- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
re: French wine scam uncovered
Posted on 2/23/10 at 9:13 pm to Tiger JJ
Posted on 2/23/10 at 9:13 pm to Tiger JJ
quote:
The idea that the average consumer — or even wine experts — can reliably tell the difference between higher- and lower-quality wines.
there may be some cognitive dissonance at play here. malcolm gladwell gave a talk [i think it's on youtube?] about how consumers SAY they want rich, dark robust coffee, for example, but they actually buy and prefer in taste tests weak, light-bodied coffee with lots of milk. essentially, what we consume and enjoy is decidedly NOT what we actually purchase. and not for reasons of cost--reasons of preference.
that being said, i have been stocking up on these 3.99 bottles of la granja 360 at trader joe's that i think are better than 20 dollar bottles of wine i get at bevmo or total wine. so maybe i am the example that proves gladwell's rule?
0
Posted on 2/23/10 at 9:45 pm to Tiger JJ
quote:There's too much information lacking in that paragraph to make anything that it says meaningful in any way.
But what about real experts? What about professional sommeliers and judges in respected wine competitions? What about reviewers for prestigious wine magazines? Well, they’re full of it, too. Take two articles published recently in the Journal of Wine Economics, both by a retired statistician and active winemaker, Robert Hodgson. In one experiment, Mr. Hodgson served 100 wines to actual California State Fair Wine Competition judges, over the course of four years. The tastings were blind, and each judge was presented the same wine three times, each time from the same exact bottle. What Mr. Hodgson found was remarkable: On a 20-point rating scale, from 80-100, judges typically varied in their ratings of the same wine by plus-or-minus four points. The same wine could be rated a 90, an 86, and a 94, all by the same judge in the same year. Only about 10% of judges stayed within two points — and those judges weren’t the same judges year-to-year, meaning it was more likely chance than skill that led to their greater accuracy.
Posted on 2/23/10 at 10:55 pm to Tiger JJ
The French prefer American wine, Judgament of Paris
Posted on 2/23/10 at 11:04 pm to DatBeer
quote:
“Not a single American consumer complained.”
I guess not... The most expensive bottle of pinot the winery sells in $11.99
people buying 12 dollar bottles of wine, like me, aren't going to know the difference
Posted on 2/24/10 at 2:11 am to DatBeer
quote:
The French prefer American wine, Judgament of Paris
....35yrs ago
Posted on 2/24/10 at 6:35 am to L.A.
quote:
There's too much information lacking in that paragraph to make anything that it says meaningful in any way.
Yeah, like how they poured from the same bottle over a three year period.
Posted on 2/24/10 at 10:23 am to notiger1997
quote:That's the biggest one, but also that 100 wines were served to judges. Over how long a period of time? If you're tasting multiple wines in a short period of time they there's no way one can give a fair appraisal of each individual wine.
Yeah, like how they poured from the same bottle over a three year period.
The first part of this story is great. The French are well versed in this kind of subterfuge.
The second part of the story, about the 100 wines being given to wine experts, often from the same bottle over a three year period, is a bogus "gotcha" moment.
Posted on 2/24/10 at 10:30 am to L.A.
I stopped paying big bucks for fancy wines a long long time ago after doing similar taste tests. Some of the fancy wines taste different, but I can't say better than some much cheaper wines. I buy Black Box almost exclusively and think it's great.
Posted on 2/24/10 at 10:32 am to Tiger JJ
I think the most expensive wine I've ever bought was about a 13 dollar bottle
There is no point in buying anything more expensive than that unless you're trying to impress your ignorant pretentious friends.
There is no point in buying anything more expensive than that unless you're trying to impress your ignorant pretentious friends.
Posted on 2/24/10 at 10:35 am to Nawlens Gator
quote:But ths is the fallacy is all of this talk about which wine is better than another. The only way to truly judge a bottle of wine is to open it up and serve it with dinner. Then do the same with another bottle of wine on another day. Which one did you prefer?
I stopped paying big bucks for fancy wines a long long time ago after doing similar taste tests.
Comparing multiple wines against one another in a blind taste test is not a true representation of the wines. 2 or 3 wines tasted in that fashion is ok. But 10 wines? 100 wines, like the story suggests? Please. That's riduculous.
Posted on 2/24/10 at 11:55 am to DatBeer
quote:
The French prefer American wine, Judgament of Paris
There is a decent movie about that called "Bottle Shock."
Posted on 2/24/10 at 12:34 pm to Powerman
quote:
There is no point in buying anything more expensive than that unless you're trying to impress your ignorant pretentious friends.
To say that there is no difference between a cheap bottle of California chardonnay and a Grand Cru from Burgundy is just ridiculous. There is a discernible difference between the average $13 bottle of wine and the average $75 bottle. Now, there are always cheap wines that drink like more expensive wines; and of course there are more expensive wines that don't live up to the price tag. More importantly, I'm sure there are plenty of people who don't drink much wine and upon whom a great bottle of wine is wasted.
But to make a generalization that the quality of wine never increases in proportion to the price tag is just plain ignorant.
Posted on 2/24/10 at 1:05 pm to clooneyisgod
quote:+1
To say that there is no difference between a cheap bottle of California chardonnay and a Grand Cru from Burgundy is just ridiculous. There is a discernible difference between the average $13 bottle of wine and the average $75 bottle. Now, there are always cheap wines that drink like more expensive wines; and of course there are more expensive wines that don't live up to the price tag. More importantly, I'm sure there are plenty of people who don't drink much wine and upon whom a great bottle of wine is wasted.
But to make a generalization that the quality of wine never increases in proportion to the price tag is just plain ignorant.
Posted on 2/24/10 at 1:09 pm to L.A.
quote:
The only way to truly judge a bottle of wine is to open it up and serve it with dinner. Then do the same with another bottle of wine on another day. Which one did you prefer?
You'd have to keep the food the same right?
Posted on 2/24/10 at 1:20 pm to Powerman
quote:That's a good point. To be truly accurate I suppose you would. Plus the temperature of the wine would have to be the same from one night to the next, etc.
You'd have to keep the food the same right?
But my larger point is that blind wine tastings are an artificial, imperfect means for determinig how good a wine is.
Posted on 2/24/10 at 1:22 pm to Powerman
To me, and this is just my opinion, that $75 Grand Cru just tastes different, but I don't think better, than much cheaper wines. If both were given to me, I probably would still drink the black box.
Posted on 2/24/10 at 1:26 pm to Nawlens Gator
quote:
To me, and this is just my opinion, that $75 Grand Cru just tastes different, but I don't think better, than much cheaper wines. If both were given to me, I probably would still drink the black box.
Fair enough. As long as you can acknowledge that there are other folks to whom it does taste better.
Posted on 2/24/10 at 1:28 pm to clooneyisgod
quote:
As long as you can acknowledge that there are other folks to whom it does taste better.
How much of that is the power of suggestion though?
Posted on 2/24/10 at 1:30 pm to L.A.
quote:
But my larger point is that blind wine tastings are an artificial, imperfect means for determinig how good a wine is.
No doubt. Which is why wine ratings like Parker's or Wine Spectator's should probably only be used a rough guide. On the other hand, I think it's unrealistic to think that a wine which James Laube rated as a 93 is actually a terrible wine. There is certainly a margin for error, but it's not huge.
At the end of the day, you drink what you like.
Posted on 2/24/10 at 1:32 pm to Powerman
quote:
How much of that is the power of suggestion though?
I absolutely believe that there are many wine drinkers out there who in a blind tasting can distinguish between simple table wine and great wine.
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News