On 10/05/13 10-May-2013;4:05 pm, Charles Haynes wrote: > The wine tasting I have consistently advocated is personal double-blind > vertical or horizontal tastings with a ringer.
Here's a counterpoint of sorts. I find it interesting, although I personally have no opinion; not being a wine fan. http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/12/tasting-wine-blind/ Not pasting the whole article here (see URL above for that) but some quotes, to give a flavour (heh) of the whole: It should be obvious to any thinking person that blind tastings necessarily favor–on a group vote basis–wines which offer immediate pleasure and gratification. Left to their undirected devices, the senses will almost always gravitate to the obvious and miss the subtle. I have fallen victim to the sweeter-is-better trap several times myself. At blind tastings that include left bank and right bank young Bordeaux, the right bank wines almost always garner higher scores from the crowd. Young Merlot simply tastes “better” than young Cabernet Sauvignon. Softer, sweeter, more flattering. ... "The problem with blind tasting is that you’re working from a position of ignorance,” said Bob. If you know exactly what it is that you’re tasting — a young first-growth wine, for example — then you can taste it in that light. Similarly, if you know that you’re looking at an Ad Reinhardt painting, you’ll be willing to spend a few minutes with it so that you can appreciate its subtleties. If you didn’t know it was a Reinhardt, then you’d probably just read it as a black monochrome and move on. Or think about someone like Joseph Beuys: the whole point of the art is that it’s multi-layered, and responds slowly to the viewer, who has to think things through. ... Pepsi generally wins in blind tastings, ‘cos it’s sweeter. But most people still prefer Coke. -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
