NM on the 2010 Vintage

[JimHow]

We had a 1989 Tertre Rotebouef in Denver last year that was unfortunately tired.
I remember drinking a young Tertre Rotebouef back around 2001 on the first night we met Pappa Doc and Jackdaw.
It was really nice.
Jacques, you were there, what was that, a '95?

[Blanquito]

No I won’t have it.

The most ridiculous comment ever made on BWE was that “Parker discovered the Rhone”

Who said that again? Was it Jeff Leve?

[JimHow]

It's an interesting discussion, obviously strong feelings on both sides.
I think we can make our points without personal insults!
Some great wine minds here, I'm learning a lot but I think we can just agree to disagree.

[William P]

I just dropped by this thread and after a quick read, I'm sadden by tone. As the official BWE worst taster, I was always impressed by the tolerance of differing opinions. There is always friendly disagreement but rarely does it get personal. It seems on this thread, we lost it.

I point no fingers, as I know how easy it is to lose civility on the net. I've done so often. I just hope we continue you leave our egos by the door when we enter BWE. I agree with the often posted concept that wine is personal and subjective, so tread lightly. The beauty of our board is not the wine but the people.

Bill

[JimHow]

Amen, Bill.

[Chateau Vin]

.
.
.
I think we can just agree to disagree.

"Agree to disagree".....there it is, needs to be pulled out of the depths...

[jal]

I really only remember the 1989 we had in the 2009 Fabio tasting, Jim. I liked it as did almost everyone that evening. Ian was ashamed to bring it home to his mum, Stefan didn't like it, Winona hated it iirc.
This is the second time in a month that criticism of an estate on BWE is getting out of hand. People who criticized GPL were accused of libel. Now Tertre Roteboeuf.
I just don't get, you like it, good for you, I don't, also good for you as I won't fight you in the store's aisles for the last bottle. Anything beyond that smells of self importance at best and self interest at worst.
And GBF, there's a reason some people do not post on your threads.

[greatbxfreak]

Jacques,

Isn't it wiser to write? - "I don't fancy Tertre Roteboeuf, because it's too high alcohol, is over-extracted, dry, modern, unbalanced soup of prunes" instead of "I often wondered whether Tertre Roteboeuf was trying to replicate the image of that 47 Cheval Blanc, in addition to making the archetype of a Parkerized wine." For me it's an insult towards TR's winemaker.

I don't even think Francois M. has ever tasted Cheval Blanc 1947 as he rarely tastes other winemakers wines.

[Racer Chris]

Mark or i...t,

It's personal vendetta - fuck off!

I was feeling mildly entertained until this post.
You probably should take a break from here Izak.

[Comte Flaneur]

Let’s take a deep breath, pause, press the reset button, move on and regroup.

Good to see both Izak and Mark posting on here more regularly both have a lot to contribute here, Izak has a fantastic website and Mark also brings a lot of wisdom and experience to the discussion - I count Robert as a regular here even though he is clearly venerated on the other board.

[AlohaArtakaHoundsong]

I blame Neal Martin.

[robert goulet]

No I won’t have it.

The most ridiculous comment ever made on BWE was that “Parker discovered the Rhone”

I thought it was when I declared 2010 Clos de l’Oratoire the 'panty dropper!'

[OrlandoRobert]

No I won’t have it.

The most ridiculous comment ever made on BWE was that “Parker discovered the Rhone”

I thought it was when I declared 2010 Clos de l’Oratoire the 'panty dropper!'

Panties? Ha, that wine was all wood!

[robert goulet]

No I won’t have it.

The most ridiculous comment ever made on BWE was that “Parker discovered the Rhone”

I thought it was when I declared 2010 Clos de l’Oratoire the 'panty dropper!'

Panties? Ha, that wine was all wood!

Wood popper?

[Claudius2]

Stefan
There are numerous factors, but the general formula is as follows:
A). Pick a hotter climate ideally with dry weather in late season
B). Choose grape varieties and specific clones that tend to produce higher sugars and alcohol - some clones of syrah and grenache are examples
C). Maximise bunch exposure and manage the canopy to give sufficient photosynthesis without excessive foliage (leaf plucking, pruning etc) as you want the vine to direct resources to the grapes and not a dense canopy
D). Don't irrigate or use drip irrigation as too much water reduces sugars
E). Harvest late, ideally when the grapes are looking dried out. Use your refractometer every day to give you the sugar content you want. If you want wine to taste like prunes, you ensure they look like them.......
F). Do a lot of research on yeasts both cultured and wild, to see which strains turbo-charge the alcohol level. Pick the yeasts that ferment at a warm temperature (but not too hot) to enable the yeast to blow out lots of alcohol
G). If you STILL want more alcohol, then use reverse osmosis to take water out and thus increase the alcohol and other components.

It that fails, then the spirit bottle can work too......
By this time, you will have a wine that smells like prunes, molasses and stale ash trays, and tastes like a cross between entry level Ruby Port and road tar. Likely it is impossible to drink with food, will sear through your sinuses, and leave a black coating on your tongue. More than a few sips will leave your palate jaded, ready for a blast of water, and the alcohol will hit you too soon. You may need to sleep it off.

In my lifetime, alcohol levels have steadily increased just about everywhere, and while winemaking is an issue, higher temperatures, drier weather (especially in late season) and the higher concentration of CO2 in the air are factors.
Even fruit and vegetables ripen faster in such an environment.

I have read a few times here that the 1980's was the golden years of Bordeaux. I am not entering that argument, but I noted the alcohol levels at the Leoville Barton vertical I attended a month or two ago.
The 93, 94, 96, 90, 2000 were 12.5%, the 1985 was "only" 12%.
I did not note the alc level of the others but I think the 1982 was also 12.5%.
Although not tasted here, the 1988 was labelled at 13%.

The "real" alcohol level will vary up or down a little, but I recall that the wines were "cool" on the palate.
They had achieved intensity and balance without a hot blast of spirity alcohol.
Further, the alc level HAD NOT INCREASED from 82 to 2000, and the style of these wines were remarkably consistent, accepting for vintage conditions.
The style of the wine showed through.

[Musigny 151]

Mark or i...t,

It's personal vendetta - fuck off!

It is not personal, and I am not sure why you think it would be. I met you a couple of times in Bordeaux, and if I have exchanged two words with you, I really can’t remember them. My problem is that you have set yourself as an authority on Bordeaux, and it seems to me that whenever you write you get very basic things wrong. That should not matter, everybody is entitled to mistakes, and even if these suggest that you might not have a firm grasp on some fairly important basics, if you acknowledged mistakes and moved on, it would be fine. You however go on the attack, culminating in the lovely quote above.

Let me return to the Tertre Roteboeuf. I know the wines fairly well, and agree it is somewhat different to many Saint Emilions. I remember fondly the wines of 1970s, and especially the 1975 which was very fine, and the 1974, that believe it or not, was one of the top wines of the vintage. In the eighties, the wines were far less interesting, and the trajectory in the marketplace was a little down. The new regime has reinvigorated it, and even if they are still for me very much on the dark side, they are a little more complex than most. What they are not, is anything like Burgundy, at least any Burgundy I know. I thought Browett’s comment comparing it to Musigny, the silkiest, most fragrant of wines was almost as comic as yours introducing the concept. I am sorry if you take offense, but the comparison is utterly absurd. He must have a lot to sell. That is the kind of thing I was talking about earlier.

We may not have similar palates, but that should not matter. I have friends with dissimilar palates, and the only problem with them is finding wines to bring to a BYO, which we will both like. Damned near impossible, but fun to try.

[OrlandoRobert]

Not to beat a dead horse, but I was curious about what Jeff Leve says about Tertre Rôteboeuf:

The wine of Tertre Roteboeuf is rich, racy and plush. With age, the wine develops exotic, opulent textures and aromatic qualities. However, it does not seem to make old bones. The wine might be best between 15 and 25 years of age, depending on the vintage.
Read more at:https://www.thewinecellarinsider.com/bo ... roteboeuf/

He notes that the 2010 hit 16% and the 2009 hit 15.5%.

He notes that the winemaking practices involve late picking, warming the cellars to 68 degrees Celsius to “improve integration” of the new 100% oak barrels and the wine, which is then matured 18-24 mos. He also notes that the vineyard has a micro-climate that is 1 degree warmer than its neighbor, “aiding in the degree of ripeness”.

I would call this more Port than Pinot, but that is my country yak palate.

[stefan]

Thanks, Mark. So it is difficult to produce these monsters that many people (not I) love.

@OrlandoRobert, I doubt that Jeff Leve, who hates Burgundies, would say that Tertre Roteboeuf reminds him of Musigny. He comes by here occasionally; maybe he'll comment on that comparison.

[Comte Flaneur]

I have read reviews which have compared La Conseillante from the 1980s to fine red burgundy. Iirc for its silky magical qualities. I can’t exactly remember who or when but it was quite a long time ago, and it was a credible source I seem to remember. It may well have been Stephen Browett who is regarded as credible and runs one of the largest wine merchants in the world.

[DavidG]

The 1989 and 1990 Conseillante were silky and magical. I loved them both. They didn't remind me of Burgundy. But back then, my impression of Burgundy was thin and weedy.

[Racer Chris]

... Burgundy was thin and weedy.

Has that changed?

[Comte Flaneur]

Yes I think so Chris. Burgundy is much better and more consistent today than it was in the 1980s when three out of four bottles was disappointing. Btw for the record I agree with David - La Conseillante does not remind me of burgundy either - as much as I love both. I was just reporting that the comparison has been made.

[Musigny 151]

Generally it is hard to compare regions; even more so when the grapes are not the same. For me the major exception to this is Beychevelle 1959, which is the best Burgundy ever made in Bordeaux. The Conseillante 1989/1990 is a relatively large scaled wine, but I can’t say I have seen any resemblance to Burgundy. Pretty good wines though.

[Musigny 151]

On a slightly different note, why have so many wines in Saint Emilion gone to the dark side, while Pomerol remains practically untouched?

[Comte Flaneur]

Is it because St-Emilion has a hierarchy and Pomerol doesn’t? So perhaps there is less temptation to soup up your product in Pomerol than in St-Emilion.

[Musigny 151]

I am not sure; isn’t the modern hierarchy how much you can charge for your wines? .

Look at Pavie and Angelus, especially since they have been promoted. In both cases, prices have increased far more quickly than the rest of Bordeaux.

[AKR]

Are buyers really slaves to the St Em hierarchy? For years (departed) Belair had some high stature in the firmament, but when it was available stateside it didn't go for big money. I suppose the proof was when the owners gave up trying to resurrect the 'brand' figuring that too many generations of enthusiasts weren't going to buy it no matter what they did. (one reason why I'm amazed that Simard's name was kept on after the Vauthiers took it over)

[Musigny 151]

Buyers not. Most would struggle to know where La Gaffeliere for instance would be classified.

It is much more important to producers because land prices are based on the classification. It makes actually for an interesting dilemma. Say your chateau has been promoted, and the property is now worth 30% more; suddenly you have a real issue with inheritance taxes.

[Racer Chris]

Yes I think so Chris.
...

Oh, sorry Ian. My question was merely rhetorical and not intended as a serious inquiry.
From everything I've read, once someone has a life altering experience (aha moment) with Burgundy they often waste a lot of money trying to recreate that singular experience, but mostly without success. That's not a recipe I want to follow.
However I will keep trying it, but only with other peoples' money. I guess that's the only way I'll get to experience great Pomerol too.

[robert goulet]

I am not sure; isn’t the modern hierarchy how much you can charge for your wines? .

Look at Pavie and Angelus, especially since they have been promoted. In both cases, prices have increased far more quickly than the rest of Bordeaux.

I was assuming this was more politics rather than price structure....like some cronyism or tit for tat behind the scene type stuff...because Pavie and Angleus....well ahhhhhh....ummmmm....pass.

[Claudius2]

Stefan
Most vintages in the Barossa are hot and dry, and this place is arguably the best terroir for monsters.
The Marananga area (where Seppelt is located, along with Torbreck, Greenock Creek and a few others) in particular has old dry grown shiraz, grenache and mourvedre vines and they are well known for richness, thick texture and hi alcohol.
My frustration is that going back 50 years or so, the style of Barossa reds was more akin to Bordeaux in their weight, alcohol content (12, 12.5%) and texture.
They had freshness and decent acidity, and the Hunter wines did too (if the makers could control the mercaptans, Brett, VA other faults).

I think things started to change in the late 80's and 90's and some of the monsters received 100 point scores from RP.
Not sure if it still applies, but at one point, Greenock Creek bagged more 100 pt RP scores than ANY other producer - anywhere.
A local (Adelaide based) critic used to write reviews for them that were included with the order forms (yeah, mailed in those days).
He waxed lyrical about how wonderful they are with endless hyperbole and bombast.

So why not make massive, inky, tarry turbo charged reds?
If they are swooned over by RP and other critics then why not? I bought the Creek Block Shriraz one year, and opened one soon after delivery. I sent the rest to auction, and sold them for over $200 each, after paying $60 plus freight.
It wasn't about the money, I just don't enjoy road tar.
However, please don't think that the entire Barossa is like that. It isn't. There are many makers that avoid the hi alc monsters like the plague.

Can I tell you are true story.
A Barosa maker some years ago cracked a joke (they are normally up for one anytime).
Q: "How do you know a nouveau riche American wine taster?
A: "He has two wine critics with him to advise him which wines he likes".

I can also say that over here in Singapore, most buyers are label drinkers and their behaviour at tastings leaves me shaking my head.
But I'm a little more forgiving as they will generally listen to the makers and other tasters and try to to understand them.
Wendy's palate is now very well trained (and rather spoilt I have to say).

[Musigny 151]

Your joke was on the lines of,

“If you think I am an elitist, you should talk to my personal sommelier”

[dstgolf]

Just dropped by the sandbox to catch up and coronavirus lockdown psychosis must be starting to set in with the amount of sand being thrown around. Yes there has been great tolerance here with the odd outburst and insult with feelings bruised that happens over the web as you can't always express what you want to say in print as you can in speech but Jim's line just accept to agree to disagree move on and don't take things so personal. Hard at times but everyone's entitled to their opinion and there are no correct answers when it comes to ones taste and personal preference.

I like the topic of alcohol content in wine and Claudius has touched on a few things above about some of the variables contributing to alcohol level. A beautiful wine is all about balance and harmony between fruit, tannins,acidity and alcohol as we all know. Raise one and the others have to balance out and you can't just look at one in isolation like alcohol and take a simple approach that it's all do to global warming.

I laugh when you visit chateau after chateau, winery after winery and many of us have been to a lot in our lives and we keep hearing a theme. Wine is all about terroir!! It all happens in the field and whether they are biodynamic or not there always is a spiel. Then you go inside and you see grand computer systems controlling everything with another spiel about why their steel/concrete/fibreglass vats are superior and cold maceration, yeast, oak from where/chips vs barrels new vs old, American vs French and which cooper/how much toast to the barrels etc etc. Bottom line is that wine making is sophisticated alchemy and every step along the way starting with mother nature in the field all the way to bottling the winemaker plays their influence. Alcohol content can be controlled at virtually every step along the way.

We have heard that wines from the 70s/80s came in at 12-13.5% and that was the end of the Golden age with the onset of global warming producing riper fruit and more alcoholic wines. I'd like to call relative horse shit!! Were the wines back then truly 12.5% when reporting alcohol content below 14% can have an allowable margin of error that is perfectly acceptable to the authorities of 1.5% and then you add into the mix that most jurisdictions tax the producer based on the alcohol%. In France my understanding the tax rate is 50% cheaper if the wine is less than 14% so that 13.5% wine could have been 15% by law but where do you think the producer would have been reporting the alcohol %. Have the regulations changed on taxation and enforcement of such recently or have the alcohol contents risen. I suspect a combination of both.

Riper fruit is a good thing but as fruit ripens acidity drops and tannins are certainly there but less noticeable and alcohol content has the potential to increase. Higher alcohol can increase the apparent sweetness and acidity in the wine again playing with balance.

The winemaker chooses when to pick. If too late then risks over ripe pruny fruit with lower acidity/higher alc/riper tannins and earlier the opposite. Always a trade off. Once in the winery then the chemistry starts. Wild yeast vs hybrids. Wild yeast dies at about 14% alc and hybrids can resist up to about 16%+/- so depending on yeast chosen then it becomes the winemakers choice how much alcohol the end product has. Every step along the way will also have a effect, add sugar(chaptilization), length /temperature of maceration/fermentation and then when the wine is ready to bottle they can always use many methods to remove alcohol such as reverse osmosis/reverse cone separation and on and on. Why not add alcohol in the end if not enough....

It is a very complex topic but the winemaker can intervene at numerous steps through the process to lower/raise alcohol and again it's about balance. They control the alcohol content to produce what they feel is a beautiful wine that will sell. You may not like the final product but they wouldn't be manipulating the wine if it didn't sell. Everyone has their own palate and they decide for themselves what they like and don't like and I'm sure that everyone has seen their palate change over the years to a certain extent.

No rights and wrongs but the one thing I know is that alcohol levels have been rising/maybe and winemaking styles have become more homogenous with more and more wines starting to taste similar but that's a whole different topic.

For those interested in a simple perspective of alcohol levels...https://daily.sevenfifty.com/taking-con ... s-in-wine/

More in depth for the very interested....https://www.bio-conferences.org/article ... _02012.pdf

[JoelD]

Yes I think so Chris.
...

Oh, sorry Ian. My question was merely rhetorical and not intended as a serious inquiry.
From everything I've read, once someone has a life altering experience (aha moment) with Burgundy they often waste a lot of money trying to recreate that singular experience, but mostly without success. That's not a recipe I want to follow.
However I will keep trying it, but only with other peoples' money. I guess that's the only way I'll get to experience great Pomerol too.

I understand this sentiment for sure and that is why I have avoided Burgundy(and Pomerol) until this past year or so. However, I think I have found a way to just try to find a lot of good "mhmm" experiences with more reasonably priced burgs. Also doing the same with back vintage Pomerol now when I can find from good sources. I.e Conseillante, VCC. Especially if I have already tried the specific vintage of a wine. Then I seek that bottle out.

I guess you would say this is hedging my bets. But so far seems to be working out fairly well so far.

[Racer Chris]

We have heard that wines from the 70s/80s came in at 12-13.5% and that was the end of the Golden age with the onset of global warming producing riper fruit and more alcoholic wines. I'd like to call relative horse shit!! Were the wines back then truly 12.5% when reporting alcohol content below 14% can have an allowable margin of error that is perfectly acceptable to the authorities of 1.5% and then you add into the mix that most jurisdictions tax the producer based on the alcohol%.

I agree 100%. Some of the older bottles I've had are labeled 12% or 12.5%, and some are labeled 12-14%. According to my friend who has supplied all the old bottles I've had, the label has more to do with the law than actual measured content. And as far as they way they feel, especially after consuming half a bottle is no different than many recent bottles I've had that are labeled at 13.5%.

[robert goulet]

Though I prefer to try and avoid 14%+ ....granted I am not an expert on the winemaking process, but you can probably sneak by with 14.5% and age well in some cases....
(ex.) Last yr. I did have a '98 dead arm d'arenberg which was drinking fairly nice...the wine was 14.5%...seems more the exception than the rule but granted the alc is not as high as alot of other monster shiraz...i guess 14.5% could mean 15%....most big shiraz that I have tasted 15 plus yrs have been a disaster...it seems once the fruit starts fading exposing more of the alc. it's over.

[Nicklasss]

We have heard that wines from the 70s/80s came in at 12-13.5% and that was the end of the Golden age with the onset of global warming producing riper fruit and more alcoholic wines. I'd like to call relative horse shit!! Were the wines back then truly 12.5% when reporting alcohol content below 14% can have an allowable margin of error that is perfectly acceptable to the authorities of 1.5% and then you add into the mix that most jurisdictions tax the producer based on the alcohol%.

I agree 100%. Some of the older bottles I've had are labeled 12% or 12.5%, and some are labeled 12-14%. According to my friend who has supplied all the old bottles I've had, the label has more to do with the law than actual measured content. And as far as they way they feel, especially after consuming half a bottle is no different than many recent bottles I've had that are labeled at 13.5%.

I agree too with Danny and Racer. That if very true that you have to consider + or - 1.5 % alcohol on the level inscribed on the label, and the final number written is more aligned with legislation, taxes and politics.

Remember those clean environmentally friendly Volkswagen cars? Being a chemist, good measurement method is the only thing that could confirm alcohol level of a bottle, with a certain uncertainty.

Now what is scary, the 15.2 % alcohol Grand Vin de Bordeaux is maybe having higher level!

Blind tasting with different tasters, different bottles, is the best way to confirm which wine you really like objectively, without label, alcohol, critic TN reputation, etc... etc... avoiding "parti pris".

Nic

[robert goulet]

I almost grabbed a '12 Ch. Couspaude for 50% off....until I saw the alc.at 16% ....WTF?

[AKR]

I almost grabbed a '12 Ch. Couspaude for 50% off....until I saw the alc.at 16% ....WTF?

Couspade has the profile of something I'd think I'd like....but I've found that my bottles never blossomed the way I'd expected. I stopped buying it as they are pretty costly for all that oak treatment. I suspect others have noticed that given it always seem to be getting blown out every few years.

Ferrand Lartigue is another that sadly falls into the same camp. They have great stories and everything looks good on the surface. But time goes by and I think to myself, when will this emerge?

[Musigny 151]

Just dropped by the sandbox to catch up and coronavirus lockdown psychosis must be starting to set in with the amount of sand being thrown around. Yes there has been great tolerance here with the odd outburst and insult with feelings bruised that happens over the web as you can't always express what you want to say in print as you can in speech but Jim's line just accept to agree to disagree move on and don't take things so personal. Hard at times but everyone's entitled to their opinion and there are no correct answers when it comes to ones taste and personal preference.

I like the topic of alcohol content in wine and Claudius has touched on a few things above about some of the variables contributing to alcohol level. A beautiful wine is all about balance and harmony between fruit, tannins,acidity and alcohol as we all know. Raise one and the others have to balance out and you can't just look at one in isolation like alcohol and take a simple approach that it's all do to global warming.

I laugh when you visit chateau after chateau, winery after winery and many of us have been to a lot in our lives and we keep hearing a theme. Wine is all about terroir!! It all happens in the field and whether they are biodynamic or not there always is a spiel. Then you go inside and you see grand computer systems controlling everything with another spiel about why their steel/concrete/fibreglass vats are superior and cold maceration, yeast, oak from where/chips vs barrels new vs old, American vs French and which cooper/how much toast to the barrels etc etc. Bottom line is that wine making is sophisticated alchemy and every step along the way starting with mother nature in the field all the way to bottling the winemaker plays their influence. Alcohol content can be controlled at virtually every step along the way.

We have heard that wines from the 70s/80s came in at 12-13.5% and that was the end of the Golden age with the onset of global warming producing riper fruit and more alcoholic wines. I'd like to call relative horse shit!! Were the wines back then truly 12.5% when reporting alcohol content below 14% can have an allowable margin of error that is perfectly acceptable to the authorities of 1.5% and then you add into the mix that most jurisdictions tax the producer based on the alcohol%. In France my understanding the tax rate is 50% cheaper if the wine is less than 14% so that 13.5% wine could have been 15% by law but where do you think the producer would have been reporting the alcohol %. Have the regulations changed on taxation and enforcement of such recently or have the alcohol contents risen. I suspect a combination of both.

Riper fruit is a good thing but as fruit ripens acidity drops and tannins are certainly there but less noticeable and alcohol content has the potential to increase. Higher alcohol can increase the apparent sweetness and acidity in the wine again playing with balance.

The winemaker chooses when to pick. If too late then risks over ripe pruny fruit with lower acidity/higher alc/riper tannins and earlier the opposite. Always a trade off. Once in the winery then the chemistry starts. Wild yeast vs hybrids. Wild yeast dies at about 14% alc and hybrids can resist up to about 16%+/- so depending on yeast chosen then it becomes the winemakers choice how much alcohol the end product has. Every step along the way will also have a effect, add sugar(chaptilization), length /temperature of maceration/fermentation and then when the wine is ready to bottle they can always use many methods to remove alcohol such as reverse osmosis/reverse cone separation and on and on. Why not add alcohol in the end if not enough....

It is a very complex topic but the winemaker can intervene at numerous steps through the process to lower/raise alcohol and again it's about balance. They control the alcohol content to produce what they feel is a beautiful wine that will sell. You may not like the final product but they wouldn't be manipulating the wine if it didn't sell. Everyone has their own palate and they decide for themselves what they like and don't like and I'm sure that everyone has seen their palate change over the years to a certain extent.

No rights and wrongs but the one thing I know is that alcohol levels have been rising/maybe and winemaking styles have become more homogenous with more and more wines starting to taste similar but that's a whole different topic.

For those interested in a simple perspective of alcohol levels...https://daily.sevenfifty.com/taking-con ... s-in-wine/

More in depth for the very interested....https://www.bio-conferences.org/article ... _02012.pdf

A few thoughts.

For the most of the last century the chateaux chapitalzed. You don’t do that if the wine has potential alcohol in the 14% range, you do it when the wines are in the 10-12% area, which happened all too often. I am afraid global warming is real. I mentioned this before, but it is important, When I first started tasting wines in the seventies, you were lucky to get three ripe vintages per decade. Now it is close to seven. Finally, the French authorities also did a fair amount of random testing with very heavy fines etc if you were naughty.

Wine does make itself obviously; winemakers do, some do more, some less. It does take away a little when you see the sausage being made; in this case the labs and computers, the different barrels, and hear the finer points of malolactic. But in the end, you have product which at its best still reflects where it came from, coupled with the winemaker’s intervention.