Catching up with Robert Parker Jr

Catching up with Robert Parker Jr

Click on me

I found this very interesting… enjoy …

How important is it to cleanse your palate during wine tasting, and what is the best way to do so?

The best way to cleanse your palate is by using a great mineral water such as Badoit. As you feel the palate developing a build-up of tannins or acid, drinking a half-ounce or an ounce of Badoit in between wines and sloshing it around on your palate before swallowing does a wonderful job of not only cleansing the palate, but giving the palate uplift and vibrancy, making it very fresh for the next wine you taste. You don’t want a mineral water that is salty, too earthy or too aggressively effervescent, and that is where Badoit comes into the picture. It has very fine, restrained and delicate bubbles. It is extraordinarily pure, with no hints of saltiness or earthiness.

"Your list of 100-pointers is one of the most scrutinised. But what defines a 100-pointer wine, and how much does personal taste have to do with it?

100-point wines are usually distinguishable by their intensity and complexity of aromas, even before they hit your palate. However, once on the palate, I’m always looking for perfect equilibrium between fruit extracts, the tannins and any wood if the wine is aged in oak, the acidity, the alcohol as well as an incredible purity, a multi-layered texture and a finish of at least 40 to 45-plus seconds. Personal taste certainly has something to do with it, but I think we all agree that while wine tasting is subjective, for the great wines of the world and the greatest vintages, there’s always a consensus on those particular wines and years among experts."

Kyle,

Maybe I’m missing something, but what was the point of your bold font? Clearly personal taste is everything when rating wine, but there should be some level of consensus among tasters ie Bob gives it 100, Janis gives it 97, Suckling gives it 108 etc.

How much did Badoit pay for sponsoring that comment

First time I remember reading a mineral water tasting note.

I love Badoit and drink it religiously in France but I am shocked to hear him say it’s not salty. It’s pretty mineral-driven and to my palate somewhat salty (not in a bad way or I wouldn’t drink it so much). For big tastings, regular water and bread is the best way to cleanse my palate, at least for me. YMMV.

First bold part goes against what he’s said in the past. Second, there are many examples where critics differing wildly. Sure in many cases they agree, but a statement like that is patently false.

So…what’s your point?

I don’t think he’s saying what you think. I don’t interpret it as “wine X is better than wine Y” in 198Z. I think he means that there is concensus that wine X and wine Y are great wines from their region, and 198Z is a great year in that region. There really is a lot of consensus on those things.

My point was that he has said personal preference plays no roll and now he says it does. Second, I think vintage greatness is far from critical consensus, just a few examples: 1997, 1998, 2007 & 2011 Napa and 1982 2003 Bordeaux

P.S. If you don’t agree with me, that’s fine. I just thought those two lines were interesting.

I get your point, but there is absolutely a consensus that 1982 is a great Bordeaux vintage. That doesn’t mean that everyone agrees. 2003 is likely more controversial, but in general if you ask experts to rank vintages you will see a pretty strong consensus. Anyway, I’m hard pressed to think of a more controversial Bordeaux vintage in the last 40 years.

I don’t know when Parker said personal taste doesn’t matter. When I was reading him, he often talked about how wines might be to someone else’s taste, even if he did it in a somewhat condescending way.

early in my career as a professional gluten and wino

It’s the amateur gluten that people really worry about.

But gluten-free living aside, I found this kind of interesting:

The best wines I’ve had in the past year — that I bought and put in my cellar, at prices between US$40 and US$75 — were mostly 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2009 Gigondas and Chateauneuf du Papes

Still loading up on the 2007 CdPs!

Interesting though. It’s a collection of vintages that are stylistically different. I liked 2005 as well as 2004 and 2006, but didn’t care for 2007 or 2003. And I know people disagree about this, but I’m on Parker’s side in terms of aging and I wouldn’t be buying 2003s at this point.

I do not agree. 99% of the time, most critics and experienced tasters agree on the truly great wines. Not always, but most of the time, there is a consensus.

7QDMaTGsOBo

Jeff, I agree that much of the time there is consensus. The difference, and the reason I highlighted that last comment, between your comment and Parker’s is he said there was always consensus. I inferred this to mean that when he says a wine/vintage is great, he is right because other critics will always agree with him. This goes back on his stance on certain varieties/styles being worthless. He often speaks in terms of absolutes when we all know the wine world is anything but.

What else is he going to drink with sushi? En magnum!

Yawn

I know him. He loves his water but he’s also a spectacular sommelier of wine and spirits.

They agree when tasting non-blind. Serve them double blind, then take their notes away before revealing bottles. I guarantee you’ll see some very different reviews.

Especially if you make it easy by putting in a few oak bombs against some AFWE bottles. But if you have similar styles, it’s much harder.

However, I do think that when people are really familiar with an area, type of wine, etc., and they have developed preferences, they will be able to recognize wines more easily. In the case of Parker for example, he’s had a lot of Bordeaux and he has preferences. If people have tasted the same wines for years and they have similar palates, their scores are more likely to converge when tasting those wines blind.

Anyway, the day before Thanksgiving, sushi and CdP sounds just about right.