Wine Myths - General Posted by Jeff (Friday October 03 2003 @ 12:28AM EDT)

The following myths were articulated on the basis of personal experience while the factual basis for my answers was provided by google.com and my wine library: Myth: White Zinfandel is a varietal Reality: All zinfandel grapes are red. They always have been; they always will be. White Zinfandel was the brain child of an American producer, Sutter Home Winery located in the heart of Napa Valley. It is actually made from red zinfandel grapes. During production, the wine is allowed very little contact with the red skins. The result is a pinkish rose. Other vineyards copied the Sutter Home product and at one time, it was the best selling "variety" in the country. (I don't like it. But since snooty wine writers won't mention it, I thought I'd provide you with material that won't appear in the Manhattan wine pages.) Myth: You should let wine breathe in the bottle before you pour it. Reality: According to the Wine Spectator's Harvey Steinman, this is simply a farce. Yes, wine does react with air and chemical changes do occur. But those reactions will not develop as a result of air entering a dime-sized hole at the top of a bottle. If breathing is necessary, do yourself a favor and pour yourself a glass. Its fun to enjoy the wine in all its stages from the beginning to the end of the bottle. Those changes provide its character. If it's a special wine and a special night, those changing traits will be the ones you'll remember long after the wine was finished. Myth: The older it gets, the better it gets Reality: This statement cannot be applied to all vintages, varieties and producers with a single stroke. Some vintages are simply not equipped to survive years in the cellar. That doesn't mean they aren't worth buying, but it does mean that you cannot keep them as long as, say, a 2000 Bordeaux. Some varieties are best consumed young. Age will only ruin them. If you have a Beaujolais or a Pinot Grigio that you've been holding for a special occasion, then break it out tonight. Chances are that if you hold it any longer, it will not enhance your special evening. (Frankly, it's probably already spent.) Some producers do not make wine to last. Their wine is meant for immediate consumption. There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, these wines are usually less expensive and they won't take up valuable space in your cellar. Some wines are built to last. They blossom in the cellar with a new range of tastes and fragrant sensations. The great wines hold this characteristic. For this reason they are expensive. So it makes no more sense to buy a Chateau Margeaux that you plan to drink immediately than it does to buy a Gallo of Sonoma that you plan to hold for a decade. (Gallo is my favorite drink now.) Myth: Reserved wine is better Reality: American wine is not bound by appellations; no governing body controls terms on a label. Therefore, "reserved" has no real significance and its appearance on a label fails to designate anything except a particular producer's fancy. Originally, bottles stamped "reserved" were intended for consumption by the chateau. If that still applied, then you wouldn't find them on your wine store shelf. Myth: You should select a wine that appropriately matches your entre. Reality: Some people have turned the art of matching wine with food into a science. But reality holds that most wine is consumed before the entre is presented. You will probably have four or five sips as you consume your meal where as you may have several glasses over conversation before dinner is even served. Select a wine that you want to drink. This is my rule. It's presented without supporting evidence but it's made with an appeal to common sense. Is it wise to purchase an $80.00 dollar bottle of wine on the basis of four or five sips? For me, the answer is no.

< Misperceptions, The Media and the War | The Spaniard >

By Tom (Friday October 03 2003 @ 08:52AM EDT)

Jancis Robinson, who co-edited with Hugh Johnson, the Wine Atlas of the World and writes on wine every Saturday for the Financial Times has a site I frequent for wine news. A recent posting picks up on some of the above myths and adds others.

[ reply | parent ]

By Jeff (Friday October 03 2003 @ 09:00AM EDT) I considered mentioning glass reuse, but I couldn't find an experts analysis to support my point and I already had one item which was purely based on my own opinion. I hate when people provide each serving in a different glass. It takes one complete glass just to eliminate soap residue. When you hand me a new glass with each serving, you're really just handing me more soap scum. [ reply | parent ]

By Joe (Friday October 03 2003 @ 09:42AM EDT)

and, White American Cheese is really a mild chedder and Budweiser is technically a lager... I usually go to Ed's Liquor Shop, get an empty box, and pick 12 of the most interesting labels, and whatever comes inside the bottle is a total surprise... "If I have to choose between two evils, I pick the one I haven't tried yet" - Mae West AMEN on not fretting which wine goes with which food, get what you like!!

[ reply | parent ]

By Matt (Friday October 03 2003 @ 10:27AM EDT)

Is it really a myth that wine should sit in the bottle to breathe? Does anyone do this? Most people that know that allowing certain reds to breathe will enhance the flavor - which is true - know enough to decant.

[ reply | parent ]

By Tom (Friday October 03 2003 @ 10:30AM EDT) I think the more significant point is that you want to start and continue tasting all through the bottle from first pop to last drop. I certainly changes, and to miss any step is regretful. I'd rather aereate in the glass than decant the whole bottle. [ reply | parent ]

By Matt (Friday October 03 2003 @ 11:26AM EDT) That missing a step is regretful, I would say, is a matter of taste. Apologies for the pun. If you have a bottle of a certain wine and you know that the taste of your preference requires aeration, then the proper method for aeration is via decanting. My point was to clarify that Jeff's myth isn't that aeration doesn't change wine, but that a wine in an uncorked bottle can become aerated. [ reply | parent ]

By Jeff (Friday October 03 2003 @ 12:46PM EDT) As stated above, the myths were formulated by my personal experience, while the factual basis for the answers was found in my library. On many occasions, I've heard people suggest the wine be allowed to breathe in the bottle. And when I looked for data to support my claim that this was, in fact, a wasted effort, I discovered that Harvey Steinman took the time to address this very issue in his Essense of Wine. That leads me to believe the myth is larger than my personal experience. [ reply | parent ]

By doctordoug (Friday October 03 2003 @ 10:42AM EDT) How long does a good MD 20/20 take to breath? [ reply | parent ]

By Anonymous (Friday October 03 2003 @ 10:46AM EDT) Oxy, moron. [ reply | parent ]

By Joe (Friday October 03 2003 @ 11:13AM EDT) about three seconds, then it should be blended 80:20 with apple juice (for fiber) and then enjoyed with a rousing breakfast of scrapple and potatoes [ reply | parent ]

By Tom (Friday October 03 2003 @ 11:20AM EDT) when breathing becomes evaporation, you're almost ready [ reply | parent ]

By The Cowboy (Friday October 03 2003 @ 10:49AM EDT)

What does this have to do with paleolithic wineries?

[ reply | parent ]

By Jeff (Friday October 03 2003 @ 10:53AM EDT)

If I had to guess, a Hayakian such as Matt would not approve of appellations. But I wish American wine labels were governed by them. It would be nice if "Napa" or "Sonoma" actually meant something...

[ reply | parent ]

By Matt (Friday October 03 2003 @ 11:20AM EDT) Hayakian? Is that like a Kayakian? Or is it Kayaker? Oh, wait, you mean Hayekian.... Nice strawman, but I fail to see how legal definitions of appellations upsets the French wine market. I buy very little California wine. Most of what is stored in my rack (a total of 20 or so) is French, Chilean, or Australian. There are only a couple of Californian and Italian bottles. [ reply | parent ]

By kevin the one-armed boy (Friday October 03 2003 @ 11:35AM EDT) Nice rack. [ reply | parent ]

By Matt (Friday October 03 2003 @ 01:12PM EDT) I bet you say that to all the boyz. [ reply | parent ]

By kevin the one-armed boy (Friday October 03 2003 @ 01:26PM EDT) Only if they happen to be in need of a manzier. [ reply | parent ]

By Jeff (Friday October 03 2003 @ 12:40PM EDT) Perhaps you would buy more Californian if it was produced under the authority of an appellation controller. I can't tell you how many times I've been disappointed by a first time tasting of a Napa Cabernet that was Merlowered by the producer. [ reply | parent ]

By Matt (Friday October 03 2003 @ 02:34PM EDT) Maybe. The only Calis I buy are ones given an 85 or higher by Spectator. But the market is so saturated with mediocre and bad Calis that it is a PITA to find the good ones. [ reply | parent ]

By doctordoug (Friday October 03 2003 @ 02:57PM EDT) I find anything costing much more than say $2.95 a gallon is not really sweet enough for serious consumption. I mean for $15 would it hurt them to throw a little sugar in? [ reply | parent ]

By Anonymous (Friday October 03 2003 @ 03:31PM EDT) I'm going to be sick! [ reply | parent ]

By Biff (Friday October 03 2003 @ 12:21PM EDT)

I just grab a nice bottle of grapefruit Mogen David and add the lovely flavor/aroma of citrus to my meal. MD 20/20 "Aged on the truck"

[ reply | parent ]

Post a Comment

Name: Email: URL   Remember my information (uses cookies)   I would rather be anonymous Comment: * HTML tags are allowed. * Your email will not be made public. * LINK SPAM WILL BE DELETED!