Parker & Robinson, maybe two sides of...
Liked?
Ver mensaje de Juan SuchDon’t know, are you reading something else you didn’t post, Juan, or have you upped your meds again without my permission? :-)
Yep, she says the first one has oodles of alcohol that mysteriously goes down easily. But I would take that ";...a very good Valandraud"; thing with a ton of salt. Sort of like when the wonderful Jay Miller, every inch the old-school gentleman, said ";this is correct in its idiom, but I find it horrible"; about a certain high-end California Chardonnay (not an exact quote, btw, but close enough).
And if you find anything positive in the comments about that ";Virginie de Valandraud,"; you searched well beyond what I’m capable of searching. What part of ";hot"; didn’t you get?
I’ve asked myself, and as long as all these ";garagistes"; Parker loves so much keep making such black, boozy, totally-unlike-claret, mouth-numbing swill, I say Jancis has good grounds to hold something against them.
M.
That’s what her scores say...
Ver mensaje de MCamblorManuel, her scores (out of 20) are very clear: 18,5 (the maximum she awards, except for the 19/20 for the Ch. Montrose 2003), 17.5 and 16. These are high scores in my language. But sure, you don’t belive in scores as conveying any meaning... :-)
Regarding the TNs, ";Chewy, fine and absolutely no shortage of acidity."; seems like something nice. Or that ";Certainly the best kosher wine I have tasted though."; (perhaps she has tried only a very few :-)
And, yes, I agree that the TN of Virginie de Valandraud 2003 don’t invite to drink the wine (in spite of that 16 out of 20).
But you will be happy with her Marojallia TN...
Ver mensaje de MCamblorEnjoy :-):
LEFT BANK
Marojallia 2003 Margaux
15.5 Drink: 2010-16
";Very deep purple, very right bank (the Thunevins’ outpost in the left bank). Very extracted. Almost painfully concentrated. Lots of tannin and acidity. Dramatic, showy but not balanced.";
BTW, this TN resembles the Sot Lefriec 2000...
Ver mensaje de Juan Such...I tasted the last week. Too explosive to eat with ANY food:
https://www.verema.com/comunidad/vinoscatados/vino.asp?vino=5047
Re: That’s what her scores say...
Ver mensaje de Juan SuchAh, scores... Don’t care for them, don’t look at them, tend not to notice them even when they’re thrust in my face. Of course, such scores for the sort of monster ";wine"; Valandraud tends to be (by the way, have you ever tasted a Valandraud? Can you honestly tell me you liked/loved it? Was it in any way recognizable as claret?) make me flag a bit in my hitherto devoted defense of Mrs. Robinson.
And that Thunevin wine from the Left Bank... Never heard of it. Don’t suppose I would have gone out of my way to find out about it, in any case.
One thing I have only mentioned in passing in this thread (which, by the way, is getting rather boring by now) is that I don’t see myself thinking very highly of almost ANY 2003 in almost ANY part of Europe. Even my most beloved Loire whites seem to be on the flabby side for the vintage, lacking focus, wit or charm. Burgundy advance samples have left me cold. I don’t expect much from Bordeaux (except, perhaps, that the critics being what they are and liking hypertrophic, overripe, flabby, clumsy alcoholic fruit jam, they’ll probably proclaim this fiasco another ";vintage of the century";). And I’m already looking forward to a few Austrian frightfests and 15% Rieslings.
Of course, such generalization is bad. I know a few great producers will pull quite drinkable wine out of the heatstroke. But I won’t go too crazy buying.
M.
Re: A 12/20 rating is a barely above average wine
Ver mensaje de Juan SuchJuan, you may be correct that, at least theoretically in Parker’s scoring scheme, an 80 point wine may have no technical flaws. I have heard that JR’s scoring does not convert directly to Parker’s, although I do not subscibe to her Purple Pages and do not know for sure. I do see where she has said on the free part of her website that she awards only full and half-points, and that the ";great majority"; of wines are scored somewhere between 15 and 18.5. This only gives eight possible scores for ";non-exceptional wines"; - ";an improvement on the [traditional British] five star system."; Isn’t she saying that, under her system as she practices it, 12 is exceptionally bad?
Re: drama
Ver mensaje de MCamblorWhat do you mean tongue-in-cheek? I LIVE tongue-in-cheek ;^)
I enjoy the exchange, that’s all. In my own mini-community I’d be the Manuel Camblor in my fussiness over absolute essentials such as fine tea/coffee, pure-origin chocolate, correct procedures to brew the former, right pairings for the latter, and other stuff most people can do without.
It’s simply that I spent 32 years complaining about the provincialism of Tenerife...and then I landed here in Royal City where Liptons seems to be a luxury and wine outside La Mancha utter snobbery. I’ve just realized--in rather a violent fashion--how many people have never heard the words Cluizel, Lapsang, Maragogype, Palo Cortado, Riesling...and live blissfully unconscious of what they’re missing. Of course it’s a tad late for me by now, but it’s also somewhat sobering, what the hell, to see people whose priorities have to do with children, mortgages, handball...
The 20 point rating system
Ver mensaje de WaltZalenskiThe 20 point rating system is quite extended around Europe. It’s employed, among others, by the ’Vinum’ magazine (with editions in Germany, Switzerland, France and Spain), elmundovino.com (from El Mundo, a Spanish newspaper) or ’The Vine’, the newsletter written by Clive Coates. In all these publications a 12 out of 20 seems to be equivalent to an 80 point wine rated on the WA or WS.
I can’t found that comment from Jancis that the ";great majority"; of wines she tastes are scored somewhere between 15 and 18.5. Anyway, I think this is the result of her bias (as with most wine critics) towards tasting the best wines on the market.