When I first moved to San Francisco a few years back, there were some inexpensive wines that I thought were not only drinkable, but worth always having a case around for those weeknights with grilled burgers or pizza. Red Truck was one of those producers and I think I still have a few bottles from the case I bought 4 years ago. But, it occurs to me now, that I'm no longer much of a fan of Red Truck. I've had a few of the wines since that first case and nothing's really knocked me out. Good enough, but not memorable. And, unfortunately, the 2006 Red Truck Zinfandel Mendocino County on the Whole Foods Holiday wine top ten list falls in that camp.
Have been a big fan of the Long Shadows wines for some time now and this one lived up to the expectation. A recommendation from a good, very trusted wine friend, I was actually more entranced by this wine than I thought I would be. Huge nose, with dark cherries, plum and mocha, followed by some mellow Christmas spice notes (cinnamon, nutmeg, clove). Tannins are a little chalky still, but will mellow over time and I'm glad I have a few more in the cellar so I can taste it when it does.
Another in the Long Shadows line-up. If you remember, I reviewed the 2004 Chester Kidder when I was in Portland over the summer (Long Shadows ChesterKidder) and really enjoyed it, giving a 92+ rating. The 2006 didn't fall too far from that tree. On the nose, it's dark cherry, chocolate, espresso, smoke and roasted nuts - a much more complex nose than the 2004. But, it is still very young. When I opened it, it took about 45 minutes to come into its own, with a very tight and bitter start. But, it did open up and delivered good fruit and acidity, with just the right amount of toast and nuttiness. The thing I found amazing about this wine is that, even at 14.9% alcohol, it had zero heat. None at all. Will be a beautiful wine 5 - 7 years down the road.
A very important thing took place in the wine world recently - seems as though someone "got it." Now, that may be unfair because there certainly are people in the wine industry who get it, but it's been slowly developing over time, rather than coming about as a quick and revolutionary transformation. Sure, winemakers know how to make wine and I thank my lucky stars every day that they do. But, the marketing side of things has always been a bit elusive for so many winemakers...and then adding in the Internet and the power of social media and the whole thing took what was already turned on its head back on its head again.
Halfway through the Whole Foods Wine Holiday Top Ten list for this year, Doug Bell and team are doing pretty well. One wine that really pleasantly surprised me (the Pepperwood Grove Pinot Noir, even after two tastings) and another that fell really short (the Sutter Home Muscat, which was too sweet and one dimensional). But, overall, this is a good list of wines and Whole Foods is living up to its philosophy of maintaining the balance between quality and price.
Nice to see an old familiar brand on the Whole Foods Holiday Top Ten wine list again this year - M. Chapoutier. Back on the 2008 list, Doug Bell at Whole Foods included the 2007 M. Chapoutier Belleruche Côtes-Du-Rhône Rouge. This year, it's a white from the same producer, the 2008 M. Chapoutier Belleruche Special Selection Côtes-Du-Rhône Blanc.
I'm not much of a sparkling wine connoisseur. I know what i like when I taste it, but you can put most any sparkling wine in front of me, as long as it's not too sweet, and I'll probably like it enough to raise a toast at a wedding or at the stroke of midnight new years eve. But, I'm not one to analyze it and pull apart all the different elements - not even sure why except it may have something to do with bubbles getting in the way of the flavors and aromas. Let's just say that I wish I knew more about this category, but, for now, with so many other types of wines to explore, I'll leave it at "I know what I like when I taste it."
We briefly interrupt the Whole Foods Holiday Top Ten List for this special post on the 2008 Pancake Cellars Big Day White, Paso Robles, California.
For those of you who have followed this blog in it's first year of existence, you'll know that I've spent some time trying to figure out why certain wines are of interest to people and why others are not. The biggest surprise in that effort is the 2007 Pancake Cellars. A year ago, I picked up a bottle at Trader Joe's based on a recommendation by my buddy Jason over at Jason's Wine Blog (yes, we were both very clever when we named our blogs) and because it had a campy label and a $5 price tag.
The retro label is a tip-off—you'll find comfort in this bottle. Honeysuckle and peaches make it playful for occasions like brunch or dessert when you need a wine on the sweet side. Cowgirl Creamery Organic Mount Tam or Rogue Creamery's Anniversary Blue cheese makes the wine's sugary side divine.
I was really impressed with the nose - peach, pear and cedar, with a hint of grandma's old mothballs (which, for me, is nostalgic and since it wasn't overwhelming on the nose, brought back very fond memories of my grandmother and her wardrobe-saving white balls of winged creature demise). The nose is a bit over-oaked, thus the woodsy, cedar components, but the mouth doesn't pull much of that oak into the blend. It does change from nose to mouth, transforming into lemon, peach, grapefruit, cream and butter. It's light in color, with just enough acidity and very little heat (which has been consistent for all the top ten wines thus far).
Pepperwood Grove is not one of the wines I expected to be on the Whole Foods Top Ten Holiday Wine List this year. I can't remember the last time I've had a wine from this producer, but I do remember never being blown away by any of their wines. So, it was with some reluctance that I went into tasting this wine, knowing that I could have a negative bias towards it. I didn't taste it blind, but even if I had, I would have been able to pick it out of the group instantly, as it's a very light-colored Pinot and much lighter than the other reds in the Top Ten.


One of the biggest requirements in the blogging world is authenticity. This is a space that demands transparency, openness, honesty, whatever you want to call it - but at the end of the day, people want to feel like they're hearing from and talking to real people. It's not like TV, where actors can play "real" people in ads and shows and people will buy it - many have tried to pass that off as real in the online world and have not fared well (remember LonelyGirl15?)Along those lines, a question that I keep thinking about is whether or not wine bloggers need to disclose that they receive wine and product samples from wineries, winemakers, PR firms and whoever else might gain from sharing product with anyone who has an audience. For me, I currently disclose the source of my wine – if I buy it myself, I say nothing, but if I receive a sample, I let people know that it’s a sample. In the blogging world, it’s my way of letting you know that my opinion may be swayed in some way by the notion of "free."
Where I struggle with this approach is this...
The biggest wine reviewers in the world are giving reviews of sample wines and not disclosing it. If you think Robert Parker or the folks over at Wine Spectator buy all their own wine for review, just go to one of their offices to see how much wine is provided by eager seekers of high scores and validation. Now, I have nothing against Wine Spectator and I truly believe that there has to be some kind of authoritative voice reviewing wine, if for no other reason than most consumers, unfortunately, need to be told what to drink...but also for the simple notion that bloggers need something to complain about, rail against, rally behind, compare themselves to, whatever you want to call it (if you disagree, just check out all the blogger noise over Robert Parker, starting with 1WineDude, who so elegantly steered us all through the debate).
So, if the big boys don’t share with you every time a wine was provided free of charge, why is everyone else expected to? When I first started this blog, I felt it was my duty and, to be honest, when I got a sample, it was like I won the lottery. I felt like I had arrived, like I had reached some magical point in my wine blogging and it was fun to share that with people. It was very easy at that point to determine which wines were samples and which were not, so, by extension, it was also easy to let everyone know what was what. Now, as more samples have been coming in, it seems 50 – 60% of the wines I review are in that category and the organization of it all hasn’t yet reached daunting, but it certainly takes some thought as to how best to arrange and store the wines.
The real question is this – do I review wines any differently knowing that I purchased it vs. having someone supply it for me? The answer to that is “no, absolutely not.” I have never gone into a tasting of a sample wine thinking that I need to treat it any differently than any other wine I purchased. That I can say with complete honesty. What I can’t say for sure is whether or not my biases come into the picture in a subconscious way – for example, do I have a preconceived notion that a high-end cult wine is better than a sample wine from a winery I’ve never heard of before? Probably. But, we all have that.
And, although I do some blind tastings, I refuse to do all my tastings that way because I believe there is some value to tasting a wine within the context you came across it. If I’ve coveted a wine for a long time and then somehow end up with a bottle, the search is part of that experience and, thus, should have an impact on how I taste the wine. Some purists may argue with me on that one, but that’s the way I’ve always seen it. Does it influence the end score I give a wine? Maybe, but never by more than a point or two and, let’s be honest, we all do to some extent, otherwise blind tastings wouldn't exist.
You may be thinking at this point – “Is this guy writing in his journal or does he have a point here?” My point is this – I’ve decided I will no longer disclose in individual posts which wines are samples and which wines I buy. I will provide an ongoing disclosure here on my blog saying just that, but wanted to let you all know that I’m treating everything the same from this point forward.
Let me know what you think on the matter and how you treat it on your own blog.
CORRECTION TO THE BLOG POST ABOVE (11/10/09): As you can see in the comments for this post, Thomas Matthews of Wine Spectator has graciously sent along the Wine Spectator tasting guidelines (you can find them at Wine Spectator Tasting Procedures and Taster Profiles). Although the title of the post says that Wine Spectator does not tell you about their samples policy, my real intent was to say that they do not disclose it as part of every wine review, as was my policy for the last year or so. I have now changed that policy and, although I will not tell you in every post whether the wine being reviewed is a sample or not, you can always find my disclosure policy here.
SUBMIT BLOG
HOW IT WORKS
Scan your favorite wine blogs every day.
Search over 150 wine blogs
Click to visit the blog or browse all of the bloggers intros.
Wine bloggers reach new audiences and readers find new
wine blogs and keep up with their favorites.
Register
Link to WineWonks