The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: - Page 9

TheRiddick · 07-13-2009, 10:24 PM

Johnny, I really hope that the scores Sam's and Parker give out are based on a 110 point scale. If these wines are rated 91 points, then I sure can taste you and Parker on wines that easily rate MUCH higher, by any palate's preferences.

Quit buying points and buy what YOUR palate likes.

Just to show you how much I "rate" Parker's palate. He and I had a few public exchanges where I exposed his obvious lack of understanding simple wine making principles and techniques. All this while he pretended he didn't "recognize" my name (I posted under a real name) and while he didin't realize that just a month prior one of my distributors tasted Parker on my new releases when as soon as the distributor mentioned my name Parker immediately recognized it, the distributor told me that. As soon as I got into an argument with Parker, other winemakers were making bets to see what kind of scores he will release for my wines. Well, he did rate a number of them in the 90-91 range, but then rated my best wine, almost legendary by now in the Pinot Noir community (winemakers and consumers both), a lowly 87 points with a note that said the wine is already on the downslope and won't last past 2 years, basically getting back at me. The wine is now 4 years old and not even close to hitting on all cylinders.

One of my Syrahs was just rated at 91 points, second year in the row for this wine. Vineyard owner (I buy fruit) does a taste test comparison every year to see how wineries do with his grapes and every year, hands down, my wine is voted the best of the bunch by all the wineries. This year, while mine received 91 points, another Syrah from these same grapes, received a 94 point score from same reviewer. The difference? I am not a "famous" name like the one who made the other wine (he makes upper 90s rated Cabs in Napa).

To make it short, points have meaning to only one person, the one who assigns them. And they are assigned for various reasons. Sam's got a good deal on a wine, meaning they commited to XXX number of cases in order to get a much better price and yes, their marketing guy HAS to give it a high rating to move the wine. They, and others as well, don't do this often in order to keep up their "reputations", but I've seen plenty of swill hyped up and sold by the case to consumers who then proudly put a bottle on a table and proclaim, "This is XX points!" But ask them to describe the wine to you, without a cheat sheet, and they are lost with the only thing they do remember being the point score.

In addition, many wineries "dial in" the flavor profile most wine reviewers like (plenty of oak, some sugar and if you want big Parker points then dial in lots of brett) and receive higher scores. Are they good wines? Maybe, but in most cases I would not and could not have more than a sip while I will happily consume 2-3 bottles worth of something that has balance of all components.

I am an industry insider, thus my take on reviews is very different than that of consumers'. Same for tasting a wine, where I immediately pick out all sorts of faults, only a few consumers I have met so far are able to keep up and only because they drink with us for some time and help out at wineries. Otherwise, I can name famous wine critics, people who pretty much any wine consumer knows name wise, who I tasted with and all I can say is that they don't know much about wine, in general.

Buy that Meridian Pinot Noir I posted on above, let me know what you think. It can be had on sale here in CA, I am sure you can find it in NV. Buy any Bogle product, they are all affordable and tasty. Sebastiani. From France buy some (Kermit Lynch imported) Cote du Rhone blends, they are usually cheap and tasty (mostly Grenache and Syrah blends). Buy German Rieslings and Loire whites (Vouvrays), they are all affordable and VERY tasty, but yes, they all lack high scores. Scores do not have a "taste" they are just an arbitrary number.

And best advice I could give in this thread? Avoid any and all "animals" labels like the one above. Not only are they mostly "chemical experiments" produced mostly in a lab, but they destroyed an industry in the past few years. You don't smoke crappy cigars, why drink crappy wines?

cherrybomb · 07-13-2009, 11:26 PM

perrin and fils reserve 2007

SeanGAR · 07-14-2009, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cherrybomb

perrin and fils reserve 2007

Cotes du Rhone?

SeanGAR · 07-14-2009, 08:54 AM

I had the 07 Meridian pinot noir recently (wine is from Italy) and was underwhelmed. I suppose it comes from drinking lots of 82 and 85 Cote du Nuits when I lived in Dijon in 1988, but I haven't had a Pinot Noir this side of the pond that I really enjoyed (and now Italian as well). I will admit that I haven't gone Costa Browne or anything crazy, but I'm not going to spend 50+ bucks just to get a pinot I like. I admit that the reasonably prices pinots from Bourgogne are damned hard to find as well. I used to get the Napa Ridge pinot for 3-3.50 15 years ago at Osco in Illinois (wasn't available in FL) ... that had decent if light pinot character and was a nice deal. In Dijon, I bought a lot of Bourgogne from a small place in Nuits St Georges that was excellent, supposedly just across the fence from higher NSG classification. It was 4.50-5 bucks in 1998 if I remember right.

Since I can get a nice Chianti from one of the superiore areas for 10-14 bucks, I stick with those normally. A nice one I had recently for under 11 bucks. Firm tannins but not dusty/drying, good concentration, nice sang/fruit character, goes well with food. Had the 2007.

easyt · 07-14-2009, 09:05 AM

Great thread, thanks.

I like complexity & spiciness in wine and am a big fan of zinfandel. My favorite is Rancho Zabaco's 2004 zin. It's $17.

Their more recent stuff hasn't been as good, however.

07-14-2009, 09:41 AM

C'mon, Greg, you can't put ALL animal labels under one umbrella.

I like wines that get described as having "cherry" and "chocolate" notes and a long finish. "Firm tannins" is a turn off to me. What does this suggest?

SeanGAR · 07-14-2009, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BC-Axeman

"Firm tannins" is a turn off to me. What does this suggest?

Ohh ohh .. let me guess ......

you buy Boone's Farm by the case?

JK ... everybody has different taste in wine.

07-14-2009, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeanGAR

Ohh ohh .. let me guess ......

you buy Boone's Farm by the case?

JK ... everybody has different taste in wine.

LOL!
I like just enough tannin to know it's there and have it get subdued with age. "Fruit forward" is a way it's sometimes described.

TheRiddick · 07-14-2009, 10:27 PM

Sean, the Meridian Pinot I am talking about is from CA grapes. Granted, nothing in the Burgundy mold, but for the sake of this thread, a very nicely done wine and at a great price. FWIW, I have yet to come across a sub-$150 red Burg that I like and would actually pay money for, most lack flavor. At the $35-50 price point there is plenty to pick from in CA.

Those Rancho Zabaco Zins are VERY good and sell at good price points.
.
.
.
.
Lance,

Name one, just one, "animal" label that is drinkable. I have yet to find one. I'll gladly take a bottle of 2BC over any of them, at least 2BC is real fruit based and clean without any chemical additives.

"Fruit forward" can also mean "structured", its all about balance and if tannin management is done right during wine making you won't notice tannin much while consuming wine. Your take on tannins is similar to mine.
.
.
.
.
Taste in wine, as in anything else, IS subjective. I came across a good number of wine drinkers who will loudly proclaim they hate over-oaked wine and then go for the oakiest wine on the table, so taste and perception are also very divergent.

I'd rather drink beer than bad wine, and do so in real life more than I want to admit. As with cigars, I buy quality over quantity and if that means I have only 100+ cigars in the humidor rather than 400, so be it. Life is short to smoke and drink sub-par products, IMO.

07-16-2009, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

And best advice I could give in this thread? Avoid any and all "animals" labels like the one above. Not only are they mostly "chemical experiments" produced mostly in a lab, but they destroyed an industry in the past few years. You don't smoke crappy cigars, why drink crappy wines?

Different Strokes for Different folks. What you consider crappy others consider very good.

Call that "animal" label what you want.. Destroyed an industry? To destroy an industry, the industry would have to be no more. The fact that we're having this conversation shows it hasn't destroyed anything.

Most wines (like most beers, like most scotches, like most everything) are grown in the field, then made in a factory and then run through a lab.

For what it's worth.. keep in mind.. just because a label has an animal doesn't make it as you call it an "Animal" label.. Should I not be surprised to see an African wine with a Giraffe on it using typical African art?

The history of the wine and the winemaker

mosesbotbol · 07-16-2009, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

Name one, just one, "animal" label that is drinkable. I have yet to find one. I'll gladly take a bottle of 2BC over any of them, at least 2BC is real fruit based and clean without any chemical additives.

You're saying you'd drink 2BC over 2000 Mouton? I would've never thought!

TheRiddick · 07-16-2009, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sboyajian

Most wines (like most beers, like most scotches, like most everything) are grown in the field, then made in a factory and then run through a lab.

I am not sure I understand "... then run through lab" point you made. I know of no one who runs their wines "through lab", I am talking fine wines of course and save for verifying alcohol, acidity and dryness numbers there is no "lab work" involved.

Get some info before making a statement. Talk to Australians themselves, while they were happy with grabbing a big chunk of the USA market when the likes of "Yellow Tail" appeared (and were imitated by everyone else making same, chemical driven plonk that may not even be grapes in some cases), they are now crying because not only did these "chemical experiments" kill the market for locals (USA producers), but also greatly reduced the market for the middle and high end Oz producers as well. So far, Oz imports are down and going down as we speak, people can be fooled some of the time, but not always and consumers are finally waking up.

Fine Syrah market is dead in USA because of the "animal" labels, do some research to see why.

Do you buy and smoke Cremosas? Just curuious.
.
.
.
.
.
Moses, that ram on Mouton is an art form and a one time deal, you know that :-) But yes, I'll take 2BC over ANY "animal label" save that ram on Mouton :-)

SeanGAR · 07-16-2009, 08:42 PM

Most of the upscale Aussie syrahs I have had in the last 5-7 years were over ripe, jammy, high alcohol, and unpleasant. Big fruit perhaps, but out of balance and undrinkable after a half a glass. Made to show "big" in a comparison tasting, not to be a nice wine with a meal.

What chemicals are you referring to when you say 'chemical driven plonk'. Sulfur is a chemical. Flavor compounds extracted from oak barrels are chemicals. Wine is nothing but a bunch of chemicals in a glass that can taste good or not, depending more on a person's personal preference than anything. I dislike the super ripe walla walla/HHH wines, but some people really like them. Who is right?

07-16-2009, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRiddick

I am not sure I understand "... then run through lab" point you made. I know of no one who runs their wines "through lab", I am talking fine wines of course and save for verifying alcohol, acidity and dryness numbers there is no "lab work" involved.

Get some info before making a statement. Talk to Australians themselves, while they were happy with grabbing a big chunk of the USA market when the likes of "Yellow Tail" appeared (and were imitated by everyone else making same, chemical driven plonk that may not even be grapes in some cases), they are now crying because not only did these "chemical experiments" kill the market for locals (USA producers), but also greatly reduced the market for the middle and high end Oz producers as well. So far, Oz imports are down and going down as we speak, people can be fooled some of the time, but not always and consumers are finally waking up.

Fine Syrah market is dead in USA because of the "animal" labels, do some research to see why.

Do you buy and smoke Cremosas? Just curuious.
.
.
.
.
.
Moses, that ram on Mouton is an art form and a one time deal, you know that :-) But yes, I'll take 2BC over ANY "animal label" save that ram on Mouton :-)

That is actually exactly what I was referring to.. hopefully you don't think that I felt all winemakers bring the wine in, and if it's not "up to snuff" they start adding extra chemicals and ingredients to change it somehow.

I have drank Yellow Tail, many people buy it because of it's "budget" cost.. I don't know that I have ever finished a glass outside of just being "courteous" and certainly have never gone back for a 2nd glass.

Tall Horse, at least to me, does not have that same affect. I wouldn't classify a wine bad or gimmicky simply because it has an Animal on the label.

Should I steer away from Grey Goose Vodka? Should I stay away from Glenfiddich because it has an animal on it's label? With all due respect, while the the argument could be made that some wines like Yellowtail are pushing better wines out of the market because sales swing to the cheaper brand, calling all "Animal" brands bad, is just in poor taste. Can't make an assessment without actually trying the brand.

As you said yourself.. "Get some info before making a statement" ... unless you have tried all of those brands, and know exactly the process each one goes from vineyard to shelf, you can't make that kind of blanket statement.

As for Cremosas.. never had one. I typically smoke Padron's (yes, even the Londres and x000 series), Fuente (even a curly head from time to time), Tatuaje, and Pepin. That being said, I'd welcome the opportunity to try a Cremosa before I chalked it up to a crap cigar not worth my time.

07-16-2009, 10:14 PM

Cremosas would be good cigars if not for the fishy taste and smell they leave hanging in the room.
If a cheap wine is not very flavorful, yet not astringent, vinegary or otherwise offensive, I don't care what is on the label. There are only so many brand names you can come up with.

07-16-2009, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BC-Axeman

Cremosas would be good cigars if not for the fishy taste and smell they leave hanging in the room.
If a cheap wine is not very flavorful, yet not astringent, vinegary or otherwise offensive, I don't care what is on the label. There are only so many brand names you can come up with.

Now if that's not a glowing review, I don't know what is...

mosesbotbol · 07-17-2009, 03:38 PM

If the wine label is not a picture of the Chateau or vineyard, it's a gimmick. Wine should reflect the land and chateau in both wine and label. There must be pride and history. Cartoon characters; no way.

07-17-2009, 06:10 PM

I guess I just can't see past the "the label defines the wine" logic.. ah well...

SeanGAR · 07-17-2009, 07:37 PM

Back on focus .... a beaujolais villages that I like for just over 10 bucks is....

http://www.kysela.com/burgundy/carra.htm

2007 Manoir du Carra, Beaujolais-Villages, Unfiltered
This 100% Gamay wine is produced from a selection of old vines (70 to 100 years old).

Aged in large oak barrels (foudres) for 3-4 months. No filtration. Egg white fining.

Beautiful purple-rimmed, dark cherry juice color. Explosive nose of intense Gamay fruit, a rich flavorful taste and a clean finish.

Did a side by side this 2007 Villages with George Duboeuf BV and there was no comparison. The Carra had nice very clean Gamay fruit, a lighter style (even for Beaujolais, think Fleurie not Morgon) but nice picnic wine, the Duboeuf showed what happens when you go for quantity over quality. No tannins to speak of, dry enough so it isn't spoiled. Me likey.

Didn't buy a case yet but it is certainly on my list. I see it listed online at 14.99 .... I paid something like 10.35 in Kroger, I wouldn't pay 15 bucks.

TheRiddick · 07-18-2009, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sboyajian

Should I steer away from Grey Goose Vodka? Should I stay away from Glenfiddich because it has an animal on it's label? With all due respect, while the the argument could be made that some wines like Yellowtail are pushing better wines out of the market because sales swing to the cheaper brand, calling all "Animal" brands bad, is just in poor taste. Can't make an assessment without actually trying the brand.

As you said yourself.. "Get some info before making a statement" ... unless you have tried all of those brands, and know exactly the process each one goes from vineyard to shelf, you can't make that kind of blanket statement.

We were talking WINE, right? What are Grey Goose and Glenfiddich?

Cheaper and "bad" are two different things, very much so in this discussion, IMO. Cheaper are the wines I listed above, there is whole bunch. "Bad" are wines I won't buy or even drink if offered for free, I only have one liver and no spares. And yes, being an industry insider, I do try a fair amount of wines, thus I only discuss wines I KNOW personally and well, I know a seriously good number of them whether I like them or not.

On the third point, the info is available, I do read up a fair amount on a daily basis, its MY JOB. I make wine for a living. And when I say these "animal labels" are chemical experiments, they are, just stock up on wine industry periodicals and light up a few cigars while you read up.

I am not here to tell people what to drink, I am simply pointing out that there are affordable wines worth seeking out and drinking. Same way you and I avoid certain cigars and brands, wines are also to be either followed or ignored.

And as I said already, it is strange that people don't bat an eye at spending a nice chunk on good cigars, or Scotch/Cognac/etc, yet "save" by buying inferior wines when much better wines are available at roughly same prices.

Anyway, I see we're talking apples and oranges, if "animal labels" suite your palate, in general terms, no issue here, your liver and your wallet.m I'll go pop a beer now...

Bogle, Sebastiani, J. Lohr, Meridian, Vouvray, German Reisling, CdR, Chilean and Argentine, all can be had in the $5-15 range.

07-13-2009, 10:24 PM	#161
TheRiddick Non-believer Join Date: Jan 2009 First Name: Greg Location: Las Vegas Posts: 943 Trading: (7)	Re: The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: Johnny, I really hope that the scores Sam's and Parker give out are based on a 110 point scale. If these wines are rated 91 points, then I sure can taste you and Parker on wines that easily rate MUCH higher, by any palate's preferences. Quit buying points and buy what YOUR palate likes. Just to show you how much I "rate" Parker's palate. He and I had a few public exchanges where I exposed his obvious lack of understanding simple wine making principles and techniques. All this while he pretended he didn't "recognize" my name (I posted under a real name) and while he didin't realize that just a month prior one of my distributors tasted Parker on my new releases when as soon as the distributor mentioned my name Parker immediately recognized it, the distributor told me that. As soon as I got into an argument with Parker, other winemakers were making bets to see what kind of scores he will release for my wines. Well, he did rate a number of them in the 90-91 range, but then rated my best wine, almost legendary by now in the Pinot Noir community (winemakers and consumers both), a lowly 87 points with a note that said the wine is already on the downslope and won't last past 2 years, basically getting back at me. The wine is now 4 years old and not even close to hitting on all cylinders. One of my Syrahs was just rated at 91 points, second year in the row for this wine. Vineyard owner (I buy fruit) does a taste test comparison every year to see how wineries do with his grapes and every year, hands down, my wine is voted the best of the bunch by all the wineries. This year, while mine received 91 points, another Syrah from these same grapes, received a 94 point score from same reviewer. The difference? I am not a "famous" name like the one who made the other wine (he makes upper 90s rated Cabs in Napa). To make it short, points have meaning to only one person, the one who assigns them. And they are assigned for various reasons. Sam's got a good deal on a wine, meaning they commited to XXX number of cases in order to get a much better price and yes, their marketing guy HAS to give it a high rating to move the wine. They, and others as well, don't do this often in order to keep up their "reputations", but I've seen plenty of swill hyped up and sold by the case to consumers who then proudly put a bottle on a table and proclaim, "This is XX points!" But ask them to describe the wine to you, without a cheat sheet, and they are lost with the only thing they do remember being the point score. In addition, many wineries "dial in" the flavor profile most wine reviewers like (plenty of oak, some sugar and if you want big Parker points then dial in lots of brett) and receive higher scores. Are they good wines? Maybe, but in most cases I would not and could not have more than a sip while I will happily consume 2-3 bottles worth of something that has balance of all components. I am an industry insider, thus my take on reviews is very different than that of consumers'. Same for tasting a wine, where I immediately pick out all sorts of faults, only a few consumers I have met so far are able to keep up and only because they drink with us for some time and help out at wineries. Otherwise, I can name famous wine critics, people who pretty much any wine consumer knows name wise, who I tasted with and all I can say is that they don't know much about wine, in general. Buy that Meridian Pinot Noir I posted on above, let me know what you think. It can be had on sale here in CA, I am sure you can find it in NV. Buy any Bogle product, they are all affordable and tasty. Sebastiani. From France buy some (Kermit Lynch imported) Cote du Rhone blends, they are usually cheap and tasty (mostly Grenache and Syrah blends). Buy German Rieslings and Loire whites (Vouvrays), they are all affordable and VERY tasty, but yes, they all lack high scores. Scores do not have a "taste" they are just an arbitrary number. And best advice I could give in this thread? Avoid any and all "animals" labels like the one above. Not only are they mostly "chemical experiments" produced mostly in a lab, but they destroyed an industry in the past few years. You don't smoke crappy cigars, why drink crappy wines?

07-13-2009, 11:26 PM	#162
cherrybomb Adjusting to the Life Join Date: Oct 2008 First Name: Chris Location: somewhere over the rainbow Posts: 291 Trading: (15)	Re: The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: perrin and fils reserve 2007 __________________ It is better to be hated for who you are, then loved for what you are not

07-14-2009, 08:54 AM	#164
SeanGAR Crotchety Geezer Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Radford VA Posts: 911 Trading: (3)	Re: The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: I had the 07 Meridian pinot noir recently (wine is from Italy) and was underwhelmed. I suppose it comes from drinking lots of 82 and 85 Cote du Nuits when I lived in Dijon in 1988, but I haven't had a Pinot Noir this side of the pond that I really enjoyed (and now Italian as well). I will admit that I haven't gone Costa Browne or anything crazy, but I'm not going to spend 50+ bucks just to get a pinot I like. I admit that the reasonably prices pinots from Bourgogne are damned hard to find as well. I used to get the Napa Ridge pinot for 3-3.50 15 years ago at Osco in Illinois (wasn't available in FL) ... that had decent if light pinot character and was a nice deal. In Dijon, I bought a lot of Bourgogne from a small place in Nuits St Georges that was excellent, supposedly just across the fence from higher NSG classification. It was 4.50-5 bucks in 1998 if I remember right. Since I can get a nice Chianti from one of the superiore areas for 10-14 bucks, I stick with those normally. A nice one I had recently for under 11 bucks. Firm tannins but not dusty/drying, good concentration, nice sang/fruit character, goes well with food. Had the 2007. __________________ How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?

07-14-2009, 09:05 AM	#165
easyt Just in from the Storm Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 2 Trading: (1)	Re: The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: Great thread, thanks. I like complexity & spiciness in wine and am a big fan of zinfandel. My favorite is Rancho Zabaco's 2004 zin. It's $17. Their more recent stuff hasn't been as good, however.

07-14-2009, 09:41 AM	#166
BC-Axeman Guest Posts: n/a	Re: The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: C'mon, Greg, you can't put ALL animal labels under one umbrella. I like wines that get described as having "cherry" and "chocolate" notes and a long finish. "Firm tannins" is a turn off to me. What does this suggest?

07-14-2009, 10:27 PM	#169
TheRiddick Non-believer Join Date: Jan 2009 First Name: Greg Location: Las Vegas Posts: 943 Trading: (7)	Re: The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: Sean, the Meridian Pinot I am talking about is from CA grapes. Granted, nothing in the Burgundy mold, but for the sake of this thread, a very nicely done wine and at a great price. FWIW, I have yet to come across a sub-$150 red Burg that I like and would actually pay money for, most lack flavor. At the $35-50 price point there is plenty to pick from in CA. Those Rancho Zabaco Zins are VERY good and sell at good price points. . . . . Lance, Name one, just one, "animal" label that is drinkable. I have yet to find one. I'll gladly take a bottle of 2BC over any of them, at least 2BC is real fruit based and clean without any chemical additives. "Fruit forward" can also mean "structured", its all about balance and if tannin management is done right during wine making you won't notice tannin much while consuming wine. Your take on tannins is similar to mine. . . . . Taste in wine, as in anything else, IS subjective. I came across a good number of wine drinkers who will loudly proclaim they hate over-oaked wine and then go for the oakiest wine on the table, so taste and perception are also very divergent. I'd rather drink beer than bad wine, and do so in real life more than I want to admit. As with cigars, I buy quality over quantity and if that means I have only 100+ cigars in the humidor rather than 400, so be it. Life is short to smoke and drink sub-par products, IMO.

07-16-2009, 08:42 PM	#173
SeanGAR Crotchety Geezer Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Radford VA Posts: 911 Trading: (3)	Re: The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: Most of the upscale Aussie syrahs I have had in the last 5-7 years were over ripe, jammy, high alcohol, and unpleasant. Big fruit perhaps, but out of balance and undrinkable after a half a glass. Made to show "big" in a comparison tasting, not to be a nice wine with a meal. What chemicals are you referring to when you say 'chemical driven plonk'. Sulfur is a chemical. Flavor compounds extracted from oak barrels are chemicals. Wine is nothing but a bunch of chemicals in a glass that can taste good or not, depending more on a person's personal preference than anything. I dislike the super ripe walla walla/HHH wines, but some people really like them. Who is right? __________________ How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?

07-16-2009, 10:14 PM	#175
BC-Axeman Guest Posts: n/a	Re: The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: Cremosas would be good cigars if not for the fishy taste and smell they leave hanging in the room. If a cheap wine is not very flavorful, yet not astringent, vinegary or otherwise offensive, I don't care what is on the label. There are only so many brand names you can come up with.

07-17-2009, 03:38 PM	#177
mosesbotbol That's a Corgi Join Date: Oct 2008 First Name: Moses Location: Boston Posts: 6,171 Trading: (6)	Re: The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: If the wine label is not a picture of the Chateau or vineyard, it's a gimmick. Wine should reflect the land and chateau in both wine and label. There must be pride and history. Cartoon characters; no way. __________________ Port Wine & Claret \| British Cars \| Welsh Corgi's

07-17-2009, 06:10 PM	#178
sboyajian Guest Posts: n/a	Re: The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: I guess I just can't see past the "the label defines the wine" logic.. ah well...

07-17-2009, 07:37 PM	#179
SeanGAR Crotchety Geezer Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Radford VA Posts: 911 Trading: (3)	Re: The Under $20 A Bottle Wine Thread: Back on focus .... a beaujolais villages that I like for just over 10 bucks is.... http://www.kysela.com/burgundy/carra.htm 2007 Manoir du Carra, Beaujolais-Villages, Unfiltered This 100% Gamay wine is produced from a selection of old vines (70 to 100 years old). Aged in large oak barrels (foudres) for 3-4 months. No filtration. Egg white fining. Beautiful purple-rimmed, dark cherry juice color. Explosive nose of intense Gamay fruit, a rich flavorful taste and a clean finish. Did a side by side this 2007 Villages with George Duboeuf BV and there was no comparison. The Carra had nice very clean Gamay fruit, a lighter style (even for Beaujolais, think Fleurie not Morgon) but nice picnic wine, the Duboeuf showed what happens when you go for quantity over quality. No tannins to speak of, dry enough so it isn't spoiled. Me likey. Didn't buy a case yet but it is certainly on my list. I see it listed online at 14.99 .... I paid something like 10.35 in Kroger, I wouldn't pay 15 bucks. __________________ How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat? Last edited by SeanGAR; 07-17-2009 at 07:48 PM.