On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Vinayak Hegde <vinay...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Udhay Shankar N <ud...@pobox.com> wrote: > > We've had (parts of) this discussion here before, but this is worth a > > read. Especially interested in Charles' response to this one. > > > > Udhay > > Another article on "Wine Tasting is bullshit" series > http://www.vox.com/2015/5/20/8625785/expensive-wine-taste-cheap I wouldn't say "bullshit" as much as "subject to well known biases." That's why I recommend double blind tastings, and buying the wines YOU like in those tastings regardless of the price or what anyone else thinks. That's how an avowed Champagne snob (me!) started drinking Cava. However, having done double blind tastings that included Indian wines, I can safely say that I'd rather drink something else. (As of a few years ago, perhaps they've improved since then. I'd be willing to try if someone told me not just that they were "good" but that they had "improved a lot.") Typical "wine tastings" where everyone stands around informally quaffing various known wines and eating finger foods are a fine way to socialise but a terrible way to judge wine. Even going to wineries and tasting there isn't all that great because you are usually tasting a bunch of different styles of wine, and you're subject to all the biases that come from not tasting blind. That doesn't mean that wine tasting is "bullshit," that there aren't significant differences between wines, that people can discern those differences, or that there can be a consensus on "good" and "bad" wines. It does mean that you have to taste wines for yourself to figure out what you like, and if what you like is available at a good price then you win! -- Charles
