- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Watched the documentary Somm last night
Posted on 2/4/16 at 1:58 pm
Posted on 2/4/16 at 1:58 pm
Very, very interesting. I was absolutely astounded at how exhaustive the requirements are to become a Master Sommelier. It was incredible. For those that haven't seen, to become the highest level sommelier you have to pass a 3 part test that can only be attempted once per year. Very, very few have passed it the first try. These people, and I'm not being too far off base here, have to know *everything* about wine. Like ever. Some of these people can smell a glass of wine and tell you what fricking village in the world the vines came from. These people truly are EXPERTS.
Anyone else seen this? I'm not even a wine guy but was fascinated.
Anyone else seen this? I'm not even a wine guy but was fascinated.
11
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:05 pm to WG_Dawg
The pressure these guys are under to pass that test is outrageous. I know nothing about wine and found Somm interesting.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:05 pm to WG_Dawg
i watched and it was very impressive what they do.
not going to lie, i did enjoy seeing the one 'know it all' guy not get it. that guy just got on my nerves.
not going to lie, i did enjoy seeing the one 'know it all' guy not get it. that guy just got on my nerves.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:06 pm to WG_Dawg
It's an eye opening doc. I enjoyed it.
Along the same line, a pretty good movie is "Bottle Shock."
Along the same line, a pretty good movie is "Bottle Shock."
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:06 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
to become the highest level sommelier you have to pass a 3 part test that can only be attempted once per year. Very, very few have passed it the first try. These people, and I'm not being too far off base here, have to know *everything* about wine. Like ever. Some of these people can smell a glass of wine and tell you what fricking village in the world the vines came from.
Kinda Sad
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:10 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
These people truly are EXPERTS.
Wine Tasting is Junk Science
quote:
The first experiment took place in 2005. The last was in Sacramento earlier this month. Hodgson's findings have stunned the wine industry. Over the years he has shown again and again that even trained, professional palates are terrible at judging wine.
"The results are disturbing," says Hodgson from the Fieldbrook Winery in Humboldt County, described by its owner as a rural paradise. "Only about 10% of judges are consistent and those judges who were consistent one year were ordinary the next year.
quote:
Results from the first four years of the experiment, published in the Journal of Wine Economics, showed a typical judge's scores varied by plus or minus four points over the three blind tastings. A wine deemed to be a good 90 would be rated as an acceptable 86 by the same judge minutes later and then an excellent 94.
quote:
Hodgson isn't alone in questioning the science of wine-tasting. French academic Frédéric Brochet tested the effect of labels in 2001. He presented the same Bordeaux superior wine to 57 volunteers a week apart and in two different bottles – one for a table wine, the other for a grand cru.
The tasters were fooled.
When tasting a supposedly superior wine, their language was more positive – describing it as complex, balanced, long and woody. When the same wine was presented as plonk, the critics were more likely to use negatives such as weak, light and flat.
In 2008 a study of 6,000 blind tastings by Robin Goldstein in the Journal of Wine Economics found a positive link between the price of wine and the amount people enjoyed it. But the link only existed for people trained to detect the elements of wine that make them expensive.
In 2011 Professor Richard Wiseman, a psychologist (and former professional magician) at Hertfordshire University invited 578 people to comment on a range of red and white wines, varying from £3.49 for a claret to £30 for champagne, and tasted blind.
People could tell the difference between wines under £5 and those above £10 only 53% of the time for whites and only 47% of the time for reds. Overall they would have been just as a successful flipping a coin to guess.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
was going to include in my post that they do know a ton of shite but there was evidence in the documentary how much of an inexact science this is. with the testing and pretesting, some of them were so far off from each other that it brings up the idea that its a lot of bullshite going on
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:14 pm to Deactived
yeah it may be over a year since i've done the "wine tasting is bullshite" shtick but it seems apt here
the best is the experiment where dyed white wine was judged by experts and they rated it as a red
the best is the experiment where dyed white wine was judged by experts and they rated it as a red
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Wine Tasting is Junk Science
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:16 pm to WG_Dawg
My secretary's husband is studying for these tests. He is stressed.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
that sounds about right.
what struck me as also kind of odd about the testing, and correct me if im wrong, but didnt the final test come down to 6 wines? that seems very specific and not the greatest way to find out who really knows the most. seems more of a chance and lets hope they pick 6 that i can pick out. the guy that technically knows the least might get lucky during the test and pull 6 wines they happen to be familiar with
what struck me as also kind of odd about the testing, and correct me if im wrong, but didnt the final test come down to 6 wines? that seems very specific and not the greatest way to find out who really knows the most. seems more of a chance and lets hope they pick 6 that i can pick out. the guy that technically knows the least might get lucky during the test and pull 6 wines they happen to be familiar with
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:48 pm to Deactived
the most important thing sommoliers do is create an aura of authority to tell you what pairs with what so your mind enjoys the pairing more
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
Wine tasting isn't, or shouldn't be, a science. It's an art. Making wine, from the growth of the grape through to the barrel aging, certainly has some basic science going on, but even it is more art than science. How the shite can the process of making wine not be a science but the tasting of it be? Makes no sense. It's all a matter of personal preference, perception,and sense memories. If you like Yellow Tail, awesome. Drink it.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:54 pm to LoveThatMoney
the problem is that perception creates the concept of taste. that's why when you give a person samples of 2 wines and tell them that one came from an $80 bottle and one came from a $10 bottle, the $80 offering will get better ratings/reviews...even if it's the same wine
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:02 pm to WG_Dawg
Haven't seen the doc but I know a dude who is a sommelier who works in nyc and he's kind of a chode, so I'll probably avoid it
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
Well sure, that's true to a degree. Which is why the best time I've had with wine tastings is when the leader doesn't tell you shite about the wine until after you have tasted it and experienced it for yourself.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
Knowing what they do is not junk science. Or to recognize a wine from whatever year.
Lot of drinking and knowledge sounds like a good time.
Saying one thing is better than the other is just taste - so not really junk science, no science at all.
But these guys go all in with their taste buds...and taste is all that is about. If they can describe something and give a good indication...that's fine...when they start saying one is better than the other - that I have a problem with. And I'm not talking about two-buck Chuck.
Lot of drinking and knowledge sounds like a good time.
Saying one thing is better than the other is just taste - so not really junk science, no science at all.
But these guys go all in with their taste buds...and taste is all that is about. If they can describe something and give a good indication...that's fine...when they start saying one is better than the other - that I have a problem with. And I'm not talking about two-buck Chuck.
This post was edited on 2/4/16 at 3:05 pm
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:16 pm to WG_Dawg
This movie made me realize that everyone I've come across that claims to know wine is actually a schmuck.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:28 pm to WG_Dawg
I've had this on my queue for a while now. It looked really interesting, but the main reason I was planning on seeing it was because I was dating this chick who was pretty much addicted to wine. Now that we're not together anymore, I forget that it's even there. 
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:29 pm to CocomoLSU
quote:
I was dating this chick who was pretty much addicted to wine.
so an alcoholic?
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News