The Wine's the Thing
Mitch Kornfeld
12/1

Going to a Tasting 101. And the Findings Thereof.


I had the good fortune to attend the recent Union Square Wines and Spirits (USQ, as they like to be called) first annual Mega-Tasting. It was quite an event. How Mega was it? It was so Mega that it was held on two days. Actually, for a tasting of this size--I mean number of wines and number of people--they had to do it over two days; the store isn't big enough to accommodate a large tasting. 

The tasting itself was excellent. There were some very high quality wines and it was FREE. It was just like being handed a fifty-dollar bill. Next year they might need three days. Actually, if they hired a hall and charged just enough to cover the cost (plus a little more bread and cheese) I'd be very happy to pay it. The wines were well chosen, just like in the store itself. They even had five real Champagnes that averaged over $53.00 retail. There's an old adage that says, "the wine tastes better when someone else is paying for it." The wines at this tasting tasted very good indeed.

At the end of this piece I'll recommend several good bottles in different categories and different price ranges that I enjoyed at the tasting, but now for some thoughts about how to best enjoy a "stand up" tasting.

I categorize tastings as either "stand up" or "sit down." A sit down tasting is the more formal kind. You usually know what the wines are beforehand (i.e. Bordeaux, Burgundy, California Cabernet Sauvignon, The Wines of Tuscany etc.), and there is usually an authority on the particular wines to lead the discussion. The wines are usually more expensive than those at stand up tastings, but they are usually of a higher caliber, as goes hand in hand with the price, and there is sometimes a tie-in with a tax deductible charity organization.

As good as the sit down tastings are, I prefer the stand ups. You get to move around and choose what wines you try, and there is much more room for interaction. You get to talk one-on-one to the person pouring the wines, who is sometimes the winemaker, and sometimes is even the person whose name is on the label. The fellow taster at your elbow can also be the source for some constructive conversation or a choice tidbit or two.

My first bit of advice happens to get to the heart of the problem that one has in writing about wine for a general audience. That is, of course, how to hold the interest of both the beginner and the expert at the same time. If you keep it simple you can lose the expert, and if you get too technical the beginner's eyes gloss over. So if you happen to be an expert please forgive me because this first recommendation is going to seem really elementary but there are legions of people who just haven't heard it yet.

Rule 1. Hold the wine glass by the stem not by the bowl. If you walk up to the person doing the pouring with your hand wrapped around the bowl it's like wearing a sign that says "Beginner Approaching." What this means is that you are assured of being offered their entry-level wine. It may be a perfectly nice $8.00 entry-level wine, but keep in mind that you just can't taste every wine at a tasting and you have to make some choices. It's better to pass over some of the inexpensive wines and go for the better stuff. 

Also keep in mind that at the price you are paying, usually around fifty dollars, you deserve to start with the mid-level stuff, and by starting with the mid-level wines, you are more likely to find that eye-opening epiphany wine, and you will become a loyal reader of this column.

2. Avoid white wines. I know this sounds radical, and in practice it's hard to do, but it's good advice. First off you can consume just so much alcohol before your tasting senses start losing their acuity. Whites, especially lighter ones, go down easily, and they quickly add to your total amount of alcohol consumed, thus lowering your ability to evaluate the upcoming wines. If you are following the basic rules (white before red, light before heavy, and dry before sweet) you'll be leaving at least some of the heavy hitters for last and you'll be glad you have left your faculties in working order when you get to them. (Note: Speaking of the basic rules. With exceptions for technical reasons USQ set up the entire tasting in the general order of lighter to heavier.)

3. If at all possible eat something before you go. Unless you know that food will definitely be served it's best to have something in your stomach so the alcohol won't get to you too soon and you'll be able to do critical tasting as discussed in rule 2 above. Bread and cheese are almost always served at tastings but they invariably run out quickly. Most tastings are held during the week after working hours so people show up from work without having eaten anything. Give them some wine and they get very hungry very quickly. Even a quick slice of pizza before you go would help. If they happen to unexpectedly serve food and you've just eaten something don't worry about it. You are there for hedonistic purposes. You don't go to tastings very often. You only go through life once. A tasting is eat, drink, and be merry time. Go with the flow. Enjoy yourself.

4. If you are not in business attire go in a nice shirt from a winery that makes really good wine. This has about the same effect as holding your glass correctly. They think you're a veteran and they give you the better stuff. It's not necessary to actually visit a winery to get a shirt but I highly recommend visiting wineries. It's very instructive and great fun. If you're wearing a shirt from the likes of, say, Chateau Montelena, Silver Oak, Heitz, or Kistler, you gain instant respect. I went to the USQ Mega-Tasting wearing a shirt from Ravenswood Winery of Sonoma California. Their motto is "No Wimpy Wines." Enough said.

5. Go in with some kind of a strategy. There's always something printed listing the wines or the producers, often both. Sometimes there's even a site map. Look over the material for a couple of minutes before you start tasting and try to get to a few producers that pique your interest. It's good to try the wines you have a particular interest in early, when your tasting senses are at their sharpest. Crowding often causes strategies to go awry, but if you go in with some kind of a plan you'll do better than you would by just trying everything at random.

The USQ Mega-Tasting advertised 100 wines. The first day had 79 and I have no doubt that they rotated in at least 21 more on day two to go over 100. Doing my best in the pursuit of journalistic excellence, and doing a lot of dumping and a little spitting I managed to taste 46 wines. Here are my favorites in various well established (ha!) categories in ascending order of cost. The prices are from the USQ information sheets.

Cheap white wine: Casa Lapostolle 2000 Sauvignon Blanc, Chile, $8. A ringer for a trendy New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc in the $10 to $15 range. Fresh and young (the Southern Hemisphere harvests in March and April) with flavors of new mown hay, melon, and sweet green peas. It's a great value and it's widely available.

Cheap red wine: Antinori 1999 Santa Christina, Tuscany, Italy, $8. Gushes with delicious pure Sangiovese fruit. Not complex, but a charmer. If this "baby Chianti" is any indication 1999 could be a big year for the more serious Tuscan reds.

Inexpensive Chardonnay: Castello da Sala 1999, Umbria, Italy, $10.95.Another nice 1999. It has real Chardonnay flavor, something usually lacking in inexpensive Italian chards. Very nice.

Serious Australian Chardonnay: Madfish 1999. $17. Inexpensive Chardonnay from the New World (read Australia and California) is a category that some wine writers love to hate. Sometimes they make you almost forget that there are serious Australian chards out there at all. Grown in a cooler climate with lower yields for more concentration this French styled chard is a real eye opener. At this price it's a great introduction to the category.

Sparkling wine that's not actually from the Champagne region: Roederer Estate Non-Vintage Brut, Anderson Valley, Mendocino, California. $18. Of all the French Champagne houses that have set up shop in California, Roederer is probably the best. This sparkler doesn't have quite the depth or complexity of a good Champagne, but it has more fruit. It's just a delightful sparkling wine that will please all but the most dedicated Francophiles.

Mid-Priced California red: Rutherford Hill 1997 Napa Valley Merlot. $19. This winery doesn't get great press but Merlot has always been their best wine and '97 was an excellent vintage. They really came through with this one. It's rich, round, and tasty. Good now and even better with a little age on it.

Ready to drink red Rioja: Marques del Puerto 1989 Rioja Gran Reserva. $22. Yes that's 1989, not 1999. Rioja is one of the few places where you can get good bottles already aged for you. This wine is smooth, polished, and elegant. Omit the boldly flavored foods and drink with roasted chestnuts from your open fire.

Better Australian Shiraz: Larrikin 1997 Barossa. $26. This wine is dense and rich with true Syrah blackberry fruit. It's a good example of a category that I really have to get to know better.

Top-notch California Pinot Noir: Iron Horse 1998 Green Valley, Sonoma. $29. Rich, tasty, and mouth-filling, this wine is lush and velvety in the way that textbooks describe good Burgundy. Should be excellent with turkey, either for Christmas or the next few upcoming fourth Thursdays in November.

Real Champagne: Gossett Brut Excellence (Non-Vintage) $30. Gossett is the oldest producer in Champagne. Their non-vintage Brut has all the yeasty, toasty, fresh baked bread complexity that the fermented in the very bottle you are holding méthode champenoise is all about. A bottle of this wine will make a lover of true Champagne very happy indeed.

Miscellaneous California red: L'Ecosse 1996 Cabernet Franc. $30. I have found that many varietal cabernet francs are annoyingly lacking in the mid-palate, not so this beauty. It's got the three D's. Dense, dark, and delicious. It's drinking beautifully right now. A really pleasant surprise.

Top of the line California Chardonnay: Beringer 1998 Napa Valley Private Reserve. $40. I think that the winemaking team at Beringer saw that the '98 wasn't going to be as rich as the super-concentrated '97 so they pulled out all the stops on the "complexing agents" (new French oak, etc.), and it really shows. It's a gorgeous package of multidimensional yeast, toast, vanilla, and fruit flavors. The '97, as I recall, was number 15 in the Wine Spectator's top 100 wines of 1999. This wine is even better. If it's within your budget grab it.

California "Private Reserve" Cabernet Sauvignon: Random Ridge 1997, The Cabernets, $45. This new winery has produced a big, concentrated, powerful wine with fruit to match the oak. It's as expensive as I care to go for a bottle of wine these days, but considering the competition it's not a bad buy. If you have a cellar this should be a great bottle starting in about five years.

Moving up toward the pricier end of the scale, the tasting had three luxury Champagnes. They were out of the Veuve Clicquot La Grand Dame when I finally got to their table, but I did get to try the Gosset Blanc de Blancs (I didn't catch the year, it was an extra addition not listed in the USQ material) and the Mumm de Cramant (Non-Vintage). The Gossett is perfectly lovely with all the finesse and elegance you could want. It is emphatically not as big and flavorful as the Brut Excellence but that's not the point here. (Power vs. Finesse is a subject for a future column but I'm running way over as it is.) This wine was made for gracious living. It's all about refinement, elegance, and finesse, and it's about competing with the likes of Dom Perignon, a wine it reminded me of. At $50 a bottle of this wine is less than half the price of Dom Perignon and I suspect that it is only a hair behind in quality. If someone out there has the wherewithal to try them side by side I would be very interested to hear what you think.

The Mumm is a Crémant Champagne. Crémant means "creaming," which in champagne parlance means it has less pressure and less bubbles than other Champagnes. The grapes come from vineyards rated at 100% (alas another topic for a future column) and the wine has finesse and elegance in spades. It's a joy to drink and totally beguiling. It made the Mumm Cordon Rouge, a fine wine in its own right, seem coarse in comparison. It will set you back $55 a bottle.

Lastly, in the really big red category, I tasted the Barossa Valley Estates' 1997 E&E Black Pepper Shiraz, a super-concentrated blockbuster Syrah. Absolutely terrific. I think the wine Spectator gave it 94 points. Too bad it's $80.

There you go. All of those wines should keep you busy for a while and provide plenty of good Holiday cheer. Enjoy.

© Mitch Kornfeld 2000 All rights reserved


Previously by Mitch Kornfeld...

Nouveau Beaujolais, Etc. (11/24/00)