Back to wine...

Although I was tempted to comment on the recent, heavily politically oriented thread, I have restrained myself for once. (well, except for that last)
I'm sipping a nicely aged bottle of 1988 Inglenook "Reserve Cask" Cabernet ($6US), and ignoring the Democratic National Convention that's straining to burst forth from my de-energized TV. :^)
I plan to ignore the Republican Convention too - albeit over a different bottle of wine. Please wake me up in time for the Crush (which appears to be early this year), and then let me sleep until it's time to vote...
Tom S
Reply to
Tom S
>Although I was tempted to comment on the recent, heavily politically >oriented thread, I have restrained myself for once. (well, except for that >last) > >I'm sipping a nicely aged bottle of 1988 Inglenook "Reserve Cask" Cabernet >($6US), and ignoring the Democratic National Convention that's straining to >burst forth from my de-energized TV. :^) > >I plan to ignore the Republican Convention too - albeit over a different >bottle of wine. Please wake me up in time for the Crush (which appears to >be early this year), and then let me sleep until it's time to vote... > There's a lot to be said for non-partisanship, particularly in this forum. But will you be drinking a more expensive wine when the Republicans meet? ;-)
Vino To reply, add "x" between letters and numbers of e-mail address.
Reply to
Vino
Back to wine.... Oh yes, good idea!! I realized early on that I couldn't *plonk* everyone who discusses politics here, otherwise, half my resources would be gone. So I learned how to set up a message rule by subject, and now the newsgroup is back to the way I discovered it 2-3 weeks ago (or whenever). *** A few newbie WINE questions, if I may *** 1) Now that I'm learning as much as I can about wine (reading some books, going to wine-related sites, and of course, drinking wine), I run into a little confusion almost immediately. Winecommune.com lists "Bordeaux blend" under the category "varietals," whereas a book that I am reading lists Medoc, Graves, Pomerol, etc. as the actual varietals. Which is correct? Winecommune.com further divides Bordeaux blends into sub-categories, however, these sub-categories (such as Pauillac, St. Julien, St. Estephe, Margaux) do seem to be one level above the actual wineries* themselves (however, there does seem to be a winery* named Margaux as well), yet not exactly worthy of being labeled "varietal." Please explain! 2) Received my first two bottles of wine that I won on Winecommune.com. One was perfect, but the other one had some (very slight) leakage (in transit for 3 days, California to Chicago). Although the seller promises a full refund if the wine is bad, he claims to have seen that happen before without any problems. Suggests I let it settle for at least 3 days. I was planning to keep it longer (WS: "Best after 2006"). Now my dilemma is if I try it after 3 days, just to see if it's good or not (albeit, I will enjoy it, if it is), I still have to buy another bottle if I want it for 2006, as planned. So, if I do go with my original plan to cellar if for 2 years, are my chances favorable that it still will be drinkable? It's a 1996 Pichon-Longueville Baron. Thanks in advance * One other question: Is my use of the word "winery" correct? I have also seen "producer" used in, what I believe to be, a synonymous fashion. Am I correct? > Although I was tempted to comment on the recent, heavily politically > oriented thread, I have restrained myself for once. (well, except for that > last) > > I'm sipping a nicely aged bottle of 1988 Inglenook "Reserve Cask" Cabernet > ($6US), and ignoring the Democratic National Convention that's straining to > burst forth from my de-energized TV. :^) > > I plan to ignore the Republican Convention too - albeit over a different > bottle of wine. Please wake me up in time for the Crush (which appears to > be early this year), and then let me sleep until it's time to vote... > > Tom S > >
Reply to
Vincent
In article , nobody@nowhere. com says... > >Back to wine.... Oh yes, good idea!! I realized early on that I couldn't >*plonk* everyone who discusses politics here, otherwise, half my resources >would be gone. So I learned how to set up a message rule by subject, and now >the newsgroup is back to the way I discovered it 2-3 weeks ago (or >whenever). > >*** A few newbie WINE questions, if I may *** > >1) Now that I'm learning as much as I can about wine (reading some books, >going to wine-related sites, and of course, drinking wine), I run into a >little confusion almost immediately. Winecommune.com lists "Bordeaux blend" >under the category "varietals," whereas a book that I am reading lists >Medoc, Graves, Pomerol, etc. as the actual varietals. Which is correct? > >Winecommune.com further divides Bordeaux blends into sub-categories, >however, these sub-categories (such as Pauillac, St. Julien, St. Estephe, >Margaux) do seem to be one level above the actual wineries* themselves >(however, there does seem to be a winery* named Margaux as well), yet not >exactly worthy of being labeled "varietal." Please explain! The simple answer, Vincent, is that some wines are "named" for the main grape (s) that went into the wine, i.e. Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Chardonnay, etc ., while others (Bordeaux - region, France is a perfect example) have place names, i.e. St Estephe, Pauillac, Medoc, etc. In some cases the place goes much farther in the name, Ch. ______, Medoc, Bordeaux. These wines are define the place that the grapes came from (and very often the location where the wine was actually produced), rather than the "blend" of grapes going into it, usually Cabernet Sauvignon, Cabernet Franc, Merlot, Petite Verdot, Malbec. the wine might be 100% CS, or M, or CF, or might be a combination of all five. The producer (and to some extent the location) will dictate. Sometimes, the exact percentage of the constituant varietals will be difficult to track down. In other cases history will usually give you a strong clue. A really rough "rule-of-thumb" is that much new world wine lists the varietal (grape type), while much old world wine lists the place. Neither is "correct," it is just how each does it. Many US, CA producers are now doing blended wines, that usually have proprietary names (rather than place names), that work with the Bordeaux varietals, i.e. Cain 5, which usually uses all five Bordeaux red varietals. Others will be happy to give you very useful and excellent detail on just who does what, with which. > >2) Received my first two bottles of wine that I won on Winecommune.com. One >was perfect, but the other one had some (very slight) leakage (in transit >for 3 days, California to Chicago). Although the seller promises a full >refund if the wine is bad, he claims to have seen that happen before without >any problems. Suggests I let it settle for at least 3 days. I was planning >to keep it longer (WS: "Best after 2006"). Now my dilemma is if I try it >after 3 days, just to see if it's good or not (albeit, I will enjoy it, if >it is), I still have to buy another bottle if I want it for 2006, as >planned. So, if I do go with my original plan to cellar if for 2 years, are >my chances favorable that it still will be drinkable? It's a 1996 >Pichon-Longueville Baron. Interesting problem. If the merchant will replace the bottle, I think you might be more pleased with that result. Wine that has had some leakage can still be wonderful. If, however, you are going to lay it down for another 2 years, you could possibly have problems - not saying that you WILL, only that you could. Drinking a still youthful Bordeaux early might not be the most enlightening thing for you to do right now in your wine journey. OTOH, there can be a great learning experience in doing so. I'd pop it, and pour a little into a really large glass, doing all the normal tasting steps, before taking a little sip, or three, and doing an evaluation. Letting it sit during a slow dinner, and coming back to it from time-to-time and giving it a good swirl, for a re-evaluation (don't top up the glass during this experiment), will began to reveal the wine to you. If there are still "harsh elements" that you are finding, you might want to decant the remainder, letting it sit in an unsealed decanter for a few hours. Start the process all over with a glass from the decanter, and gauge the "progress" of the wine. At the very least, you should have a fun evening charting the evolution of the wine and THAT experience, alone, should be worth the price of the bottle. After you've had a few glasses (shared with a fun person(s), you can then decide whether to acquire an additional bottle. By following the merchant's recommendation, and being patient, they might well be willing to extend a financial courtesy to you with respect to the second bottle - I surely would. If you are going to cellar for another few years, maybe pick up two bottles, in case WS was off in their "time-to-drink" speculation, and it still needs more time, OR, in case they were right and you LOVE the wine! Wouldn't it be nice to have an additional bottle in your cellar, if it's GREAT? > >Thanks in advance > >* One other question: Is my use of the word "winery" correct? I have also >seen "producer" used in, what I believe to be, a synonymous fashion. Am I >correct? Usually they are synonymous. There are many possible levels of involvemnt in the production of wine around the world. One may grow the grapes, extract the juice, ferment it, bottle it, store it for some time, then sell the wine to an exporter, or merchandiser, or handle even that, themselves. Other times, someone grows, someone else crushes, someone else buys the juice and may make the wine, or even re-sell the juice to one, who does. After the fermentation, all sorts of roads can be taken with respect to getting the wine to the consumer. The answer then, is "it depends," but for most purposes, they are synoymous. Most of all - ENJOY!!! Hunt > > >"Tom S" wrote in message >news:sWjOc.100349$fR7.26453@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com... >> Although I was tempted to comment on the recent, heavily politically >> oriented thread, I have restrained myself for once. (well, except for >that >> last) >> >> I'm sipping a nicely aged bottle of 1988 Inglenook "Reserve Cask" Cabernet >> ($6US), and ignoring the Democratic National Convention that's straining >to >> burst forth from my de-energized TV. :^) >> >> I plan to ignore the Republican Convention too - albeit over a different >> bottle of wine. Please wake me up in time for the Crush (which appears to >> be early this year), and then let me sleep until it's time to vote... >> >> Tom S >> >> > >
Reply to
Hunt
> >*** A few newbie WINE questions, if I may *** > >1) Now that I'm learning as much as I can about wine (reading some books, >going to wine-related sites, and of course, drinking wine), I run into a >little confusion almost immediately. Winecommune.com lists "Bordeaux blend" >under the category "varietals," whereas a book that I am reading lists >Medoc, Graves, Pomerol, etc. as the actual varietals. Which is correct? Varietals are species of grapes. Cabernet sauvignon is a type of grape. Chardonnay is a type of grape. Merlot is a type of grape. Medoc, Graves, Pomeral, etc. are regions--geographic areas that produce a specific style of wine. Depending upon the country there will usually be some sort of controlling legislation with regard to the use of one of these regional names. You'll see acronyms like DOC to indicate an authorized use of a regional name. Bordeaux tends to favor cabernet sauvignon and merlot as the basic varietal, but they blend other grapes to develop their characteristic style. (One bank of the river favors CS and the other leans to merlot, but I never know whether that is looking upstream or downstream and am too lazy to look it up this AM.) Regardless "Bordeaux blend" means a mix of varietals similar to what is found in the Bordeaux region. > >Winecommune.com further divides Bordeaux blends into sub-categories, >however, these sub-categories (such as Pauillac, St. Julien, St. Estephe, >Margaux) do seem to be one level above the actual wineries* themselves >(however, there does seem to be a winery* named Margaux as well), yet not >exactly worthy of being labeled "varietal." Please explain! Again, you're mixing regions with grape species. > >2) Received my first two bottles of wine that I won on Winecommune.com. One >was perfect, but the other one had some (very slight) leakage (in transit >for 3 days, California to Chicago). Although the seller promises a full >refund if the wine is bad, he claims to have seen that happen before without >any problems. Suggests I let it settle for at least 3 days. I was planning >to keep it longer (WS: "Best after 2006"). Now my dilemma is if I try it >after 3 days, just to see if it's good or not (albeit, I will enjoy it, if >it is), I still have to buy another bottle if I want it for 2006, as >planned. So, if I do go with my original plan to cellar if for 2 years, are >my chances favorable that it still will be drinkable? It's a 1996 >Pichon-Longueville Baron.
If you're wine shipped in three days recently, it probably survived quite nicely--it's been cool. Shipping by UPS ground is pretty reliable, but try to stay away from mid-summer when wines can get backed in the truck or mid-winter when they can freeze. Spring/fall are ideal shipping times.
"Very slight" leakage would be undetectable and concealed by the capsule. If you've got leakage dripped out beyond the capsule, that seems more than very slight.
Settling after shipping is always a good idea. Don't expect full quality of a good wine if you rip it out of the box and pull the cork on the day it arrives.
If you plan to buy some quantity of the Pichon-Longqueville Baron for cellaring, by all means taste in a week or so. If you only intend to buy this one or two bottle shipment, then cross your fingers and put it away for 2006.
Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" "Phantom Flights, Bangkok Nights" Both from Smithsonian Books ***www.thunderchief.org
Reply to
Ed Rasimus
>Varietals are species of grapes. Cabernet sauvignon is a type of >grape. Chardonnay is a type of grape. Merlot is a type of grape. >
actually all wine grapes are of the species vitis vinifera, or hybrids thereof.
Mike
Mike Tommasi, Six Fours, France email link
formatting link
Reply to
Mike Tommasi
"Vincent" in news:ulsOc.2287$uC7.1288@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com... > Back to wine.... Oh yes, good idea!! Yes, very good idea. > > *** A few newbie WINE questions, if I may *** > > 1) Now that I'm learning as much as I can about wine > (reading some books, going to wine-related sites, and of > course, drinking wine), I run into a little confusion almost > immediately. ... > > Winecommune.com further divides Bordeaux blends into > sub-categories, however, these sub-categories (such as Pauillac, > St. Julien, St. Estephe, Margaux) do seem to be one level above > the actual wineries* themselves (however, there does seem to be > a winery* named Margaux as well), yet not > exactly worthy of being labeled "varietal." Please explain!
If I might suggest from a little experience with this situation, although there may be good replies eager with specific answers (sort of like samples of fish), I've found that the situation is served more effectively by patient reading in good tutorial books (sort of like learning how to fish). In this spirit Yoxall titled chapters of his old popular Burgundy book "some optional history" and "some compulsory geography." Blake Ozias in his old popular book _All About Wine_ sketched out the major and minor divisions of wine-making Europe in an overview. The picture that they are all trying to explain is complex and inconsistent (divisions and entities important in Bordeaux are different from those in Burgundy, for example, and yet again from those in Italy, etc etc.). Complexity and inconsistency are exactly what eager students don't want, so they hunger for formulas or answers to explain it all. (Sorry, I'm reflecting a little here, I used to teach, and to run into this often, in different contexts than wine, but the underlying issue was the same.)
There is always a need for good background-reading books for this, they are indispensable for someone serious (as Vincent here seems to be). I don't know any perfect one, I do continue to recommend Stevenson's "encyclopedia" (ISBN 0789480395) which certainly has the required information, though not laid out in tutorial form. The overview pages at the beginning of each region's section are useful.
I would like to learn of other effective books for this purpose for Anglophone readers. There's one in the last couple of years by a US graduate of both the MW and MS programs (extremely unusual, and testimony to his wine knowledge), thinner than Stevenson's, in a "coffee-table" format, but I don't know it well or have the details handy. Maybe other people experienced with this situation can recommend other sources?
-- Max
Reply to
Max Hauser
Salut/Hi Vincent, le/on Fri, 30 Jul 2004 13:49:14 GMT, tu disais/you said:- >1) Now that I'm learning as much as I can about wine (reading some books, >going to wine-related sites, and of course, drinking wine), I run into a >little confusion almost immediately. Winecommune.com lists "Bordeaux blend" >under the category "varietals," I'm not surprised you find naing a little confusing. It is. So, Bordeaux blend is not _a_ varietal (why not grape variety, I ask?). It is a shorthand to describe a wine made from one of a number of grap varieties. Red. Cabernet Sauvignon Cabernet Franc Merlot Malbec Petit Verdot Carmenère (sp?) White Sauvignon Blanc Sémillon Muscadelle. (Sauvignon Gris?) A wine made in the Bordeaux area MUST only be made from those grape varieties. In practice only the first three reds and two whites are grown in respectable quantities. So the shortcut word, probably invented to counter the patented "Meritage" name for the same blend means that the wine (theoretically) conforms to the description above. > whereas a book that I am reading lists Medoc, Graves, Pomerol, etc. as the actual varietals. Which is correct? I doubt it. I think you're misreading what your book says. In France, wines are described NOT by the grape varieties directly, but by the region, district and commune (village). So these regions - Médoc, Graves, Pomerol are all wine regions within Bordeaux, they do NOTY describe the grape variety, though that is implicit. In the case of Pomerol for example, the great majority of producers make Merlot wines. Other Regions in Bordeaux are St Emilion, Entre deux Mers, Sauternes, Bourg, Blaye & Fronsac. Within these areas, (which sometimes take the names of a single village) you can have villages (or more accurately "communes" which are the smallest french administrative district) such as Pauillac, etc as Winecommune says. >Margaux) do seem to be one level above the actual wineries* themselves >(however, there does seem to be a winery* named Margaux as well), yet not >exactly worthy of being labeled "varietal." Please explain! No. The wineries in that area are usually called "Chateau Something". Every winery is situated in a commune of some name, and then the commune is situated within an area and then a region. So Ch Latour is in the commune of Pauillac, which is in the Medoc area in the Bordeaux Region. In general the more vague the name on the bottle, the less good it is (vast generalisation.) So the lowest of the low from the area has the regional "appellation", name (as in what rules apply to the making of the wine and where the grapes may come from) This isn't necessarily related to quality, by the way, but to "tight description". Appellation Bordeaux Controlée" Next up is the area, such as Médoc. So you can have a wine such as "La Fleur du Bordeaux" for example. which may be "Appellation Médoc Controlée". Even more precise would be a wine whose grapes must come from within a single commune, You would exptect that wine to reflect some of the characteristics of the commune. The name may be Ch something or other, or may not. So you may have "Mouton-Cadet Appellation Pauillac Controllée". Next up is a single chateau wine. Chateaux are classified in several ranks (especially in Médoc), from no classification at all (other than the village) through Cru Bourgeois up to 1er Cru classée 1st classed growth, according to a classification created in 1855. So You may find three wineries next to each-other, one being Appellation village name, another Cru Bourgeois and the next a 2nd growth (2ieme Cru classée Village name). Yes it's complex, but that's the way it is. >planned. So, if I do go with my original plan to cellar if for 2 years, are >my chances favorable that it still will be drinkable? It's a 1996 >Pichon-Longueville Baron. I think so, in fact I think 10 years old the the youngest you shold drink it, However, I hope it didn't get too hot in transit. Heat is hard on wines. >* One other question: Is my use of the word "winery" correct? I have also >seen "producer" used in, what I believe to be, a synonymous fashion. Am I >correct?
A producer is - in general - the person or company, and winery the establishment. So Ch. Tour des Gendres is a winery in Bergerac and the producer is Luc de Conti, who is also winemaker.
-- All the Best Ian Hoare
formatting link
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website
--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Ian Hoare
in article 10gkom5aa836dec@corp.supernews.com, Max Hauser at maxREMOVE@THIStdl.com wrote on 7/30/04 8:01 AM: > > I would like to learn of other effective books for this purpose for > Anglophone readers. There's one in the last couple of years by a US > graduate of both the MW and MS programs (extremely unusual, and testimony to > his wine knowledge), thinner than Stevenson's, in a "coffee-table" format, > but I don't know it well or have the details handy. Maybe other people > experienced with this situation can recommend other sources? > > -- Max > > Is this the author you refer to? If so, do you recall which of his books impressed you? Thanks. From wine-expos.com: > Doug Frost is a Kansas City based wines and spirits writer and lecturer who > writes for numerous regional and national publications. His first book, > Uncorking Wine was released in 1996 to critical acclaim and his newest book, > On Wine, a Master Sommelier and Master of Wine Tells All, is recently > published by Rizzoli International. He holds the titles of both Master of Wine > and Master Sommelier, only the second person in history to have achieved both > these remarkable distinctions. Eleven years later, there are only three people > in the entire world with both titles. According to USA Today, "Frost likely > knows as much as anyone in the world about how to make, market, serve and > identify wines."
Reply to
Midlife
> Although I was tempted to comment on the recent, heavily politically > oriented thread, I have restrained myself for once. (well, except for that > last) > > I'm sipping a nicely aged bottle of 1988 Inglenook "Reserve Cask" Cabernet > ($6US), and ignoring the Democratic National Convention that's straining to > burst forth from my de-energized TV. :^) > > I plan to ignore the Republican Convention too - albeit over a different > bottle of wine. Please wake me up in time for the Crush (which appears to > be early this year), and then let me sleep until it's time to vote... > > Tom S > > It's very easy to ignore US politics when you are in the UK with a nice bottle of Cote Rotie 1996... Am I alone? Can't think of anything UK specific to exclude anyone either.
Lloyd
Reply to
lloyd
> "Vincent" in news:ulsOc.2287$uC7.1288@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com... > >>Back to wine.... Oh yes, good idea!! > > > Yes, very good idea. > > >>*** A few newbie WINE questions, if I may *** >> >>1) Now that I'm learning as much as I can about wine >>(reading some books, going to wine-related sites, and of >>course, drinking wine), I run into a little confusion almost >>immediately. ... >> >>Winecommune.com further divides Bordeaux blends into >>sub-categories, however, these sub-categories (such as Pauillac, >>St. Julien, St. Estephe, Margaux) do seem to be one level above >>the actual wineries* themselves (however, there does seem to be >>a winery* named Margaux as well), yet not >>exactly worthy of being labeled "varietal." Please explain! > > > If I might suggest from a little experience with this situation, although > there may be good replies eager with specific answers (sort of like samples > of fish), I've found that the situation is served more effectively by > patient reading in good tutorial books (sort of like learning how to fish). > In this spirit Yoxall titled chapters of his old popular Burgundy book "some > optional history" and "some compulsory geography." Blake Ozias in his old > popular book _All About Wine_ sketched out the major and minor divisions of > wine-making Europe in an overview. The picture that they are all trying to > explain is complex and inconsistent (divisions and entities important in > Bordeaux are different from those in Burgundy, for example, and yet again > from those in Italy, etc etc.). Complexity and inconsistency are exactly > what eager students don't want, so they hunger for formulas or answers to > explain it all. (Sorry, I'm reflecting a little here, I used to teach, and > to run into this often, in different contexts than wine, but the underlying > issue was the same.) > > There is always a need for good background-reading books for this, they are > indispensable for someone serious (as Vincent here seems to be). I don't > know any perfect one, I do continue to recommend Stevenson's "encyclopedia" > (ISBN 0789480395) which certainly has the required information, though not > laid out in tutorial form. The overview pages at the beginning of each > region's section are useful. > > I would like to learn of other effective books for this purpose for > Anglophone readers. There's one in the last couple of years by a US > graduate of both the MW and MS programs (extremely unusual, and testimony to > his wine knowledge), thinner than Stevenson's, in a "coffee-table" format, > but I don't know it well or have the details handy. Maybe other people > experienced with this situation can recommend other sources? > > -- Max > > Hugh Johnson's Atlas of Wine is one of my best companions for my expansion of knowledge. The fully contoured maps allow the reader to understand just how wine making fits in with the world. Some of the Burgundy maps are astounding in detail and you can really get to grips with why your wine is tasting so good, where it was made, and the history of the region. All vineyards are colour coded according to appelation and cru. It's always nice just pointing at a map at some region on the other side of the world and saying "I drank that!"
A proper "wine-geek" book I have just started is by Michael Broadbent (not even going to attempt a mini biography) and it gives a amazingly comprehensive account of vintages across the globe some starting with the 1800s. Plenty of tasting notes of some of the best wines.
Two pennies worth.
Lloyd
Reply to
lloyd
> (One bank of the river favors CS and the other leans to merlot, > but I never know whether that is looking upstream or downstream > and am too lazy to look it up this AM.)
Left and right bank *always* refers to where the water goes: downstream. Left bank (Médoc, Graves) is predominantly Cabernet; right bank and "between-the-banks" (Entre-deux-Mers) is Merlot country.
M.
Reply to
Michael Pronay
> In France, wines are described NOT by the grape varieties > directly, but by the region, district and commune (village).
With the frequently forgotten exception of Alsace.
M.
Reply to
Michael Pronay
> >> (One bank of the river favors CS and the other leans to merlot, >> but I never know whether that is looking upstream or downstream >> and am too lazy to look it up this AM.) > >Left and right bank *always* refers to where the water goes: >downstream. Left bank (Médoc, Graves) is predominantly Cabernet; >right bank and "between-the-banks" (Entre-deux-Mers) is Merlot >country.
Thanks, but it's hopeless. After 23 years in tactical aviation, I still can't remember which wing has the green light and which has the red. And, even if I knew that, I don't recall which side is the appropriate passing side.
I guess on the Seine, I'd be facing north, on the Rhone I'd be looking south and on the Gironde I'd be facing west? I know for sure that with the Mississippi I'd be looking south and for the Colorado southwest--that is if I was in a wet spot.
Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" "Phantom Flights, Bangkok Nights" Both from Smithsonian Books ***www.thunderchief.org
Reply to
Ed Rasimus
> Thanks, but it's hopeless. After 23 years in tactical aviation, > I still can't remember which wing has the green light and which > has the red. My analogy works with traffic lights: As you drive, right is the good side (= green), left the wrong one (= red). > I guess on the Seine, I'd be facing north, on the Rhone I'd be > looking south and on the Gironde I'd be facing west?
North by northwest, rather. Dordogne (Libourne) would be west.
M.
Reply to
Michael Pronay
> >> Thanks, but it's hopeless. After 23 years in tactical aviation, >> I still can't remember which wing has the green light and which >> has the red. > >My analogy works with traffic lights: As you drive, right is the >good side (= green), left the wrong one (= red).
Unless of course in the UK or many Asian countries.
Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" "Phantom Flights, Bangkok Nights" Both from Smithsonian Books ***www.thunderchief.org
Reply to
Ed Rasimus
>> My analogy works with traffic lights: As you drive, right is the >> good side (= green), left the wrong one (= red). > Unless of course in the UK or many Asian countries. I was talking about *my* personal analogy, which ... > Ed Rasimus > Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) ^^^^
... should obviously also work with you.
M.
Reply to
Michael Pronay
> >>> My analogy works with traffic lights: As you drive, right is the >>> good side (= green), left the wrong one (= red). > >> Unless of course in the UK or many Asian countries. > >I was talking about *my* personal analogy, which ... > >> Ed Rasimus >> Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) > ^^^^ > >... should obviously also work with you. > >M.
We world-travelers have to be flexible. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" "Phantom Flights, Bangkok Nights" Both from Smithsonian Books ***www.thunderchief.org
Reply to
Ed Rasimus
Which reminds me of an amusing (non-wine) incident a few years back.
I am a very keen sailor - and at the time was "dating" a landlubbing, sweet young thing, who didn't know her port from her stern (in fact, she had a very nice stern!!!)
At my local "things nautical" store, I found and purchased for her a sweat shirt, with "Starboard" written in large green lettering down the right sleeve, and "Port" (in red letters) down the left sleeve.
A couple of weekends later when we were leaving the marina for a weekends racing, there she was, to bid us a good luck and good racing; and, yes, she was wearing my gift - back to front.
Getting this back even obscurely on-topic - remember this question "Any Red Port Left?"
--
st.helier
--
st.helier
Reply to
st.helier
> > >>(One bank of the river favors CS and the other leans to merlot, >>but I never know whether that is looking upstream or downstream >>and am too lazy to look it up this AM.) > > > Left and right bank *always* refers to where the water goes: > downstream. Left bank (Médoc, Graves) is predominantly Cabernet; > right bank and "between-the-banks" (Entre-deux-Mers) is Merlot > country. >
At a tasting of Haut Brion and La Mission in NYC last year, the guy from the estate told us, for those years where could remember, the proportions in the mix. For a left bank wine it was often surprisingly high in Merlot, sometimes even with more Merlot that Cabernet.
--brian
-- Brian Boutel Wellington New Zealand
Note the NOSPAM
--
Brian Boutel
Wellington New Zealand
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Brian Boutel

DrinksForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.