The results? The same wine won every single time: Yellow Tail Shiraz.

This might have been why I stopped doing the parties. The point – that I hadn’t been trying to make – had been proven. Despite what any of my friends may have thought or said about Yellow Tail Shiraz, if they didn’t know they were drinking it, they loved it.

The more I learn about wine, the more I think that those tasting parties were microcosms of everything that has been going on in the entire wine industry in the 21st century. The globalization of a single (YTS) style of wine-making, the bias of the 100 point scale towards essentially more expensive versions of YTS (an ironic combination of elitism and garishness), and the resulting reactions against these developments… all, really, came from a bunch of YTS-loving Americans (a few other nationalities were represented at my tastings too).

So while recently pulling a shift at the wine store where I act as guide for the perplexed once a week, I read the intro to the third edition of The Wine Trials.

If you haven’t read it, it’s probably worth a read, if only to reinforce the findings of my blind tastings with more scientifically rigorous blind tastings – that if you don’t know what you’re drinking, you are likely to enjoy Yellow Tail Shiraz more than just about anything.

This is of course a gross over-simplification of the WT “manifesto.” So let me give a more detailed summary (I love that oxymoron):

1. There are many wines under $15 that you will enjoy more than much more expensive wines. This is especially true of champagne/sparkling wine/cava.

2. If you know a wine’s cost or brand, and it is expensive or a brand that you like, you are likely going to enjoy it more. In other words, perception influences taste.

3. Many of the “revered” top-tier wine producers – like LVMH who produces Dom Perignon among many others, and Veuve Clicquot – spend more on marketing than on wine making. In other words, you’re paying for what’s ON the bottle rather than what’s IN it.

4. The 100 point scale favors expensive wine.

5. It’s a near statistical impossibility to get consistent ratings or awards for the same wine when judged in multiple competitions or by different judges, or even by the same judge at different times. In other words, wine awards and scores are almost completely arbitrary.

While these points can all be very liberating to the consumer, there’s something contradictory at the heart of the of the Wine Trials manifesto.

Mr. Goldstein, the author, uses these points to make the compelling case that we should all trust our taste, and value brand less. The whole book is built around the recommendations that follow the manifesto, over 100 wines under $15 that were preferred in blind tastings to similar wines over $50.

However, near the end of the manifest, he bemoans the fact that wine producers are using the consumer’s preference for certain styles of wine (yes, YTS) to influence their wine making toward that style. He doesn’t want wine makers to make wine for anyone other than themselves. He wants diversity of wine style to be preserved. Please, dear god, don’t let La Tache start to taste like Castle Rock!

So I finished the manifesto thinking “hmmmm.” It seems to me, that if you’re going to write a book celebrating the power of the consumer to make their own decisions about taste, and promoting inexpensive, crowd-pleasing wines, then you can’t turn around and complain about the global dumbing-down of wine.

People vote with their dollars, and if you encourage everyone to believe that their taste is god, they’ll spend money on the easy pleasures of the uneducated palate. And producers will chase those dollars.

Say what you will about wine, though, there IS a learning curve. You can be taught to taste more, to taste differently, to taste without prejudice, to understand what you’re tasting. In many cases these things have to be learned.

Tasting something as complex as a good wine is not intuitive, though it can have intuitive elements. YTS succeeds in pleasing many because it plays to the intuitive elements: sweetness and richness predominantly.

YTS, along with many, many other globally-styled wines (Menage a Trois is one of my favorites), strives to have no unfamiliar or sharp elements, like minerality or acidity or tannins, that intrude on the intuitive pleasures and require interpretation or education to understand. It aspires to be simply pleasurable, because that’s where the money is. It is, and this is neither compliment nor insult, the water of wine.

At a recent Court of Master Sommeliers intro course/test (I passed, yay!) we did multiple blind tastings throughout the weekend. The attempt was to get us to identify wines – grapes used, region made, vintage – by their characteristics of sight, smell and taste. I noticed how difficult it was, for most everyone, to distinguish wines from Chile, Australia, Argentina, and California – the New World – while the wines from France, Italy, and Germany were all so remarkably different.

Perhaps Old World wines are what they are because they’ve grown out of and are still, to some extent, part of their cultures, whereas New World wines are part of, mainly, the world of commerce.

What’s lost in the globalization of the YTS style, though, is diversity, individuality, terroir, vintage… but who really cares if you like it, right? Well, I guess that’s the question. Do you care?

If you don’t, then you’ll be relieved to know that you can stop paying for over-priced luxury brand wines that are selling you a lifestyle, rather than a wine. There are plenty of inexpensive wines of uncomplicated pleasure to be had. God knows, you can’t go wrong with YTS at seven bucks a bottle. And you’ll find plenty more throughout the New World.

Unless of course you care that people see you drinking Veuve Clicquot more than you care that it’s made from cheap grapes and tastes worse than, well, cheap champagne. In that case, feel free to feed their corporate marketing machine. I wish I had your money.

But if you care about that world of wine that has been evolving over millenia to express the various cultures and lands where it has been made; if you care to expand your tastes, nay, your very soul, beyond the bounds of the familiar; then you have a more difficult, but also more fun and potentially more rewarding road ahead: self-education.

It’s going to cost you a bit more, both in time and in cash, because it takes some studying to learn about how good wines are made and what makes them distinctive. And some of the most interesting wines – I won’t call them “best” – do cost more because of the care and attention given to the grapes both in the vineyard and in the winery.

But there are those fascinating and affordable wines you would never get to experience unless you branch out into the Abruzzos, Burgenlands, Cahors, and Duoros of the world. And the good news is that caring about diversity, valuing it, can have the same affect as knowing a wine is expensive: you’ll start to get more pleasure from the diverse tastes.

Even if you don’t care, and just want your YTS, the good news is that if you keep drinking, sooner or later you’re probably going to want variety. If for no other reason than boredom, you will likely then start caring about diversity and individuality in wine. Just hope it isn’t too late to find some.

2001 Chateau Beauregard Ducasse, Graves

Delicious, mature, complex Bordeaux for under $15? Believe it. If you’ve wanted to get a sense of what all the Bordeaux fuss is about, in terms of taste, but didn’t think you could afford to find out… think again. For $12.99 at K & L Wines, this Graves blend of Merlot, Cab Sauv, and Cab Franc is an excellent example at an amazing price.

For me, this drank beautifully straight from the bottle, sans decanting. Aromas of rich blackberry, tea, a hit of tobacco perhaps, and Indonesian spice primed my palate for the arrival of this full-bodied, fruit balanced, mouth-filling juice. Exciting, elegant tannins drive through tunnels of dark berry and spice flavor like a Peugeot in the Aravis Pass. At 10 years of age, this bargain Bordeaux is in its prime.

I went to a Bordeaux tasting recently of about 10 wines that were all from $15 to $85 more expensive than this one, and none of them pleased me as much as this.

Please drink this with grilled steak or roast lamb. Veggies, try this with dark chocolate, or a stewed Indian spinach-mushroom dish. An amazing alternative paring would be Indonesian beef rendang.

It has aromas of cinnamon toast and cherry candy, with hints of raspberry and leather. It tastes smooth and light with penetrating yet balanced fruit and a great finish. At 12.5% alcohol, it’s worry-free, gulpable Pinot pleasure.

The simply elegant label could make this a classy party pour, but if you’re in the entertainment industry make sure the party is for the right studio. The prominent “MGM” might be misconstrued.

For those who care about such things, this Pinot Noir comes from a strange terroir in France: Languedoc. Not that Languedoc is strange, it’s just that it’s very unusual for Pinot Noir to come from this part of France. Languedoc is the hot southern mediterranean coast of France, know for grenache, carignan, mourvedre, merlot, cab, and syrah… but definitely not Pinot Noir.

Chilean Carmenère grapes ripening for wine

To say “Chilean Carmenère” is really to be redundant. Wine from the Carmenère grape is produced virtually nowhere else in the world other than Chile, at the moment (though California will soon be adding it to its list of varieties). Known as the “lost grape of Bordeaux,” Carmenère originated in France as one of the blending grapes of Bordeaux. But the cooler, wetter French climate was difficult for this heat-loving, late-ripening variety, and it was basically phased out of production there at the end of the 19th century when Europe was smitten by phylloxera.

Lucky for us, though, a few exiled Carmenère vines found refuge in the hot, arid valleys of Chile and took root there, mistaken for decades as a Merlot clone.  When it was discovered, just over 15 years ago in 1994, to be the lost variety Carmenère, the Chileans undertook a project of studying them, selecting the best of them, and culivating Carmenère to its strengths… and for that we owe them our sincere thanks.

Carmenère has enticing qualities similar to Cabernet Sauvingnon (with which it is often blended), but with deeper color, smoother tannins, lively acidity and unique characteristic aromas and flavors of tobacco, licorice, and spice.

Great examples of Carmenère can be found from many producers in the $10-$15 range, with the most widely distributed coming from Santa Rita, Santa Alicia, and Concha Y Toro. Montes makes a Cab-Carm blend in this range, and a higher-end Carmenère only.

Even when the Chileans make this in a fruit-forward, New World style, its less fruity varietal characteristics are still prominent and  keep it balanced, making this a great food wine. Unsurprisingly delicious with South American dishes, its also great with Mexican, steaks and roasts, duck and goose, fajitas de carne, hearty stews, and definitely with burgers, pizza, and barbeque.

Read Part 1/3: Cahors
Read Part 2/3: Montepulciano d’Abruzzo

The second in my series of 3 wines that I’ve fallen in love with recently for their consistent quality, affordability, and great food affinity, is Montepulciano d’Abruzzo. While not exactly uncommon, Montepulciano d’Abruzzo is often over-looked because of Italy’s other superstar wines from Tuscany, Piedmont, and the Veneto. Yet it is unique, distinctly Italian, and deserves to be enjoyed at the dinner table.

Aflame: Montepulciano vines in autumn in Abruzzo

The grape, Montepulciano, is grown in small quantities elsewhere around Italy, but its spiritual home is Abruzzo. At first sip, the wines are understated, soft. Not overly tannic, not overly acidic, not overly fruity.

But they tend to have a deepness of character tinged with a classic Italian rusticity that blossoms after it breaths for 30 minutes to an hour and is used to wash down just about any Italian food involving pasta, bread, tomatoes, game, beef, charcuterie, cheese, olive oil, garlic… you get the idea. Because of its softer tannins, it’s a red wine that goes well with a wide range of vegetables, beans, and legumes.

This is family wine, seemingly designed to be drunk from clay pitchers around a big, noisy table. And it’s usually priced to be drunk heartily too. Great examples of Montepulciano d’Abruzzo exist in the $10-$15 range from Caldora, La Quercia, Vallevo, Zaccagnini and many others.

To say that Montepulciano d’Abruzzo may not offer you a “profound” wine drinking experience is not to dis it. It’s a wine that grows on you, like your quiet friend who you didn’t notice at first and then one day you realize how comfortable you are around them because they let you be yourself. And that is, in its own way, profound.

Read part 1/3: Cahors.

If you’re wondering what this has to do with Pinot Noir, the answer is: Variety. The first uncommon wine you need to try is Cahors.

Cahors truffle hunter and her owner

CAHORS

Inland from Bordeaux along the banks of the Lot river is the spiritual home of Malbec, or Cot as it is locally known. It may be best to think of it as Cot, since the Cahors version can be very different than the Argentine.

So deeply inky purple that they are referred to as “black wines,” the wines of Cahors are blends of at least 70% Cot (Malbec), and no more than 30% total of Merlot and/or Tannat. Tannat is not widely cultivated other than in this area of France, and it contributes to the deep color and tannic structure of Cahors wine. Tannat has also been identified as the grape with the highest levels of anthocyanins (really healthy antioxidants).

The fruit of modern Cahors wines can be ripe and berry-rich, but it is always balanced against robust tannic structure, rich minerality, and elegant acidity. This balance is what makes it so great with food. It also makes these wines good candidates for decanting… maybe in a big earthen carafe.

The quality of Cahors is consistently high among most producers, but because it is relatively unheard of, over-looked because of nearby Bordeaux, you can find gulp-able examples of Cahors for around $15 from Chateau la Coustarelle, Clos la Coutale, Clos Siguier, and quite a few other producers.

Cahors locals say there is no better pairing for their wine than dishes that use the black truffles that grow locally. It also goes well with any meat & potatoes-y hearty farmstead food, and seems a classic with burgers, pizza, barbeque, and dark chocolate.

Read part 2/3: Montepulciano d’Abruzzo

High alcohol Pinot Noir

I currently have a policy of not buying any Pinot Noir (or wine in general) with more than 13.5% alcohol by volume. That eliminates a lot of wine, I know. I’m just sick of having a few glasses of wine with dinner and facing serious consequences the next day. Forget about the liver damage. Forget about the depression and ennui. It’s the saggy skin and baggy eyes that are killing me. Alcohol is making me look bad. It has to stop!

There was a time when I equated higher alcohol with better quality. In a way, in California, that’s true. Much of the mass produced Pinot Noir here is made by harvesting over-ripe grapes from high-yielding vines and watering it down to create an alcohol level that still maintains some body (12.5-13.5%) yet allows the producer to have significantly more finished wine than they had grape juice to start (more profit!).  If you know nothing else besides the alcohol content of a California wine, it does, in this context, often signify higher quality when it is over 13.5%.

This “higher alcohol = better quality” paradigm seems to be upheld by nearly every wine evaluating publication out there. Pinot Noirs produced by Kosta Browne, Loring, Paul Hobbs and quite a few others consistently get the highest scores given to California Pinot Noirs, and these Pinots regularly have anywhere from 14.5 to 15.9% alcohol! In fact it is hyper-rare to find a Pinot Noir from California with a 90+ score that has less than 14% alcohol.

Of course when you evaluate Pinot Noir in a flight of 30 at a time, without food, the biggest, richest, sweetest ones (i.e. the ones made from extremely ripe grapes with resulting extremely high alcohol)  will stand out.

The problem is that most people don’t experience Pinot Noir at all like a wine critic does. We usually drink our wines one at a time, appreciating it, often with a meal or some kind of food. AND WE SWALLOW! We paid good money for this 92 point Pinot, and we’re going to get it in our belly. All that richness and high alcohol may taste great if you’re spitting, but it doesn’t necessarily feel that great at the end of a bottle.

Having made Pinot Noir, I can see the temptation to harvest late. It’s the easy way to get rich character in the finished wine. But I’ve realized that it is only one kind of character, and maybe it’s too easy. There are other ways to have more balance, subtlety, and character that don’t result in a fortified fruit bomb. If any Pinot producers would like to consult me on how to make a Pinot Noir that is rich, elegant, balanced, subtle, AND less than 13.5% alcohol, well, I’m for hire. I’d love to be the Reverse Michel Rolland, who returns the wine industry (or at least the US Pinot Noir industry) to a standard of gracefulness over gargantuanness.

The point is, just because we can ripen grapes to 24+ brix doesn’t mean we should. In grapes, as in most fruits and veggies, there is a point in the ripening process when the life-force, surging with energy, reaches it’s apex.  After that point it begins to dwindle, to peter out, to soften. I would argue that most high alcohol (anything over 14%) Pinot Noir has been harvested past that apex, during the time of its descent from it’s most energetic state.

Yes, there is a concentrated richness in this decay. You could draw the analogy to beef that is allowed to dry-age, perhaps, which softens and enriches its flavor. And there is certainly a place for this kind of Pinot Noir. But in its dominance, and in the market dominance of the 100 point scale that promotes it, there is something lost. A brightness, a thrill, a lift.

I may be moving into the realm of the airy-fairy, but Pinot Noir, of all grapes, may have that realm. Pinot Noir harvested just before the apex of its ripening process, while it’s still on its way to the top, can have a sense haunting latency, like a photograph of two lovers kissing taken just before their lips meet. It will also have less alcohol. So that thirst that the first sip awakens, rather than slakes, can be awakened again by another and another sip.

Relying on the concentration of over-ripe grapes to give your Pinot Noir character is kind of like cheating. It’s like the rich kid winning the science fair because his parents could afford to buy him a particle splitter. It’s like the richest teams in baseball always being in the playoffs. (Yeah, I went there. Bring on the salary cap.) It’s like HBO always winning the Emmy. Duh, they have twice the budget and production time as network shows. Of course it will stand out in its category. It’s unfairly advantaged, in Pinot’s case by massive, extracted flavors that overwhelm what may be wonderful but delicate flavors in its lighter competitors (for scores). This is a good argument in favor of the kind of laws that France and Italy have that set limits on alcohol levels of wines from various AOCs and DOCs. You can’t really begin to talk about things like a wine’s expression of terroir until you’re comparing apples to apples.

But the analogy to the science fair or the World Series or the Emmys doesn’t exactly fit. Because the truth is that if I were judging, those big Pinots would lose. I don’t like them anymore, except maybe as a small taste for dessert. I certainly wouldn’t buy them. They’ve all begun to taste so similar in their bigness. My tastes have changed. I can smell the hangover in the aroma.

France and many Oregon wineries make amazing Pinot Noir at around 13% alcohol. California, even though its AVAs are quite different, could too.

Fog conceals the unique pinot noir vineyards of Santa Lucia Highlands

“Now, normal is a lifetime.”

So said Steve McIntyre, of McIntyre Vineyards. We were discussing the variability of recent vintages in California, but the twinkle in his eye suggested he meant something more.

Santa Lucia Highlands hasn’t even had a lifetime. Modern vineyards began to be planted in the Salinas Valley of Monterey, home of SLH,  in the 1970′s, and Santa Lucia Highlands didn’t achieve AVA status until 1991. That this is an average age of inception for a California Pinot Noir AVA (Russian River Valley came to be in 1983, and Santa Rita Hills in 2001), shows just how infantile is West Coast wine development.

The unfortunate trend that I’ve noticed in the wine world is to think of “new” in the pejorative. With almost unanimous agreement from every corner, Burgundy’s Grand Crus are declared superior to the best California single vineyard bottlings.  In the realm of taste, this makes little sense to me.

We don’t think of people this way, because all of us are new in one way – having not even a full lifetime of experience – and we are all old in other ways – having been born from the ancient race of humanity and inherited its acquired experience. We don’t choose to love only Italian or French women or men because they are somehow inherently better than California women or men based on the fact that Italian & French cultures outdate California’s by millenia. We evaluate people as they come to us… ideally unlabeled.

I believe that wine, like people, has the same opportunity for greatness no matter where it comes from. Even a cursory review of the history of the Cote d’Or will show that though the vineyards have been around for centuries, the vines and the current wine making practices have really developed to be what they are just in the last half century – just a couple decades ahead of California. During this time, other than knowing where to grow, the French have been very much in the process of getting their merde together.

Some Burgundian Pinot Noir IS great, no doubt. But I would argue that its being from Burgundy is not the reason – other than in respect to the same elements that give the Santa Lucia Highlands, for example, the opportunity to be great: its climate and/or terroir. There is not some magical technique that the Burgundians are using to add a special je ne sais quoi to their Pinot Noirs, and to convey that impression, as is so regularly done, is tantamount to advocating belief in the tooth fairy. In respect to climate, somewhere like New York could, I would suggest, be called inferior to both California and Burgundy. It gets both too hot and too cold, rains too much, and has soil that is too rich and dense. Yes you can grow and make Pinot Noir there, but it will always be handicapped by its climate.

But this is not true of the comparison between California and Burgundy. Are there differences? Are different wine making techniques employed? You betcha. Is the terroir superior? Nope. In fact someone could even make the argument that somewhere like the Santa Lucia Highland has a better climate for Pinot Noir cultivation than the birthplace of Pinot itself.

I’m not going to make that argument, but let’s look at the Santa Lucia Highlands: the south flowing currents of the Pacific Ocean generate chilly winds that are scooped up by the Monterey Bay and funneled through the wide Salinas Valley. On the south side of this valley, facing (perhaps uniquely in the world of Pinot Noir north of the equator) north-east, the Santa Lucia Highlands sandy-loamy soils are regularly cloaked in marine fog. Nestled at just the right spot on the center of California’s coast, it often misses the tropical storms that hit Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo as well as the northern storms that hit Sonoma and Mendocino, and thus stays as dry as it is cool. It’s a unique terroir. And lately wine lovers are starting to take notice.

Pinot Noir is the most cultivated grape in the Santa Lucia Highlands, and because of its climate it has the potential to be very good, and at times great. The quality of the Pinot Noir made by the various producers consistently lives up to its potential. It hasn’t had the history of Burgundy, nor the Sideways promotion of Santa Barbara, but Santa Lucia Highlands is capable of excellence. I predict it will be recognized as soon as we lose the prejudice against the new.

2010 in Santa Lucia Highlands was a mostly cool year that ripened late, but fully, with low yields. It could be phenomenal… so taste early, and buy them before the snobs realize what they’re missing (unfortunately we still have a year and a half to wait for them). My favorite producers are Bernardus, McIntyre, Siduri, and Talbott.

Dead of winter 80 degrees - Pinot Days 2011

So many Pinot Noirs, so little time… and so little palate stamina. That was, again, my lasting impression from Pinot Days 2011. A Santa Monica Airport hangar filled with 300+ Pinot Noirs… but whose counting, especially if you’re tasting?

Let me start by offering some advice: If you’ve already tasted 20+ Pinots, do NOT, if you want to continue tasting, hit the Loring Wine Company table. Loring Pinots have all the finesse of a tsunami. Massive, extracted, hot (some over 15% alcohol), the 6 pinots they poured were so gargantuan in their flavor that it made me think of those photos in Guiness of the tribe with the genital malady – elephantitis… Anyway, my palate needed CPR when they were done with me.

The good news is that Loring were the only Pinots I tasted who had so exploited this style. Gratefully, nearly every other Pinot I tasted – even those that were high in alcohol – had more restraint. Having said that, some people obviously love the Loring style, and if you do, Loring is doing it as well as anyone… everyone of their 6 pinots was scored 92-94 points by Wine Spectator.

For me, that is not an endorsement, either of Loring or of Wine Spectator. To me that shows the results of the scale of wine tasting that Wine Spectator critics must engage in – and that I engaged in at Pinot Days. When you’re tasting 30+ pinots in a day, it’s the big ones that stand out. The failings of the 100 point wine scoring system are never more obvious than when it comes to Pinot Noir.

Looks like someone needs another glass of Pinot Noir - Pinot Days 2011

It was great to see that a growing number of wineries are striving towards environmentally responsible (which is, really, just another way of saying humanly responsible) production. I noticed more wineries than ever who touted at least one organic pinot bottling and some level of sustainable or organic vineyard & winery practices.

But what was even more noteable was that the quality of these Pinot Noirs were outstanding. I tend to think that Pinot Noir, more than almost any other grape because of its delicacy and subtlely, reflects love given to it in the vineyard in its bottlings.

Highlights – OREGON

My favorite Pinot Noir of the day was the Domaine Serene 2006 Evenstad Reserve Pinot Noir. It’s beautiful, complex, polished and luscious, with enough life in it to mature through its fruit into a resonant age.

Sokol Blosser stands out for being a wholistically eco-friendly winery that makes several delicious Pinot Noirs. Erath’s 2008 Pinot Noir was quite nice, and it’s good to see that standards have remained high, or improved, there since their acquisition by Ste. Michelle.  

Some of the 2008 Oregon Pinots are going through a weird phase now… or at least I hope it’s a phase. I’ve noticed aromas of what I can only call ”construction site” on the nose of several lately and at Pinot Days. It’s a dry, chalky, minerality that has elements of cement, graphite, potting soil, chalk dust, dry wall, and maybe even a hint of wet paint… thus “construction site.” If anyone has experienced this – and it seems confined to Oregon Pinot Noir – please let me know if you have a better understand of what is causing this. I know those rich, red volcanic soils of Willamette Valley convey a distinctive iron-rich minerality, but this seems extreme.

On the other hand, the 2007 Oregon Pinots from the best producers, are maturing into something much better than they promised upon release. Belle Pente had the best 07 pinots I’ve had to date from Oregon.

Inception Pinot Noir at Pinot Days 2011

Highlights – CALIFORNIA

I’m really excited about California Pinot Noir again after Pinot Days. Aside from one (Loring) or two exceptions, the California Pinots I tasted showed a diversity of styles that were good reflections of their terroirs and were restrained enough to be elegant and graceful.

My favorite pinot noirs from California were made by Fort Ross. They were pouring Pinots from 2005 to 2008, and each seemed to have a distinctive liveliness that danced over my tongue like an ocean breeze over a Sonoma Coastal hilltop. Several of their Pinots are good values too.

Stand out California Pinot Noir producers were Benovia, Keller Estate, Roessler, and Inception. Benovia’s organic Pinots give organic a good name. Pretty, raspberry crowd-pleasers. Roessler’s pinots go from strength to strength. Keller Estate is finesse in a bottle. Inception makes lovely and value-oriented pinot noir, and you won’t have more fun at any other tasting table.

I had several white wines during the day, mostly Chardonnay and Pinot Gris and one fascinating Sahara-dry Gewurtztraminer from Londer. But Inception’s new release Chardonnay was my favorite, no competition. Lively and luscious with the most refreshing fruit-driven zip. On this hot day, it was liquid love at first sip.

Highlights – THE REST OF THE WORLD

There wasn’t much representation of global Pinot Noir, most glaringly in the utter absence of anything from Burgundy. How can we honestly call this Pinot Days without Burgundy?

But I did try Pinots from Marlborough, Martinborough, Tasmania, and mainland Austrailia. The most notable feature was a common earthy dryness that they all shared. It reminded me of what we get from Chile in the way of Pinot Noir. Not what you’d think of as a crowd-pleaser, if it was an American crowd at least, but something to consider if you want a change from the fruity, sweet-oak flavors one tends to find in US pinot.

 My only regret is that my palate isn’t like Wolverine from the X-men – able to regenerate spontaneously and allow me to taste Pinot Noir infinitely. Despite not getting to as many pinots as I would have liked, I did taste enough to be inspired to invent a new sport – great for the fair progeny of winery owners at harvest time:

Must Wrestling.

You heard it here first… and if I can organize a must-wrestling bought, you’ll see it here first too.

Happy Tasting!

It’s overwhelming. 90 producers pouring over 300 different bottlings of a single sublime variety: Pinot Noir. How would palate even know, after the 30th taste, if you had stumbled upon the best Pinot Noir in the world? (not that i believe there is such a thing, but you know what i mean.)

Fort Ross Sonoma Coast Pinot Noir & Pinotage

To help relieve some of the daunt from this daunting adventure, I’ve gone to tastings the past two nights at K & L Wines in Hollywood to elimnate some of the potentials from the hangar tasting today. You can read my notes on the first night here.

Last night I tasted wines from Arcadian, Fort Ross, Keller Estate, and Morgan. All had strengths that are worth mentioning:

FORT ROSS
First, my favorite Pinot of the night was the Fort Ross 2006 Sea Slopes Reserve Pinot Noir. Not only was it an impressively lively and pretty Sonoma Coast Pinot, it was also the best value in the tasting at $19.99 – available at K & L Wines.

Fort Ross overlooks the ocean on the Sonoma Coast, and has beautiful coastal balance in it’s Pinots.

Just for fun Johanna, the Fort Ross rep, was pouring a 2006 Pinotage.* Nearly everyone was like, “Pinotage? Yuck!” until they tasted it. I have to admit I’d never had a Pinotage that I liked… until last night. Fort Ross’s was the best I’ve ever had. And I don’t mean that as in it was the best of the worst. I mean it as in it was a well made (treated like Sonoma Coast Pinot Noir) and yummy wine that showed the true potential of that often funky smelling & tasting *cross of Pinot Noir with Cinsault.

KELLER ESTATE
Keller is blessed with some great terroir, a diverse selection of heritage Pinot Noir clones, and one of the loveliest wine makers in California. Jacqueline Yoakum talked me through their two Pinot pours, and by the magic of her obvious passion for the craft and generous spirit she made two fine estate Pinot Noirs taste even better. The El Coro was my favorite.

Morgan Santa Lucia Highlands Pinot Noir

MORGAN and ARCADIAN
Morgan and Arcadian both poured 3 Pinots of good quality. Morgan makes at least one of their Pinots from all organic fruit, and it was my favorite of theirs - the Double L 2008 Pinot Noir.

On the continuing trend of the Santa Lucia Highlands, Morgan is one of the largest Pinot Noir producers from SLH, and Arcadian sources fruit from SLH to make one of its bottlings – my favorite, with the lowest alcohol levels too at 13.8%.

The pinots Arcadian poured were all from 2005, older than any others poured last night. They keep all their pinots in new or 1 year old oak for up to 2 years and in bottle for up to another 2 years. The resulting Pinot Noir is more structured than its California peers, and may allude to Burgundy for some drinkers. Great aging and food pairing potential.

After tasting through all the Pinots last night I had a sense of relief. 4 wineries off the chart for Saturday. But when I mentioned that to Johanna of Fort Ross, she let me know that she had two more Pinots she’d be pouring at Pinot Days. D’oh!