Some Uncle Bob Quotes From The New HGs

[Eric_LeVine]

@Jim Clary

@Eric LeVine

Paul, trust me, if I was at the lunch and tasted the bottle myself I already would have. I believe Jim Clary was one of the folks at the table. Were you at the event too?

I was at the luncheon, and in fact brought two of the bottles. My recollection is slightly different, in that I questioned Bob on the wine because I didn’t like it, not because it was a VA bomb. His point was that the wine will morph into something special over time, much like the '47 Cheval Blanc. Bob made the point to Scott Manlin and myself that he had been told that when the '47 CB was released, it was widely panned because tasters at the time didn’t have the data points at that point in time to understand the wine. It was considered port-like and over the top. He felt that the '97 Harlan was similarly controversial, and in time would be a special wine.

The early bottles that I had I didn’t like in the least. However, I haven’t had a bad bottle of this in quite awhile, not that I have drunk a lot of it. But I have had the wine perhaps 6 times in the past two years and thoroughly enjoyed it each time. I have also felt that each time I drank it that it clearly needed more time.

Just my two cents.

Jim, many thanks for clarifying.

[John_Morris]

@Bill Klapp

To top it off, he says that tasting from barrel, if in a producer’s cellar rather than a clean room, is too flawed by the ambient odors of the cellar to be meaningful (ever see the photo of Kermit Lynch in Chave’s mouldy cellar?).

Interesting stuff on Peynaud, Bill. Thanks.

I think Parker’s safe on this score, since I don’t believe he’s made many cellar visits in recent years. He generally has samples sent to him even if he’s in the region.

[Howard_Cooper]

@alan weinberg

@Howard Cooper

Speaking as someone old enough to have bought 1982 Bordeaux futures and to have read the WA when the first reviews came out. There was hype in France about the 82s even before they were harvested. The big British wine writers of the time praised the vintage from day 1. In fact, I remember reading an article from Decanter when I was looking to buy futures that essentially liked the same wines he did. The big exceptions to the universal raves for 1982 were a few US wine writers, most particularly Terry Robards and Robert Finnigan.

very different from the WA history rewrite.
alan

Does anyone else who is as old as me and remembers the time have a different version of history (other than Robert Parker)?

[Chris_Blum]

I personally pretty much disregard anything that comes from Bob or his publication. He has steadily become more irrelevant for me over the past couple of years. My palate doesn’t jibe with his more frequently than I am comfortable with and I think his judgment is impacted by outside factors.

I’m sure he’ll get along just fine without me, but I wonder how much his reputation has taken a hit on the macro level.

[ToddFrench]

@Rob Winn

@b hudak

@John Liotta

On Shirvington 2002 Shiraz:
“While it is a poster child for modern Australian wine that is often maligned by narrow-minded tasters, this 2002 has not fallen apart.” 96 points

This very wine ruined a steak dinner I had because it was WAY too big, and that also marked the moment when I stoped buying Aussie wines. Yuck.
I like Bob Parker, and I am a fan of his. I don’t agree with him on this wine at all, but I know enough to overlook good scores and good reviews on wines such as these.

This was a fun wine (02 Shirvington) upon release. Take it for what is was at the time, which for me, was a fun party wine that went great with sausage, pepperoni and aged parmesian cheese. Many thought 02 would be a classic vintage like 1998, but after time has passed, it appears that it is not so. It might have been 99 points in Bob’s eyes upon release, but it is not drinking like a 99 point wine now and surely not even close to a 96 point rating. Maybe somewhere in the mid to upper 80’s is where I would score this one now. At close to 17% alcohol, this wine shows the heat, since the fruit has taken a back seat to the high powered octane this wine offers. Mabye I will use the last few of these wines I still own and make a big steak marinade explosion.

I might even pack these up and send them to Todd French.

[Brad_England]

I’m continually perplexed at why everyone bashes Bob (on this board and on the old ebob). I’m not a friend of Bob’s, but I’ve had dinner/lunch with him a bunch of times and drunk quite a few bottles of wine with him. For me, he’s a fun guy, who likes to eat and drink, and knows a hell of a lot about wine. I also find him to be down to earth, and not at all the egoist that many criticize him for being. Again, no horse in this “bash bob” race, as we’re very light acquaintances, not friends, but I’d drink/eat/hangout with him anytime. Okay, just had to get that off my chest.

[Ken_V]

@Eric LeVine

@Jim Clary

@Eric LeVine

Paul, trust me, if I was at the lunch and tasted the bottle myself I already would have. I believe Jim Clary was one of the folks at the table. Were you at the event too?

I was at the luncheon, and in fact brought two of the bottles. My recollection is slightly different, in that I questioned Bob on the wine because I didn’t like it, not because it was a VA bomb. His point was that the wine will morph into something special over time, much like the '47 Cheval Blanc. Bob made the point to Scott Manlin and myself that he had been told that when the '47 CB was released, it was widely panned because tasters at the time didn’t have the data points at that point in time to understand the wine. It was considered port-like and over the top. He felt that the '97 Harlan was similarly controversial, and in time would be a special wine.

The early bottles that I had I didn’t like in the least. However, I haven’t had a bad bottle of this in quite awhile, not that I have drunk a lot of it. But I have had the wine perhaps 6 times in the past two years and thoroughly enjoyed it each time. I have also felt that each time I drank it that it clearly needed more time.

Just my two cents.

Jim, many thanks for clarifying.

Hey, clarifying is his middle name.


Well, actually, it’s sort of his last name.

[Note: If this isn’t as funny to y’all as it is to me, it could be the large quantities of Produttori Barbaresco I consumed tonight.

[Berry_Crawford]

@Brad England

I’m continually perplexed at why everyone bashes Bob

I think people get annoyed that he insinuates its an issue of poor character (eliteism, narrow-mindedness) when people do not agree with his palate. Also, he invited quite a bit of ill will when employees of WA were caught violating their code of ethics and then handled the fallout very poorly.

That said, the bashing often goes to far.

[Steve_Eisenhauer]

You know, when the guy says really stupid stuff that also undermines his credibility (e.g. his statements on the 2002 Shirvington), he’s going to take some stick. Maybe he should think about what he publishes once in a while.

I’m just curious, Brad, how you interpret his “narrow-minded” comments about that particular wine (if you’ve had it recently). I have had it and find his comments (and assessment of the wine) well beyond the pale.

[Rick_Gregory]

@Brad England

I’m continually perplexed at why everyone bashes Bob (on this board and on the old ebob). I’m not a friend of Bob’s, but I’ve had dinner/lunch with him a bunch of times and drunk quite a few bottles of wine with him. For me, he’s a fun guy, who likes to eat and drink, and knows a hell of a lot about wine. I also find him to be down to earth, and not at all the egoist that many criticize him for being. Again, no horse in this “bash bob” race, as we’re very light acquaintances, not friends, but I’d drink/eat/hangout with him anytime. Okay, just had to get that off my chest.

It’s quotes like this "“While it is a poster child for modern Australian wine that is often maligned by narrow-minded tasters, this 2002 has not fallen apart.”

It’s one thing to disagree, but calling people narrow-minded when they don’t like what you like does not give the impression of a fun guy who’s down to earth and not an egoist. If the latter impression is the one he wants to give off, writing things like that doesn’t help.

[Dieter_Muller]

Whatever nowdays is said about Uncle Bob - he finally did it in the 80ties! And it is no secret that some of his critics lust for his throne. It’s not that difficult to find contributions - also here - that clearly tend in this direction.

BTW, the latest “German” modification of that citied slogan is: “What should it care an oak tree if a wild boar has a scratch at its bark?”

Regarding his “surroundings” of the tasting notes I tend to stay oaky, regarding the content itself I know his preferred taste which in most of the cases positions me to adapt it to my taste. So I still see a lot of advantage reading his notes and skipping the sometimes sad rest.

dieter

[Patrick_C]

@John Liotta

On Shirvington 2002 Shiraz:
“While it is a poster child for modern Australian wine that is often maligned by narrow-minded tasters, this 2002 has not fallen apart.” 96 points

On Harlan 1997:
“The 1997 Harlan Estate is considered somewhat controversial because there are rumors that some bottles have been plagued with excessive amounts of volatile acidity. However, I have never encountered that problem in any of my tastings. It represents a Napa Valley version of a great Graves blended with a top-notch Pauillac.” 100 points

At least he is consistent.

You guys need to get on with your lives.

[Ian_Fitzsimmons]

@Howard Cooper

Speaking as someone old enough to have bought 1982 Bordeaux futures and to have read the WA when the first reviews came out. There was hype in France about the 82s even before they were harvested. The big British wine writers of the time praised the vintage from day 1. In fact, I remember reading an article from Decanter when I was looking to buy futures that essentially liked the same wines he did. The big exceptions to the universal raves for 1982 were a few US wine writers, most particularly Terry Robards and Robert Finnigan.

The combination of Parker’s reviews, the confirming reviews in Decanter, and the great prices convinced me to buy futures.

Nice to have a first-hand account, Howard, thank you. Even if Parker’s distinction is to have been the the only significant U.S. reviewer praising the 82s, though, that would have helped to establish his preeminent position in the U.S. market, at a time when the U.S. market was rising to prominence worldwide. I thought this was, more or less, the point in Emperor.

Bob’s a smart and able guy - he’s made a good career out of his hobby, and how many of us can claim to have done the same? But the habit he’s acquired of attacking the character or intelligence of people whose views differ from his is bound to alienate many folks - in my view, rightly so. He’d be a happier camper if he could rise above the fray more often than he does.

I wonder if the next great market steersman will be a Chinese or Indian writer?

[Jeff_Fish]

@b hudak

@John Liotta

On Shirvington 2002 Shiraz:
“While it is a poster child for modern Australian wine that is often maligned by narrow-minded tasters, this 2002 has not fallen apart.” 96 points

This very wine ruined a steak dinner I had because it was WAY too big, and that also marked the moment when I stoped buying Aussie wines. Yuck.
I like Bob Parker, and I am a fan of his. I don’t agree with him on this wine at all, but I know enough to overlook good scores and good reviews on wines such as these.

Bob, I am not Parker follower, but I am curious how you can discern which wines you overlook his scores and reviews? Do you only trust his palate on Bordeaux or California cabs, for example, and ignore his reviews on other regions/varietals, etc.? (I am not trying to single you out and please don’t take this as a personal attack - I am really just interested on how Parker is relied upon for wine purchases based upon your statement).

[Scott_Butler]

@Rick Gregory

@Brad England

I’m continually perplexed at why everyone bashes Bob (on this board and on the old ebob). I’m not a friend of Bob’s, but I’ve had dinner/lunch with him a bunch of times and drunk quite a few bottles of wine with him. For me, he’s a fun guy, who likes to eat and drink, and knows a hell of a lot about wine. I also find him to be down to earth, and not at all the egoist that many criticize him for being. Again, no horse in this “bash bob” race, as we’re very light acquaintances, not friends, but I’d drink/eat/hangout with him anytime. Okay, just had to get that off my chest.

It’s quotes like this "“While it is a poster child for modern Australian wine that is often maligned by narrow-minded tasters, this 2002 has not fallen apart.”

It’s one thing to disagree, but calling people narrow-minded when they don’t like what you like does not give the impression of a fun guy who’s down to earth and not an egoist. If the latter impression is the one he wants to give off, writing things like that doesn’t help.

Yes, that is the crux of the issue. It is not that he gets it wrong sometimes, and it is not that he doesn’t know wine…but it is the fact that if you disagree with him, or if he does get one wrong…he makes it his life’s work to berate you publicly, while staunchly defending a rating that he knows is flawed.

Be a man, if you rate something 100 points and then the wine falls apart - write a little blurb in the HG and say “wow, did this wine do a 180!!”. It’s pretty simple, and only adds to a persons credibility.

[Howard_Cooper]

@I. Fitzsimmons

@Howard Cooper

Speaking as someone old enough to have bought 1982 Bordeaux futures and to have read the WA when the first reviews came out. There was hype in France about the 82s even before they were harvested. The big British wine writers of the time praised the vintage from day 1. In fact, I remember reading an article from Decanter when I was looking to buy futures that essentially liked the same wines he did. The big exceptions to the universal raves for 1982 were a few US wine writers, most particularly Terry Robards and Robert Finnigan.

The combination of Parker’s reviews, the confirming reviews in Decanter, and the great prices convinced me to buy futures.

Nice to have a first-hand account, Howard, thank you. Even if Parker’s distinction is to have been the the only significant U.S. reviewer praising the 82s, though, that would have helped to establish his preeminent position in the U.S. market, at a time when the U.S. market was rising to prominence worldwide. I thought this was, more or less, the point in Emperor.

Bob’s a smart and able guy - he’s made a good career out of his hobby, and how many of us can claim to have done the same? But the habit he’s acquired of attacking the character or intelligence of people whose views differ from his is bound to alienate many folks - in my view, rightly so. He’d be a happier camper if he could rise above the fray more often than he does.

I wonder if the next great market steersman will be a Chinese or Indian writer?

I agree that Robert Parker earned his way to his preeminent position in US wine writing. First of all, his style of wine writing (including 100 points) was much clearer and easier to understand than the other wine writers in the early 80s. At that time, a lot of wine writers (particularly the British ones) were tied to the trade and they almost never criticized a wine. In the early days, Robert Parker often criticized wines he did not think were up to snuff. Second, Robert Parker rated wine based on what was in the glass, not based on the winery’s reputation, which was not common among wine writers at the time, although a couple of others were starting to do so. Third, he made a number of correct calls, including on 1982 Bordeaux, but also pointing out fairly early that 1980 Burgundies were better than people thought and that 1983 Burgundies had issues at a time when the trade was promoting the vintage as great. So, yes, he earned his place and deserved it.

[Steve_Eisenhauer]

@I. Fitzsimmons

But the habit he’s acquired of attacking the character or intelligence of people whose views differ from his is bound to alienate many folks - in my view, rightly so. He’d be a happier camper if he could rise above the fray more often than he does.

He starts the fray on too many occasions. Whether it’s 1997 Harlan, Sierra Car Crash (where he gets a couple of friends and his wife together to taste a bottle and “refute” the people who’ve noticed problems) or the 2002 Shirvington (which everyone else’s opinion that I’ve seen assesses the wine as marginally acceptable to a train wreck depending on their current bottle but Bob still defends as a high-90s wine), he takes an indefensible position and insults everyone who disagrees with his opinion (and his opinion from years ago is what is at issue). Wouldn’t it be refreshing to hear him say about the 2002 Shirvington “I retasted the 2002 Shirvington Shiraz recently and was very disappointed with this wine. Although it was outstanding when young, it has not held up as I thought it would” - or something to that effect?

The bottle we had in October 2009, within a few minutes after opening, was a disjointed mess. It may have had a brief moment of drinkability, but it crashed quickly. It was so bad, it went straight into more than one person’s spit bucket. When I heard it was a Parker 99 point wine (which I hadn’t known) with a drinking window we were well within, I was floored. This was not a dispute relating to palates - this was a wine that was enormously flawed and provenance did not seem to be the problem.

[Scott_Butler]

What is that one Cali winery that got HUGE Parker scores, and then fell apart big-time after the first couple years. Leonard Taylor flamed them badly on Ebob and Parker (nor Squires) wouldn’t even respond to that one. Tells me he was so wrong on that one he couldn’t even pretend to defend it. Was in Behrens & Hitchcock, or am I thinking of the wrong wine?

[GregUrsino]

@Patrick C

@John Liotta

On Shirvington 2002 Shiraz:
“While it is a poster child for modern Australian wine that is often maligned by narrow-minded tasters, this 2002 has not fallen apart.” 96 points

On Harlan 1997:
“The 1997 Harlan Estate is considered somewhat controversial because there are rumors that some bottles have been plagued with excessive amounts of volatile acidity. However, I have never encountered that problem in any of my tastings. It represents a Napa Valley version of a great Graves blended with a top-notch Pauillac.” 100 points

At least he is consistent.

You guys need to get on with your lives.

Yup. I mean the guy writes like 1,000,000 sentences a day. We got people obsessing for weeks about a sentence he wrote. Come on.

[Robert.Fleming]

@Steve Eisenhauer

Wouldn’t it be refreshing to hear him say about the 2002 Shirvington “I retasted the 2002 Shirvington Shiraz recently and was very disappointed with this wine. Although it was outstanding when young, it has not held up as I thought it would” - or something to that effect?

No. He need not change his opinion, which I am willing to accept as genuinely held. But it would be refreshing for him to simply state his opinion without insulting those who hold a different one.