Poll: Have alcohol levels risen because of Robert Parker?

[JimHow]

Poll:

Have alcohol levels in wine risen since 1980 MORE because of:

A. Robert Parker's influence.

B. Global warming.

C. Both.

D. Neither.

[DavidG]

Brett Favre.

[Claret]

Both, warming play into the riper style he favored.

[JimHow]

Can it really be true that global warming has had a factor in alcohol levels rising so significantly in just one generation?
If so we are surely doomed at a very rapid pace, are we not?

[DavidG]

Most of the higher alcohol levels are attributable IMO to the growers'/winemakers' choices to pick later and riper. Climate has assisted them, but whether that’s random statistical fluctuation or global warming can be debated. Not denying global warming here, just saying it’s hard to know how much it’s responsible for a few hot vintages. I do think we are on a path to self-immolation. Not sure if it’s reversible or if we have the political will to reverse it.

And if the hot air coming out of Washington DC is any indication, we are surely doomed.

[AlexR]

I ask you: can one man, albeit the world's leading wine critic, change the way an entire region makes their wine?

I don't think so.

There was a certain category of wines that went overboard with the extraction/new oak thing. Yes. But how typical were they of the whole?
And could that could also be considered a sort of experimentation, and a way of apeing New World wines?

Does anyone think that winemakers at famous châteaux changed their winemaking style simply to please the palate of one foreigner?

Parker refutes the accusation of fostering a new top-heavy style by insisting that his favorite Bordeaux is probably Haut Brion - an estate that never fell into that trap.

Times have changed. I tried 2017 Valandraud last week. Nothing outrageous there.

What I'd like to see is how some of the 100 point darlings mature.
That having been said, ageworthiness is not, in and of itself, a virtue.
If a wine is wonderful 3 or 4 years after the vintage, is this not an advantage more than anything else?
Should it decline early on (for a Bordeaux), this is not necessarily a shortcoming.

Best regards,
Alex R.

[DavidG]

Alex, it’s odd seeing you argue against the concept that Parker had an outsized influence in Bordeaux.

But I agree that one man cannot do it alone. He was the assisted by thousands of consumers that bought his recommendations and drove up prices, and by the owners of the top estates who saw which side their bread was buttered on. But Parker was the catalyst.

And no, I don’t think those consumers kept buying wines they didn’t like just because Parker said so. They reloaded because they liked the wines.

It is true that Parker's influence did not affect many of the smaller, less known estates that you often remind us make up the bulk of Bordeaux, but we’re talking about the major players here.

Finally, I agree that his influence with winemakers is waning now that he is no longer active. I think some of the more beneficial changes he ushered in, like cleanliness and letting the grapes ripen, will persist while the excesses of over-ripeness will moderate.

[marcs]

A strange question to ask now, because since 2012 Parker's influence has receded and alcohol levels have dropped. To me, that demonstrates that a significant share of the boost in alcohol levels between, say, 1989 and 2010 was due to Parker. But when you look at alcohol levels today, in the 2014, 15, 16, 17 vintages, I think Parker is not so important and it's more about global warming and technology.

[JimHow]

So your answer is C then?
I'm still trying t figure out the Brett Favre connection.

[DavidG]

That was a goofy irrelevant answer. About a guy that just wouldn't go away.

[RPCV]

An interesting question. Parker stressed ripeness so much that it would be impossible not to see an increase in alcohol levels in order to attain higher scores. That being said, the climatic cycle has allowed for late harvests in much of Europe for many years. Parker's influence on wine making can not be underestimated. However, growers and winemakers had the choice of harvesting more ripe fruit and many tilted away from tradition. It's hard to blame them....higher scores, better prices, more demand. Like I mentioned in the other poll, Parker did us all a service when he stressed cleanliness, ripe fruit, expansion of second wine programs and better temperature control in the supply chain; all of which created competition at the grower/winemaker level. However, his influence at the tasting table created a demand for wines of homogeny...higher alcohol, low acid, jammy fruit, smooth tannins etc. So, I say increased due to Parker....Lastly, count me in as a big fan of the new philosophy in wine making. A long overdue change and return a more traditional approach.

[JimHow]

Lastly, count me in as a big fan of the new philosophy in wine making. A long overdue change and return a more traditional approach.

Aaaamen, brother.

[Racer Chris]

So your answer is C then?
I'm still trying t figure out the Brett Favre connection.

It's a common poll choice on other wine fora.