Fair enough. I am not sure I would ever feel sufficiently motivated to start a new thread just to point out that the language you use in posts here was “unhelpful,” so I assumed that some more visceral reaction was behind the OP.
Wow, Neal, I think you’re taking this thread a little too seriously. I was simply asking aloud what most mean when they use the term, “Undrinkable” in a tasting note.
I get both Neal’s reaction and the reaction to that reaction. On the one hand, the range of meanings likely when someone calls a wine undrinkable is really pretty narrow, going from I really don’t like it much to, quite literally, I wouldn’t drink it and, after the first taste, didn’t. The only reason to start a thread on it is a tendency to reject out of hanbd ideas or evaluations on does not agree with, which is a problem on this board and one Neal has rightly objected to elsewhere. On the other hand, the topic and the responses have generally lacked that level of blind ire here, making Neal’s reactions seem a little over the top, at least to me. Seeing the dispute this way, I can’t get worked up about either side.
On the topic, I don’t know if I’ve ever called a wine undrinkable, but wines I pour down the drain are generally ones that are corked, cooked or somehow or other, to me rotten. Wines whose style I don’t like, when I confront them at tastings, I usually taste some more as a matter of further education. I have no objections to those who will drink wines that I find undrinkable because, say, they are corked. Maybe they are fortunate enough to lack the gene that sensitizes them to the smell. Maybe they had a wonderful experience with wet dogs in their youth. Either way, it’s OK with me.
Counselor is pre-holiday cranky
The great ones work at their craft
For me “undrinkable” means undrinkable by me. Same as some of the others have said.
Doesn’t mean that the wine is flawed in that it’s corked, bretty, cooked, etc. Just that the wine tastes like crap to me and I don’t want it in my body. And there’s a lot of wine like that. Usually it’s because the wine is too sweet and/or too hot, but not always. Sometimes it just tastes bad to me.
Here’s an example. Pat Paulson wines. I wanted to like them because I always thought he was a kick. Tried them and spit instantly. Sweet and harsh. Undrinkable. Would I die if I drank them? Maybe not but I wasn’t taking any chances. Same with Two Buck Chuck. Spit it instantly. And Ferguson Crest, owned by the singer Fergie. Those are just horrible wines. But sometimes you can use them for marinades, and that’s usually what we do.
I was afraid I was one of the guilty parties, but I just did a search of all of my CT tasting notes, and have never called a wine “undrinkable.”
I have, however, said a wine is “hard to drink.” For me, that usually means: I don’t really like this wine at all, I won’t buy it again, if I have another bottle I may give it away, BUT if it is in my glass… you know… it’s wine. And I like wine. So I will probably drink it. Even if it is hard. (Someone has to do it… right?)
I could imagine others using “undrinkable” in the way I use “hard to drink”. But really, it seems something as definitive as “undrinkable” should be reserved for major-pour-down-the-drain flaws.
Hey it could be worse. Someone could use quinine in a tasting note. 
(p.s. Ian d’Agata has used quinine as a descriptor.)
I have said it at least 15 times. Only twice was the wine actually undrinkable when it was not obviously corked or heat damaged.
I guess saying that is like saying “omg i’m so tired i’m going to die”… you aren’t ‘really’ going to die.
I don’t think i’ve used ‘undrinkable’ in a TN, but if i did, it probably means there’s no way in hell i would drink it under any circumstances. (i.e. free, and only drink available… i’d still pass).
I’m not sure I’ve used ‘undrinkable’ in a TN either, but to me it would either mean a serious flaw (too much brett/tca/mouse) OR it could mean a winemaking style that is aggressively not to my taste. I’ve had wines that tasted like pure oak chips that i just couldn’t drink, and that would be ‘undrinkable’ as well but a different ‘undrinkable’ than the first meaning. I’m sure if I used that word in my TN i’d indicate which of the two i meant.
I think the term is mostly used as a way of signaling the taster only allows wines that meet certain pedigrees on their palate. After all, unless a wine is poison, tastes of actual vomit or has become a solid, it’s drinkable. I doubt in the vast majority of cases when the term is used it is an actually undrinkable wine. It’s a melodramatic way of signaling it doesn’t meet the taster’s high standards.
We are going back to the subjective/objective debate. I find that there are a lot of wines that are for me undrinkable, of which a fraction are obviously flawed. I choose not to drink some wines preferring iced tea, water or beer.
Take Kosta Browne Pinots for example. I have had two wines from this producer, and loathed them both times, I could not detect any interesting bits, nor could I guess the grape. Is this a flawed wine, or just an unappealing undrinkable one (at least to me)?
But did you detect any naughty bits?
Prisoner…
![[rofl.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/a/a7452fcd8e675af869f8da01174474a545b03944.gif "rofl"){kind=small}
So just 92 pts then.
+1
Same.
If I use it, it means I won’t put any more in my mouth after the first sip or two. Usually because it’s flawed but possibly because it’s terrible without a specific identifiable flaw. I’ll say why I consider it undrinkable. I can’t recall writing a TN on a wine that’s been undrinkable without bad TCA, spoilage, or VA. Maybe a few grotesquely over-oaked Shiraz from the 1990s?
I do think some use it as hyperbole or to highlight their dislike for a particular style. It’s usually accompanied by a description of what the taster finds so objectionable. That’s useful as it tells me something about the taster as well as the wine. “Undrinkable” without an explanation is as useless as a score without a note.