Robert Parker has sunk to a new low

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:44 pm

He's closed down the "social hall" thread.

Wow.

This guy is pathetic.

I'm not renewing my Wine Advocate subscription.

What a little man.

Not that he or anyone cares, but I have lost complete and total respect for this guy. What a disappointment. I truly thought he was something different from the phonies at Wine Spectator, Decanter, etc.

His conduct during the whole Squires/Miller controversy has been an abomination.

(Just my opinion.)

rjsussex · Post by **rjsussex** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:55 pm

From the UK and never reading Squires board, this epic is compelling to me but not really very surprising.

Jim - think of it as a justification for your excellent BWE. I've said often enough on other threads that the Parker-power is the worst thing to happen to fine wine in my life-time. And it has now corrupted - absolutely.

Richard

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 8:01 pm

I agree, Richard.
Obviously I'm biased, and I've certainly made many, many mistakes with this site over the past decade, but as much as ever I believe this is the best site for honest, free-spirited, uncensored discussion about wine on the internet.
Not that Parker and Squires are seeking my advice, but I think they could have avoided this mess by doing the exact opposite of what they have done: Let people have their say, try to show some sensitivity to the legitimate concerns, just ignore the nutty attacks, and move on. The controversy would have died weeks ago. Instead, they have perpetuated the problem tremendously by their bizarre conduct.

And who is this Steve Pohlman character on the "moderation committee"? Are they kidding? This guy seems about ten times more obnoxious than Squires himself!

rjsussex · Post by **rjsussex** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 8:22 am

Take a look at this, from the excellent UK based Winedoctor site. He's taking about Emmanuel Cruse of Issan (I think BWE had a great visit there?) and how he measures his successful stewardship of the property. Guess how!

Depressing, scary.

"What I found most remarkable, however, was how Emmanuel [Cruse] communicated his viticultural and no doubt financial success; not by his own palate, the judgement perhaps based on tastings of his own wine against that of his Bordeaux peers, but instead by simple scores. Robert Parker's scores, in fact. Emmanuel rattled off the numbers for his recent vintages, and those of other properties in the region, from memory, and based on said numbers concluded that d'Issan was now one of the leading properties in the appellation. If there was ever any doubt of the significance of Parker to this little region of France, they were quashed that evening."

Cruse's neighbout Gonzalue Lurton of Durfort takes the other approach: flatly refusing to let him anywhere near the property or have samples. Result: current in bond UK prices for 06s: Durfort c £170, Issan c £320. Guess which I bought.

Richard

Admin · Post by **Admin** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 8:47 am

rjsussex wrote:Cruse's neighbout Gonzalue Lurton of Durfort takes the other approach: flatly refusing to let him anywhere near the property or have samples. Result: current in bond UK prices for 06s: Durfort c £170, Issan c £320. Guess which I bought.

Issan?

Only joking... that's really interesting that a classed growth (I assume you're talking about Durfort-Vivens) doesn't let Robert Parker taste their wines. I'll have to remember to try some.

-PhilR

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:16 pm

Good point, Phil, we should start a thread on "quality anti-Parker" wines.

Richard, I sat next to Alfred Tesseron at the BWE Pontet-Canet dinner in NYC a couple years ago. He's a wonderful man, completely humble and charming. He spoke over and over about his efforts to chase Parker points. We met Emanuel Cruse at two BWE dinners in NYC featuring d'Issan, Corbin, and Lagrange. Another absolutely quality person, but it is clear that he represents, for good or bad, the general Bordeaux mindset of courting Parker's approval. Like most things in life, Parker's influences are not completely good or completely bad, but probably somewhere in between. I wonder if his influence is going to start falling off in the years ahead. I predict it will.

rjsussex · Post by **rjsussex** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:31 pm

Fair enough, Jim, and chasing Parker points is what's been depressingly familiar in St Emilion for years (I now buy no wine from the region because of it), but it is truly sad that the proprietors of Pontet Canet and d'Issan are so focussed on driving up their Parker-points - and they don't need to explain why when both properties have in effect doubled their prices since 04 on the back of those points.

Best

Richard

ps - I think Gruaud also refuse admission to him.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:46 pm

Yeah, I think it is unfortunate. I'm sure the quality of Issan and Pontet Canet are at their highest levels, but, at least in the case of Pontet Canet, I've enjoyed their wines from as far back as the mid-eighties, long before it was a Parker darling. I cringed a bit when I bought single bottles of a bunch of '06s last week and Pontet Canet was on the shelf wrapped in paper, with the bottle with the extra thick glass, sitting Mouton-like on the shelf. No longer the working man's Pauillac, I guess.

rjsussex · Post by **rjsussex** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 2:00 pm

I wonder what you make of the PC 06, Jim, when you taste it. The buzz in the UK trade (not that they openly say it when prices and therefore their profits are so high!) is that the 05 and the 06 have both tipped fatally into the over-extracted modern style as reflected in the Parker points.

R

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 2:03 pm

I'm planning on trying it this coming week, Richard, I'll report back in.

Comte Flaneur · Post by **Comte Flaneur** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 4:03 pm

Thanks for the quote Richard...it confirms what Basil Fawlty would describe as the "bleedin' obvious"...

But as you point out, it is a depressing cycle: hire Michel Rolland, pump up the extraction and alcohol, reap the higher points, aggressively ramp your prices up, then employ extra heavy embossed bottles, wrapped in posh toilet paper.

Pape Clement, run by the relentlessly opportunistic and ruthless tycoon Bernard Magrez, is the most depressing example of this in my opinion, because I adored this esate (the oldest in Bordeaux) up until the mid-90s and the changes ran roughshod over centuries of tradition.

Like Pointet-Canet (pun intended), where to be fair the changes have been less radical, it has become a thoroughly modern anaethetised wine, which could come from Chile or California.

When it comes to the 50-100 point system - it is in reality a four of five points system in terms of wines you simply must buy or avoid. Moreover the dividing line has been creeping up inexorably because the critics have effectively been engaging in a points bidding war to grab attention. It is a depressing vicious circle.

It is no surprise that wines high in alcohol tend to win blind tastings and score most points...so surprise, surprise the alcohol levels have been creeping up inexorably with the points.

I think these days if your wine scores less than 90, you're fucked (pardon my French). If you score above say 93 it is a license to print money, as Pointet and Pape have been doing.

And as was pointed out on another site it woz the points wot made Parker, much more than anything else. As Richard says Bordeaux has been blighted by Parker and no region more so than St-Emilion where the damage has reached tragi-comic proportions. Thats why I find myself drifting more and more towards burgundy.

I use points but only to differentiate wines in a tasting - but there is nothing really fair, scientific, accurate or consistent about it.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:38 pm

Sadly, I find it difficult to disagree with anything you've said, Comte.

I don't want to sound melodramatic, but there was a time, not even that long ago, that I actually enjoyed reading Parker. He seemed different than the rest to me, seemed honest, I liked the lack of advertizing, the bare-bones look to the Advocate, the idea that you had this country lawyer from Maryland churning out reviews on cheap paper on some printing press in his garage. He didn't seem to respond when rags like Wine Spectator and Decanter took shots at him. I watched a couple of his interviews with Charlie Rose on YouTube and I said, hey, this seems like a pretty good guy to me.

But even though I have enjoyed some of the Parkerized fruit bombs like Pavie, Cap de Faugeres, and others, unfortunately I think you are more right than wrong in your comments above. And the arrogance and phonyness we've seen from him over on the Squires site-- not just during this most recent controversy but in general-- has really caused me to question his judgment. There seems to be an arrogance and narcissism there that is pretty shocking, and when someone with so much impact over the flow of tens of millions of dollars attempts to censor debate and criticism of his work, and the questionable junkets of his "team", then he needs to be taken to the woodshed. And that's why we're here!

Elmo · Post by **Elmo** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:02 pm

I followed, I think, almost all the threads on BWE, eBob and Beserkers. From my view, they can mostly be summed up as "negative critisism is fun to write and to read". Sure MS seems like a wanker, but why push the envelope on this? Just let it go and buid a better board. If you build it, they will come.....

(looong time lurker, almost ready to become frequent poster)

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:20 pm

Looking forward to your positive reviews, Elmo.
I write positive comments on wines like '06 Lynch, '06 Clos Marsalette, etc., every week.
I try to contribute at least one tasting note every week.
In a positive manner!

Everyone else should, too! You're more than welcome to join in and add to the positive quality of the site.

Don't just stand there lurking, join in on the fun!

And that goes for everyone else! Anyone who thinks these Parker/Squires threads are too negative, well, then, as Bill said elsewhere, don't read 'em!

Twice I've offered to take them down, and twice dids't BWE thus refuse.

And feel free to make the site more "positive" by adding your tasting notes!

Have you had any good wines lately, Elmo?

I've posted my notes on what I've been drinking.

How about you? Or any other BWEers?

stefan · Post by **stefan** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:41 pm

Come on aboard, Elmo!

stefan

ChrisW · Post by **ChrisW** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 6:10 am

I believe that this forum has sunk to levels below that of the Squires forum lately. That board has moved on and the participants which have stayed, and there are many, are discussing over 75 different interesting wine topics every day. This board seems to have inherited the repetitive negative way of stirring the pot, similar to the approach of some of the (former?) posters on the Squires board.

Can't we move on and let these "personal axes to grind" off this public board?

For me, wine drinking and reading about wine is a positive thing in my life. Reading posts like this or other recent posts on this board just doesn't fit with this.

And for what it's worth:

I believe that pontet canet 2005 and 2006 and great wines and certainly not overextracted or over-alcoholic. At least, if one's definition is that wines such as latour are also not overextracted. The PC's are just great wines IMO and are not rated high just by Parker, but by almost the entire wine press (including the British)

The idea that Parker's ratings are very different from that of other critics is false if one takes the time to compare the numbers. The critics generally are boringly alligned in there appraisals. It takes rare exceptions such as Pavie 2003 to stir the pot, and even that doesn't work as Robinson has scored Pavie highest of all first growths in later blind tastings. Parker's ratings are just much more used and well-known than the ratings of other critics.

Below one finds a list of all the wines which Parker gave 96 points or higher in the years 1982-1997. These must be the years when he was at the top of his powers and according to some changed Bordeaux for the worst, in the sense that all chateaux now want to produce wines similar to the ones which received the highest points.

Looking at the list: does anyone think that this list varies considerably from the top-list of other critics and is it a bad thing if all chateaux in Bordeaux try to reach the level of the wines in the list? One can see that all wine styles are represented and I wonder if there is anyone who claims not to like "Parker wines" who cannot find at least 50 of the 62 wines on the list which he/she considers to be among the best wines made in Bordeaux.

ChrisW

Beausejour (Duffau Lagarrosse) 1990 (100)
Chateau Margaux 1990 (100)
Clinet 1989 (100)
Haut Brion 1989 (100)
Lafite-Rothschild 1982 (100)
Lafite-Rothschild 1996 (100)
Lafleur 1982 (100)
Latour 1982 (100)
Leoville-Las Cases 1982 (100)
Montrose 1990 (100)
Mouton-Rothschild 1982 (100)
Mouton-Rothschild 1986 (100)
Petrus 1989 (100)
Petrus 1990 (100)
Pichon-Longueville Comtesse de Lalande 1982 (100)
Chateau Margaux 1996 (99)
Cheval Blanc 1982 (99)
La Mission Haut Brion 1982 (99)
La Mission Haut Brion 1989 (99)
La Tour Haut-Brion 1982 (99)
Lafite-Rothschild 1986 (99)
Latour 1996 (99)
Le Pin 1982 (99)
Certan de May 1982 (98)
Cheval Blanc 1990 (98)
Le Pin 1990 (98)
Le Tertre Roteboeuf 1990 (98)
Leoville-Las Cases 1986 (98)
Leoville-Las Cases 1996 (98)
Petrus 1982 (98)
Pichon-Longueville Baron 1982 (98)
Troplong-Mondot 1990 (98)
La Conseillante 1990 (97)
La Mondotte 1996 (97)
Lafleur 1990 (97)
Palmer 1983 (97)
Angelus 1989 (96)
Angelus 1990 (96)
Chateau Margaux 1983 (96)
Chateau Margaux 1986 (96)
Clinet 1995 (96)
Cos d'Estournel 1982 (96)
Ducru Beaucaillou 1996 (96)
Gruaud Larose 1982 (96)
Haut Brion 1990 (96)
Haut Brion 1995 (96)
Latour 1990 (96)
Latour 1995 (96)
Le Pin 1989 (96)
L'Eglise Clinet 1995 (96)
Leoville-Las Cases 1990 (96)
Leoville-Poyferre 1990 (96)
L'Evangile 1990 (96)
Montrose 1989 (96)
Petrus 1995 (96)
Pichon-Longueville Baron 1990 (96)
Pichon-Longueville Comtesse de Lalande 1986 (96)
Pichon-Longueville Comtesse de Lalande 1995 (96)
Pichon-Longueville Comtesse de Lalande 1996 (96)
Rauzan-Segla (Rausan-Segla) 1986 (96)
Talbot 1986 (96)
Troplong-Mondot 1989 (96)

Comte Flaneur · Post by **Comte Flaneur** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 6:48 am

Oh really?

Well you are entitled to tour opinion Chris.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:33 am

They've "moved on," Chris, because hundreds, no, thousands, of messages of dissent have been deleted by Mark Squires and Robert Parker.

And of course there is a very easy resolution to all of this: Merely vote "yes" in the poll and/or allow Stefan to decide. Like Pilate, I wash my hands on the fate of Mark Squires and Robert Parker.

But alas, that's all I have to say, I'm off to the Windy City for a Pichon Lalande vertical with my fellow BWEers!

dstgolf · Post by **dstgolf** » Sat Jun 20, 2009 1:23 pm

Have fun in Chicago Jim. I'll be interested to see if you have better luck with PL than we did last month.Looking forward to the reviews.

Danny

greatbxfreak · Post by **greatbxfreak** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 11:05 am

JimHow,

I'm with ChrisW here!

I sincerely think you have some personal agenda against Squires, which shouldn't influence this board. And I don't quite understand your complain - is it one thread in "Social Hall" that has been closed or whole section?? The latter functions still very well, however.

I think Bob and Mark now give much more room for discussions after some critical post against them. And I enjoy going there to post. Sometimes BWE board stands still for several days with nothing happening.

Just my two cents.

stefan · Post by **stefan** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 11:31 am

Hmm. It is not only Jim who has complaints, but also posters on The Square's board. Look at Jay Hack's (now closed) poll on the social hall board.

stefan

Comte Flaneur · Post by **Comte Flaneur** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:09 am

Its interesting how two of the most vociferous defenders of the Parker/Squires regime come from Holland and Denmark, with Yitzak arguably carving out his career on the coattails of Parker. On another board someone kicked off a post about the "American obsession" with points. As I pointed out it is not an uniquely American obsession, as this thread has amply demonstrated.

While I agree we should eventually lay this to rest and move on, as one of the first to be kicked off the Squires board (in 2003 I think) I am 100% behind Jim on this for bringing it up. Not only have other boards had a field day on this - so why shouldn't we discuss the man who has single handedly changed the world of wine for better or for worse?

This tawdry episode has exposed the lamentable lack of democracy on eBob. IMHO, any organisation is ultimately a reflection of those at the very top of the pyramid. If Bob had any misgivings about Squires's antics he would have muzzled him a long time ago. The fact that he let him go on like this, while trying to present himself as the nice affable and reasonable guy, speaks volumes. Its called "swan politics"...let the other guy do your dirty work for you while presenting yourself as houlier than thou. It is perfectly reasonable to expose his narcissism and double standards.

ChrisW · Post by **ChrisW** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:46 am

I'm not "defending" anything on the Squires board. I do not participate on the Squires board and I don't like the kind of moderation that went on there. Just as I do not like many other things in this world. Yet, given the choice I just avoid them and select options which I do like. There are so many different wine forums now in this world that one certainly is not convicted to the Squires forum if one wants to discuss about wine on the internet.

I'm only regretting that half of the posts over the recent weeks on THIS board, which has nothing to with the Squires board, have been around topics or statements like "xxx is a liar", "xxx is a monster", "xxx has sunk too a new low" and many more personal attacks (also on some other former posters like winedinners and pomerollover, whose contributions I really appreciated in the past).

I participate in another (Dutch) forum where this topic flew over within a few days. Even on Wine Berserkers, where most of the outcast of the Squires forum found a new home, this topic died of several weeks ago.

ChrisW

stefan · Post by **stefan** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:09 am

Can't we get past talking about people who talk about Parker et al?

stefan, a monster and proud of it

greatbxfreak · Post by **greatbxfreak** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:29 am

Comte Flaneur,

Sour grapes, aren't they?

I don't need to make any career, neither here og there, I've full time job within chemistry and wine's my hobby not an income source.

There're many people contributing with fine things on Squires board, Gil Lempert Schwartz and especially Jeff Leve alias pomerlover. He's now gentle in posting than before and his reports from Bordeaux are precious and full of soul. If you're on Squires board it's question of attitude, balance and not letting anyone provoke you. I've learnt that hard way.

It'd be nice with some post about Bordeaux, travels and food, not week long stiring the pot about squires.

I like this board but after a very nice start it seems it went very, very quiet. Not so many here post in my threads, even if posters asked before for some TNs.

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:09 am

Bordeaux Freak, people here can post whatever they want. Nobody here should preach to anyone what he or she can post. That's the way they do it on the Squires board and in Iran. This is BWE, based in America and the Free World, where people can say things without being deleted/censored/banned/executed. (I was going to add tortured but, well, never mind....) If you have such positive things to contribute, then be my guest and post them. I just posted a thread on Pichon Lalande. I've been posting "positive" notes on the first 2006 Bordeauxs to hit the shelves. Tell me what your experience has been with those wines. But don't waste your time preaching what you feel people here should or shouldn't say because you are truly wasting your time and only perpetuating the controversy longer.

stefan · Post by **stefan** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:19 am

Izak, it is a fact of life on BWE that posts about wines draw few comments. But that does not mean that they are not read. I just now bumped your post "2008 Bordeaux en primeur - first impressions"". It has only 13 responses but 140 views.

Jim, Izak did not say anything about what topics that should not be addressed but was rather bemoaning the shortage of posts about wine, food, and travel. I personally appreciated your Comtesse post and wish we had more posts like that.

stefan

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:24 am

Indeed I welcome posts on tasting notes, events, food, etc. I post notes here on virtually every wine I drink. Everyone else should too. I'm especially talking to those of you-- you know who you are-- who are posting your notes on cellartracker but can't take the extra five seconds to cross-post them here on BWE. I know who you are! Shame on you!

jal · Post by **jal** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:53 am

Frankly greatbxfreak, I don't remember you ever posting anything on somebody else's threads. You do complain a bit much when people say nothing about your threads, though.

As far as the subject at hand is concerned, I really hate being told to shut up. If you don't like the thread or the subject don't read it.

stefan · Post by **stefan** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:58 am

Jacques, I don't see anywhere that Izak told anyone to shut up; certainly not on this page.

stefan

jal · Post by **jal** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 12:37 pm

You are right Stefan, we are only urged to "move on" in this thread and the poll responses. I may be a little too sensitive but it feels like I'm being told to be quiet. If that's not the intent, I take back my complaint.

Rudi Finkler · Post by **Rudi Finkler** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:42 pm

Originally Posted by JimHow
...That's the way they do it on the Squires board and in Iran...

What a ridiculous remark, Jim....

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:19 pm

Of course, when I refer to America and the Free World, I am specifically excluding Texas....

Comte Flaneur · Post by **Comte Flaneur** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:10 pm

greatbxfreak wrote:Comte Flaneur,

Sour grapes, aren't they?

>>On the contrary Izak, I wear my expulsion as a badge of honor; I am part of an elite, though not-so-small-anymore, club...anyway isn't this a case of the pot calling the kettle black (see below)?

I don't need to make any career, neither here og there, I've full time job within chemistry and wine's my hobby not an income source.

>>You are probably better off not giving up your day job Izak - I personally think there are too many critics to read now and the space is overcrowded. Besides you have forums like this...Sorry I did not get around to reading your notes on the 08 vintage but I had already read so many other notes by then that my eyes had started to glaze over

There're many people contributing with fine things on Squires board, Gil Lempert Schwartz and especially Jeff Leve alias pomerlover. He's now gentle in posting than before and his reports from Bordeaux are precious and full of soul. If you're on Squires board it's question of attitude, balance and not letting anyone provoke you. I've learnt that hard way.

>>Good to hear that you feel at home there

It'd be nice with some post about Bordeaux, travels and food, not week long stiring the pot about squires.

I like this board but after a very nice start it seems it went very, very quiet.

>>Sorry you feel it is too boring for you

Not so many here post in my threads, even if posters asked before for some TNs.

>>So no sour grapes there then?

Blanquito · Post by **Blanquito** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:48 pm

I'm sorry, I cannot accept that even now that Jeff Leve is "gentle" and "full of soul". I tried to stay on the sidelines, but Jeff Leve could be the most obnious personality in on-line wine posting, and his slavish devotion to all things Parker makes his opinions on wine highly suspect. Jeff is also an idiot (at least on-line; I've never met him in person).

That said, I defend anyone's right to have an opinion and to post it (including my own). And I commend BWE for refusing censorship. So if you don't like a thread, you should be allowed to say so and others should be allowed to defend themselves. The beauty of the internet is we don't have to read threads we find boring, objectionable, etc.

P.S. I enjoy your threads on Bordeaux, GreatBordeauxFreak, and I read them with interest.

stefan · Post by **stefan** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:11 am

Whatever his failings, Leve has some interesting things to say. I look at The Square's board now every day or two just to read his posts about his current tastings in Bordeaux. From the latest, I learned several things, such as Ausone is increasing year by year its planting of Cabernet Franc and that Tertre Roteboeuf uses only Radoux oak (most Bdx estates use several different kinds).

stefan

greatbxfreak · Post by **greatbxfreak** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:21 pm

Stefan and ChrisW are open minded and understand things.

Comte Flaneur,

I find your comments far too ironic and far too personal. It's really under the belt.

I don't know and frankly don't want to know why you've been expelled from Squires. You've just entered my ignore list.

stefan · Post by **stefan** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 4:56 am

Welcome to BWE, Dan. The Square's loss is BWE's gain.

stefan

JimHow · Post by **JimHow** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 9:39 am

Welcome Dan, but sorry, we dont "keep it down and reasonable" here.

William P · Post by **William P** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 3:03 pm

I always smile when people talk about the truth as if talk boards are the source of all knowledge. Studies show even when people witness an event, they can't accurately describe what the saw or heard. Now add egos and financial gain and factors we will never know. The Truth is never easy to devine.