Parker---Targeted and misunderstood

"Richard Neidich" wrote in news:1ilVf.10217 $ snipped-for-privacy@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:

Hi,

this article in decanter is a excerpt of the one that was published in the the Dining and Wine section of last wednesday NY Times (requires free registration).

S.

Parker, for all of what others may think, has never steered me wrong in selecting a wine - I search for wines he rates highly regularly using various internet resources. I always check his ratings for "reds" "rated 90 or higher" and are "less than 25 dollars" :): Petrus is out of my reach.

I think Parker has revolutionized and energized Americans to understand and appreciate wine more than before his existence. He simplified the understanding of wine.

That said my personal taste in wine differs from his. He likes mostly fruit bombs, I like more subtle wines. Personal taste only.

I do think his vintage charts are right on.

In my earlier days of drinking I relied heavily on RP until I found my own way.

"Richard Neidich" in news:1ilVf.10217$ snipped-for-privacy@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:

It's an odd piece. A bunch of that stuff has appeared before, and been hashed out in print and online. (I felt I was re-reading a bunch of familiar lines.) The format of the Decanter piece (note the question at the end) reminds me of trolling messages on newsgroups.

It doesn't need to be understood, it needs to be drunk.

He's a moron.

As we all should.

"Michael Scarpitti" wrote ....

What a load of unadulterated crap, Michael.

See Tim's post above.

Parker has not influenced some regions of Italy as much as other wine-producing regions.

st.helier wrote:

Mr. Uranium, I am not sure where you reside but I am on east coast USA. Southern state. When I started to like wine in general there were some I liked and some I did not. Over the years my tastes have changed considerably. I did not know much about French wines but knew I liked Chateau Margaux as we had visited on my honeymoon.

But I had no knowledge of what the varieties were. So when someone would say Bordeaux style wine...I had no idea what they meant. I wanted to know more about wine in general. My knowledge was lacking and somewhere in the mid 80's I decided to expand my knowledge.

Parker was instrumental in the description in his first Bordeaux book just to explain the difference in wines from Haut Medoc vs Pomerol. The differnce in the Cab based vs Merlot prominant wines.

I assume you are not anti education and knowledge about wine?

You might be the only person more controversial in this group than me! :-)

Well, Richard, let's work on our uniqueness!

I happened to look in a WS over the weekend, just to see if anything had changed. Well, it hadn't. The same old sorts of stories, breathless gushing (are this years XXXX's the best ever?; is it time to buy XXXXX?, blah, blah, blah). I guess the idea of wine magazines just does not strike me as viable. I have several books that I use as references (I mean books such as Vino Italiano, and the Gambero Rosso guide book), and when I see a wine firm such as Argiolas or Taurino given praise in writing, I take it that I am not insane. I absolutely LOVE the wines of these producers, and did so before I read anything about them.

Richard Neidich wrote:

I dwell in the State of Ohio.

The number of wines available is excessive. It's best to specialise. Why do you think that Bordeaux-style wine is worth knowing about? It's French! do you cook French style? Did you ever stop to think that 'knowledge of wine' is only half of the equation? If you had an inteterest in French wine, why not French cooking? I despise French cooking, so I have no interest in French wine. French cooking is pretentious. The use of sauces on everything ruins it. Italian cooking is much 'simpler', in that few or no sauces are used. The flavors of the foods are not disguised or interefred with by sauces. Italian wines have been developed to complement the dishes of the regions. Thus, I set out to try to learn some regional Italian dishes that I could make with some consistency, and I always serve them with wines of the region that are appropriate.

I am against presuming that French wines and cooking are the best.

It's a big struggle to try to overcome the inertia present here.

"Richard Neidich" skrev i melding news:%fDVf.18056$ snipped-for-privacy@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...

the 1855 classification was based, not one one year, but several, if not decades, afaik. And, yes, it is outdated - even prices of today are a better guide...

And I agree, the 100 point system is moot, with customers demanding that 'their' wines have at least 90. The fault is not with the system or with this Parker guy, but with customers with bragging needs. :-)

I also believe that Parker favors a certain bold style of wine and that wineries unfortunately adapt to it in order to get 90 points or more. Again, it is the general public following the points of the pied piper, to mix metaphors :-)

Anders

"Michael Scarpitti" wrote ......

So where does that leave *your* comment that Parker has destroyed the winemaking world?

I repeat - *you* write rubbish! Why don't you take stock of your thoughts and write something which is clear and concise and not pure emotional bullshit.

I am so glad that I am not forced to listen to you, Michael, because I guarantee that you are just a raver who loves the sound of your own voice - vomiting forth the very first thing that comes into your mind, without giving any cognisance to what you may have said 5 minutes earlier.

Parker has NOT destroyed anything.

Italy still makes a lake of "vino ordinario" just as France produces an ocean of vin ordinaire - nothing to do with Parker.

Please tell me how Parker has destroyed the Spanish or NZ or South African or Portuguese or Austrian or Australian or Chilean or Argentine wine making industries - of what effect he has had on Champagne or Tokaji or Mosel?

Of course Parker has had an effect on *some* winemakers practices (and we can argue the pros and cons of that - as we should!).

I, myself, have never read Parker - but I have heard that although he appears to "know" Bordeaux - his opinions on Burgundy are not roundly supported.

As to Italy. no doubt, some winemakers *are* influenced by Parkers opinions - their choice - but this hardly amounts to the destruction of the Italian industry.

Less of the emotional bullshit Michael - stick to what you know!

"st.helier" wrote in news:1xEVf.8771$ snipped-for-privacy@news.xtra.co.nz:

the "best" effect that parker has had in my life occurred in Tournon, France where I was browsing a wine shop. The owner made reference to a wine highly touted by Parker, I replied that I "don't drink scores, I drink wine" at which point I was introduced to some lovely wines. I can only thank Parker for that. :-)

"Less of the emotional bullshit Michael - stick to what you know!" Saint: That would mean the dude would have not a thing to say. As Murray would say--Bupkis.

As you know I was part of Parkers apparatus before I entered the business and remember hearing his impressions of the English wine writers which was favorable. I remember when Hugh Johnson was in Baltimore to promote a book, Bob stopped by to say hello.

Even then Parker was only a factor in what I chose to buy--the ultimate arbiter was me.

Sure he has. All over Italy wines are made in the hope of being catalogued by the master, and so the style is adjusted accordingly. This is truly a shame, often it is now hard to distinguish a Nero d'Avola from a Nebbiolo...