21 Comments
User's avatar
Patrick Carpenter's avatar

A problem when comparing old and new world wines blind is that the former exist traditionally to go with food and the latter not necessarily so. Many Americans treat wine as a drink in its own right, not so many French do. The tannins and acidity in French wines can make them trickier to taste on their own but then they shine with appropriate food. Therefore, in a blind tasting without food the often riper and smoother and even bolder American wines will stand out and have more appeal.

Henry Jeffreys's avatar

Definitely true but I think at the Judgement certainly with the reds, the judges were looking for wines that tastes French, ie. Not fruity and easy, because they didn't want another upset.

Dave Baxter's avatar

I think the thing the JoP tells us about wine is two-fold: A) great wine can come from anywhere, given enough time, care, knowhow, and deep enough roots. Hence the great wines now hailing from so many places around the world. Then B) "terroir" is a trickier beast than we give it credit for, often only discernable as a contrast to another terroir. When the French drank Cali wines for (probably) the first time, it threw off their easy ability to detect local terroirs even though they were intimately familiar with them..

Henry Jeffreys's avatar

I'm not sure great wine can come from anywhere but yes opened people's eyes somewhat to what was possible though it would have happened anyway. I just think it's interesting that after this 'Copernican momment' France stayed wine top nation.

Dave Baxter's avatar

There's a quote from Bottle Shock when Alan Rickman snidely says "I don't foresee the imminent ciltivation of the Chicago vine." And yet, back in the 1800's the British press wrote about sparkling Catawba (a naturally occuring hybrid grape) coming out of Illinois that (they claimed) rivaled the Champagne at the time. So truly, what are the limits if the time and care is given to figure out any specific place and terroir? The opening of minds might have happened anyway, but given how glacially wine likes to change at all we can still be thankful for the moments that force sudden and/or radical change within our lifetimes

As for France remaining top dog, they worked hard to do so, while California and America in general have done the exact opposite. This may be where heritage and history play the biggest role: America has never valued wine as a product or industry the way Europe and especially France has. We continue to do the bare minimum to support it and even actively stiffle it as part of our dysfunctional relationship with alcohol. If we can ever get out of our own way, maybe something more will change. But liikely not until.

Jeremy R Cole's avatar

Right, if you're in California, drinking non napa/Sonoma Californian wines are typically reasonable value. By contrast, until I went to france, I didn't understand that there are lower tiers of Bordeaux and burgundy that just aren't for sale here

Douglas Blyde's avatar

I did a Judgement of TRUMP

Henry Jeffreys's avatar

And who won? I hope America.

Douglas Blyde's avatar

It was at vineyard Stockross and the result was not America First

Paul Howard Davies's avatar

My local wine club held a “Judgment of Coedpoeth” evening event. All 24 members scored the French v American wines and the Californian wines were clear winners. Bordeaux still seems to be losing its allure, but the winning wines will never take off because of the price and I detect a certain “Judgment of Trump” factor at play.

Henry Jeffreys's avatar

Yes you see that in bourbon too, American things just aren't that popular at the moment.

Dan Berger's avatar

Henry,

A very sound analysis. Unfortunately, PhD mathematician Neal Hulkower of Oregon says that if Spurrier had used a much more accurate scoring system called Borda, which evaluates ranks and ignores the raw scores, a California wine would have finished second to a Bordeaux. Moreover, for various reasons California Cabernets no longer have any particular relevance in the world because of alcohol levels that reach 16% or more and acid levels that are insufficient for the wines to age at all. Also, regional characteristics of the modern-era Cabs are now just a rumor, having been sacrificed on the altar of excessive contact with oak. --Dan Berger

Dave Baxter's avatar

Honestly, Cab Franc should have become the great red grape of California. Maybe we struggled to get it ripe enough in the 1970's, too. But these days it's the obvious Californian star between the two Cabs.

Steven Kent Mirassou's avatar

Couldn’t agree more Dave! There is no contest between the two if one takes organoleptic complexity, food friendliness, stylistic variability potential, and just plain sexiness into account. Cab Franc for the big win.

Dan Berger's avatar

I’m writing a book on Cabernet and it’s almost finished. In one of the chapters I detail Borda and Neal’s thesis

Miquel Hudin's avatar

You forget to mention, "a surfer dude" with a crap wig plopped on top of James T. Kirk v2

Martin D. Brown's avatar

A surprisingly enjoyable film

Henry Jeffreys's avatar

In a so bad it's good way.

Martin D. Brown's avatar

TBH I quite liked it, and was surprised that I did. Also turns up in Rickman's diaries if I remember correctly

Max Cellar's avatar

The 'un train peut en cacher un autre' framing is the sharpest part of this — and it extends further than Italy. The real hidden train was Burgundy's retreat from the quality contest entirely. Once American critics could argue California Chardonnay rivaled Puligny, the grands crus' only defensible move was to stop competing on quality benchmarks and shift to something genuinely unreplicable: allocation relationships, provenance, 30-year waiting lists no California operation can manufacture. Bordeaux bounced back through Parker; Burgundy bounced back by making the comparison irrelevant. The Liv-ex Power 100 is the long-term scoreboard of that move.