The Wine Curmudgeon

Wine review: Mandolin Pinot Noir 2007

Much pinot noir that costs $15 or less is made with grapes that aren't pinot noir. This is not illegal, since federal law allows a wine to called by its varietal as long as it contains 75 percent of the varietal. This is so common that one Dallas wine bar owner told me that when a saleswoman brings in a pinot that is all pinot, she makes sure to mention it so that the owner knows it's not like the others.

That's because many sub-$15 pinots don't always taste like pinot noir. They're not unpleasant, but they're fruitier and less earthy than pinot noir and have many of the characteristics of the syrah or zinfandel that is often used to fill in the other 25 percent. Complicating the problem is that many of these wines don't list the grapes used on the label, so consumers are left wondering what's in the bottle.

Which is a long, but worthwhile, way of getting to the Mandolin (about $12, sample). It tastes like pinot noir, which the Wine Curmudgeon was quite shocked to discover. My tasting notes: "A surprisingly pleasant $12 pinot noir, given that so few of them at this price point taste like pinot noir. It had a bit of pinot earthiness, there was the requisite pinot fruit (berries?) and even a bit of pinot finish -- not much in the way of tannins, as it should be, and even a hint of more earthiness. It was not jammy or overly fruity, like so many southern France and other grocery store pinots."

The catch, you ask? Because there is always a catch with a wine this well made, isn't there? Turns out availability is limited, and the 2008 is or will be on store shelves soon. But if you find a 2007 somewhere, buy it and enjoy it.

wine reviews, pinot noir, Mandolin, red wine, California wine

Wine of the week: Layer Cake Shiraz 2008

Nothing illustrates the crisis facing the wine business more than Layer Cake's shiraz, a Robert Parker favorite with a suggested retail price of $15. Yet the Wine Curmudgeon has seen it selling in Dallas for as little as $11.99, and it recently showed up on Wine-Searcher.com for as little as $12.59.

When this kind of wine gets discounted 20 percent for no other reason than the world is awash in $15 wine, and especially $15 Australian wine (to say nothing of $8 Australian wine), we're having a crisis.

Which is not to say that the Layer Cake (sample) isn't worth $12. It may even be worth $15. It's a typical Australian shiraz, with an almost blueberry middle, and solid shiraz flavors and structure. Best yet, it even tastes a little fresher than most shirazes (if that sort of thing is possible). Drink this with beef and barbecue and some more beef. And if you see it somewhere for $11 or $12, buy a couple of bottles.

wine reviews, wine of the week, Australian wine, Layer Cake, shiraz

Why I don't like winespeak

Saw this review of an Argentine malbec: "Dark purple red colour with black berry on the nose. On palate it's black currant with hint of spice. Approachable light to medium bodied and little or no tannins but lack of depth and short finishing."

Does anyone have any idea what this means?

wine terms, winespeak

Winebits 113: U.S. wineries, minimum pricing, cheap wine imports

• Growth in U.S. wineries: There were 6,223 wineries in the United States in November 2009, reports Wine Business Monthly, a 6 percent increase over 2008. About half of the wineries are in California, a figure that has been consistent for the past four years. The interesting news -- and what matters for regional wine -- is that 10 states now have more than 100 wineries: Not just California, Washington and Oregon, but New York, Virginia, Texas, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and North Carolina. In addition, the regional numbers in the study are almost certainly not up to date. Texas' wine trade group reports almost 200 wineries, about 50 more than the study, and I'm sure the other top regional states are equally under reported.

• Minimum wine prices in UK? The item last week that consumption would decrease 40 percent in Great Britain if binge drinking were eliminated elicited enough interest to note that one of the solutions being proposed to the abuse is minimum pricing. Critics say the country's four major supermarket chains sell booze below cost as loss leaders to attract customers, so the plan would force them to sell beer for at least £6 a six-pack (about US$10) and £4.50 (about US$7.50) for a bottle of wine. Needless to say, that would never happen in the U.S., and it is quite controversial in Britain.

• Chilean exports soar: Anyone who doubts that Americans have changed their wine drinking habits should note that Concha y Toro, the Chilean producer that makes a host of sub-$10 wines, saw exports rise 22 percent in 2009. The company's two biggest export markets Great Britain and the U.S.

U.S. wineries, cheap wine, minimum prices, Chilean wine, wine exports

Expensive wine of the month 10: Murphy Goode All In Claret 2004

The All In Claret from Murphy Goode, a red Bordeaux blend, is quintessential expensive California wine (though it's from Sonoma's Alexander Valley and not Napa). It's full of rich, concentrated fruit (cherries and berries?) and you won't miss the oak. The tannins are there, but they don't get in the way, and the alcohol checks in at 14.5 percent.

In other words, the All In ($45, sample) is a wine that part of the wine world will love and another part will sip, spit, and move on from. I saw this myself at the Cordon Bleu Challenge last week, when I brought the wine for my team to cook. We drank what was left afterward -- two of us loved it and two of us went, "Meh." Regular visitors can guess what the Wine Curmudgeon thought.

This does not mean the All In is a "bad" wine; in fact, it's extremely well made and the fruit is top quality. My pal Joe Pollack at St. Louis Eats and Drinks called it an outstanding wine. Rather, this illustrates a point about wine that I have been trying to make for more than 20 years, and which the Winestream Media regularly ignores. Wine is not objective. Wine is subjective. The goal of wine criticism should not be to tell people what to drink, but to explain to them what the wine tastes like so they can make up their own mind. That's why scores are so useless. They don't explain anything. They tell people what to drink.

Would I spend $45 for the All In? Probably not, since I don't like that style of wine. But someone who does, like my cookoff teammates, probably would. My job, and that's what I did here, is tell them what it tastes like so they can make their own decision. Wine drinkers are not as stupid as the wine business wants them to be.

wine reviews, expensive wine, Murphy Goode All In Claret

Cordon Bleu cookoff: "We wuz robbed"

The Wine Curmudgeon knows how to be a good loser. I am, after all, Chicago Cubs fan, so if I had not learned how to lose I would have long ago run screaming into the darkness. But I am not taking my team's second-place finish in last night's Le Cordon Bleu Challenge well.

Apparently, we finished second by one vote, and we finished second by one vote to the team that included former Dallas Cowboy Everson Walls. Which leads to the question: If the winners had not had Walls, would they have won? I think not. I suppose there is something Dallas residents love more than the Cowboys, but I don't know what it is. Or, as I told our very disappointed (and talented) team leader, chef Nikki Bodamer of the Dallas Cordon Bleu, the loss was probably my fault. She needed a more famous guest chef than the Wine Curmudgeon.

Because our effort -- chicken breasts stuffed with goat cheese, pecans, shallots and garlic, with fried spaghetti squash garnish, couscous with dried fruit, grilled asparagus, and a stunning red wine demi-glace -- was damn good. And I say that as someone who is not particularly fond of stuffed chicken breasts or goat cheese.

After the jump, a few thoughts about my experience in a professional kitchen with professional chefs, preparing dinner for 20 in an hour.

Robert Parker, Dr. Vino and paying for wine

This has, once again, turned into a big stink among the wine types who hang out in the cyber ether. Blogger Tyler Colman, whose Dr. Vino is among the top-visited wine blogs on the Internet, has taken Robert Parker to task for allegedly not paying for all of the wines that Parker's empire reviews. Parker, of course, runs the Wine Advocate and is the most important person in the wine world.

Does Parker buy the wine he and his tasters write about? Parker says yes, mostly. Colman says no, and wonders why Parker isn't more forthright about sampling. The Wine Curmudgeon says: "Who cares?"

Should Parker be upfront about which wine is purchased and which is sampled (the practice where producers give wines to writers to review). Yes. Is it the most important problem facing the wine world? No, and I truly don't understand why this keeps coming up. Has Dr. Vino written about critic Jancis Robinson, the anti-Parker, and how she uses samples? I couldn't find any evidence that he has.

Criticize Parker for having too much influence. Criticize Parker for inventing the 100-point scoring system. Criticize Parker for his palate, which prefers powerful, fruity, high-alcohol, oaky wines. Criticize Parker because the Italians, French and Spanish make wine that tastes like it came from California's Central Coast in order to play to his palate. Criticize Parker because companies now exist to help winemakers manipulate grapes to make wines that play to his palate.

Those are the problems facing the wine world, not whether Robert Parker hedges about samples. Yes, taking on Parker generates lots of comments and repeat visits to a blog or Web site. But it doesn't help anyone make better wine.

Robert Parker, Dr. Vino, wine samples