Wine (alt.food.wine) Devoted to the discussion of wine and wine-related topics. A place to read and comment about wines, wine and food matching, storage systems, wine paraphernalia, etc. In general, any topic related to wine is valid fodder for the group.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)   Report Post  
Vino
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Problem of Michael Scarpotti

I don't think that anyone who regularly contributes informed opinion
or factual information to AFW and who has been following the postings
of one Michael Scarpotti can seriously dispute the fact that he is,
without question, a troll (however anyone wants to define that term).
Trolls thrive on replies to their postings.

Please!!! Please!!! Stop replying to his postings. Eventually, he will
starve and move on to some other newsgroup.

Vino
To reply, add "x" between
letters and numbers of
e-mail address.
  #2 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dale Williams
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My apologies, the troll succeeded in raising my ire and I posted w/o thinking.
Indeed, the best strategy is to ignore. A post on googlegroups of "scarpitti
troll" will show you how much time various newsgroups have wasted on him.
Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply
  #3 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dale Williams
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My apologies, the troll succeeded in raising my ire and I posted w/o thinking.
Indeed, the best strategy is to ignore. A post on googlegroups of "scarpitti
troll" will show you how much time various newsgroups have wasted on him.
Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply
  #4 (permalink)   Report Post  
Michael Scarpitti
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Vino > wrote in message >. ..
> I don't think that anyone who regularly contributes informed opinion
> or factual information to AFW and who has been following the postings
> of one Michael Scarpotti can seriously dispute the fact that he is,
> without question, a troll (however anyone wants to define that term).
> Trolls thrive on replies to their postings.
>
> Please!!! Please!!! Stop replying to his postings. Eventually, he will
> starve and move on to some other newsgroup.
>
> Vino
> To reply, add "x" between
> letters and numbers of
> e-mail address.


Perhaps those who wish to continue believing myths and falsehhods need
not read them. Air (oxygen) ruins wine.
  #5 (permalink)   Report Post  
Michael Scarpitti
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Vino > wrote in message >. ..
> I don't think that anyone who regularly contributes informed opinion
> or factual information to AFW and who has been following the postings
> of one Michael Scarpotti can seriously dispute the fact that he is,
> without question, a troll (however anyone wants to define that term).
> Trolls thrive on replies to their postings.
>
> Please!!! Please!!! Stop replying to his postings. Eventually, he will
> starve and move on to some other newsgroup.
>
> Vino
> To reply, add "x" between
> letters and numbers of
> e-mail address.


Perhaps those who wish to continue believing myths and falsehhods need
not read them. Air (oxygen) ruins wine.


  #7 (permalink)   Report Post  
Michael Scarpitti
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Vino > wrote in message >. ..
> I don't think that anyone who regularly contributes informed opinion
> or factual information to AFW and who has been following the postings
> of one Michael Scarpotti can seriously dispute the fact that he is,
> without question, a troll (however anyone wants to define that term).
> Trolls thrive on replies to their postings.
>
> Please!!! Please!!! Stop replying to his postings. Eventually, he will
> starve and move on to some other newsgroup.
>
> Vino
> To reply, add "x" between
> letters and numbers of
> e-mail address.


http://www.palantir.net/cgi-bin/file...v/stresspi.wav
  #12 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dana Myers
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Uranium Committee wrote:

> CONTROLLED oxidation during storage is part of aging. The amount of
> wine in the barrel is controlled by topping up. Once it's in the
> bottle, it's sealed, with only a very tiny exchange with the outside
> atmosphere possible. If oxygen weren't bad for wine, it would not be
> sealed, now would it?


Oxidation itself is not always bad for wine; as mentioned, barrel aging
provides micro-oxygenation, from which the wine benefits. Once bottled,
the wine may be stored for an indeterminate period of time, thus permitting
oxidation in the bottle would not be controlled. This does not mean
that a wine will not benefit from *some* additional oxidation when
served. Sealing a bottle well to reduce oxidation is to *preserve*
the wine until it is *served*, but oxidation at the time of serving
may provides benefits just as oxidation during barrel aging. Of course,
too much exposure to air and a wine ends up oxidized and burnt, but it's
clear that many wines improve with exposure to air after opening, before
hitting a sweet spot and deteriorating.

Further, exposure to air does more than oxidize a wine, so it is
perhaps an error to focus on only the oxidation. As I and others
have observed, some wines come out of the bottle with funky or "off"
aromas which quickly dissipate once exposed to air - so some
exposure to air can improve these wines even if very little oxidation
takes places.

None of this is to be construed as an assertion on my part that
*all* oxidation is good for a wine. Clearly it's easy to get too
much, but that doesn't mean that any oxidation is bad.

Dana
  #13 (permalink)   Report Post  
Uranium Committee
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dana Myers > wrote in message . com>...
> Uranium Committee wrote:
>
> > CONTROLLED oxidation during storage is part of aging. The amount of
> > wine in the barrel is controlled by topping up. Once it's in the
> > bottle, it's sealed, with only a very tiny exchange with the outside
> > atmosphere possible. If oxygen weren't bad for wine, it would not be
> > sealed, now would it?

>
> Oxidation itself is not always bad for wine; as mentioned, barrel aging
> provides micro-oxygenation, from which the wine benefits.


But that is BEFORE it is ready to drink. AFTER it is ready to drink,
further oxidation is undesirable.

> Once bottled,
> the wine may be stored for an indeterminate period of time, thus permitting
> oxidation in the bottle would not be controlled. This does not mean
> that a wine will not benefit from *some* additional oxidation when
> served.


You've confused two things that happen to wine when it is opened and
exposed to air:

1. Oxygen in the air begins to attack it

2. The wine's volatile parts are allowed to escape and affect our
senses.

#2 is good (for the most part).

#1 is bad.

> Sealing a bottle well to reduce oxidation is to *preserve*
> the wine until it is *served*, but oxidation at the time of serving
> may provides benefits just as oxidation during barrel aging.


No, it doesn't. Oxidation after the wine is mature ruins the wine,
which begins at once.

> Of course,
> too much exposure to air and a wine ends up oxidized and burnt, but it's
> clear that many wines improve with exposure to air after opening, before
> hitting a sweet spot and deteriorating.


Again, you've confused two separate phenomena.

> Further, exposure to air does more than oxidize a wine, so it is
> perhaps an error to focus on only the oxidation. As I and others
> have observed, some wines come out of the bottle with funky or "off"
> aromas which quickly dissipate once exposed to air - so some
> exposure to air can improve these wines even if very little oxidation
> takes places.
>
> None of this is to be construed as an assertion on my part that
> *all* oxidation is good for a wine. Clearly it's easy to get too
> much, but that doesn't mean that any oxidation is bad.
>
> Dana

  #14 (permalink)   Report Post  
Uranium Committee
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dana Myers > wrote in message . com>...
> Uranium Committee wrote:
>
> > CONTROLLED oxidation during storage is part of aging. The amount of
> > wine in the barrel is controlled by topping up. Once it's in the
> > bottle, it's sealed, with only a very tiny exchange with the outside
> > atmosphere possible. If oxygen weren't bad for wine, it would not be
> > sealed, now would it?

>
> Oxidation itself is not always bad for wine; as mentioned, barrel aging
> provides micro-oxygenation, from which the wine benefits.


You must also realize the surface-to-volume ratio in a barrel is much
different from an open bottle or even a corked one. Barrels are topped
up to keep the air out.
  #15 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dana Myers
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Uranium Committee wrote:
> Dana Myers > wrote in message . com>...
>
>>Uranium Committee wrote:


>>Oxidation itself is not always bad for wine; as mentioned, barrel aging
>>provides micro-oxygenation, from which the wine benefits.

>
>
> But that is BEFORE it is ready to drink. AFTER it is ready to drink,
> further oxidation is undesirable.


Wine isn't like Coca-Cola, it isn't a product manufactured to
some precise tolerance and "perfect" upon release. The notion
of when a wine is "ready to drink" is fairly subjective and
influenced by individual preferences.

>> Once bottled,
>>the wine may be stored for an indeterminate period of time, thus permitting
>>oxidation in the bottle would not be controlled. This does not mean
>>that a wine will not benefit from *some* additional oxidation when
>>served.

>
>
> You've confused two things that happen to wine when it is opened and
> exposed to air:


Actually, I have not. I have *explained* two things that happen
when wine is opened and exposed to air. I'm not confused at all.
>
> 1. Oxygen in the air begins to attack it


It sure does. But, something you appear unwilling to
even entertain, oxidation that occurs when first
opening a wine, and perhaps even for some time
afterward, may be *beneficial*. The fact is, the
oxidation of a wine starts back in maceration,
and proceeds on a continuum until the wine is
digested. It is quite possible and, in fact,
quite common, for a winemaker to bottle wine
long before "maturity". Just like color emulsions
are often shipped before reaching "ripeness" to
allow for time spent in the supply chain, wine
is usually bottled before maturity. Unlike
color emulsions, there's no set of objective
measurements that can be made to determine if
a particular wine is "ready" or not.

So some of the oxidation that occurs upon
opening may in fact be anticipated and planned
for by the winemaker. You don't have to take my
word on this, you can ask a few winemakers. It's
a fact of life.

Some of that oxidation may actually improve the wine.
Too much oxidation and you start deteriorating.

> 2. The wine's volatile parts are allowed to escape and affect our
> senses.


Some of the volatiles may not be pleasant and you don't want
them to influence your senses. Many of the volatiles are
pleasant and you want them to influence your senses.

> #2 is good (for the most part).


Well, once unpleasant aromas have blown off. But
then the pleasant volatiles will also deteriorate.

> #1 is bad.


Oxidation is not uniformly bad. *Too much* oxidation is
bad. Some oxidation is part of the process, even in your
wine glass.

The "opening up" of a wine includes all of the above, and,
in the majority of cases, the wine will improve with a few
minutes in the glass or sometimes more, and eventually
it will deteriorate.
>
>
>> Sealing a bottle well to reduce oxidation is to *preserve*
>>the wine until it is *served*, but oxidation at the time of serving
>>may provides benefits just as oxidation during barrel aging.

>
>
> No, it doesn't. Oxidation after the wine is mature ruins the wine,
> which begins at once.


Well, please define for me when a wine is "mature". Here's a
hint: it usually isn't when the wine is bottled, and it may be
a period of several years, and the perception of maturity in a
wine is prone to be subjective. Maturity doesn't necessarily
before a bottle is opened; and it may occur long before a
bottle is opened.

I suppose your above statement would be correct if there was
some precise notion of wine maturity. There simply isn't.


>>Of course,
>>too much exposure to air and a wine ends up oxidized and burnt, but it's
>>clear that many wines improve with exposure to air after opening, before
>>hitting a sweet spot and deteriorating.

>
>
> Again, you've confused two separate phenomena.


No, I haven't. You're apparently attributing a degree of
precision to winemaking that simply does not exist other than
in your imagination.

You seem intent on asserting that a wine is at the
peak of maturity when the cork is pulled and then
immediately plummets into wreckage. This assertion
simply doesn't stand up to educated inspection.

Have you ever had the opportunity to taste a wine
through the lifecycle, to taste the freshly fermented
must, to taste it in the barrel over a period of time,
then to taste it in the bottle over time? If so,
you'd find that the notion of "maturity" is much
less defined that you seem to expect.

Dana


  #16 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dana Myers
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Uranium Committee wrote:

> Dana Myers > wrote in message . com>...


>>Oxidation itself is not always bad for wine; as mentioned, barrel aging
>>provides micro-oxygenation, from which the wine benefits.

>
>
> You must also realize the surface-to-volume ratio in a barrel is much
> different from an open bottle or even a corked one. Barrels are topped
> up to keep the air out.


What have I written to indicate I do not understand winemaking?
Oxidation occurs throughout the life of a wine, including when
poured into a glass. Winemakers understand this and plan for it,
at least the good ones do.

Perhaps you'd like to explain why the makers of Velletri
Rosso DOC Riserva state things like:

> After botting, the "Velletri Riserva" can
> be kept at least another 3-4 years before drinking


If the wine was "perfect" upon release, they would say
something like "drink the wine as soon as possible", like
Budweiser's gimmicky "day fresh beer" program. In fact,
the producer suggests a long storage of the wine.

> SERVE: At a temperature of 18° - 20° C.; uncork the bottle
> at least two hours before tasting this wine.


Even with a wine that you like and apparently think is "perfect"
when first opened, the producer *instructs* you to open the wine
at least *two hours* before tasting.

Dana
  #17 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dana Myers
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Uranium Committee wrote:

> Dana Myers > wrote in message . com>...


>>Oxidation itself is not always bad for wine; as mentioned, barrel aging
>>provides micro-oxygenation, from which the wine benefits.

>
>
> You must also realize the surface-to-volume ratio in a barrel is much
> different from an open bottle or even a corked one. Barrels are topped
> up to keep the air out.


What have I written to indicate I do not understand winemaking?
Oxidation occurs throughout the life of a wine, including when
poured into a glass. Winemakers understand this and plan for it,
at least the good ones do.

Perhaps you'd like to explain why the makers of Velletri
Rosso DOC Riserva state things like:

> After botting, the "Velletri Riserva" can
> be kept at least another 3-4 years before drinking


If the wine was "perfect" upon release, they would say
something like "drink the wine as soon as possible", like
Budweiser's gimmicky "day fresh beer" program. In fact,
the producer suggests a long storage of the wine.

> SERVE: At a temperature of 18° - 20° C.; uncork the bottle
> at least two hours before tasting this wine.


Even with a wine that you like and apparently think is "perfect"
when first opened, the producer *instructs* you to open the wine
at least *two hours* before tasting.

Dana
  #18 (permalink)   Report Post  
Uranium Committee
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dana Myers > wrote in message .com>...
> Uranium Committee wrote:
>
> > Dana Myers > wrote in message . com>...

>
> >>Oxidation itself is not always bad for wine; as mentioned, barrel aging
> >>provides micro-oxygenation, from which the wine benefits.

> >
> >
> > You must also realize the surface-to-volume ratio in a barrel is much
> > different from an open bottle or even a corked one. Barrels are topped
> > up to keep the air out.

>
> What have I written to indicate I do not understand winemaking?
> Oxidation occurs throughout the life of a wine, including when
> poured into a glass. Winemakers understand this and plan for it,
> at least the good ones do.
>
> Perhaps you'd like to explain why the makers of Velletri
> Rosso DOC Riserva state things like:
>
> > After botting, the "Velletri Riserva" can
> > be kept at least another 3-4 years before drinking

>
> If the wine was "perfect" upon release, they would say
> something like "drink the wine as soon as possible", like
> Budweiser's gimmicky "day fresh beer" program. In fact,
> the producer suggests a long storage of the wine.
>
> > SERVE: At a temperature of 18° - 20° C.; uncork the bottle
> > at least two hours before tasting this wine.

>
> Even with a wine that you like and apparently think is "perfect"
> when first opened, the producer *instructs* you to open the wine
> at least *two hours* before tasting.
>
> Dana



Then the winemaker is wrong. This is insane.
  #19 (permalink)   Report Post  
Uranium Committee
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dana Myers > wrote in message .com>...
> Uranium Committee wrote:
>
> > Dana Myers > wrote in message . com>...

>
> >>Oxidation itself is not always bad for wine; as mentioned, barrel aging
> >>provides micro-oxygenation, from which the wine benefits.

> >
> >
> > You must also realize the surface-to-volume ratio in a barrel is much
> > different from an open bottle or even a corked one. Barrels are topped
> > up to keep the air out.

>
> What have I written to indicate I do not understand winemaking?
> Oxidation occurs throughout the life of a wine, including when
> poured into a glass. Winemakers understand this and plan for it,
> at least the good ones do.
>
> Perhaps you'd like to explain why the makers of Velletri
> Rosso DOC Riserva state things like:
>
> > After botting, the "Velletri Riserva" can
> > be kept at least another 3-4 years before drinking

>
> If the wine was "perfect" upon release, they would say
> something like "drink the wine as soon as possible", like
> Budweiser's gimmicky "day fresh beer" program. In fact,
> the producer suggests a long storage of the wine.
>
> > SERVE: At a temperature of 18° - 20° C.; uncork the bottle
> > at least two hours before tasting this wine.

>
> Even with a wine that you like and apparently think is "perfect"
> when first opened, the producer *instructs* you to open the wine
> at least *two hours* before tasting.
>
> Dana



Then the winemaker is wrong. This is insane.
  #20 (permalink)   Report Post  
Uranium Committee
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dana Myers > wrote in message .com>...
> Uranium Committee wrote:
> > Dana Myers > wrote in message . com>...
> >
> >>Uranium Committee wrote:

>
> >>Oxidation itself is not always bad for wine; as mentioned, barrel aging
> >>provides micro-oxygenation, from which the wine benefits.

> >
> >
> > But that is BEFORE it is ready to drink. AFTER it is ready to drink,
> > further oxidation is undesirable.

>
> Wine isn't like Coca-Cola, it isn't a product manufactured to
> some precise tolerance and "perfect" upon release. The notion
> of when a wine is "ready to drink" is fairly subjective and
> influenced by individual preferences.
>
> >> Once bottled,
> >>the wine may be stored for an indeterminate period of time, thus permitting
> >>oxidation in the bottle would not be controlled. This does not mean
> >>that a wine will not benefit from *some* additional oxidation when
> >>served.

> >
> >
> > You've confused two things that happen to wine when it is opened and
> > exposed to air:

>
> Actually, I have not. I have *explained* two things that happen
> when wine is opened and exposed to air. I'm not confused at all.
> >
> > 1. Oxygen in the air begins to attack it

>
> It sure does. But, something you appear unwilling to
> even entertain, oxidation that occurs when first
> opening a wine, and perhaps even for some time
> afterward, may be *beneficial*.


IMPOSSIBLE

> The fact is, the
> oxidation of a wine starts back in maceration,
> and proceeds on a continuum until the wine is
> digested. It is quite possible and, in fact,
> quite common, for a winemaker to bottle wine
> long before "maturity". Just like color emulsions
> are often shipped before reaching "ripeness" to
> allow for time spent in the supply chain, wine
> is usually bottled before maturity. Unlike
> color emulsions, there's no set of objective
> measurements that can be made to determine if
> a particular wine is "ready" or not.


But WHEN it is ready, it does NOT benefit from being left open to the
air for any significant amount of time.

> So some of the oxidation that occurs upon
> opening may in fact be anticipated and planned
> for by the winemaker. You don't have to take my
> word on this, you can ask a few winemakers. It's
> a fact of life.
>
> Some of that oxidation may actually improve the wine.
> Too much oxidation and you start deteriorating.
>
> > 2. The wine's volatile parts are allowed to escape and affect our
> > senses.

>
> Some of the volatiles may not be pleasant and you don't want
> them to influence your senses. Many of the volatiles are
> pleasant and you want them to influence your senses.



I said the volatiles 'affect our senses'. I didn't claim that they are
all good or all bad.


> > #2 is good (for the most part).

>
> Well, once unpleasant aromas have blown off. But
> then the pleasant volatiles will also deteriorate.
>
> > #1 is bad.

>
> Oxidation is not uniformly bad. *Too much* oxidation is
> bad. Some oxidation is part of the process, even in your
> wine glass.


No, what you are talking about is merely air TRANSPORTING the
volatiles to our senses. We need to breathe oxygen to live. The oxygen
has NO benefit to the wine (nor does it affect the wine negatively in
the typically short span of time while in your glass), but the rest of
the air (mostly nitrogen) merely acts as a transporting vehicle and
does not significantly affect the wine.

>
> The "opening up" of a wine includes all of the above, and,
> in the majority of cases, the wine will improve with a few
> minutes in the glass or sometimes more, and eventually
> it will deteriorate.


Two phenomena to discuss:

1. Aerial transport of volatiles

2. Oxidation

> >
> >
> >> Sealing a bottle well to reduce oxidation is to *preserve*
> >>the wine until it is *served*, but oxidation at the time of serving
> >>may provides benefits just as oxidation during barrel aging.

> >
> >
> > No, it doesn't. Oxidation after the wine is mature ruins the wine,
> > which begins at once.

>
> Well, please define for me when a wine is "mature". Here's a
> hint: it usually isn't when the wine is bottled, and it may be
> a period of several years, and the perception of maturity in a
> wine is prone to be subjective.


Agreed.

> Maturity doesn't necessarily
> before a bottle is opened; and it may occur long before a
> bottle is opened.


Of course.
>
> I suppose your above statement would be correct if there was
> some precise notion of wine maturity. There simply isn't.


The two issues are not related.

>
>
> >>Of course,
> >>too much exposure to air and a wine ends up oxidized and burnt, but it's
> >>clear that many wines improve with exposure to air after opening, before
> >>hitting a sweet spot and deteriorating.

> >
> >
> > Again, you've confused two separate phenomena.

>
> No, I haven't. You're apparently attributing a degree of
> precision to winemaking that simply does not exist other than
> in your imagination.
>
> You seem intent on asserting that a wine is at the
> peak of maturity when the cork is pulled and then
> immediately plummets into wreckage.


Well, not really. I'm simply saying that if it's ready to drink, and
then opened, it's all downhill from there. Drink immediately upon
opening and recap after opening.

If it's not ready, aerating it by 'breathing' it will not improve it.

> This assertion
> simply doesn't stand up to educated inspection.
>
> Have you ever had the opportunity to taste a wine
> through the lifecycle, to taste the freshly fermented
> must, to taste it in the barrel over a period of time,
> then to taste it in the bottle over time? If so,
> you'd find that the notion of "maturity" is much
> less defined that you seem to expect.


I understand a wine can be drunk over a long period of time. I
generally find young Barberas unsavory, despite the Piedmontese
preference for enjoying them young. I like them about 4 or more years
old. No, I have not tasted wine in the barrel.


> Dana



  #21 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dana Myers
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Uranium Committee wrote:

> Dana Myers > wrote in message .com>...


[...]

>>>SERVE: At a temperature of 18° - 20° C.; uncork the bottle

>>
>> > at least two hours before tasting this wine.

>>
>>Even with a wine that you like and apparently think is "perfect"
>>when first opened, the producer *instructs* you to open the wine
>>at least *two hours* before tasting.



> Then the winemaker is wrong. This is insane.


Ah. Now we've arrived at the crux of the issue.

Of course, everyone appreciates wine differently, and
some people appreciate wine in ways not intended by the
winemaker. So it's perfectly valid for you to believe
a wine should be consumed immediately upon opening, because
that's the way you like it. No one can tell you that
you are wrong to enjoy wine the way you like it. None
of this has to do with oxidation, wine maturity, or
any objective technology.

It's just the way *you* like wine. The conflict
arose was when you declared *your* preference is the only
correct one and attempted to "prove" it. It appears your
preference runs somewhat counter to widely accepted wisdom,
including that of the makers of the wine. That doesn't
make anyone wrong, it just makes you different, and all
is well as long as you don't try to tell everyone else
they are wrong.

Cheers,
Dana


  #22 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dana Myers
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Uranium Committee wrote:

> Dana Myers > wrote in message .com>...


>>Have you ever had the opportunity to taste a wine
>>through the lifecycle, to taste the freshly fermented
>>must, to taste it in the barrel over a period of time,
>>then to taste it in the bottle over time? If so,
>>you'd find that the notion of "maturity" is much
>>less defined that you seem to expect.

>
>
> I understand a wine can be drunk over a long period of time. I
> generally find young Barberas unsavory, despite the Piedmontese
> preference for enjoying them young. I like them about 4 or more years
> old. No, I have not tasted wine in the barrel.


Tasting from must to barrel to bottle is an amazingly eye-opening
experience. I would strongly encourage you to arrange to do so
at some point in your life; living in California wine country, the
opportunity is easier to find.

Cheers,
Dana
  #23 (permalink)   Report Post  
Larry
 
Posts: n/a
Default


>
>It's just the way *you* like wine. The conflict
>arose was when you declared *your* preference is the only
>correct one and attempted to "prove" it. It appears your
>preference runs somewhat counter to widely accepted wisdom,
>including that of the makers of the wine. That doesn't
>make anyone wrong, it just makes you different, and all
>is well as long as you don't try to tell everyone else
>they are wrong.
>
>Cheers,
>Dana



Bullseye(sp) Dana!


I've kill filed him long time ago but do get his postings second hand.
You have way more patience and tolerance than many. If he decides to
argue with your statement then the jig is up.....TROLL big time.

Your closing statements should end this thread. Most have already
silenced their keyboards.

All the best,

Larry
Southern Ontario


  #24 (permalink)   Report Post  
Larry
 
Posts: n/a
Default


>
>It's just the way *you* like wine. The conflict
>arose was when you declared *your* preference is the only
>correct one and attempted to "prove" it. It appears your
>preference runs somewhat counter to widely accepted wisdom,
>including that of the makers of the wine. That doesn't
>make anyone wrong, it just makes you different, and all
>is well as long as you don't try to tell everyone else
>they are wrong.
>
>Cheers,
>Dana



Bullseye(sp) Dana!


I've kill filed him long time ago but do get his postings second hand.
You have way more patience and tolerance than many. If he decides to
argue with your statement then the jig is up.....TROLL big time.

Your closing statements should end this thread. Most have already
silenced their keyboards.

All the best,

Larry
Southern Ontario


  #25 (permalink)   Report Post  
Uranium Committee
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dana Myers > wrote in message . com>...
> Uranium Committee wrote:
>


OK, Dana, my taste is that I really, really, really dislike oxidized
wine. A wine that has been opened and sitting out for several hours
half-empty tastes noticeably inferior to the same wine freshly opened.


> > Dana Myers > wrote in message .com>...

>
> [...]
>
> >>>SERVE: At a temperature of 18° - 20° C.; uncork the bottle

>
> >> > at least two hours before tasting this wine.
> >>
> >>Even with a wine that you like and apparently think is "perfect"
> >>when first opened, the producer *instructs* you to open the wine
> >>at least *two hours* before tasting.

>
>
> > Then the winemaker is wrong. This is insane.

>
> Ah. Now we've arrived at the crux of the issue.
>
> Of course, everyone appreciates wine differently, and
> some people appreciate wine in ways not intended by the
> winemaker. So it's perfectly valid for you to believe
> a wine should be consumed immediately upon opening, because
> that's the way you like it. No one can tell you that
> you are wrong to enjoy wine the way you like it. None
> of this has to do with oxidation, wine maturity, or
> any objective technology.
>
> It's just the way *you* like wine. The conflict
> arose was when you declared *your* preference is the only
> correct one and attempted to "prove" it. It appears your
> preference runs somewhat counter to widely accepted wisdom,
> including that of the makers of the wine. That doesn't
> make anyone wrong, it just makes you different, and all
> is well as long as you don't try to tell everyone else
> they are wrong.
>
> Cheers,
> Dana



  #26 (permalink)   Report Post  
Uranium Committee
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dana Myers > wrote in message . com>...
> Uranium Committee wrote:
>


OK, Dana, my taste is that I really, really, really dislike oxidized
wine. A wine that has been opened and sitting out for several hours
half-empty tastes noticeably inferior to the same wine freshly opened.


> > Dana Myers > wrote in message .com>...

>
> [...]
>
> >>>SERVE: At a temperature of 18° - 20° C.; uncork the bottle

>
> >> > at least two hours before tasting this wine.
> >>
> >>Even with a wine that you like and apparently think is "perfect"
> >>when first opened, the producer *instructs* you to open the wine
> >>at least *two hours* before tasting.

>
>
> > Then the winemaker is wrong. This is insane.

>
> Ah. Now we've arrived at the crux of the issue.
>
> Of course, everyone appreciates wine differently, and
> some people appreciate wine in ways not intended by the
> winemaker. So it's perfectly valid for you to believe
> a wine should be consumed immediately upon opening, because
> that's the way you like it. No one can tell you that
> you are wrong to enjoy wine the way you like it. None
> of this has to do with oxidation, wine maturity, or
> any objective technology.
>
> It's just the way *you* like wine. The conflict
> arose was when you declared *your* preference is the only
> correct one and attempted to "prove" it. It appears your
> preference runs somewhat counter to widely accepted wisdom,
> including that of the makers of the wine. That doesn't
> make anyone wrong, it just makes you different, and all
> is well as long as you don't try to tell everyone else
> they are wrong.
>
> Cheers,
> Dana

  #29 (permalink)   Report Post  
Vincent
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I've had this wine twice, the first time after about a 2-hour decant (not
enough), and the second, this past weekend, after an 8-hour decant. The
flavors really did open up more the second time, but decanting alone can't
make up for aging, and this wine is still too young. I'm excited about its
potential though, as I've still another 10 bottles waiting for another day.

This is only one of two wines that I've had multiple (more than 2) vintages
of, the other being La Lagune. The 1996 Pichon Baron is quite enjoyable
after 3-4 hours, the 1986 after 2, and even the 1966 needed a little (tasted
when opened; & then every 15 minutes; was satisfied at 45). Also had the
1982, but this was served to us from a decanter, though I don't know for how
long it was decanting.

One of the biggest surprises I've ever encountered is the 1975 La Lagune.
This isn't a well-known winery, and 1975 was not known as one of the better
vintages, which makes this a bargain find (though you are unlikely to
stumble upon it at the local Liquorama). If I taste it right after opening,
it seems as if it has faded away - can hardly taste the fruit, and the
tannins are just barely present. But then I poured it into another bottle
and let it settle for 2 hours (and I recorked it because I was afraid 2
hours might be to long, and I had just begun cooking). After the 2 hours, I
poured a little into the glass, swirled it around, and the whole thing came
alive!! Why? I don't know. Generally decanting softens the tannins, but
this was almost opposite. If anyone can explain this, please do.

\/


"JEP" wrote in message

<snip>
> I opened a bottle of 2000 Baron de Pichon Longueville (I know,
> infanticide, but I couldn't resist) and I can tell you the wine
> improved with a couple hours of exposure to air. It was even better
> the next day.
>
> Andy



  #37 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dana Myers
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Uranium Committee wrote:

> Oxidation may conceivably 'improve' a grossly immature wine, but only
> because it is immature, and only for a brief period.


Perhaps long enough to drink it... :-)

Dana
  #38 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dana Myers
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Uranium Committee wrote:

> Oxidation may conceivably 'improve' a grossly immature wine, but only
> because it is immature, and only for a brief period.


Perhaps long enough to drink it... :-)

Dana
  #39 (permalink)   Report Post  
RV WRLee
 
Posts: n/a
Default

>Peel an apple and watch it turn brown. See how long it takes. The same
>thing is happeneing to your wine as it sits out in the air.
>


No it's not.
Bi!!
  #40 (permalink)   Report Post  
RV WRLee
 
Posts: n/a
Default

>Peel an apple and watch it turn brown. See how long it takes. The same
>thing is happeneing to your wine as it sits out in the air.
>


No it's not.
Bi!!


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looks like the Sriracha problem wasn't a problem after all. ImStillMags General Cooking 1 16-07-2014 11:39 PM
Hey, Michael! Melba's Jammin' General Cooking 6 23-11-2005 10:50 PM
Are Michael Scarpotti and Uranium Committee One and the Same? Vino Wine 8 12-09-2004 06:43 PM
Tea day with Michael Ripon Tea 4 04-05-2004 12:19 PM
Where's Michael Edleman? PENMART01 General Cooking 13 05-01-2004 04:04 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:25 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"