A wine you may have never heard of before

For the most part, this thing blog is an avenue for me to vent, pipe off, and generally call a spade a spade (if that's how I see it). In the interest of showing some restraint, once in a while I come across things by way of the shop that I think people ought to know about. Such is the case today.

The wine of the day is 'Bourgogne Passetoutgrain'. It should be noted that occasionally there is an 's' added making it 'Passetoutgrains', but this seems to be the choice of the producer. The basic premise is the same, regardless of spelling.

As the two words might imply, this is a French wine. It is from the region of Burgundy (Bourgogne en Français), specifically from the Côte d'Or. While this is still a rather general locale, the majority of these wines (at least the ones I have come across) come from the Côte de Nuits in the northern part of Burgundy. Even more specifically, the fruit for this type of wine is generally grown east of N74 where the vineyards are planted more to the plains than the famed 'Golden Slope' that has made Burgundy what it is. The second name for this wine 'Passetoutgrain', is actually more like three words in one. Phonetically it's pronounced something like 'Poss' (like 'moss') 'Tu' (like 'too') 'Gran' (like 'grand' without the 'd' and with a slight nasal hint). I should apologize to the fluent French speakers out there if you feel I'm not doing this justice, but what are you going to do? Translated, in order, the words mean 'From All Grains' (seeds). This may not be an exact translation, but what the hell - there's no word in English for 'entrepreneur'. As you may have gathered, that is what this wine is made from, 'All Seeds' grown in this area. And those would be Pinot Noir and Gamay.

I'm sure that somebody has told you or you read something, somewhere along the line that all 'Red Burgundy' must be Pinot Noir. This is true, this wine being the only exception. To give some historical context, back in the 14th century, the head cheese around these parts was a guy named Philip the Good. It probably goes without saying that 'Philip the Jack Ass' doesn't carry the same clout, so 'the Good' it was to be. Old man Philip was sitting around getting loaded one day, entertaining some important people, and doing what dukes do. As he took a drink from his goblet of wine, he realized that what he was drinking tasted like crap. He demanded to know what it was he was drinking. The waiter responded, 'Gamay, dude'. So as to show his power and impress his friends, he proclaimed the gamay grape inferior and as such, it shall be purged from his domaine. What he didn't understand (and probably wouldn't have listened to anyway) is that while Gamay may indeed be 'inferior' to Pinot Noir, it wasn't necessarily the grape's fault. It was the soil that the vines were planted that was the problem. Philip the Good fell back asswards into the idea of terroir, and the rest is history.

Well, almost. As with any sweeping statement made by any politico, there were some skeptics. And so, some Gamay remained. And it remains to this day. The vast majority of it is grown, harvested, and made into wine mostly for the owner's consumption and maybe a few of his friends. The rest becomes Passetoutgrain.

Legally, any wine bottled as a Passetoutgrain (P.T.G) must be one third Pinot Noir. This is obviously done so as to retain some 'Bourgogne'-ness to the final wine. It has been my experience that most P.T.G is really bottled 50%/50% Pinot Noir/Gamay, if not more like 60%/40% or even 70%/30%. While this may sound like a strange blend, it actually works and more often than not, works very well. Think about it: Gamay (especially when grown in most parts of Beaujolais) makes a wine that is extremely 'fruit forward' showing very little tannin, rather monolithic on the palate, and in the end, a wine that is generally rather forgettable. (Before you start calling me a 'wine snob', think it over. I know that a whole bunch of people get all giddy over Beaujolais nouveau, but these wines are all about immediate gratification. There's nothing wrong with that, it just ain't my bag.) The Pinot Noir brings the other side of the coin to the equation. Structure, Tannin, Subtlety, and ageability. And along the lines of the latter, if you have the opportunity to drink an older P.T.G., jump at it. The wine will surprise you. I was able to get some .98 P.T.G from Taupenot-Merme during a 'close out' sale and was fully expecting 8 bottles of fairly well aged vinegar. Far from it. I am not suggesting that I will lay this down for another 10 years, I won't, but it sure as hell wasn't dead.

In a previous life, I served a P.T.G. at the restaurant in which I worked. As per usual, if I pointed it out on the list, the guest would refuse it out of hand. I whole-heartedly believe this was simply because of the name. If I was able to, I would simply pour a taste, and explain afterwards. This is the best wine I have been able to find that brings people out of California and Oregon and into the 'French' style of Pinot. Call it a 'Gateway Pinot' if you will. For the record, I cut my teeth on Oregon and California Pinots and to be sure there are some very good ones being made. To be sure as well, they are a totally different animal. I am not necessarily passing judgment, it is just that I have a preference.

Fast forward to modern day, and for the last month and a half, I find myself selling P.T.G. like a bastard. This is for many reasons, but two in particular. First, it should be obvious that I am a huge fan of the wine. Couple that with the fact that I don't sell what I don't like. Second, is the price. I have yet to see a P.T.G. that retails for more that $14.00. Compare this with the prices that the rest of Burgundy commands (or my friends on the west coast, for that matter) and financially, this wine becomes more and more attractive.

There are a number of houses that make a P.T.G., but as you might imagine, they are probably busy promoting their 'top shelf' stuff. A couple straight away are Jean-Luc Joillot and Patrice Rion, but these may be difficult for you to find. Truth be know, finding any Passetoutgrain in your average 'bottle shop' is going to be damn near impossible. There are two main reasons for this:

1. The buyer at your favorite place has never heard of it, tasted it, or has no clue what to do with it.

2. It is very rare that a Passetoutgrain ever gets rated(just a quick glance at erobertparker.com yields only sixteen hits). As such, most shops would never pick it up in the first place because they are convinced (or too lazy to do otherwise) that people will only buy wines with a Parker/Spectator rating. This is all the more reason to avoid shops of this nature.

So there it is. I hope that some part of this makes some sense to some of you reading this. Do yourself a favor and try to find this wine. It may not change your life, but it will definitely change your perspective on Burgundy.

P.S.
If you are shopping at a wine shop anywhere near Savannah, Georgia (other than Le Chai), and they start yammering about this wine, be suspect of their 'true intentions'. They read this just like you did.

Need a new habit?

I came into work today feeling a little bit frustrated. The weather changes, the gallon of gesso (the F.A.'s canvas primer) that spilled in the shed, the joys of playing with Fiberglas insulation, all of which had me wondering what I was doing with my time. I was starting to think I ought to take up an extra-curricular activity that I may have previously shunned. I wasn't really able to come up with anything and went on about my day. That was until I came across this:

Cocaine now cheaper than wine as fewer take up drugs

Eureka!! Here's the entire article:

CLASS A drugs are often less expensive than the traditional accompaniments to a night out - alcohol and cigarettes - according to new research.

New figures show that the price of drugs on Scotland’s streets has plummeted over the past decade with heroin, ecstasy, cocaine and cannabis cheaper than a decade ago.

The reasons for the decline are complex, with factors like a rise in home cannabis-growers to a slump in the popularity of ecstasy being cited.

Last month Strathclyde Police reported finding dealers selling cocaine for as little as £40 a gram, around £2.50 for every line snorted; which is cheaper than a glass of wine.

A tablet of ecstasy has had its street value slashed by 71 per cent since 1994 and now costs as little as £1. And cannabis has dropped in price by a third in ten years.

Recent research shows that drug use among young Scots teenagers has been decreasing over five years. Drugs groups say if this continues it could further impact drugs prices as dealers target wider markets.

This could be it. I could get on a jet plane and be there in a few hours. I even invited my architect neighbors to come along. They seemed excited at first, then had second thoughts. Seeing as I can't stand Cocaine or people who are on it, I have no idea what this stuff goes for. But maybe, that's just because I have never tried it. After a short discussion, the conclusion was reached that the going rate in Scotland isn't all that much better than what it's going for around here. My argument was that Scotland has to be marginally more appealing than parts of the U.S. and as such would make the experience all the more worth while. My friends are on the fence.

So, here's an open invitation to anyone who feels like going across the pond and getting all tweaked out on a bunch of blow.

Of course, I'm just kidding but here is a perfect example of basic economics and the concept of supply and demand. For all I know, the dealers in Scotland may have the finest booger sugar in the world, but if nobody cares about it, the price is immaterial.

Cult wineries of California, be warned.

Proof that Science kicks ass!!

Leave it to the Germans to combine the best of both worlds: Beer and Health. The Neuzelle Kloster Brewery 'brews up anti-aging beer'.

"The drink, labeled on the bottle in a bizarre mixture of English and German as "Anti-Ageing-Bier,'' has been developed by adding hot spring mineral water, algae and antioxidants to the traditional ingredients of beer -- water, hops, yeast and barley, resulting in an ale that is rich in vitamins and minerals."

Admittedly these things are not exactly what I would think of when searching for something to put in my brew but okay.

"The Anti-Ageing-Bier, however, is said to give the drinker 10 times the antioxidants of a normal pint of lager, bitter or ale."

I'm no scientist and I truly know little about the role of antioxidants, but 10 times more can't be bad thing, right? If drinking two beers a day is good for you, shouldn't drinking 20 be even better? Maybe not.

From the second page of the article:

"I would definitely drink it as long as it doesn't taste too bad. Women spend a lot of money on botox and all that so I expect it would go down quite well as an alternative," said Zeena Moolla, a journalist from north London."

She's sounds pretty optimistic about this stuff. Maybe I should look into buying some stock in this brewery.

"Charlie Wilcox, a 53-year-old businessman from east London, was unenthusiastic. "Drinking beer makes you think that you're younger anyway,'' he said.

"For me, the drink is about taste so the claim that it is anti-aging wouldn't make me switch from my normal lager."

Sounds like Charlie has seen one too many cases of 'beer goggles' in his time. So we heard casual drinkers of both sexes, but what about a 'real' professional?

Tom Sanders, a professor of nutrition at Kings College, London, also expressed skepticism. He said that a beer claiming to be a healthy drink was "highly misleading.''

"Antioxidants are already naturally present in beer and a bit of added pond slime is unlikely to have huge benefits,'' he said.

Beautiful.

Tax you, Tax me, Tax it Together, Tax-a-ly

(title sung to the tune of the Lionel Ritchie classic)

I know it's only Monday, but I already have a nomination for the 'Genius of the Week' award: City Councilman Joe Newman of Chesapeake, Virginia. What did this guy and his merry team of clowns do to deserve this accolade, you ask?

"The Chesapeake City Council is asking Virginia legislators to impose an additional 10 percent state tax on beer and wine."

Why would such an increase even be a option?

"Councilman Joe Newman says most people would be willing to pay more for discretionary purchases such as beer and wine in order to have adequate roads and schools and to fund public-safety proposals. He says the surcharge would bring in 125 (M) million dollars statewide."

I'm going to go through this one by one. First off, I think that the use of the words 'most people' is a bit of stretch. I would argue that given a choice, most people would be willing to pay no taxes whatsoever. I know this option will never happen, but one can dream. Second, what is this about the purchasing of beer and wine as 'discretionary' spending. I always thought this classification was relegated to things like a Rolex watch or that Picasso you've been eyeing for a while. Of course, I also think that things like beer and wine should be classified as foodstuffs. They are consumed as often, if not more than Doritos. Sometimes even in conjunction with each other, and I suspect beer and wine have higher nutritional values than a pack of Twinkies. And lastly, kudos to Old Man Newman for bringing the schools (read - 'the children') in for 'moral' justification. Who could possibly argue against that? You wouldn't be so selfish as to deny the kids a new swing set would you?

And now the ringer:

"The surcharge would be on top of any other sales taxes. Customers already pay a five percent sales tax on beer and wine bought in retail stores."

This is brilliant. How do these people get elected? To bring this into perspective, for one a case of wine at roughly $8.00 per bottle, this new tax would cost the average dude another fifteen bucks! I bet the people in Norfolk (3.5 miles away),Portsmouth (4.7 miles away), or even as far as Virginia Beach (19.2 miles away) are praying like a bastard that the Chesapeake City Council gets this through. Even if you had to drive to Va. Beach in your H2 and it was uphill both ways, you would still be saving money.

What's going on in Texas?

One more time. It seems like every other week, some wide spot in the road is voting on whether or not to dance with devil by permitting the sale of beer and wine. The latest: Lewisville, Texas. I'm sure everybody is familiar with this fine town but for those of you who are not, it's about 25 miles north of Dallas, Texas. I can't get my head around this. How can the state which invented 'Lone Star', the same state that claims 'Lone Star'as its national beer, not permit alcohol sales throughout its borders?

This bout pits two local heavy weights.

"Both Tevon Taylor, leader of the Lewisville Citizens for Economic Progress and Ben Smith, leader of the Keep Lewisville Safe movement plan to be in attendance at the council meeting."

The initials are too good, I can't resist. In one corner, you've got the pro-beer (T.T.) and in the other, the prohibtionist (B.S.). Onto the arguments:

Smith said Keep Lewisville Safe, opponents of legal alcohol sales in Lewisville, will launch their campaign Jan. 2. Although he didn't want to reveal specifics of the campaign, Smith said their goal is to educate voters about the dangers of alcohol.

'Keep Lewisville Safe' from what? As I have said before, the imlication is this - "Jesus drank, but you ain't Jesus, so suck it!" And it's a good thing he's keeping the 'specifics of the campaign' on the down-low. It's real hard to figure out the one plank in your platform. With all due respect to Mr. Smith (he's the pastor at the local Baptist church), Jesus is coming back, right? Problem is we don't know when or where? Suppose Jesus was heading to Lewisville to bring the faithful into the fold but because of the long drive, he wanted to have a beer first? He would have to go down to Flowers Mound to get one. And how would that make you feel, knowing those 'heathens' down the road got Jesus before you did? And for the grand finale:

"Now we're going to make a huge alcohol, beer and wine store adjacent to delay Middle School where there are many at-risk students and is a central purchasing site for day-laborers in Lewisville," Smith said. "What we're going to see for years to come is the streets lined with inebriated individuals who drink to soothe their pain. I feel like the residents of Old Town will be strongly behind our campaign because of what it will do to their community."

That's right. One sip of hooch and the whole town is going to hell in a handbasket. Overnight, Lewisville is going to look like a modern day version of 'The Night of Living Dead'. How about this, Reverend? Why don't you people set up zoning like the rest of the damn world has that prevents some jackass from setting up a pot still in the elementary school cafeteria? Believe it or not, people will drive to get a drink. They're doing it right now.

If somehow Rev. Smith's campaign succeeds and alcohol sales are not permitted, Lewisville will graduate to the growing list of towns that I will never visit. Sleep well, folks of Lewisville. I know I will (and do) after a good meal and a nice bottle of wine. Maybe, even a glass of Basil Hayden's to boot.

A light at the end of the tunnel?

After the recent ruling of the WTO and few hundred more articles demanding the French change how they label their wines, I was starting to think there was no hope. Out of the blue comes this article.

"Australia is about to agree to a naming-rights policy that will end the use of many European names on Australian wines. But what will the favourite wines be called in future?"

Hip-Hip Hooray!! The Aussies may have figured it out. Maybe they can convince the rest of the world to follow suit.

I should say that I don't agree with Ben Canadier's tone in the article. He writes in a way that only reinforces the idea that wine professionals and enthusiasts alike are above the fray and the lowly drinker will never understand such things. Case in point:

"Indeed - and this is the point in a nutshell - if the wine came from Paris, Texas, it would be called sparkling wine. At least by right-minded wine professionals. They would never call it champagne."

Or how about this one?

"Yes, we name it that, but 90 per cent of people still call it champagne. Or fizz, or bubbles, or cheap bubbly, or giggle juice, or champas, or champas darl."

I am sitting here dumbfounded wondering what my response might be if someone came into my shop or the restaurant I used to work in and asked for a glass of 'giggle juice'. I know most people can't get enough of these cute Aussie terms but this is ridiculous. Cue the b.s.:

"If you think this is all perfectly ridiculous, you are in for even more fun with the EU and its latest piece of moral copyright. Port and sherry.

The names of those two drinks from Portugal and Spain, in that order. These words - not unlike champagne - are well-worn and time-honoured; they're more or less household names.

When drinkers and occasional drinkers see these words on a bottle's label, they know what's in the bottle. In an increasingly confusing world, you would think that such effortless and transparent communication would be encouraged, not regulated."

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, why is this idea of individuality and the protection of it so bad? It is perfectly natural and should be a matter of practice the world 'round. There is a chance that it could be. Enter the Wonder Twins. First off, McWilliam's CEO Kevin McLintock.

"The terminology changeover enables us to more accurately communicate the styles of our home-grown fortifieds to our customers, both locally and in export markets."

McWilliam's also thinks the name changes offer the Australian wine industry the chance to highlight our "point-of-difference" and "uniqueness".

Whoa! I think we've got a live one here. Next up is his sidekick, Stephen Strachan. He's the chief executive of the Winemakers' Federation of Australia. There is a good reason for this. He gets it.

"We don't have to sign the agreement, but by doing so, and by agreeing to drop the use of European names like sherry and port from our bottles, we do win some market access. The EU can put up technical barriers to trade based on these names; so if we have our own names, then we have something distinctly Australian."

All right, Strachan! Everything's coming up roses. Then the obligatory 'cute' factor rears its ugly head:

"The excitement and the new labels can be left up to the marketing people ... there's clearly some room for fun: one suggestion was that port just be spelt backwards - trop". Or for the vintage version, veepee?"

As bad as it sounds, this is marginally better than the previous alternative:

"He took a fairly straightforward and commonsense approach to Australian wine names. Burgundy would be renamed burgalia. Chablis, chabalia, port, portalia The list goes on."

You gonna eat that?

For the most part, I limit the topics I comment on to mostly alcohol and occasionally food. In an unprecedented move, CNN brings the trifecta: Alcohol, Food, and Law (the enforcement of which is open for interpretation).

Second acquittal over 'fajita-gate'.

Let me first say that I can't get enough of anything 'gate'. I am constantly amazed at how many ways the press in this country can drive this word into the ground. Travel-gate, Pretzel-gate, American Idol-gate, ad naseum. On to the article:

"A police officer was acquitted Wednesday of a charge linked to his involvement in an drunken off-duty fight over a bag of steak fajitas two years ago. Jurors deadlocked on an assault charge, and prosecutors said they planned to retry him"

It is no secret that I am suspect of most things California. And while this may not be fair to the nice people who live out there, court cases like this do little to help their image. 'Deadlocked' on the assault charge?

"The jury found Matthew Tonsing innocent of battery and voted 8-4 in favor of acquittal on a felony assault with a deadly weapon charge. Jurors had already cleared him of a misdemeanor battery charge."

I have had some pretty horrible gastronomic experiences in California but I think the prosecutors might have been reaching a bit far with the 'deadly weapon' bit. The dateline reads 'San Francisco, Ca.' If they were anywhere near the Mission they might have been able to find some hot sauce that would make you cry, but this 'burrito battery' jive is a little too much.

"On Monday, the jury acquitted David Lee, one of three San Francisco officers arrested for allegedly confronting two men outside a bar and demanding their doggie bag of fajitas."

So, it's 'not guilty' on all or most of the charges for two of them and probably the third. What's the minimum sentence for being a doush bag? Maybe Arnold can look into that before he starts trying to run for 'Supreme Commander of the Universe'.

Thank the Lord for the Boys in Blue

I reckon it's hard time in western Maryland. It seems 'Old Man Wilt' was having a little trouble covering the monthly bills and decided to go into business for himself. Problem is he didn't get the 'OK' from the authorities.

Maryland Announces Seizure Of Homemade Wine

The subtitle to this little gem reads:"Officials: Seizure Comprises State's Largest Amount Of Confiscated Illegal Wine"

From the article:

Authorities said George "Buck" Wilt Jr., 66, of Little Orleans, Md., faces charges of selling alcoholic beverages without a license and possession of alcoholic beverages for the purpose of sale without a license.

State troopers and enforcment (this misspelling is in the article, for real -- T.t.S.) officers of the comptroller's office participated in the raid in the 12600 block of Beverly Hills Drive over the weekend. They found 388 containers of homemade wine, according to the comptroller's office.

Assuming that the alleged 'Buck Juice' was bottled in 750's and not 'en Magnum' this breaks down to just over 32 cases of wine. While this may be the 'State's Largest Amount of Confiscated Illegal Wine', it really doesn't add up to much.

And just as a sidenote, isn't there an old saying that goes 'Caveat Emptor'. For those of you in west Maryland, that's Latin for 'Don't trust the dude in Little Orleans with a trunk-full of Petrus.'

WTF?!?

In a earlier post, I proposed that it may be a good idea to stay out of states that start with the letter 'M'. I was being somewhat facetious, but there may be more to it than I originally thought. Enter Missouri.

I guess there isn't a whole lot going down is this great state. The headline reads : "Plan would make it illegal for teenagers to be drunk". I am no lawyer so please forgive me if I sound like an idiot, but what the hell is this?

The proposal by a special House and Senate committee seeks to eliminate what many regard as loopholes in the state's underage drinking laws.

Loopholes? What kind of loopholes? This sounds like the underage contigency has its own lobbying group.

For example, while it is currently illegal for minors to buy, seek to buy or possess alcohol, it's not illegal for them to be intoxicated. Under the committee's plan, youth could be charged solely for being drunk - regardless of whether they were in possession of alcohol at the time.

Really? This is beautiful. I guess I should have studied the law a bit more when I was younger. I always assumed that possesion was somewhat irrelevant. So I could have been 14, loaded on pure grain alcohol, and been able to say 'Up yours copper, you (uh, I mean, I) ain't got nothin' on me!'

"The proposal would make it a misdemeanor for adults to knowingly allow teens to drink on their property, even if the adult did not buy the alcohol."

And what about the situation when the adult is not 'in the know'?

Sen. Michael Gibbons, R-Kirkwood, cited a recent teen drinking party in his own neighborhood as an example of the kind of activity he'd like to prevent. He said the law needs to spell out specific sanctions to parents who tacitly allow parties to take place.

'A recent teen drinking party'? 'In his own neighborhood'?!? For the love of God, he's a Senator. Why didn't he get off his ass and go over and do something about it at the time? Maybe he was up for re-election and didn't want to piss off his supporters. And now, with the 'mandate' he received from the people, he's gonna bring this 'boozin' to an end.

Angela Hirsch, executive director of Missouri chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said that while the proposal isn't perfect, it at least would eliminate many of the weaknesses of state law as it concerns underage drinking.

"It's an excellent step in the right direction," she said.

Just how many 'weaknesses of state law' are there? And which direction is that 'excellent step' going. It's a step towards Prohibition, I suspect.

I could go on but will sum it up with this: How about making alcohol and its consumption non-Taboo? This is arguably the single greatest factor in alcohol abuse in the U.S. especially as it applies to the younger generations. Anything that is made off limits to a teenager, be it sex, cigarettes, junk food, rap music, you name it, that will be the first thing a teenager is going to seek out when the opportunity affords itself. This isn't your kids not listening to you. It is human nature. And anybody who disagrees is lying to themselves. Everyone did something 'taboo' when they were younger.

If alcohol is accepted and incorporated into normal life, I suspect that many of these problems will simply disappear. The reason some kid gets into Missouri State and drinks 80 beers in one session is not because he couldn't hack Economics 101. It is because he has no frame of reference and respect for alcohol and quantities thereof.

Wine tours in Wisconsin

I'm sure you already have your tickets booked for tearing up Wisconsin and all the viniferous treasures it holds. Apparently, you're not alone.

The article is really not all that exciting but there is one quote that piqued my curiosity. This is from Mary Spurgeon of Spurgeon Vineyards:

"I don't care what anybody says, sugar sells," Spurgeon told us. "Our top three sellers are sweet; if we dropped everything else except those, we'd still thrive."

For Real?!?! All it takes is sugar and the shit flies off the shelves? Could someone please explain to why I have to fight tooth and nail to get one monkey to even try a German Riesling? I am tempted to leave these people in the dark and simply horde it all for my Financial Advisor and myself. If you don't think you like it fine! That just leaves more for me.

But then reality (and my conscience) slaps me around a little bit and I know that must carry on trying to save these wayward souls and spreading the good word Riesling.

Anybody in the market for a vineyard?

The headline reads:

Haight Vineyard is still for sale

Just taking the words at face value, one might think that the owner is having trouble sealing the deal because he's asking for the moon. As it turns out, maybe he is just not financially speaking.

"The 81-year-old entrepreneur put his winery on the market in March and almost immediately he received offers to buy to the eight acres of land. The property-which includes six vineyards, the winery and several houses-is on the market for $2 million."

This breaks down to $250k per acre. That doesn't seem all that unreasonable for Connecticut real estate. But it seems finding the money man isn't the problem.

"I have no doubt I'll find someone. But this being the oldest vineyard in Connecticut, the first vineyard and a vineyard in which I have spent 30 years of my life, I'm just determined to find the right person,"

What's this about the 'right person'?!?

"I don't want someone who is just interested in the land. I only talk to those with similar intentions for the vineyard," Mr. Haight said. "I want to be sure I have a very good fit of someone who would have the same hopes and aspirations for this vineyard as I've had for 30 years."

I have never met Mr. Haight. For that matter, I have never even heard of him or his wines. But if I could meet him, I would buy him a drink in a heartbeat. How many people (not to mention winemakers) in this world actually care about something any longer than it takes to get it on their resumé? I applaud this guy, if for no other reason because he obviously understands that this is something bigger than just him or his bank account. Can the same be said of Mondavi?

Mr. Haight decided to sell his vineyard earlier this year because he knew it was time to think about its future.

I only hope I will be so fortunate. This guy is 81! And now he thinking about his future?

Is it X + X or X + Y or what?

Late breaking news:

SANGIOVESE'S ANCESTORS FOUND.

Stop the presses!! As it turns out, just about everything came from something. I think there is some sort of law of thermodynamics that says something like 'Man cannot create nor destroy matter'. The implication is that it simply changes (mutates) into something else. Enter the grapes Ciliegiolo and Calabrese Montenuovo. Don't they just roll off the toungue? These two got busy a while back and gave birth to the almighty Sangiovese.

Maybe now that one of the Italian greats has been brought down a peg, my friends in California will let go of the idea that Zinfandel is all their own.

The Eagle Has Landed

Back from a few days in New Orleans.

I got to hang out with a few economists and contrary to popular belief, these people can throw down. I know, you think economist and images of pocket protectors and eye glasses with masking tape over the bridge come to mind, but some of them can drink.

Truth be known, one guy did break out some 'data' and graphs but he had a pint in his hand at the same time so that kind of makes up for it.

Delta Airlines, the TSA, and the forces of nature conspired to keep me at bay, but to no avail.

And so without further adieu, the jaded one returns....

Taking off

I'm blowing this popsicle stand for a few days to spend some time with my brother. He's going to speak on all things economic and I am going to do my part to deplete the 'Crescent City's' supply of alcohol.

Fair ye well.

I'll be back on Tuesday.

Drink more Riesling.

The WTO or: How I Learned to Stop Thinking and Love Marginal Foodstuffs

Final Score:

U.S / Australia____1 The Rest of the World_____0

In a 'not so surprising' yet 'quite disappointing' move, the WTO has apparently ruled in on the importance and economic value of 'geographic indication' aka 'place name' labeling. For anybody unclear on what this means it is the idea that products made in a particular place, made to particular standards should be the only products to carry the name of said place. This is a commonly accepted concept when it comes to 'Cuban' cigars and 'Vidalia' onions, but 'Parma' ham not so much.

Here are a few of the gems in the article:

In a preliminary decision provided to the governments two days ago, the WTO found EU rules that protect the geographical origin of more than 600 products discriminate against foreign producers such as those who grow ``Idaho'' potatoes, because those producers can't register their products in Europe.

At the risk of sounding 'un-American', I propose something of a truce. I suspect that the reason my friends in Idaho are not permitted to register their product as such might have something to do with wine producers in California running the word 'Champagne' into the ground. Or maybe Kraft with its 'Parmesan' cheese. I have a feeling that if certain companies would recognize that they are biting the fame of the 'real' products, that the EU might lend an ear to the idea that 'Idaho' potatoes are unique.

"European countries are much more protective of place names, and they want to spread that around the world,'' said Albert Tramposch, a lawyer at the law firm Burns Doane Swecker & Mathis in Alexandria, Virginia.

Why is this idea of being 'protective' presented as some sort of negative? What does that say about all the 'Buy American' bumper stickers I see when rolling through the Wal-Mart parking lot? And why not 'spread that around the world'? There are far things worse that could happen.

"Budvar, based in a town called Ceske Budejovice in Czech and Budweis in German, claims brewers have used the name for hundreds of years. Anheuser-Busch argues it has used the trademark since 1876, 19 years before Budvar was established."

So here's my .02 - Everybody is from somewhere. August Busch I was from somewhere too. He ended up in St. Louis and stared making something he knew from back home. For those of you who don't know how German works, here's a crash course as it applies to this beverage. The town is Budvar. In German, it's Budwies. When speaking of origin, the Germans tack on 'er' to the town from whence it came. Therefore, a beer from the town of Budweis would then be called a 'Budweiser'. Second, there is documentation on brewing in what is known as the Czech Republic going back to 1088. Whether or not Anheuser-Busch registered its trademark before this particular brewery was established, I think it is pretty safe to say that this beer was being made there for some time.

And the round up is awesome:

"The EU system also restricts the shellfish label ``Whitstable oysters'' to those from the southern English coastal town; limits Emmental cheese and Breton cider to French regions; Cornish clotted cream to the English county of Cornwall; Kalamata olives to Greece and ``Newcastle Brown Ale,'' to the English city of the same name."

Maybe I am mis-reading this statement but there seems to be a sense of indignation or 'how dare they?' to the words. Is there even a half-assed argument that can be made supporting the production Newcastle Brown anywhere else but Newcastle?

I understand that we are a relatively young nation but how can this not make sense to the average Joe? Just read the menus of restaurants here in the states. Hudson Valley Fois Gras, Ashley Farms Chicken, New Zealand Rack of Lamb, and on and on and on. There is a reason the source is identified. And it's not because the restaurant has too much ink in the printer.

Further proof that California is insane!

Sonoma grapples with tourist image, alcohol problems

This is beautiful. In the interest of time, I'll show you the highlights. On the one hand:

"At the Plaza, well-heeled tourists stroll hand-in-hand, buying local wines and cheeses. They often enjoy their bounty with a picnic on one of the park benches in the historic square."

And on the other:

"Just a block away at Depot Park, a small group of unemployed residents, mostly men, hangs out drinking out of bottles wrapped in brown paper bags. Residents and business owners nearby say they sometimes get drunk, fight and steal from them."

It only gets better:

"The solution? Attempting to strike a balance, the City Council passed a law that bans drinking in public places - but only between sunset and 11:30 a.m."

Is that standard or daylight savings time? The justifications only get better:

"Some have said we're trying to make homelessness illegal," Ashford said. "I don't want it to be, nor should it be illegal in Sonoma. However, it is illegal to steal people's property and trespass on other people's property.

"It's the behavior the ordinance is aimed at, not at a particular group of people."

Really?

Gurney said many of the people who hang out in the parks are not homeless but choose to live a lifestyle of drug and alcohol abuse. He said they've declined offers of social services assistance.

Wow. I can't imagine some dude drinking a 40 oz. Steel Reserve refusing 'social services assistance' from the police chief of Sonoma. 'But I just want to help you' the kind policeman said. Yeah, right. Wasn't that the premise for the first RAMBO?

"Robert Behrens, who runs a bed and breakfast between the Plaza and Depot Park, has been a victim of thefts he suspects were committed by alcohol-abusing vagrants."

He suspects?!? How about this? I suspect the guy stealing your lawn decorations doesn't care about you or your B&B, regardless of a few beers.

Dear ACLU,

Is this, even in the least possible way, not racist? Or maybe, the wineries could start 'keepin' it real' by brown bagging the juice on its way out the door.

Another reason to stay out of states that start with 'M'

Not to be outdone by their friends in the Northeast, it looks like Michigan can't decide if they're coming or going. Read the article if you wish, but the lead paragraph sums it all up:

"Local liquor retailers are trying to figure out whether a bill to de-regulate state liquor prices would help or harm them.

In lieu of my head exploding, 'No Comment'.

When will it end?

Say what you will about the tax structure in this country, but I have just about had it. I know all the arguments about who will pay for the roads and the schools and the rich are the only ones who get off, blah, blah, blah. How about this? Leave alcohol alone!!!! Aside from marijuana (and mind you, I don't smoke), it may be the only natural gift that exists in this world. That's right, it's a gift. Somebody, God, Allah, Yahweh, Haile Bop, Mickey Mouse, I don't know who, but somebody figured out that this thing called life can be a pretty hard slog and therefore offered us a reprieve from it all. Is it not enough to tax everything else?

Apparently not. Enter this genius.

"re-elected Sen. Marian Walsh has moved to refile a bill to increase the excise tax on alcohol for the first time since 1979. Walsh first filed the bill more than three years ago, when it was defeated handily."

Defeated?!? I can't believe it. So why flog a dead horse?

"Walsh appears to have more hope in the bill being passed next year, after a recent favorable report by the Senate Committee on Taxation moved the bill up to the Senate Ways and Means Committee"

What's that about a politician never meeting a tax they didn't like?

"Though for Walsh the bill is not about taking money from taxpayers' pockets, it's about treating alcoholics and drug addicts."

So it's not about that for Walsh. What's it about for everybody else? They left out 'the children'. What about them? The trail of poo continues on...

Walsh wants to use as much as $80 million annually from the tax to pay for a Substance Abuse Health Protection Fund, which would treat state residents with addictions. Education and prevention services would also be provided by the tax.

$80 million is a fair chunk of change. What does it cost to get somebody sober? And what is this about 'education'? Is that like 'Don't Drink and Drive' or is this like buying paper clips for the local elementary?

'But we've done research! The public is all for it!

"Walsh cited a 2000 Journal of Public Health survey that said 80 percent of adults support increasing alcohol taxes if the funds collected are used for alcohol treatment and prevention programs."

That was 4 years ago, and I'm guessing the questionnaire went something like this: 'Would you (living in Kansas) support an increase in alcohol tax for the state of Massachusetts?' What do you think? And how many people actually believe that the monies collected will be appropriated solely to alcohol awareness? I've got 2 words for those who do: Social Security. And now for the one/two:

One:

"But, for the most part, Walsh expects wholesalers and importers to feel the brunt of the excise tax increases, with only pennies coming from your average Joe."

Are you kidding me?!? Why would they absorb the cost any more than they have to? And if this is a statewide taxation, all distros will be burdened equally. So guess what? This is coming straight out of the drinkers' pocket. And speaking of which, how many of those are there?

Two:

"The state senator added that 43 percent of the public doesn't drink, and those who do, 5 percent drink about half of what is sold statewide."

So lets run the numbers: As of 2000, there were 6.43 million chowder heads. According to the senator, that makes 321,500 'alcoholics'. At $80 million to 'fix' these wayward souls, that comes out to $248.83. If that's all it takes to get treatment, the drunkards could make this recycling the bottles from the nearby frat house on Sunday morning.

Maybe I am not picking up what they're putting down. Or maybe this is total B.S.

Load up and get loaded

It looks like we here in America aren't the only ones looking for a deal. And apparently Wal-Mart isn't the only company in the world willing to give you one

Anger over cheap fuel for wine offer

A Coles Myer promotion that offers customers heavily discounted petrol in return for buying a dozen bottles of wine has drawn the wrath of other retailers and consumer groups, with claims it is anti-competitive and irresponsible.

For those of you unaware, Coles Myer is a mega-corporation that includes within its portfolio the likes of Coles Supermarkets, Bi-Lo, Liquor Land, Vintage Cellar, Target, and K-mart as well as many others. So as to leave no stone unturned, they also own Coles Express described as 'service stations conveniently located throughout Australia'. Here's the pitch:

The Coles Liquorland division this month launched a pre-Christmas offer of 12 cents a litre off the price of petrol to customers who buy a dozen bottles of wine. The fuel discount dwarfs the existing 4 cents off for supermarket customers.

12 cents a litre? Wow. And I am assuming that the 4 cents the 'supermarket customers' are currently getting is some Aussie version of the 'preferred customer' program that Piggly Wiggly is running with those damn keychain cards. If this was done here, there would be a discrimination suit in about two seconds. 'AA takes exception, demands cheap fuel for all'.

Alan McKenzie, spokesman for the National Association of Retail Grocers of Australia, said the move sent the wrong message to consumers by linking cheap fuel with alcohol.

WTF?!? Is he trying to draw some connection to Joe Camel and kids smoking. This is a bit of a stretch. And what about the mom & pop shops?:

Mr McKenzie said the move could also force smaller businesses out of the market as many would be unable to compete with the giant supermarket chain in the long term.

I'm not sure that Coles Myer is really looking at the 'long term'. If I remember correctly, isn't Australia coming out of a grape glut? Who might have a hand in that? Go ahead, guess. Could it possibly be what appears as the single largest retail chain in the country? And what are the chances that they paid top dollar for the wine? Here's the deal: Coles got a sweetheart deal on a sh*tload of plonk and in an effort to be your 'friend', they're going to pass the savings on to you. Or so you think. For my friends getting ready for the SAT, I propose a word problem.

Angus has a pick up truck. Angus is out of petrol. Petrol is going for $1.10 per litre. (For those on Standard, thats $4.17US per gallon) The pick up truck has a petrol tank with a capacity of 53 litres. What would it cost to fill up the pick up truck? (answer: $58.30AU - $58.38US). If Angus buys a case of wine to drink on his way to the next gas station, he will recieve a discount of 0.12AU per litre. (0.46US)
The case of wine will cost, at $5.00/bottle = $60.00. With the discount on the petrol included, how bad is Angus getting screwed.

Put down the bottle..uh, I mean Bible..no, the rifle..aw screw it!

Looks like good times in Croatia. Apparently Old Man Stefancic got a little excited and decided to paint the town red.

After a quarrel in a restaurant overnight on Saturday in the central town of Slunj, Josip Stefancic punched a guest in the face, cutting his eye, the Vecernji List daily reported.

This is awesome.

The priest, known in his parish as the Sheriff, then took a rifle and threatened other guests before fleeing in his car and crashing into a tree. When police arrived at the scene he refused a breathalyser test.

What the hell is going on with this guy? And his defense council (self-annointed) is brilliant:

"I admit that I have made a mistake. However, everyone makes mistakes, politicians and even the pope," said Stefancic, who was, according to press reports, already involved in a series of similar incidents.

I didn't know the Pope was into partying. That changes my whole perspective on the dude. Maybe we can get down next time he's on this side of the pond. And look at what his boss had to say about the matter:

"Stefancic did not act alone. The wine was with him,"

Is that like 'The Devil made me do it'?

And here comes the ringer:

Catholic priests strongly protested Croatia's new zero-tolerance drink-driving law, adopted earlier this year, arguing that they have to imbibe wine as part of their work.

I make this same arguement to the F.A. every time I come home loaded. 'Baby, it's not my fault. I had to drink.' Of course, I'm not waving guns around the living room, so maybe that helps.

It's all a matter of who you talk to and who you believe

Yesterday marked another year that my Financial Advisor has spent in this world. In anticipation of such an event, great plans were made and dashed. In the end, all worked out just fine and the F.A. and myself arrived for dinner at 8 in the pee em. The venue for this meal (and many before as well as more to come) was Elizabeth on 37th. If you ever find yourself in this little piece of paradise known as Savannah, Georgia, this is the only restaurant that matters. That is not to say there aren't other good or even excellent restaurants in this town, there most definitely are. But Elizabeth is operating on a totally different level. With the Brothers Butch (Greg and Gary) on the floor and Kelly and Jeremy in the back, one would have to go out of their way not to have an 'experience' here. The food is unreal and the wines (both listed and not listed) will bring you to tears. And it is of the wine served last night that I will now speak.

Château Gloria - St.-Julien-Beychevelle 1975.

At 29 years old, this wine was incredible. Given that I generally refrain from esoteric, long winded, self serving descriptors, this wine showed what a true joy it can be to drink a properly aged Bordeaux. Unfortunately, I think that most people don't get the opportunity to drink such wines very often if ever. This is either because of short sightedness on the restaurant's behalf or impatience and lack of understanding in the home cellar. Everything about this wine screamed 'subtlety'. Aromatics were tight and ever changing. Alcohol hardly noticable on the nose. Color very much intact with no breaking at the edge. Tannins, while very much still present, subdued. All in all, quite possibly the perfect bottle for the meal.

With that said, let us take a look at Monsieur Parker's take on this same wine:

This has always been a very good 1975. Atypically powerful and muscular for Gloria, it exhibits as much fruit as many of the top wines. The opaque garnet color reveals slight amber at the edge. The wine offers a classic St.-Julien/Pauillac aromatic profile (tobacco, cedar, currants) combined with more earthy, dusty notes than usual (blame that on the 1975 vintage). A sweet, rich, chewy attack is followed by a dense, concentrated wine that may suffer from a lack of complexity and finesse, but more than compensates for that deficiency with plenty of muscle, extract, ripeness, and body. Drink it over the next 5-7 years. Last tasted 12/95.

For the record, he gave this wine 87 points. To put this into perspective, he also awarded the 2002 Yellow Tail 'The Reserve' Shiraz 87 points. I would dare say that I take exception to this. And according to his own notes, drinking a .75 Gloria in November of 2004 is too late. This wine is D.O.A. Far from it my friend. Further proof that he is just one dude with one opinion. And you know what they say about opinions and a**holes, everybody's got one.

Just a side note. Parker rated the entire vintage of 1975 for St. Julien, St. Estephe, and Pauillac an 89-I which according to the legend makes the 1975 'Above Average to Excellent' and 'Irregular, even among the best wines'. I have long contended that the French at their worst are better than most at their best. This wine was (is, and will be for some time) proof.

Australia & California Shoot It out Again!

Upon seeing this headline, I could barely contain my excitement. I fully expected a bit of the old 'Mine is bigger than yours', but to my surprise, it went more like 'mine is just slightly more marginal than yours'. What a complete waste of time. Here's the round up:

Top Scoring Wines:
Chardonnay
Madfish 2003 Chardonnay, Western Australia

Sauvignon Blanc
Geyser Peak 2003 Block Collection Sauvignon Blanc,
Russian River Valley, California

Other Whites
Eberle 2003 Mill Road Viognier, Paso Robles, California

Cabernet Sauvignon
St Supery 2002 Limited Edition Cabernet Sauvignon, Napa Valley,
California

Merlot
Reynolds 2001 Reserve Merlot, New South Wales, Australia

Pinot Noir
Pfendler 2001 Copeland Creek Pinot Noir, Sonoma Coast, California

Red Blends
Clautiere 2002 Mon Beau Rouge, Paso Robles, California
St Supery 2000 Elu, Napa Valley, California

Syrah/Shiraz
Lindemans 2003 Bin 50 Shiraz, South East Australia
Rosemount Estate Diamond 2002 Shiraz, Australia

Other Reds
Yangarra Estate 2002 Old Vine Grenache, McLaren Vale, Australia

Sparkling
Gloria Ferrer Blanc de Noirs, Sonoma County, California

Dessert
De Bortoli 2002 Noble One Semillon, Australia

Madfish? I can't tell you how much I love animals and seemingly unrelated descriptors. Geyser Peak S.B? Is this really the best that California has to offer? If so, they are in bigger trouble than previously thought. And CA. couldn't put anything up against Lindemans and Rosemount? Is somebody asleep at the wheel? I trust that houses that actually make wine, are too busy selling it to bother with something like this. But then, they explain the strict methods by which the tasting was conducted:

Our wine review process is unique within the industry.

(For real?!? Then how did you reach the same crappy conclusions that everybody else does? What is that saying about polishing a turd?)

All wines are tasted without reference to producer, appellation or price.

(Another claim often made and one which I simply don't understand. What is wrong with context? What if the Pinot tastes like Syrah? Which category does it win?)

Each wine is judged and reviewed on its own merit.

(I simply don't believe this. The implication is that the wine has merit to begin with.)

The wines are rated using a 100 point scale. Wines are placed into flights and evaluated by a team of judges. The top scoring wines as selected by the team of judges are then submitted to the entire panel for review.

(WTF???)

All wines reviewed indicate a numerical score and are recommended from the "heart."

(Oh stop, I'm gonna bust out cryin'. From the heart? I can think of a few other parts of the human anatomy that might be a little more appropriate.)

The tasting panels are comprised of a diverse range of wine industry professionals from varying disciplines including restaurant and retail trade, winemakers, wine writers, wine educators, and wine consultants.

(Interesting use of the word 'discipline'. If any of the 'judges' had the slightest bit of discipline they would have thrown out the entire lot and started over.)

God helps us all.

Careful what you wish for

Japan, I am talking to you. I know this sounds like good times but just look around the world. Everywhere that currently makes wine is either going into or coming out of economic trouble. The reality is that there is only so much wine needed in the world. And guess what, the world doesn't need yours. Of course, the way you have defined 'Japanese' wine leaves a great deal of room for interpretation:

The Ministry of Health and Welfare dictates that a wine can still be labeled "Japanese" if as little as 5 percent of it is made domestically. And to qualify as "domestically made" wine, it only has to be fermented here, so many wineries import grape juice or concentrate from other countries and then ferment it here in order to satisfy their "domestic wine" requirements.

This is like North Dakota in reverse. But it gets better:

This means that a blend composed of 95 percent Bulgarian bulk wine and 5 percent of wine made in Japan from reconstituted Australian grape concentrate can, incredibly, be labeled as "100 percent Japanese Wine."

I think I need a drink. What happened here? At the risk of making a generalization, the Japanese are pretty smart people as a whole, right? Maybe there is still hope.

"For years," Gutlove explained, "growers focused on the well known marketing names Cabernet and Merlot, despite the fact that these grapes didn't respond well at all to Japan's climate. We finally decided that instead of growing what we thought we could sell, we'd prefer to learn to sell what we thought we could grow best here in Japan, even if no one had ever heard of the grape variety." (emphasis T.t.S.)

Yo, California, maybe you ought to look into this concept.

Historical research revealed that it was actually the most widely planted grape in the preprohibition U.S., and that 100 percent Norton wines had even won prizes at international competitions in Vienna.

Vienna, for real?? I'm assuming they're talking about the city in Austria and not the suburb of D.C. And what 'prizes' did it win? Best Norton at show? How much competition could it possibly have had?

If I had a nickle for every prize, award, or medal given to a wine, I could almost afford my own winery. Then I could start collecting awards myself.

Separation of Church and what?

Still wet behind the ears, the Governer elect of the great state of Utah is already making some noise that is sure to rattle some swords. It seems that they're having a little trouble paying for roads and schools and the like. And as per usual, the genie is in the bottle.

SALT LAKE CITY - Gov.-elect Jon Huntsman Jr. said Thursday he is open to changing the state's restrictive liquor laws, often derided nationally as absurdly complicated and annoying, as part of an aggressive campaign to boost Utah's image and its economy.

Open?? What exactly does that mean? Is that something like 'we are going to have a study conducted looking into the potential tax revenue generated from blah, blah, blah...'?

I'll give old man Huntsman credit for eloquence:

He said Utah exists in "splendid isolation" to economic realities, lagging behind every surrounding state "in the most competitive neighborhood of any region in the United States." He cited the turnaround of Colorado, a "failed state 20 years ago" after an energy bust, as a diversified model for Utah to follow with aggressive marketing and business recruitment.

Splendid Isolation, huh? How many ways can you say 'Sh*thole in the Middle of Nowhere'? And what exactly qualifies Colorado as a 'failed state'? Is that like spending $300 trillion to move a piece of luggage thirty feet? Or is it like hosting the Olympics? I bet those school kids are getting great use out of that Ski Jump the world used for about a week.

I don't know how many of you have visited SLC, but the following is true. I know it sounds like something from the 1800's, but...

Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are forbidden to drink, and the laws reflect that. Utah has no open-door saloons; patrons of the state's only full-service liquor clubs must sign up and pay a membership fee before imbibing, a rule that discourages drop-ins.

The myriad regulations require drinkers to completely drain a glass or bottle before they can get a waiter to pour another round. For home, Utah retailers offer only weakened beer with 3.2 percent alcohol content. The stronger stuff can be bought only at out-of-the-way state-run liquor stores at exorbitant prices.

Cue the prohibitionist jargon: saloons, liquor club, drain a glass, stronger stuff, etc..

Huntsman acknowledged the Mormon church, which opposed any loosening of the laws for the 2002 Winter Olympics, would weigh in on any changes.

"There are, like with any issue, several constituencies," he said. "I consider the church a very important constituent."

What about the 'Gimme a damn beer' constituency? Maybe they will finally get some face time with the 'gubner'.

Unbelievable.

What did you call me?

I think this is hilarious. Obviously, our friends 'Down Under' have a better sense of humor that the folks state side. I do take exception to the idea that rosé is somehow less than masculine, possibly effeminate, or actually 'gay'. Here's the entire article:

Pansy wine targets gay Australians

Pansy's makers hope to paint Sydney pink
A New Zealand winemaker is launching a pink-hued wine for Australia's gay community and calling it Pansy.
Producers hope the rose wine will appeal to Sydneysiders, who consume $3.1m (£1.6m) of alcohol each month.

The husband and wife team behind the drink said the wine was originally devised as a way of thanking their gay friends in the industry.

Described as "fresh, funky and fun", the winemakers say the blend was created as a bit of fun.

"Pansy is about friendship, kindness and generosity of human spirit," winemaker Erica Crawford said.

The winemakers said "Pansy" will be launched in Sydney next week at a nightclub along the route of the city's annual gay Mardi Gras.

Real men (gay or not) drink rosé. And the kicker is that chicks (gay or not) dig it too.

There may yet be hope

**I recommend reading the article cited in full**

A while back I opined on the 'market' forces in the wine world and how they pertain to the position that France maintains or is losing ground on. The argument goes that place-name labeling or more importantly, lack of varietal labeling (i.e. Merlot, Cab Sauv, etc..) is intimidating/confusing and people are buying what they can easily recognize. I contend that we in this country will reach the same conclusion that the French (along with the rest of Europe) have, given enough time. The conclusion being that certain grapes 'perform' better in certain environs. And as such, eventually the idea of Ravenswood making a Cabernet, Merlot, Chardonnay, Syrah, and 6,000 different single vineyard Zinfandels will cease to exist. Instead, they will only produce 6,000 different single vineyard Zins. And not because these other grapes aren't profitable, because it makes sense. It's is a simple concept: Instead of doing ten things half-assed, do one thing pretty well, if not excellent. I am not alone. It is curious though, the argument presented in the article.

In question is the matter of water. More specifically the if, when, and why to add it a wine during its formative days (i.e. fermentation). I will admit straight away that I think this is a bad idea. I fancy myself a purist in that I think nothing should be added or taken away from the grape must or the finished wine. This would include chemical fertilizers/pesticides, cultured yeasts, chaptalization, the use of oak chips/staves/powder (see 'Liquid Smoke'), fining (with Egg whites or Bentonite), filtration, and osmosis (forward or backward). There are fine wines being produced that employ one or more of the practices listed above but I would prefer that the winemaker 'leave well enough alone'

Enter Karl Wente and Bruno D'Alfonso. These two are breaking the silence on what may or may not be a more common practice in California. They both make a good case for the cause.

The idea is this: Our grapes get too ripe. Along with high ripeness levels, you get huge levels of sugar. In order to ferment these wines dry (i.e. no Residual Sugar), the resulting wines weigh in with alcohol levels from 15.5% - 18%. At this point, it is very difficult to make a wine that is well-integrated, both on the nose and palate. More often than not, the result is a glass full of jet fuel with a healthy dose of IHOP blueberry syrup.

So, cue the agua. By adding a bit of water to the must, you increase the overall volume of the must, thus bring the high sugar levels back into check producing a more generally palatable wine. It is not so much diluting the must as it is evening the playing field. Of course, this can be a slippery slope.

"Wente is shattering the silence, he says, because “watering back” – adding water during fermentation – can be an important tool for improving California wines. It’s a way to make more elegant wines, he says, and sometimes it is the way to turn a good wine into a great wine. And if more vintners would talk about it, he figures, the practice would gain public understanding and acceptance."

I admire his optimism on the 'acceptance' front, but I think it's a pretty big hill to climb. Just watch any jackass at a bar on Saturday night. Sooner or later, he's going to say something about the bartender watering down his drink. Imagine if this was standard procedure and the bartender was allowed to do so as long as he admitted to it. Or would an confession even be necessary.

“Watering back” is a reaction to the California wine industry’s growing propensity to make ever more powerful wines, the kind that earn critical acclaim and command high prices. Wente is among the growing ranks of winemakers who question whether intensity should be achieved at the expense of elegance and finesse."

Way to go Wente! It is a novel concept, but there is life after Parker. Or maybe, life without Parker. I shudder to think. Millions of people actually having to rely on their own palates and experiences when it comes to buying wine. And what's this about 'elegance' and 'finesse'? I thought only those snotty Frogs aspired for such things.

"It’s a problem throughout the state: As bold as some of California’s flashier wines can be, they also can be so alcoholic that they’re out of balance."

BINGO! Fish On! We got a live one here!

"The French absolutely consider the practice to be fraud. “It is an economic fraud because you sell water at the price of wine,” says Cedric Saucier, a member of the oenology faculty at the University of Bordeaux."

This is also known as 'Truth in Advertising'. Something the American brewing culture has conveniently ignored.

"Adding water at any point in the winemaking process has been illegal in France since 1907 and now is illegal in all countries that are members of the International Organization of Vine and Wine.

“This law was introduced at that time because there was an overproduction of wine in general,” Saucier says. “If you increase the yield of wine either by viticultural practice or by watering down the wine, you will decrease wine quality.”

This stikes at the heart of the matter. The 'viticultural practices' he is referring to are myriad. The two most important are vineyard yield and irrigation. The amount (tons) of fruit permitted from each hectare (2.47 acres) is strictly limited. To control this, the vines are 'green harvested', which is the culling of whole clusters long before the grapes begin ripening to focus the vines energy/nutrients/water to only a select amount of grapes. This yields fewer yet more concentrated grapes at harvest proper. The question of irrigation is that there is no question. It is illegal. This is the case almost throughout France and much of Europe. There are many reasons for this but the most simple explanation is this: The vines are like living sponges. If/when the rain falls, it soaks up all the water it can. But the vine is an unselfish being. It keeps very little for itself, instead sending the lion's share straight to the grapes. This, of course, dilutes whatever sugars and flavors that were in the grapes at that point. This is a particular problem when close to harvest.

Enough of what I have to say on the subject. I'll leave it up to Mary Ewing Mulligan, M.S. Here she comes with the left hook:

"The universality of the problem in California and the resulting need to add water every year raises a bigger question for Mulligan: “You need to rethink whether you should grow grapes in a region that needs to have overripe fruit to get the flavors you want,” she says."

Again, just because it will grow, doesn't make it good. And it's not my fault you paid too much for your land or house or yacht. Let's check the ego at the door and step back into reality. What single thing would make this entire equation work itself out? Time. I know it's not all that fashionable with the current - 'I want it yesterday and twice as big as my neighbor's got - mentality but it is the answer.

Consider yourself warned.

I saw it on TV, so it must be true!!

The article I referenced about the movie 'Sideways' had a link to this article. I am surprised that I missed this piece the first time around, but not surprised at all about what it reveals. If anybody out there still gets misty-eyed over the prospect of a 'romantic wine getaway' in Napa, how about taking Clos du Val off the itinerary.

"There are more bottles of Clos Du Val in Hollywood movies than any other wine – and the Napa producer reckons that can boost sales by up to 50%.

Clos du Val pays a Santa Monica marketing firm around US$5,000 a month to keep its wines in directors' minds.

Aaron Gordon of Set Resources offers up cases of Clos du Val to be served at premieres and other big showbiz events, the Los Angeles Times reports."

Ummmm, $60k a year? Good work if you can get it.

"An example of the fruits of such diligent marketing can be found in the forthcoming Steven Spielberg film The Terminal. The director felt having actor Tom Hanks order a bottle of Champagne was too pretentious for a romantic dinner.

So prop master David Harlocker came up with a bottle of Clos du Val Cabernet Sauvignon. 'Steven said that would work fine,' Harlocker said.

Admittedly another film that I have yet to see but WTF! Champagne too pretentious?!?!?! How about a hundred bucks a bottle for marginal crap? Let's see what everybody's favorite (Wine Spectator) had to say about a recent offering from this most humble of wineries:

Clos du Val Cabernet Sauvignon
Napa Valley Reserve 2000___$95___83 points

"Although Harlocker says such decisions 'are just a roll of the dice', Clos du Val gives away around 240 cases a year – worth an estimated US$36,000 – on product placement."

A roll of the dice? Yeah, right. And I'm just a dumb white boy. This is over $100K per year on 'gee, I wonder if this will help sales'.

And if you needed another reason not to drink this stuff or watch TV for that matter, Clos du Val just 'lucked' into a few scenes on 'The OC'. On that front, I have been to this little piece of heaven many times and have never heard it referred to as 'The OC'. Secondly, sorry for bringing you down, but it really isn't that cool. Just remember, everywhere sucks if you're there long enough.

Hollywood and Vine (pardon the pun)

The movie 'Sideways' has been getting a bunch of attention as of late. From all reviews (both written and oral), this is a great movie. The guts of the movie are solid and I am told that the way the actors deal with the wine (i.e. speaking about it, tasting, critiquing) is relatively accurate to the real world practices of many. This is unlike Hollywood's usual take on the 'Southern Accent', which invariably sounds contrived and silly. Unless you get a guy from the South to speak on film, that is. Decanter.com is already marking it for Oscar contention. I have yet to see this film, but either way, I'm not sure what this does for the movie or me. There have been plenty of movies I thoroughly enjoyed which got nothing from 'The Academy'. And myriad more that brought home the bacon, for which I wouldn't cross the street.

A few things from the article kind of bug me:

"What has captivated critics is the low-key comedy and the anti-feelgood nature of the film. Rolling Stone praised its 'bracing wit and emotional gravity' which fuses into 'something funny, touching and vital'.

'You won't have a better time at the movies this year,' the venerable bible of hip America said." (emphasis T.t.S)

I can't tell you the last time I picked up a Rolling Stone. Maybe that means I'm not hip.

"Although the wine element of the film is 'definitely not glamorous', Jolin, who knows little about wine, said he 'learnt a lot about how to taste, what to look for and so on. I didn't know Pinot Noir could be white, for example.' "

Again not having seen the movie, I'm not sure of the context within which this little nugget of wisdom was revealed but for the rest of you, here goes: Pinot Noir is a red grape. It is red in that the skin is red. In grapes, like people, the color is all in the skin. So it is absolutely possible (and common) to attain white juice from a red grape. This is done routinely in the production of Champagne and other sparkling wine made a la 'méthode traditionnelle'.

"He also said Merlot producers may be a little put out, due to the lead character's dislike of the grape. 'I came out thinking I wasn't quite sure about Merlot either.' "

What the hell does this mean? While I am probably in agreement with the character's assessment of Merlot (especially in California), is it possible that a 2 hour movie could make such a persuasive argument against it? Especially when, so far as I understand, the primary focus of the movie is Pinot Noir? The caveat is made that he 'knows little about wine' but for the love of God, could someone please judge something on their own!! Of course, if you listen to popular opinion, this last election hinged on two entities: Michael Moore and Fox News.

I can't stand either one, so where does that leave me? Further down the road of the 'unhip' I suspect.

Beauty in the eye of who?

Many things in this world are subject to interpretation. A wine that brings me to tears could be total plonk to another person. People the world 'round go ga-ga over Picasso's work whereas only a couple of his paintings move me. It is nothing new that these two worlds have 'collided' thus creating a piece of art on a work of art. The latest in this joining of forces made its debut last week at the Chianti house of Castelli di Ama. Take a look at this beauty.

"Kapoor's work ('Aima' signifies blood in ancient Greek) is installed in the chapel yard. "

I'm curious about the use of the word 'installed'. From the picture (albeit a small one) it looks like this could have been done with 5 gallon bucket of roofing tar and a can of spray paint. Maybe the picture doesn't do it justice.

"It is described as a 'powerful, bright circle which opens in the centre of the paving, reminiscent of a small, flaming chasm.' "

For those of you unfamiliar with the word:

\Chasm\, n. [L. chasma, Gr. ?, fr. ? to grape, to open wide. See {Chaos}.]
1. A deep opening made by disruption, as a breach in the
earth or a rock; a yawning abyss; a cleft; a fissure.

I think the artist gets a few points for creativity and use of ancient Greek and relatively obscure English but lost a bit on the follow through.

I can see the scene in my head: Castelli di Ama scours the globe for months to find just the right man for the job. Dude gets to hang out in Chianti for a few months 'identifying' with this little corner of the world. In an effort not to taint the commission, the house offers no concepts and asks for no sketches. Scaffolding and curtains are erected with a flurry of activity from artist assistants. After months of rerouting tours and working around the mayhem, the artist pronounces it 'complete'. But no one must see it before its time. Invitations and press release are sent out to stir the soup. Everybody shows up dressed to the nines, sipping Prosecco and dropping names. And then the big moment. The curtain falls and so as not to come across as 'lowbrow' everyone proclaims 'genius'.

Everybody except for the guy paying the tab.

Chicken Little and all things wine

In light of the recently announced buyout of Mondavi by Constellation, there has been a rash of articles announcing the 'the sky is falling' on the last bastion of hope and innocence that this country has left: the family winery. Here are a few:

Franciscan Estates has been a part of the company that could soon own Mondavi

Chalone Wine Group board accepts buyout offer

Mergers reshaping wine trade

and so on and so on. The one that takes the cake comes from the good old 'Modbee' of Modesto, California entitled Favorite little wine may be from a mega-winery. Why is it that people are just now starting to realize the 'corporate' presence in the wine world? I find it amazing that this is 'news' to so many people. It seems that every other day one bank is taking over another or Cell Company 'A' is taking over the world.

Why would it be any different in wine? Could it be the romanticism afforded the industry? The vision of the humble farmer tending his vines, in tune and in touch with every minute detail of the vineyards from which the wines will emerge. The restraint shown to not use chemical fertilizers to better the yield. The green harvesting of whole clusters, dropping perfectly good grapes on the ground, to concentrate the vine's energy into just a few bunches of grapes. Maybe so. And for those of you out there that still hold these images to heart, worry not. This idyllic vision still exists, it just sure as hell doesn't exist at Mondavi, Chalone, Brown-Forman, and many other uber-corporations. And don't think that our friends across the pond are above it, because they aren't.

My advice would be to do some research and support the smaller houses. It is understandable that one might want to go public, have some really cool tag on Wall Street (RMBS) and watch the cash roll in but there are things more important.

For the record, let's take a look at what some of the corporations have in their portfolios:

"In addition to Ravenswood and the pending Robert Mondavi purchase, Constellation's labels include (deep breath):

Almaden, Inglenook, Vendange, Nathanson Creek, Talus, Turner Road Vintners, Covey Run, Ste. Chapelle, La Terre, Coastal Vintners, Alice White, Manischewitz, Cook's, Mondoro, Taylor California Cellars, Cribari, Wild Irish Rose, Cisco, Paul Masson, Arbor Mist, Widmer, Estate Cellars, Heritage, Dunnewood, Farallon, Belaire Creek, Blackstone, Black Box, Hardys, Banrock Station, Nobilo, Franciscan Oakville Estate, Estancia, Mount Veeder, Quintessa and Simi."

When I think quality some of the first names that come to mind are Vendage, Alica White, Manichewitz, Cook's, Wild Irish Rose, Cisco (known locally as 'Liquid Crack'. If you've got nothing to do for a couple of days, grab a couple bottles of 'Passion Fruit'. Good Times.), and Arbor Mist. With 'labels' like this, do you honestly think that Constellation is concerned with quality control?

"In addition to the labels with Gallo in the name, the portfolio includes:

Anapamu, Bridlewood, Frei Brothers, Indigo Hills, Louis M. Martini, Marcelina, Mirassou, Napa Valley Vineyards, Rancho Zabaco, MacMurray Ranch, Turning Leaf, Bella Sera, Black Swan, Da Vinci, Ecco Domani, Red Bicyclette, Redwood Creek, Gossamer Bay, Livingston Cellars, Carlo Rossi, Peter Vella, Wild Vines, Burlwood, Copperidge, Liberty Creek, William Wycliff, Tott's, Ballatore Spumante, André, Thunderbird and Night Train Express."

Frei Bros., Turning Leaf, Bella Sera (it's going to be a beautiful night, or as they say in Italy, a 'bella sera')Ecco Domani, Livingston Cellars, Tott's and André. Wow! Two amazingly bad sparkling wines in the same book. And should they really admit that they own Thunderbird and Night Train? Would you?

"The Wine Group is another big player with San Joaquin Valley roots, and it makes Franzia boxed wine, Concannon, Glen Ellen, Corbett Canyon, MG Vallejo, Foxhorn, Mogen David, Austin Vale, Vista Point, Costa Vera, Altamonte and Morassutti.

Franzia boxed (thanks for the clarification), Glen Ellen, Corbett Canyon (canyon, canyon, canyon) and Foxhorn. Unbelievable.

And these companies are making money! If I went to the bank and told them I was going to start a retail store focusing on wines like these, I would get laughed out the door. Just imagine the possibilities if the same amount of energy afforded to pedalling this crap was put into real wine making!

Union not such a good idea

Everybody has their own take on the usefulness or practicality of unions in the workplace. I'm am not a big fan but here in the South that is not so much of an issue. They exist, but in fields that don't generally effect me directly. The same can't be said in Montreal.

There's a strike acoming. The folks working for the SAQ aren't exactly stoked on the pay so they're gonna stick it to the man. Of all the things to keep 'un-unionized', it would seem alcohol and its delivery to me would be first and foremost. You see the SAQ is the sole alcohol distributor in Quebec. No SAQ, no alcohol.

Which begs the question: If the striking employee, with nothing else to do, drinks a beer is he/she a scab?