AnuvaBlog

This past Tuesday the Anuva team sat for an in-company tasting. We set the table with all the essential weaponry; water, glasses, crackers, note pads, pens and a giant spit bucket. We usually do this about once a month and have between 20 and 40 wines so at 21, this was a small tasting.

After uncorking 21 bottles our intern, Helen concealed their identities in numbered paper bags. Why? You have to taste blind. The only way to really judge the wine itself is to not know where it comes from and not see the bottle. Labels have an impact, appellations have an impact, varietal has an impact. I find it offensive that neither Wine Spectator nor Robert Parker and his team taste all of their wines blind. What are they afraid of? 

If wine professionals are true to their job, they will only taste blind and admit each palate is unique, variable depending on immediate influences (like what you ate, if you smoke, etc.) and is highly subjective. This would develop a trend toward truth in wine and not marketing to sell wine only.

We poured in sets of 5 sniffing, scribbling, sipping, swishing, spitting, smiling, sneering. We wait until the end of each round we exchange results. Ratings are based on bouquet, taste, mouth feel and over all expressiveness.

Many of the wines are clear and definite “no’s”. Descriptions are frank and honest. I like to be creative with my notes for example “It smells like bleach and tastes like an old boot with rotten vegetables, no”

 With quantification in mind we rate each wine on a 100 point scale.  All tastings are done blind allowing the best wines speak for themselves as we weed out the inferior stock.

             Consistency is the real goal. For one, accord between tasters “Do you concure?” sometimes tastings include two bottles of the same wine (that’s right we hated your rose, twice!) Blind tastings will even revisit wines from a previous tasting to ensure that the reactions are the same. For example two of the top rated wines from Tuesday’s tasting had also been rated highly in a previous tasting, Callejon Del Crimen Sangiovese 2006 & Los Quimiles 2006 Premium Cabarnet Franc from Vinos de los Andes.

Of the 21 we kept the top 12 to revisit the next day. Some wines can do a 180 with one day of air. And some simply are better down the drain.

As many of you may have read in the news last week, Wine Spectator has gotten caught with their pants down a bit. Pretty much at their ankles.

Robin Goldstein, author of The Wine Trials–a book that critiques the wine industry’s own methods of wine criticism, publicity, ratings, advertising and pricing–sent in an entry to apply for Wine Spectator’s “award for excellence” for restaurants and his Osteria L’Intrepido restaurant in Milan, Italy won.

The enormous, gargantuan problem with this, however, is that his restaurant does not exist. Oops!

Besides the obvious problem of not doing their homework–and perhaps worse than giving an award to a restaurant that doesn’t exist–is the fact that Wine Spectator itself had berated many of the wines that Goldstein put on his phantom list. I quote the Chicago Tribune article: “[the wine list includes the] 1993 Amarone Classico Gioe S. Sofia, which the magazine once likened to ‘paint thinner and nail varnish.’” Another wine that was included on the list was described by Wine Spectator as “earthy, swampy, gamy, harsh and tannic. ” So not only does Wine Spectator give out bogus awards, but they give awards to wines lists that include wines for which they have given terrible reviews. Oops squared.

As if that weren’t enough, Wine Spectator charges each applicant a $250 fee to “apply” for the award. They get roughly 4500 applicants per year. Let’s do the math: 4500 x 250 = 1.125 million dollars.

So let me get this straight, ostensibly the most prestigious, auspicious and well-known wine publication in the world not only gives out awards to entities that do not exist but they clearly do not check to see if those entities carry products that they have already declared in print to be inferior, flawed or distasteful and at the same time they make millions of dollars doing it?

What is unnerving to me is that our new publicist and I wanted desperately to find a way to put our product into WS. How can I now, as the sole full-time defender of my product, consciously make the decision to go after publicity in WS? The answer is that I cannot.

Having a glass of house wine brings memories of my trips through Italy and France, where house wine is the most common wine ordered on all menus. The anticipation and mystery of drinking an unknown brand and unknown varietal can be both overwhelming and wonderful for wine professionals. I for one, normally look for a wine that suites my mood or the food I’m having at the time. Perusing and studying the list wherever I go is a must. But last night, when I saw vino “de la casa”, I thought, “time for a break.”

A feeling of relief came over me. Instead of increasing my expectations for an expressive varietal, concentrated blend, or young fruit forward wine, my expectations subsided. Wine became a drink, a beverage and not some nectar of the Gods. And surprisingly, it was great!! I didn’t worry about the glass I drank out of, swirling, sniffing or swishing. I just had a glass of wine, and found that in one of wine’s purest forms–table wine–there is still much pleasure to be derived.

Anuva prides itself on selecting ultra-premium micro-produced wines. But this wine lover will also leave room for simplicity, home and relaxation.

Sommeliers come in all shapes and sizes. Most sommeliers at restaurants will have been in charge or at least had a major part of the creation of the wine list and therefore know that list intimately. But this also means that they will tend to be tied to the wine they have put on their list. Understandable since they are trying to sell you wine for your dinner.

In Buenos Aires, Argentina, though, this means that all of the wine will be from Argentina. Not unusual in a protectionist country. In Argentina, foreign wine hardly exists except for at the most posh of restaurants (like 3) and wine shops (literally 3). A sommelier in Argentina, therefore, and especially in Buenos Aires, will be recommending Argentine wine. Funny, that’s what I recommend.

But since wine is all about taste its good to know what you like and how to communicate that idea to the sommelier. If you like fruit forward, young malbecs, then about 50% of all wines made in Argentina will appeal to you. If you like more herbaceous, tannic wines, and actually know what that means, then a sommelier should have no trouble picking one from his list.

Why not start with the basics, though, which is probably what the sommelier will do anyway? Red or white, price range, regional preference, varietal preference. After narrowing this down then, the sommelier will usually try to push you into a slightly higher price range since s/he will work inevitably on commission.

A sommelier must  always ask what you are eating because  food combining is an art, and the sommelier should have designed his/her list around the food at the restaurant.

The same goes for buying at a wine shop. Narrow the choice of wine down by region, price, varietal, characteristics and food combining and you’re good to go.

For those of you who feel overwhelmed in making choices about wine at restaurants or at wine shops and supermarkets that have inordinately large selections, this blog is for you. Any restaurant with an enormous wine list (say 1000 labels or more) should have a sommelier on hand to guide your decision. Remember, a sommelier ultimately wants to sell you wine but also should ask some basic questions to help guide his recommendation.

First, the sommelier will probably ask what you are eating, or what type of event the wine is for (solo consumption, a dinner, a series of hors d’oeuvres, etc.). This will help to characterize the pairing. Usually sommeliers will go with traditional pairings: stronger wines with stronger foods, like-like combinations.

Second, the sommelier will likely ask how much money you had in mind to spend. The tendency here will be to push the price higher as most sommelier work on commission.

Third, they may ask if you have any specific preferences as to the qualities of the wine. Full-bodied, a specific varietal, etc.

Then they should make 3-4 recommendations and let you choose. Very rarely will they actually choose for you as this minimizes their risk. I find they tend to be much like lawyers in this way. Giving several options but not actually exercising their opinion on you.

And in a sense this is good because each sommelier also will have his or her own personal preferences. Some hate entire regions or varietals of wine. In a recent Food and Wine article, I read about several sommeliers who used very nasty language to describe Pinot Grigio, Chardonnay, and other respective varietals and one who condemned the entire Alsace region’s white wines. Thus, it is  important to know the expert or critic who is giving wine advise.  I even met a sommelier once who said he actually hates ALL wine except for muscat.

Why the heck is this guy a sommelier?