Month: October 2016

Vol. 2. No.24…TB’s new, improved rating system for wines!

In 1972, TB graduated from college and taken a job at Western Bancorp (later First Interstate Bancorp and now part of Well Fargo), in the Investment Department where he and his boss and mentor, F. Alden Damon, managed the bond portfolios of the 11 smaller banks. Those were largely comprised of municipal bonds, so he learned to distrust Moody’s and S&P bond ratings as they were higher for similar credits on the East Coast than west of the Mississippi.

Deciding to go back to school to work on a Master’s, at night, he had a finance class that required a term paper. He submitted one on “A New System for Rating Municipal Bonds”. The prof questioned him on it and said if you pursue it don’t expect a good grade, because Moody’s and S&P already do that. Really? Frustrated but determined to continue with the project he worked on it, drawing on some research of a predecessor at WBC. Focusing on New York City, TB showed how that rating should have been much lower than the ‘A’ it carried, for many reasons including demographics, amount of debt service, and several other factors. Figuring he would probably get a ‘B’ or even a ‘C+’, he didn’t put his heart into it. In other words an adequate job but not a stellar one, thanks Dr. Dunn!

When the papers were graded, mine had an ‘A1/A+’ on it…huh??? Furthermore, he told the class it was the best he had received and even read it to the class. What caused his change of mind? NYC’s problems were finally coming out and it was on its way towards the biggest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history! What had the rating agencies done? Lowered it to ‘Baa/BBB)’. In other words, using ‘my’ rating system would have predicted dire if not drastic possibilities, while the agencies glossed over it.

What is the point? Well, besides prof’s needing to encourage new thought, it is that all ratings are not created equal. Nothing is more true than subjective tasting of wine.

Consider the Judgment of Paris tasting the showed the quality of California wines was on a par with French wines. Quel horror! Even then on the second pass when they reversed the order there was some differentiation but generally close, except for the French judge who called it a travesty. They were using a system similar to the UC Davis 20-point system mentioned in the previous post. Imagine if they had been using the Parker (or similar) 100-point system, where 50 is the base and after all elements, 25 points are subjective – that’s 1/4 of the total and 50% of the scoring area! Gimme a break!

Parker defends his system but adds (as mentioned in that post):

“Scores, however, do not reveal the important facts about a wine. The written commentary that accompanies the ratings is a better source of information regarding the wine’s style and personality, its relative quality vis-à-vis its peers, and its value and aging potential than any score could ever indicate.”  Robert M. Parker

Got that? They are meaningless comparing one rating with another on the same time, even under the same variables but when they are at different times independently, they are absolutely worthless!

Now drag that across, not the current three bond rating agencies, but perhaps two or three dozen wine critics with varying palettes and desired flavors (not to mention potential conflicts of interest by who they may represent – TB is shocked at this! Shocked!)

As mentioned in the prior blog, we have rating escalation (where no one tries to get you to buy a wine with a rating less than 90! So we have a lot of 91-93 ratings, fewer but still many 94-95 ratings and fewer still with 95-98 and 99-100 ratings. But even Parker has increased the number of 98-100 ratings since 1982 when he rated just two bordeaux wines that high. Here is a link to  a list of his 100-point scoring wines…you decide:  http://www.wine-searcher.com/robertparker.lml

So TB got to thinking. IF there is compression, we need a bigger scale. Here is TB’s proposal of a 1,000 point rating system!!! Consider that there would them be 100 categories of wines – 100 times the number in the current system. Imagine telling your friend that you own a 1,000 point wine and his is only a 980. What plonk that must be!

Here is a comparison to all three scales:

20-point       100-point                                         1,000 point

Appearance                            0-2                    0-5                                                     0-50

Color                                        0-2                     <             included in Appearance        >

Aroma/Bouquet                    0-2                    0-15                                                    0-150

Volatile Acidity                     0-2                     n/a

Total Acidity                          0-2                     n/a

Sweetness (sugar)               0-1                      n/a

Flavor (!)                                 0-1                    0-20                                                 0-200

Astringency                           0-1                      n/a

General Quality*                  0-2                    0-10                                                    0-100

*Only subjective category in UCDavis system; In 100-point it also included potential for further evolution and improvement – aging.

TB’s system has the advantage of making broader distinctions between a 94-95 point wine…TEN whole points…wow! Hopefully, you see this charade for what it is, because IF that became the norm, it would be even more impressive to say “my wine is a 950, yours is just a 940…peon!” But here is the incredible thing: even more price escalation! Because those ten points might now mean $50 more cost to the consumer! Yet it still might not impress if your guests tastes weren’t aligned with the raters.

UC Davis

17-20  Wines of outstanding character having no defects

13-16   Standard wines with neither outstanding character or defect

9-12     Wines of commercial acceptability with noticeable defects

5-8       Wines below commercial acceptability

Since Robert Parker’s was the first, here is his rating meanings:

  • 96-100 — Extraordinary; a classic wine of its variety
  • 90-95 — Outstanding; exceptional complexity and character
  • 80-89 — Barely above average to very good; wine with various degrees of flavor
  • 70-79 — Average; little distinction beyond being soundly made
  • 60-69 — Below average; drinkable, but containing noticeable deficiencies
  • 50-59 — Poor; unacceptable, not recommended

Here is a link that show the minor differences in various 100-point systems. if the same person was using any of the systems they should not vary by more than a point or two.  http://www.wine.com/v6/aboutwine/wineratings.aspx?ArticleTypeId=2

Now to throw a monkey-wrench into the works, here is a personal story: in 1976, TB moved to Reno, Nevada on a job transfer. We met lots of people but they only liked beer (guys) and wine coolers (girls). One day, one of them asked if I could teach them about wine. Having brought dozens of bottles with me in the car and wondering how they held up TB said he would do it, with one caveat: they would have to work. How so? They would have to score the wines using the UCDavis system which was the only one at the time. At first they balked, but reluctantly agreed. There were eight wines in the tasting, and it was amazing how close their scores were when they had to evaluate the variables of the wine. As a ringer however, TB inserted a bottle of Gallo Hearty Burgundy at the end. Bingo! That one took best overall.

So what did we learn? That differences in preferences can be overcome by paying attention to everything that comprises a wine…to hell with the critics. This is especially true when a winemaker can take his wine to a lab in Napa, Bordeaux, or other places and be told what they need to do to get a 90 rating from Parker. That is the problem with ‘Parkerization’. Question: do you want to live in a world where all the wine tastes the same? Not TB!

As they were leaving, they asked TB to arrange a trip down to Napa Valley. It was agreed but as they were leaving one friend came up quietly and said that his uncle owned a small vineyard there and we could probably visit it. Oh sure, no problem the then-wine snob, TB said. Only when we got down there did we find out that his uncle was Joe Heitz! His wines were the most coveted in California at the time. We spent a lovely Sunday on their deck drinking Riesling with sausages from the Sonoma Cheese Factory (there was none in Napa at the time!). Then Joe and Alice took us on a tour of the winery culminating with a tasting of their wines, including the 1974 Martha’s Vineyard Cab. TB loved it so much he bought a case at $25 a bottle…most expensive wine I had bought at the time! It was so good, however that whenever we had someone over we had a bottle…until there was just one left. Never drank it and finally sold it at auction for $800, more than recovering my cost of the entire case (also sold a bottle of 1992 Screaming Eagle, it’s first vintage made by Heidi Peterson Barrett, for $1,200 – a Jeroboam sold at the Napa Valley Wine Auction for $500,000, the highest price ever for that auction – along with many 1982 Bordeaux I bought on Parker’s recommendation but didn’t personally care for as did some of my friends who also bought futures. That was the vintage that ‘established’ Parker as the reigning guru, Robert Finnegan, had panned it, and was over-ruled by Parker.

What does TB drink today? Mostly wines in the $20-$40 range except for wines that are bought from the winemakers who have the passion I want. Not big estates, not corporate owned entities. Wines that taste different from year to year and are produced for the pleasure of the owner/winemaker…not some critic.

Another lengthy one but hope you found it interesting…and useful.

TB

Vol. 2 No. 23…why care about someone else’s rating?

(TB must be getting old…just realized he had used this same title just two posts ago!!! Aarrgghh!! Growing old is hell! Hope this one works better and is more descriptive!)

Does a rating matter? Is it smart or dumb to buy wine based on someone’s rating. Here is a brief history of rating scores and how they work:

Prior to 1978, when Robert Parker started his newsletter which a year or so later morphed into The Wine Advocate, the only tasting scores were in professional tastings or wine festivals, state and county fairs, and others. The predominant scoring system was the one developed by UC Davis in 1959 (http://finias.com/wine/ucd_scoring.htm).  It is a 20-point system, which made it easy to combine scores and then average them to determine the best wines. Judges and their knowledge of wines varied and even in professional tastings, going through the lineup then reversing the order created confusion and inconsistency.

Years ago, I accompanied a friend who entered in Chili cook-offs. His chili was outstanding! We made it to the state level and then he lost. Why? Thanks to a friend who was also a judge I later found out that the chili right before his was mouth-burning hot and that is what caused him to lose. The next year he won the national title. Same goes for wine…on any given day, under different conditions, and with the same or other wines, huge discrepancies in scores can occur.

Parker’s contribution was the 100-point system which he compared to school test scores but with one major difference. 50 points is the base, meaning any wine will score at least a 50. Then there are several categories such as color, aroma, taste, etc., but here’s the biggie: 25 points is subjective! So one person might score a wine 100 and another as low as 75, even when all other categories are equal. Of course this is an extreme, but between 85 and 95? Clearly possible depending on what the reviewer likes in a wine. In addition, the 25 qualitative points vary from system to system. Parker for instance loves big, bold wines capable of aging, but since the majority of wines are purchased for immediate or near immediate consumption, that should not mean a thing to you, in fact, you might hate it. Read in Parker’s own words how it works: https://www.erobertparker.com/info/legend.asp

Not to confuse you, but so you can see the problem, here are rating classifications of several scorers: http://www.wine.com/v6/aboutwine/wineratings.aspx?ArticleTypeId=2

Parker came on the scene with the 1982 vintage of Bordeaux. Robert Finnegan, the former guru for buyers of these wines, panned the vintage. Shortly after, Parker declared it the vintage of the century. Goodbye Finnegan. Frankly, I bought a mixed case of those as futures on his recommendation. I didn’t, nor did some of my friends, see them as exceptional, but never mind, I sold them years later for a very healthy profit. Thanks, Mr. Parker!!!

Now read this:

“Scores, however, do not reveal the important facts about a wine. The written commentary that accompanies the ratings is a better source of information regarding the wine’s style and personality, its relative quality vis-à-vis its peers, and its value and aging potential than any score could ever indicate.”  Robert M. Parker

Huh? See, Parker is to himself and many others alleged to have the best tasting nose in the world. You know, insured with Lloyd’s of London for $1 million, like Bob Hope’s nose, or a singer’s voice.

As for his love of big, bold wines: he was criticized for years by Bourgogne winemakers for his lower ratings on his wines, finally some years ago he stopped rating them, turning it over to an associate. He is also a one-third partner in an Oregon Pinot Noir winery, Beaux Fréres, which to his credit he doesn’t rate…after all having his name gives it the imprimatur required to attract buyers anyway. Nothing wrong with that but compare and contrast to French burgundies and lo and behold  Beaux Fréres is not the same style and many Oregon vintners are now copying that style. If you like it fine, but TB prefers a pinot that is balanced and has more subtle flavors: to each his own.

Today there are literally dozens of critics using 100-point systems…some (many?) working with a distributor or retailer. Thus we have scoring escalation just like grade escalation in schools. Is 95, the new 90? If memory serves, in the 1982 vintage there were only two 100-point wines. That has increased and as one wine merchant quipped, “I can’t sell a wine with an 89 point rating; I can sell all the wine with a 90 rating but I can’t get them.”

Ah, but it gets worse as that translates into price! Not to mention 2008 when the Bordelaise were concerned about losing money in the financial crisis. No problem, the Chinese stepped in, buying up Lafite Rothschild, and other premier cru Bordeaux’s and driving the price to the moon, Alice, the moon! Of course, Lafite is a status symbol to wealthy Chinese. Most of it is given as gifts, or was, until the government forbid giving government officials gifts, and even when drunk it is commonly mixed with…I kid you not…tea or coke (the real thing not the drug)!  As with so many other products it has even been counterfeited the key being that Lafite is spelled with TWO ‘t’s on that label. That is where most Bordeaux wine goes today, and they have also bought up some smaller chateaux, the prestige ones are owned by conglomerates or mega-billionaires (too bad The Donald didn’t buy one of those when he instead bombed out on his ‘Trump Wine’).  The U.S. and Great Britain, once the primary markets were abandoned more or less due to the high prices…and by the way the use of herbicides and pesticides has grown at a time when other regions are cutting back.

But the era of prices going ballistic on a high, 90+ rating is coming to a close. A friend who owns a winery the 25-50% increases have withered, instead take a look online at any of the e-retailers. They show the list price, say $90, then offer them for $60…or even  $30. You never see a wine with a rating less than 90 there and the average is probably 92!

Then of course there is ‘Parkerizaton’. This is not his fault but winemakers are blending wine to get those high Parker ratings. So? So do you want to buy wine from anywhere in the world and have it taste the same…no character or terroir? TB doesn’t. Instead, he prefers wine made well in a style the winemaker chooses. He is risking his reputation and money to do that, just as he does when competing to the mega-producers who blend for consistency. As winemaker Carles Pastrana of Clos de l’Obac told Robert Mondavi when he visited his winery in Priorat, Spain: he used exactly the same blend of grapes each year. Mondavi said: that’s crazy, in different years you get varying amounts of fruit. Carles replied, “then I must be crazy. But tell me this, if you always make your wine taste the same why bother putting the year on the bottle” Mondavi was not pleased with this. Frankly, any large or ‘bulk’ producer must do this because those buyers expect the wine to taste the same every time. But Carles is not crazy…he is smart and passionate about his wine!

Lest I leave you thinking ill of Mr. Parker, remember an early statement of TB: globally good wine is chasing out bad. Several articles lately have criticized or outright condemned the 100-point systems. Frankly, many of those 90+ ratings, especially by sellers, are probably 87-90 point wines. What to do? Trust your local wine purveyor…support him/her over the supermarkets and big box wine stores that have appeared on the scene. In closing here is a joke that indicates whether  someone is a wine snob:

Customer tasting wine in a wine shop: “This wine is horrible, worst I have ever tasted.”

Clerk: “Really? Parker gave it a 90.

Customer: “I’ll take two cases!”

There you go…pay more and get less…less of what YOU like and as stated earlier, you are the only critic that counts…

Hope you enjoyed reading this as much as TB enjoyed writing it!

TB

©2016, Traderbillonwine.com

Vol 2 No 22 -a wine importer/distributor worth knowing – and a Spanish region worth knowing: Priorat!

Last April, while visiting Spain and Portugal, a name came up a few times: Eric Solomon. He specializes in smaller ‘unknown’ wines from France (Languedoc/Roussillon) and Spain. I am reasonably confident that there are others out there like Solomon, like my friend, Kermit Lynch, who did similar in the Valcluse, Chatenauf-de-Pape (Viex Telegraphe), Bandol, and others. Seek them out because the stand behind and are deeply involved in the vineyards and wineries they represent.

Solomon made a concerted effort, along with Joâo Riveras of Quinta do Infantado, just outside Piñao, Portugal, in the heart of the Douro Valley. For over a century, the small growers had to sell all of their grapes to one of the large port shippers who bottled under their names like Dow, Sandeman, Niepoort, etc. Rivera’s family was one of the early protesters of this policy and struggled to get the law changed and in the 1980’s they succeeded. The two met and Solomon tried desperately to promote, not only small vineyard ports, but other wines like Dão, Vinho Verde (Albarinho – same as Albariño in Spain), Douro and others. The market simply wasn’t ready for that. To this day, go to the Portugal section of any wine store and you will see only a few besides Port, such as Lancer’s and Mateus, along with a few others. The missing ones represent great value, especially as Spanish wines are gaining in popularity causing prices to rise.

Rivera told me that the failure to gain acceptances was mostly due to “our failure to speak up for our wines…we are our own worst enemy” (this comment was also mentioned in Spain!). Eventually, Solomon found Portuguese wines a costly venture with no upside in sight, so he now focuses mainly on Spain, Southern France, some in Italy, and one each in Switzerland, and yes, even Macedonia (and up and coming region also). There is a word in Portuguese, ‘saudades’ (sa-da-ye), which means a nostalgia and warm feeling for the past. This is bittersweet in Portugal’s case, once one of the most powerful nations in the world. At times it seems that all of those former territories bear a cross of what once was.

What can you do? Be adventurous, try some of the wines and TB believes you will be pleasantly surprised, not just on quality but on price points. Don’t wait until it is too late.

Recently, I tried ten of Solomon’s wines (6 French and 4 Spanish), at a tasting in Excelsior, MN, at the Wine Republic, now approaching its second anniversary. Their unique niche is carrying only wines that are organic, sustainable, or dynamically produced. Why should you care? Because many of the expensive wines, especially in Bordeaux, France use chemicals as herbicides and pesticides (the U.S. is slowly moving away from this practice), and there are trace elements of these chemicals – some on the banned list, by the way – in the top Crus). Note that organic is not the same as ‘natural’ wine, which, while produced organically, tends to be unstable, and can be cloudy in appearance.

Here are the wines I tasted, all are curent release 2014(?) *Asterisks indicate the ones I liked best as I disavow any use of ratings as the last blog pointed out):

Lafage Cote d’Est, Roussillon, France ($12), a blend of Grenache Blanc, Chardonnay, and Marsanne. A bargain a this price!

Lafage Cuvee Centenaire, Roussillon($15), Grenache Blanc, Grenache Gris, and Roussane). *Big brother to the first, more complex, and a very well-made wine!

Lafage Tesselle Old Vine GSM, Languedoc-Roussillon ($16), Grenache, Syrah, Mouvedre are the stars here, hence the GSM moniker. *These are vines that are 30-50 years old and while they produce less fruit it is more intense. GSM has become very popular among winemakers everywhere, and again makes for a complex wine of merit.

Lafage Tessellae Carignan, Languedoc-Roussillon ($16). 100% Carignan, a grape commonly used in the Rhone and in Argentine and Chilean wines. ***This was my favorite of the flight. Carignan and Grenache are not understood well in the U.S. thanks to producers Like Gallo who produced insipid, sweet Grenache wines in the 70’s and 80’s. Give them a try!

St. Jean du Barroux L’Argile, ($28,(note how the price increases when you move to the Rhone Valley). 50% Grenache, 30% Syrah, 10% Cinsault, 10% Carignan. My favorite of the tasting with jammy fruit and many complex flavors (note TV is not good at descriptives)

Chateau Puech-Haut Prestige, Languedoc ($22), 50% Grenache, 50% Syrah. Once you get past the name, (pooch), this is another great find…and again lower in price.

Castaño Hécula, Yecla, Spain ($15), 100% Monastrell (8 months in neutral oak). Good value, but see the next one:

Castaño Solanera, Yecla, Spain ($19), 70% Monastrell, 15% Cabernet Franc, 15% Alicante  Bouchet. *this shows how the Spanish have adapted to blending the stronger Monastrell with our varietals to make a better finish wine.

Capcanes Mas Donis, Montsant, Catalunya, Spain, 2013 ($16). *Montsant is like a claw partially surrounding the higher elevation and more recognized – and prized – Priorat region. Again, this wine is a very good value!

Black Slate Gratallops, Priorat, Spain ($23). Priorat is one of only two regions in Spain with the DOC and higher region, the other being La Rioja. This wine is 60% Carignan, 30% Cabernet Sauvignon, 30% Syrah. ***Perhaps the best value in Priorat, and from Grattallops, the oldest town and where grapes have been grown since for over 600 years! Also in Grattallops is Clos de L’Obac, which TB visited and where the owner Carles Pastranes, developed one of the original six vineyards. It was due to Alvara Pallacios, who made his reputation in La Rioja, and declared Priorat to be an excellent wine growing region. His L’Ermita ($400-800), is the benchmark here, Scala Dei, is the oldest winery here, having been operated by monks at this monesterio. Clos de L’Obac makes incredible wines in the $60-100 range.Vall Llach, which TB also visited is another fine producer. Quality? Consider this: they make three labels, Idus, Embruix, and Porrera (the village where the winery is located), when we visited last April the labels and cartons had been printed for the Porrera de Vi, their top of the line wine. Alberto, the son of the founder, and winemaker, decided the wine was very good but not to the standards he wanted for his signature wine, so it was not bottled: this wine has only been produced in 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013. That is caring, it cost a lot to declassify that wine but it is what buyers should expect of a quality winemaker. It is distributed by Michael Mondavi’s Folio Wines.

Ending with a love story, Eric Solomon met and became close friends with Daphne Glorian, whose Priorat wine, Clos Erasmus, is another pricey benchmark wine selling for over $200 a bottle. Eventually the were married and both they and their wines are doing just fine.

Whew! That is the longest blog I have ever written…hope you find it of interest and seek out the wines mentioned. Don’t forget to support your local wine merchants who do a good job, are both knowledgeable and helpful, because they are at risk from the ‘big box’ stores like Total Wines, and even supermarkets that don’t display and store wines properly and when you learn that you can buy better wines at similar prices from your local merchant, reward their research and investment by supporting their effort. It’s in all of our interest.