RP and ex asistant

pond?

It's been discussed on other fora. I'm not one of the Parker "human shields", but disgruntled ex- employees who were fired for illicit activities don't get high scores for credibility from me. I think it's quite possible that Parker is influenced (probably subconsciously) by friendship. But I doubt that is leading him to rate wines he doesn't like highly. More likely an extra point here and there. Certainly that is being human. As to the charges that he rated wines without tasting, it would need a lot more than Agnostini's word to confirm that. If he hadn't tasted Jaugaret or Jander, one would think he would just leave out- not exactly names that would hurt a book to leave out! I'd also note that called Jaugaret "notable" doesn't neccessarily imply he has tasted it.

I often don't agree with Parker about wines. I have found some of his recent comments thin-skinned and arrogant. I'm not sure I believe his own tales of his consistency. That being said, he has struggled hard for a reputation for integrity. There is nothing here that makes me trust him any less.

Nice article. Does not mean much to me as I never really like Parkerize wines but his style is the same to me.

He wants all wines to taste like Cabernet Sauv in my opinion...his stlye, higher alchohol, hugh, overly extracted wines...

Occasionally he gets them right with allighnment wtih my taste, but not usually.

I do however like his vintage charts and drinkability periods.

I agree, Dale, but this criticism echoes one made in this very newsgroup by Robert Callahan and which resulted in a letter from Parker's lawyers:

Yes, and from some of Joe R.'s stories I've gained the impression that he is quite susceptible to flattery. Perhaps he's not as sea-green incorruptible as he believes himself to be, but he does maintain a fairly high standard of integrity.

Mark Lipton

Like him or not, agree with him or not, the fact is he has a huge impact on the wine business as a high score from Parker can make a mediocre wine into a superstar overnight just as a high ranking in WS. I recall a few years back when WS made Chateau St. Jean Cinq Cepages their wine of the year and a $20 wine became a $100 wine overnight. I think he brings an awareness to the wine world that is good for the industry in general but I don't usually prefer his style preference in wine unless it's being spooned over an English muffin.

LOL! PB&P, Bill? (Peanut butter & '03 Pavie) :P

Mark Lipton

I'd put the threat of legal action in my category of Parker as being thin-skinned. Not RP's finest moment. But as far as "evidence" of Parker not having tasted a wine, I'd need more than Robert Callahan's saying it tastes a lot different than previous vintages. I'd like to have tasted, seen Parker's notes, seen RC's notes. Then maybe I could form an opinion. Of course, even that would not really be evidence. We've all seen notes on same wine from 2 tasters we respect that are dramatically different. I don't know Robert Callahan, but know people who do, and my guess is his tastes are closer to mine. I respect his opinions (or did, not seen any in a long time) But without knowing the actual facts behind method changes at Grand Tinel, it's just two different opinions. And Callahan's tasting isn't also perfect:

Note he put the Beaux Freres in his top 2.

I've seen notes I strongly disagreed with (not just as to quality, but to actual style) from Claude Kolm, John Gilman, David S., Tanzer, Parker, Suckling, etc (as well as Lipton, Davis, Spohn, Tomassi). Never thought that was evidence that they hadn't tasted the wine.

LOL! I certainly wasn't suggesting that Callahan's assertions validated the criticism, merely that they're amazingly similar to those in the book (i.e., that RMP doesn't taste some of the wines he rates and that he recycles verbiage from older notes, though Callahan merely offers it as a _possible_ scenario). But, your point is an important one: tasters are fallible, and even people whose tastes run close to one another will likely find wines that they disagree about.

Coincidentally, as I was reading your post, I got an email from Antique Wine Co. entitled "Are Parker's Notes Reliable"! Are they listening in on our discussions? ;-)

Mark Lipton

but I don't usually prefer his style

How come we do not have English muffins in England? ;-)

and whats wrong with PB and P...............................

Crumpets and English muffins can't coexist in the same space!

LOL

English crumpet......eyes glaze over

BTW, just opened bottle of Wither hills PN 2005, deep extract +, simple pleasant pinot nose, soft fruit on entry and long rather moorish palate, not bad for gbp 7 a bootle with a rib eye and salad.

"John T" wrote .

Hey JT - that's not fair !!!!!!!

Wither Hills Pinot Noir sells here for around $NZ45 = GBP18 !!!!!

At NZ pricing, while I agree that this is a OK example of NZ PN, I do believe there are others (particularly from Central Otago), which represent better value for money.

At seven quid, I would be buying myself a case or two.

Regards from springtime in the antipodes.

st.helier

not bad for gbp 7 a bottle >

mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa

what naughty boy forgot a 1

same price as NZ.

Majestic Wines have the 2006 on offer at 13.99 a bottle if you buy three.

JT

Salut/Hi Mark Lipton,

le/on Fri, 26 Oct 2007 10:58:38 -0400, tu disais/you said:-

Almost certainly, as they targeted me for their emailed publicity shots - without having been asked to. To be fair to them, they stopped when asked to.

Bon appetit Ian La Souvigne - France

"Ian Hoare" in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com :

Good to hear of firms that respect those requests, saving us the step of blacklisting their email addresses. Unlike for example Acker, which replied as follows --

-- but continued sending unsolicited commercial email indefinitely. (The blacklist method, in contrast, elicited no insincerities.)

Speaking of retailers, I ceased buying from one 20 years ago after friends complained of shabby treatment. (They were among the firm's earliest and most loyal customers, and a source of customer referrals; the proprietor had been a guest at their home. They are classy people, not given to complaining.) When I asked the proprietor about the incident, his shrugging unconcern made plain to me that the bottom line was his preoccupation. So I stopped supporting his ethic, though I was not affected personally. Stories continue to surface from customers and ex-customers. Recently an outraged ex-customer declared that he'd never buy there again and had canceled all pending orders, relating cynical treatment and an employee who was more or less upfront about the cynical nature of their business. These behaviors clearly don't trouble all customers though, some of them shrug off the stories, claiming never to have been personally affected. (If that were my criterion, I'd still be buying there.)

Reminds me of a local shop that had been highly recommended. Three years ago December they had a favorite wine of mine priced at $12.99. I went in and asked for a case. They didn't have 12 bottles left, but said they'd be happy to take my order and reserve a case when the shipment came in. No deposit asked for. I gave them my name and phone number.

When the wine arrived a week or so later (first week of January), I was told the price was longer $12.99, it was $19.99. "Our cost went up after the first of the year," I was told. By seven bucks? What crock. Not only that, but "these were the last five cases available, so if you don't want it we'll sell it to someone else." I should have flipped him the bird and walked, but I reluctantly took the wine at the higher price.

Want to know what the wine was? 2000 Allegrini Palazzo della Torre. Want to know how many cases were still around? Too many to count, as I eventually discovered. In fact, six months later I ordered a case from SuperCellars...at $12.99.

Needless to say, I never went back to that shop, and I made sure the friends who'd recommended it knew why.

I also stopped spending a LOT of money at another local shop, run by a couple guys who are actually pretty decent. But when one of them recommended a bottle to me that turned out to be corked, and I brought it back, he didn't so much as offer me a trade or a credit. Just some mumble about, "Gee, I don't know if the distributor will take it back..." This was not long after I'd gone on a major splurge of 2000 Bdx in their shop.

Earth to wine shop guy: Dude! The distributor didn't sell it to me. YOU did!

I learned a long time ago that real customer service goes a long way. And lack of it goes just as far, in the opposite direction.

JJ

On Oct 28, 5:16?pm, "Max Hauser" wrote: ?However RP's claims of score consistency, and his

Again, while I'm no Parker shield (see below, I have raised some questions) I think that you are overstating the case re the 1921 Petrus magnum. I believe they said there were no records, and the cellarmaster (who certainly wasn't around in 1921) didn't know of any magnums produced. As others experts such as Broadbent SOLD '21 Petrus mags, and tasted at same Rodenstock event, its a bit harsh to single out Parker as ignorant based on that note (where he said it seemed far younger than '21). And while Callahan felt there was a change in the wine, that Parker's note was similar to previous vintages is scarcely evidence. Is it oakier, higher alcohol, what? Without that info the charge seems to be just opinion.

But the interesting (to me at least) question is the idea of Parker's consistency. I don't equate blind tasting ability with critical abilities. But as Parker has proclaimed his consistency over and over, it would be nice to know that it was true. The only public blind tastings I am aware of were a series over years where he was a guest at Executive Wine Seminars for a Bordeaux tasting. He basically hosted, as group tasted (single blind) a horizontal of a recent release. As far as I can tell, his accuracy at identifying the wines blind ranged from 10 of 12 (I think the '79 vintage) to 3 of 14 (the

1995 vintage). The first is impressive, but single blind I could easily imagine some pro tasting friends getting 10 of 12. As to 3 of 14, I hope I could do that!

There is, however, one remarkable tasting where Parker supposedly did a truly incredible feat. His story is that in a totally double-blind setting of Bordeaux he named all 9 wines that he had tasted before exactly as to chateau and vintage, even the ringer (a Montus Madiran). And exactly matched the point rating on 8 of them. Easily the greatest tasting feat I have ever heard described. This thread on alt.food.wine is where it first went outside Prodigy:

It has been quoted many many times by the faithful.

But........

The interesting thing is that this anecdote- posted many times as independent evidence with 16 million witnesses!- is all that exists. The tasting seems to have never been seen. This year after I questioned it repeatedly Mr. Squires said he understood the clip had not been shown (with implication because it showed Parker too favorably). It turns out there was a correspondent on Capital on M6 named Bruno de la Palme (for a while I doubted that, he left remarkably little internet trail, but I did find references to him reporting on veterinarians and "the King of Accessories"), but I can't locate him. He certainly wasn't a superstar, and the show has nowhere near 16 million viewers. But the one clear thing is this tasting often cited by fans as independent proof of Parker's miracle consistency has never been seen, except possibly by a TV crew that can't be located. Parker says he might have a video, but he doesn't know where it is and doesn't have time to look.

I find it fascinating that this story, repeated for 11 years as independent proof, has never actually been independently verified. I find it very peculiar that Mr. Parker didn't express outrage at being tricked into this situation, and then it not being shown. I also find it strange that Mr. Parker, scarcely a small ego, would not have immediately had this tape copied (a hundred copies!) into US format. It would clearly be the most impressive feat of tasting I've ever heard of, yet he seems to act as if he wishes the subject dropped. How strange. Maybe someone will dig up the video.

I'm one of the shruggers Max doesn't like. He did tell me his story, but that particular store is one where I (and dozens of my friends) have shopped for years, without any ill treatment. In the couple of cases where something wasn't available, they made me "more than whole." Some people who have trouble there seem to not understand the business model (I do understand that is not what happened in the case Max referred to). I regret that Max's friends were ill-treated, but it has not matched with my experiences (nor anyone I personally know).

So the question is at what point does one stop shopping based on others' reports? I don't shop at a different Bay area store that Max has recommended, after what I felt was rudeness on the two occasions I tried to place orders for older Rieslings. Besides Max, other friends shop there, and I don't discourage them. At some point or another I have heard people express outrage at virtually every major retailer in US ( looking at CellarTracker's list of my purchases by store- this is only since 2005, when I started using CT- I can think of a complaint against each of my top dozen other than maybe Chambers St and Sherry Lehmann, and I'm sure someone hates each of them). There are some places I do not shop, and others where I will. I still shop at the store Max opposes, but I do offer a qualifier that others feel differently when asked re that retailer -I say I've only had good experiences, but others are far less happy.

We all make our decisions where to shop. Certainly a part of that is knowing that we are supporting that business, and morals can come into play. Just as every aspect of our life has ethical choices- how do we invest our money, where do we shop (and how do we package what we get there)*, how do we travel to get there, how much do we spend on luxuries as others have little, etc. I personally don't make those decision for others, nor do I expect them to make them for me.

• I have to confess, I bought a couple of those "bring your own grocery bags" (one insulated, one plain), but my average at remembering to take them with me is about 40%. And let me take one more opportunity to remind people to PLEASE try to recycle styro wine shippers. My experience is any retailer who uses is happy to accept them- saves them money, saves our landfills.

Max, I am with you. If someone does not treat me right or a friend right its just a matter of time before they get you!

Either a business model is to make sure the customer is satisfied or not to if financial interests are more important.

Either way, I agree with you when it comes to wine shops. (not even knowing exactly what the issue is.) Customer service.loyalty is critcical. If a business does not seek out the consumer to make it right, screw them. If I know of the issue, I would let them know I would not buy from them until they made it right for others.

The real definition of integrity is doing what is right even if you know you would NOT get caught doing something wrong.

Now we cannot apply this to cell phone networks cause everyone hates their current provider :-(