I seldom find F&W drink content useful, but this was an interesting concept.
As always easy to find quibbles and disagreements, but can see logic in most choices even if they wouldn't be mine

http://www.foodandwine.com/wine/40-wines

In message >,
DaleW > writes
>I seldom find F&W drink content useful, but this was an interesting concept.
>As always easy to find quibbles and disagreements, but can see logic in
>most choices even if they wouldn't be mine
>
>http://www.foodandwine.com/wine/40-wines

No Bordeaux, for example one from the 1855 classification? Madeira (or
port or sherry for those who prefer those)?



--
---
Sheila Page

On 3/10/18 10:12 AM, DaleW wrote:
> I seldom find F&W drink content useful, but this was an interesting concept.
> As always easy to find quibbles and disagreements, but can see logic in most choices even if they wouldn't be mine
>
> http://www.foodandwine.com/wine/40-wines
>

Yes, much better than the usual fluff piece. And any list that includes
Ridge Geyserville and Lapierre Morgon isn't going to get too much
criticism from me. Looking over that list, I've had 22 of the 40 wines
listed (in one vintage or another) with many of the omissions coming
from the bottom of the list.

Thanks for posting this!
Mark Lipton

--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.cwdjr.net