Okay Schrader, Eisele, Maybach, and Realm. You’re denying access to a professional wine critic because?? I am just curious what each these wineries found objectionable? and if anyone here would so kindly furnish any of these reviews which may be in question?
If a wine critic isn’t banned from some wineries, the critic is not doing his job. If there is criticism to be had, I would criticize the wineries, not the critics. The critics are supposed to be providing honest evaluations of wines, not be cheerleaders for wineries.
I looked again, and the Eisele one simply makes no sense. He’s clearly loving the changes, as he was head over heals for the 15 and 16 Estate Cab. Schrader he was giving love to, but it wasn’t what Parker and Wine Spectator were giving them, so I don’t see that as a real loss for either side. I have never had the 2010 Maybach wines, but I know that Galloni was quite critical of them. Maybe someone can speak to whether or not he was right? I can see Maybach disagreeing with him and asking him not to come any more.
I don’t know how that works but being invited to a place like Schrader, sitting at a table with the winemaker or owner and saying something like, “yeah, I’m gonna give this one 88 points.” for a cult $250 bottle of wine takes some cajones. At the same time, if that’s how it works, the expectation or pressure to give a few extra points for that same scenario I’d imagine happens more often. I suppose if he’s being that honest I’d rather read his reviews if I were an avid follower of reviews.
Guys - All we have is Galloni’s account, suggesting without explicitly stating that the wineries who banned him didn’t like his scores. I have no idea what actually happened, but there might well be another side to the story. So you might pause before passing judgment on the winery owners.
I’m with you on that for sure, but I’m referring to the setting. It’s like telling someone who invited you into their home for dinner that their lasagna is a 88/100. It’s not going to happen. Seems critics can be less biased with these types of wines if they’re tasted and scored in the same type of setting (without the winemaker/owner/rep etc present and in a more neutral location).
Dear Phil - My job is to review wines and give our readers candid assessments of those wines. Sure, there are times I would rather shoot the breeze and talk about Champagne, Italian wines, music and other topics winemakers ask me about. I think what people call ‘palate fatigue’ is more accurately described as ‘mental fatigue.’ Am I focused and concentrated when I taste with a winemaker? You are damn right I am. On top to that, I am also directly responsible for running a business and safeguarding the financial well being of our employees and their families. Only an entrepreneur or person in a similar job can understand what that entails. If you are running a company, well, you better be pretty serious about that, too. It’s as simple as that…
Maybe it doesn’t fit their business model. That would mean they stopped submitting their wines to all critics. Maybe someone can look into that. No idea, but they do sell a majority of their wine in Europe, notably France. The release price is far above what they expected. It seems like the pieces are there to surmise, correctly or not, that there’s only downside risk to submitting.
There certainly are successful wineries who don’t submit to anyone for ratings.
When Antonio was our guest at CLONYC 35 he had stated that he believed the samplings to be from off bottles/previously opened too long bottles, which in itself was weird. It seemed a timing thing. I was able to get Chris Maybach to send some 2010s and Antonio (as well as many at table) seemed to feel like they showed great, like totally different wines actually (his words). Interesting to see his reaction. I think whatever happened between him and Maybach was well after this 2010 episode. Just my 3 cents (BTW, he LOVED the 2011 Maybach Materium )
)