to be what the winemaker
intended.

There may be some 96 point Sierra Carches out there, but these four
were sub-80 in my mental conversion

I may not be much of a judge of Spanish wines, and not the biggest fan
of grenache etc, but even folks better disposed towards those wines
seemed to be in agreement that the Sierra Carches were all terrible,
and I didn't hear one person say "I'd buy this" about any of the
wines. I could see maybe #12.

I can't say it was my favorite lineup, but the good news was since I
was driving and going back to work I had no trouble spitting!

Fun time, nice group, good food, "interesting" wines, good to see some
old acquaintances and meet some new people.*


Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent
wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't
drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no
promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency.*

*

Wow. So interesting. I have followed the Sierra Carche thread and was
totally astonished of what happens in the world of wine criticism, where a
sample is provided to a critic, and then the wine in the bottle that gets
to the market bears no resemblance to the wine that the wine critic rated.

The only way to solve this is, IMHO, to punish a winery when such a
behavior appears. If I was The Wine Advocate I would not rate a wine by the
producer or branding company for 5 years. Second time, no rates anymore.



Anyway, In the last couple of weeks I was invited to some tastings for the
initial assortment of wines of a new wine shop in my town. I love this
tastings because they provide such a good view of the panorama of a given
wine region (plus sometime I take a few leftovers back home for free).

But this time, with most of wines from different emerging regions from
Spain (read: Southeast Spain) has been so deceiving: 90% of wines were
plainly undrinkable. Overripe and overextracted, with harshest tannins.
Most of them were cut the same: dense, thick, syrupy and black. None of
them showed the slightest balance or elegance.

If this is how Spain is to conquer the world wine markets, I bet we are not
getting any success.

And, worst of all, my bet is that all this inmense quantity of crap wine is
taylored to be tasted by Mr. Parker et al. And when you see the ratings of
Miller of the same wines that smell like crap, tast like crap and are
closer to crap than they are to real wine, I cannot but ask myself if he
does have a clue or if he is presented totally a different product.

s.

On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 14:35:19 -0700 (PDT), DaleW >
wrote:

>Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent
>wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't
>drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no
>promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency.*
May I just mote for the record that D's and F's do not exist on the
Dale Scale! I truly hope you found a good palate cleanser after this
encounter.

(loved the villagers remark)
Joseph Coulter
Joseph Coulter Cruises and Vacations
www.josephcoulter.com

In article
>,
DaleW > wrote:

> So I rarely have lunch away from desk, but today was too good to pass
> up. Daniel Posner at Grapes in N. White Plains invited me to join a
> group of geeks for lunch and a blind tasting, with the only knowledge
> that it would include the 2005 Sierra Carche. If anyone isn't familiar
> with this story, this was a "brand" wine that got a very high score
> from Dr Jay Miller at WA, and subsequently has led to some major
> disappointment among a lot (though not all) buyers.* There has been
> some controversy and confusion re lot numbers, production figures, and
> what the wine actually is.
>
> Lunch was hamburgers for appetizers and steak for main course, a real
> guy lunch (there was potato salad, vegetables, and cheese too). Lineup
> was 14 wines (a 15th, the 2005 Pico Madama, was corked). Daniel knew
> the lineup, but had employees blind the bottles, so single blind for
> him, for the rest of us it was double blind (though we knew there was
> at least one 2005 Sierra Carche). About a dozen foks attended, some
> ITB, a couple consumers who had bought SC, and a few interested
> observer winegeeks.
>
> As a disclaimer, I don't drink much Spanish wine except some Rioja, so
> maybe not the best judge.
>
> Flight One - Not an auspicious start
>
> #1 Menthol, slightly weedy, tired. Not good. C-
>
> #2 Grenachey, jammy/hot B-/C+
>
> #3 Porty slightly lifted nose , alcoholic, heavy in mouth but thin
> flavors C
>
> Ugly flight
>
> Flight Two
>
> #4* Light, cherry fruit, a touch of frizzante at first, some people
> really hated, I thought* a simple quaffer but not awful B-/C+
>
> #5* Horrible nose, VA meets turpentine meets weedy greenness, really
> terrible, Kenney (who has had Sierra Carche a number of times)* says
> "this is it!"* D/F
>
> #6* Ripe, jammy, dark red fruit, sweeter than my preferred style but
> at least not flawed. B-
>
> Some talk of stoning Dan and raiding the store downstairs for
> something to drink
>
> Flight Three
>
> #7 Green , some VA/shoe polish, not quite as bad as 5, but similar
> nose makes us think we found a second Sierra Carche. D
>
> #8 Jammy, sweet, rich, low low acid, a charred oak component. Not my
> style, but at least not flawed. Actually a bit of a relieft after #5 &
> 7 B-/B
>
> #9 Muted fruit, a little burnt rubber, I come around to agreeing it's
> corked.
> NR
>
> We're beginning to resemble the villagers in Frankenstein, luckily the
> upstairs of Grapes is devoid of torches.
>
> Flight Four
> #10* A bit of black fruit, a little brett, but comparatively
> straightforward and not flawed by my standards. C+/B+
>
> #11 OK, I thought #5 was bad, till I tasted this. Burnt rubber and
> sewagey brett. Horrible wine, we tried to one-up each other with
> descriptors. "tires leaving skid marks as the car slides off road into
> the waste pond at the pig farm" was my contribution (Tyler informed me
> the wastepond is called the "lagoon", I'll use that next time).
> Fatally flawed wine. F
>
> #12 Red berries, a bit plain but clean, one of my faves of the lunch
> (admittedly a bit of faint praise). It's a rare tasting where "it's
> clean" is one of the top superlatives of the event. B
>
> Flight Five
>
> #13 Red fruit, very sweet, but some balancing acids, one of the best
> of the day (again, faint praise).* I thought this or maybe #12 was an
> 01 Embruix I expected to be in lineup. B/B-
>
> #14 Hot, disjointed, off nose (I think Adam nails it with"rotting
> hay." ) C-
>
> Thank God, it's over!
>
> Then we sent in our votes for top 3 faves, and Howard totalled while
> Daniel unveiled.
>
> #1 2005 Sierra Carche (lot 8114)
> #2 2005 Espectacle (Monsant) - Dan says $150
> #3* 2004 Pico Madama
> #4 The Pepper Pot (South Africa) missed vintage, $14
> #5 2005 Sierra Carche (lot 8114)
> #6 2005 Pasanau (El Vell Coster) Priorat
> #7 2005 Sierra Carche (lot 8114)
> #8 2005 Mollydooker Carnival of Love
> #9 2007 Resalso (Ribera del Duero)
> #10 2007 A1 Mouvedre $12
> #11* 2007 Panarroz (Jumilla)
> #12 2008 Oriol (Emporda) $12
> #13 2001 Clos Fonta (Priorat)
> #14 2005 Sierra Carche (lot 8113)
>
> Vote totals
> #2 1 1st Place Vote
> #6 1 1st Place Vote, 1 2nd Place Vote, 2 Third Place Votes
> #8* 4 1st Place Votes, 6 2nd Place Votes, 1 Third Place Votes
> #12* 4 1st Place Votes, 2 2nd Place Vote, 3 Third Place Votes
> #13 2 1st Place Votes, 3 2nd Place Vote, 6 Third Place Votes
>
> OK, so #11 wasn't Sierra Carche (this was a terrible bottle, but a
> couple of people who know the* Panarroz* said bottle wasn't
> representative).
>
> I'm surprised that Carnival of Love was one of my top wines, but it
> was a relief to have something that seemed to be what the winemaker
> intended.
>
> There may be some 96 point Sierra Carches out there, but these four
> were sub-80 in my mental conversion
>
> I may not be much of a judge of Spanish wines, and not the biggest fan
> of grenache etc, but even folks better disposed towards those wines
> seemed to be in agreement that the Sierra Carches were all terrible,
> and I didn't hear one person say "I'd buy this" about any of the
> wines. I could see maybe #12.
>
> I can't say it was my favorite lineup, but the good news was since I
> was driving and going back to work I had no trouble spitting!
>
> Fun time, nice group, good food, "interesting" wines, good to see some
> old acquaintances and meet some new people.*
>
>
> Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent
> wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't
> drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no
> promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency.*
>
> *

Was this a bring your worst bottle tasting?

In article >,
santiago > wrote:

> Wow. So interesting. I have followed the Sierra Carche thread and was
> totally astonished of what happens in the world of wine criticism, where a
> sample is provided to a critic, and then the wine in the bottle that gets
> to the market bears no resemblance to the wine that the wine critic rated.
>
> The only way to solve this is, IMHO, to punish a winery when such a
> behavior appears. If I was The Wine Advocate I would not rate a wine by the
> producer or branding company for 5 years. Second time, no rates anymore.
>
>
>
> Anyway, In the last couple of weeks I was invited to some tastings for the
> initial assortment of wines of a new wine shop in my town. I love this
> tastings because they provide such a good view of the panorama of a given
> wine region (plus sometime I take a few leftovers back home for free).
>
> But this time, with most of wines from different emerging regions from
> Spain (read: Southeast Spain) has been so deceiving: 90% of wines were
> plainly undrinkable. Overripe and overextracted, with harshest tannins.
> Most of them were cut the same: dense, thick, syrupy and black. None of
> them showed the slightest balance or elegance.
>
> If this is how Spain is to conquer the world wine markets, I bet we are not
> getting any success.
>
> And, worst of all, my bet is that all this inmense quantity of crap wine is
> taylored to be tasted by Mr. Parker et al. And when you see the ratings of
> Miller of the same wines that smell like crap, tast like crap and are
> closer to crap than they are to real wine, I cannot but ask myself if he
> does have a clue or if he is presented totally a different product.
>
> s.

Spain has hit both high and low notes. The make a lot of wine and some
of it is just going to be awful as from any country. I'm big on Portugal
but have had many outright stinkers. Weren't the Sierra Carche wines
rated in Wine Expectator? If so, nough said for me.

Lawrence Leichtman > wrote in
:

>
> Spain has hit both high and low notes. The make a lot of wine and some
> of it is just going to be awful as from any country.

We have just to accept that most of the wine produced in any country has
not much interest to educated wine drinkers. France and Italy produce huge
amounts of crap also.

In Spain, you can find decent wine that comes in 1 litre tetra-pak and is
more than correct. Actually, it is much better than the crap of the wine
tasting I wrote about previously. But most of the wines in those tastings I
was referring to tried to be upscale wine made in a big, bold, in your face
style. And they failed miserably to be drinkable wines.


I'm big on
> Portugal but have had many outright stinkers. Weren't the Sierra
> Carche wines rated in Wine Expectator? If so, nough said for me.

I have only once browsed an issue of Wine Spectator and did not like it, so
I cannot tell you if they tasted the Sierra Carche wines.

Best,

s.

On Sep 3, 6:23*pm, santiago > wrote:
> Wow. So interesting. I have followed the Sierra Carche thread and was
> totally astonished of what happens in the world of wine criticism, where a
> sample is provided to a critic, and then the wine in the bottle that gets
> to the market bears no resemblance to the wine that the wine critic rated..
>
> The only way to solve this is, IMHO, to punish a winery when such a
> behavior appears. If I was The Wine Advocate I would not rate a wine by the
> producer or branding company for 5 years. Second time, no rates anymore.
>
> Anyway, In the last couple of weeks I was invited to some tastings for the
> initial assortment of wines of a new wine shop in my town. I love this
> tastings because they provide such a good view of the panorama of a given
> wine region (plus sometime I take a few leftovers back home for free).
>
> But this time, with most of wines from different emerging regions from
> Spain (read: Southeast Spain) has been so deceiving: 90% of wines were
> plainly undrinkable. Overripe and overextracted, with harshest tannins.
> Most of them were cut the same: dense, thick, syrupy and black. None of
> them showed the slightest balance or elegance.
>
> If this is how Spain is to conquer the world wine markets, I bet we are not
> getting any success.
>
> And, worst of all, my bet is that all this inmense quantity of crap wine is
> taylored to be tasted by Mr. Parker et al. And when you see the ratings of
> Miller of the same wines that smell like crap, tast like crap and are
> closer to crap than they are to real wine, I cannot but ask myself if he
> does have a clue or if he is presented totally a different product.
>
> s.

Santiago (et al)

While Miller's preferences don't mesh with mine, I have trouble
believing he would have liked these wines even if plastered. I
personally would bet on a switch, though I have no evidence. That
said, I don't absolve him of blame. When you allow your tasting to be
"presented" by the "trusted" importer, and give huge ratings to a wine
with no real identity (Sierra Carche is a "brand" owned by a British
marketing company, produced under contract by Casa de la Ermita.) you
have a responsibility in my opinion to "check" the tastings later.
Robert Kenney, who attended yesterday's tasting, has tastes for ripe
wines and purchased 4 CASES of this wine. When he hated the wine, he
sent (at his own expense, overnight!) a bottle to Miller to taste.
Miller waited 10 months to taste. Sheer laziness/incompetence.
I sat next to Dr Vino yesterday, here's his earlier summary:
http://www.drvino.com/2009/07/22/sie...a-carche-2005/

The problem is of course that the "branding agency" has no real
investment. If Sierra Carche develops a bad rep, just start a new
brand. If the branding agency is blamed, start a new agency. They're
just contracting for juice, so no capital investment.

At least the Oriol was an honest little wine.

On Sep 4, 7:59*am, Lawrence Leichtman > wrote:
> In article >,
>
>
>
>
>
> *santiago > wrote:
> > Wow. So interesting. I have followed the Sierra Carche thread and was
> > totally astonished of what happens in the world of wine criticism, where a
> > sample is provided to a critic, and then the wine in the bottle that gets
> > to the market bears no resemblance to the wine that the wine critic rated.
>
> > The only way to solve this is, IMHO, to punish a winery when such a
> > behavior appears. If I was The Wine Advocate I would not rate a wine by the
> > producer or branding company for 5 years. Second time, no rates anymore..
>
> > Anyway, In the last couple of weeks I was invited to some tastings for the
> > initial assortment of wines of a new wine shop in my town. I love this
> > tastings because they provide such a good view of the panorama of a given
> > wine region (plus sometime I take a few leftovers back home for free).
>
> > But this time, with most of wines from different emerging regions from
> > Spain (read: Southeast Spain) has been so deceiving: 90% of wines were
> > plainly undrinkable. Overripe and overextracted, with harshest tannins.
> > Most of them were cut the same: dense, thick, syrupy and black. None of
> > them showed the slightest balance or elegance.
>
> > If this is how Spain is to conquer the world wine markets, I bet we are not
> > getting any success.
>
> > And, worst of all, my bet is that all this inmense quantity of crap wine is
> > taylored to be tasted by Mr. Parker et al. And when you see the ratings of
> > Miller of the same wines that smell like crap, tast like crap and are
> > closer to crap than they are to real wine, I cannot but ask myself if he
> > does have a clue or if he is presented totally a different product.
>
> > s.
>
> Spain has hit both high and low notes. The make a lot of wine and some
> of it is just going to be awful as from any country. I'm big on Portugal
> but have had many outright stinkers. Weren't the Sierra Carche wines
> rated in Wine Expectator? If so, nough said for me.

On Sep 4, 7:59*am, Lawrence Leichtman > wrote:
> In article >,
>
>
>
>
>
> *santiago > wrote:
> > Wow. So interesting. I have followed the Sierra Carche thread and was
> > totally astonished of what happens in the world of wine criticism, where a
> > sample is provided to a critic, and then the wine in the bottle that gets
> > to the market bears no resemblance to the wine that the wine critic rated.
>
> > The only way to solve this is, IMHO, to punish a winery when such a
> > behavior appears. If I was The Wine Advocate I would not rate a wine by the
> > producer or branding company for 5 years. Second time, no rates anymore..
>
> > Anyway, In the last couple of weeks I was invited to some tastings for the
> > initial assortment of wines of a new wine shop in my town. I love this
> > tastings because they provide such a good view of the panorama of a given
> > wine region (plus sometime I take a few leftovers back home for free).
>
> > But this time, with most of wines from different emerging regions from
> > Spain (read: Southeast Spain) has been so deceiving: 90% of wines were
> > plainly undrinkable. Overripe and overextracted, with harshest tannins.
> > Most of them were cut the same: dense, thick, syrupy and black. None of
> > them showed the slightest balance or elegance.
>
> > If this is how Spain is to conquer the world wine markets, I bet we are not
> > getting any success.
>
> > And, worst of all, my bet is that all this inmense quantity of crap wine is
> > taylored to be tasted by Mr. Parker et al. And when you see the ratings of
> > Miller of the same wines that smell like crap, tast like crap and are
> > closer to crap than they are to real wine, I cannot but ask myself if he
> > does have a clue or if he is presented totally a different product.
>
> > s.
>
> Spain has hit both high and low notes. The make a lot of wine and some
> of it is just going to be awful as from any country. I'm big on Portugal
> but have had many outright stinkers. Weren't the Sierra Carche wines
> rated in Wine Expectator? If so, nough said for me.

oops, sorry for empty

SC has never been rated by WS. After Well Oiled got poor reviews on
earlier wines (WS does their tastings blind), they stopped submitting.
Josh Raynolds from IWC apparently did some due diligence, as there was
no actual winery, he decided not to review. Mark Clinard of Well Oiled
"presented" his portfolio to BigJ Miller of Wine Advocate at the
Oregon Grill in Baltimore (not blind).

On Sep 3, 8:32*pm, Joseph Coulter > wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 14:35:19 -0700 (PDT), DaleW >
> wrote:
>
> >Grade disclaimer: I'm a very easy grader, basically A is an excellent
> >wine, B a good wine, C mediocre. Anything below C means I wouldn't
> >drink at a party where it was only choice. Furthermore, I offer no
> >promises of objectivity, accuracy, and certainly not of consistency.*
>
> May I just mote for the record that D's and F's do not exist on the
> Dale Scale! I truly hope you found a good palate cleanser after this
> encounter.
>
> (loved the villagers remark)
> Joseph Coulter
> Joseph Coulter Cruises and Vacationswww.josephcoulter.com

While I can't say I enjoyed the wines, I certainly enjoyed the tasting
(and I can safely say my BAC was 0.01% or less as I went back to
office). I thought Daniel actually did a good job of choosing wines
mostly from the same areas and/or same cepages to give the SCs a fair
chance. Just FYI, the 4 Sierra Carches came from separate sources (2
from PLCB, 2 from participants who bought at retail on East Coast). 2
people bought in PA and sent to Daniel at his cost I believe. He
supplied all of the wines except the other 2 Sierra Carches (brought
by Mark F. and R. Kenney) and one Pico Madama (I think Bob brought). I
had dropped a bottle of 01 Embruix (same grapes, etc) to be included,
but Tim who did the blind bagging didn't understand that it was for
the tasting.

As I noted, my palate preference is not towards hot climate wines.
That said, several of these bottles were just flat out flawed IMHO. I
put the CoL in my top 4 wines, despite my palate preference, just
because it was so clean compared to the SCs, the Pico Madama (also
from Well Oiled), the Panarroz. etc. Others who like very ripe wines
more than I do were just as unhappy with those wines. I've never been
at a tasting where some of the top positive comments were along the
lines of "hey, at least this one is clean.

On Sep 3, 6:23�pm, santiago > wrote:
> Wow. So interesting. I have followed the Sierra Carche thread and was
> totally astonished of what happens in the world of wine criticism, where a
> sample is provided to a critic, and then the wine in the bottle that gets
> to the market bears no resemblance to the wine that the wine critic rated..
>
> The only way to solve this is, IMHO, to punish a winery when such a
> behavior appears. If I was The Wine Advocate I would not rate a wine by the
> producer or branding company for 5 years. Second time, no rates anymore.
>
> Anyway, In the last couple of weeks I was invited to some tastings for the
> initial assortment of wines of a new wine shop in my town. I love this
> tastings because they provide such a good view of the panorama of a given
> wine region (plus sometime I take a few leftovers back home for free).
>
> But this time, with most of wines from different emerging regions from
> Spain (read: Southeast Spain) has been so deceiving: 90% of wines were
> plainly undrinkable. Overripe and overextracted, with harshest tannins.
> Most of them were cut the same: dense, thick, syrupy and black. None of
> them showed the slightest balance or elegance.
>
> If this is how Spain is to conquer the world wine markets, I bet we are not
> getting any success.
>
> And, worst of all, my bet is that all this inmense quantity of crap wine is
> taylored to be tasted by Mr. Parker et al. And when you see the ratings of
> Miller of the same wines that smell like crap, tast like crap and are
> closer to crap than they are to real wine, I cannot but ask myself if he
> does have a clue or if he is presented totally a different product.
>
> s.

Amen