A bit of fun - Parker 100 pointers

[Craig(NZ)]

Ok yardee yardee we have all heard the points lemmings, trophy hunting arguments and there are few on this forum that go there so we all know the following exercise is just a bit of fun so no preaching is required

Who has tried wines on this list?? Which ones? Did any blow you away??

http://www.langtons.com.au/Magazine/Parker.aspx?MagazineId=133

Ive tried

2000 Chateau Cheval Blanc, 1er grand cru classe (A), St-Emilion
2003 Chateau Lafite-Rothschild, 1er cru classe, Pauillac
2000 Chateau Lafite-Rothschild, 1er cru classe, Pauillac
1986 Chateau Lafite-Rothschild, 1er cru classe, Pauillac
2000 Chateau Margaux, 1er cru classe, Margaux
2001 Chateau d'Yquem, 1er cru superieur, Sauternes
1990 E. Guigal la Landonne, Cote-Rotie

For me the 2000 Margaux, 2000 Cheval Blanc and 2001 Yquem were outstanding. The others were a notch back.

Can someone tell me where his list of 100 point kiwi wines are?? Is he on drugs or what

C

[Paradox]

Can someone tell me where his list of 100 point kiwi wines are?? Is he on drugs or what C

Hey, be happy with what you've got. Parker doesn't like Kiwi wines and it helps keep the price down. He's not a sauvignon blanc fan so that's the crown jewel gone, and he prefers old world pinot. Strike 2. He doesn't like our Bordeaux blends and feels they are under ripe (he may be right), but the Brits like 'em. I don't think he'd know a NZ syrah if it bit him but he's likely to call those (classical?) wines difficult as well. All good news as far as I'm concerned.....

[Gary W]

He is awesome on red Bordeaux. The only list I skimmed (thus far it is Bordeaux as largely it's where we have a confluence of opinion or taste)...and of those..

I am sure he gave 90 Cheval 100...it most certainly is. Not on his list though. He must have revised it...or it has been left off.


1989 Chateau Clinet, Pomerol * yep


1989 Chateau Haut Brion, 1er cru classe, Graves *yep
1996 Chateau Lafite-Rothschild, 1er cru classe, Pauillac *Yep

1986 Chateau Lafite-Rothschild, 1er cru classe, Pauillac *yep


1982 Chateau Lafite-Rothschild, 1er cru classe, Pauillac *yep

Only had the 85 Lafleur * but awesome

1982 Chateau Latour, 1er cru classe, Pauillac *yep
1982 Chateau Leoville-Las-Cases, 2me cru classe, St-Julien * yep. When on song.
1975 Chateau La Mission Haut Brion, cru classe, Graves *yep

1990 Chateau Margaux, 1er cru classe, Margaux ** Yep one of my favourite ever. The 1996 is right up there too.

1986 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild, 1er cru classe, Pauillac ** was slightly and very corked but I can see it.

1982 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild, 1er cru classe, Pauillac ** yep

1982 Chateau Pichon-Longueville Comtesse-de-Lalande, 2me cru classe, Pauillac ** about 99 points.

GW

[Dave Dewhurst]

Who has tried wines on this list?? Which ones? Did any blow you away??

I have. Pichon Lalande 82. Yes. Totally.

Cheers

Dave

[SueNZ]

Can someone tell me where his list of 100 point kiwi wines are?? Is he on drugs or what
C

Parker doesn't like (or understand) Kiwi wines. That is why he just sent Neal Martin out here to do his NZ section .

This came out the other day from Hawkes Bay Winegrowers. Note the last word of the heading

HAWKE’S BAY DOMINATES NZ WINE RATINGS BY ROBERT PARKER WRITER

In a just released article and wine reviews featured on www.eRobertParker.com for subscribers, Neal Martin has awarded 78 of Hawke’s Bay’s wines with a score of 90 points out of 100 or more. This is significant for Hawke’s Bay as the region makes up only 20% of NZ’s annual vintage, as opposed to Marlborough’s 59%, but has dominated published ratings. Of the 1500 wines tasted during Martin’s time in NZ, only 311 rated a score of 90 points or more giving the Hawke’s Bay region pride of place having the majority of all those wines awarded.
...
Martin visited Hawke’s Bay in January this year tasting wine and gathering information to help him write the NZ chapter in the upcoming edition of the prestigious Robert Parker’s Buyers Guide and features in The Wine Advocate.


So maybe Parker doesn't like Kiwi wines, but Neal Martin definitely likes some of them.
And so it goes on.

[Wycroft]

Further to this, I did a compilation of Neal Martin's assessment of 2006 vintage NZ pinots. My username and a name on the list will reveal my interest.

Cheers,

Nick

95
Felton Road Block 5 Pinot Noir
Felton Road Pinot Noir Block Three
Rippon Vineyard Pinot Noir Central Otago

94
Palliser Estate Pinot Noir
Burnt Spur Pinot Noir
Ata Rangi McCrone Pinot Noir

93
Terravin Hillside Pinot Noir
Alana Estate Clou Pinot Noir
Craggy Range Te Muna Road Vineyard Pinot Noir
Martinborough Vineyard Pinot Noir
Hawkshead Vineyard Pinot Noir

92
Wycroft Old River Terrace Pinot Noir
Wairau River Homeblock Pinot Noir
Wooing Tree Pinot Noir
Valli Gibbston Vineyard Pinot Noir
Pyramid Valley Calvert Vineyard Pinot Noir
Pyramid Valley Angel Flower Vineyard Pinot Noir
Pegasus Bay Pinot Noir
Mt Difficulty Pinot Noir
Mahi Pinot Noir
Kim Crawford Rise And Shine Creek Pinot Noir
Highfield Estate Marlborough Pinot Noir
Felton Road Pinot Noir
Dog Point Pinot Noir
Julicher Pinot Noir
Craggy Range Aroha Pinot Noir
Mount Dottrel Pinot Noir

91
Two Paddocks First Paddock Pinot Noir
Steve Bird Winery Big Barrel Pinot Noir
Seresin Leah Pinot Noir
Pyramid Valley Eaton Family Pinot Noir
Pegasus Bay Prima Donna Pinot Noir
Muddy Water Hare's Breath Pinot Noir
Jackson Estate Vintage Widow Pinot Noir
Felton Road Cornish Point Pinot Noir
Delta Vineyard Hatters Hill Pinot Noir
Chard Farm Pinot Noir
Pond Paddock Hawk S Flight Pinot Noir
Escarpment Te Ruhu Pinot Noir
Escarpment Moana Pinot Noir
Ata Rangi Pinot Noir

90
The Crossings Pinot Noir
Stoneleigh Marlborough Rapaura Series Pinot Noir
Seresin Pinot Noir
Quartz Reef Bendigo Estate Vineyard Pinot Noir
Mount Edward Pinot Noir
Mount Riley Seventeen Valley Pinot Noir
Kawarau Estate Reserve Pinot Noir
Judge Rock Pinot Noir
Felton Road Calvert Pinot Noir
Daniel Schuster Pinot Noir Selection Omihi Vineyards
Cloudy Bay Pinot Noir
Escarpment Kupe Pinot Noir
Saint Clair Doctor's Creek Reserve Pinot Noir
Tarras Vineyards Pinot Noir
Two Paddocks Neill Pinot Noir
Valli Bannockburn Vineyard Pinot Noir
Martinus Pinot Noir
Te Hera Estate Pinot Noir

89
Vidal Estate Stopbank Pinot Noir
Tohu Marlborough Rore Pinot Noir
Pyramid Valley Earth Smoke Vineyard Pinot Noir
Nevis Bluff Reserve Pinot Noir
Montana (Brancott) Letter Series T Pinot Noir
Montana (Brancott) Terroir Series Gabriel's Gully Pinot Noir
Hunters Pinot Noir
Carrick Pinot Noir
Amisfield Pinot Noir
Escarpment Voyager Pinot Noir
Dry River Pinot Noir
Alexander Estate Pinot Noir
Pisa Range Estate Pinot Noir
Ra Nui Pinot Noir
Rockburn Eight Barrels Pinot Noir
Rockburn Pinot Noir

88
Quartz Reef Pinot Noir
Ostler Vineyard Pinot Noir
Montana (Brancott) Terroir Series Forgotten Valley Pinot Noir
Matua Valley Estate Pinot Noir
John Forrest Collection Bannockburn Pinot Noir
Eradus Pinot Noir
Desert Heart Spenser Block Pinot Noir
Daniel Schuster Waipara Selection Pinot Noir
Palliser Estate Pencarrow Pinot Noir
Alana Estate Pinot Noir

87
Saint Clair Pioneer Sawcut Block Pinot Noir
Neudorf Moutere Pinot Noir
Mt Difficulty Roaring Meg Pinot Noir
Montana (Brancott) Marlborough Reserve Pinot Noir
Kim Crawford Pinot Noir
John Forrest Collection Pinot Noir
Huia Pinot Noir
Culley Marlborough Pinot Noir
Schubert Block B Pinot Noir
Porters Pinot Noir
Ashwell Pinot Noir
Nautilus Pinot Noir

86
Vavasour Pinot Noir
Neudorf Tom's Block Pinot Noir
Montana (Brancott) Terroir Series Corbett's Legacy Pinot Noir
Delta Vineyard Pinot Noir
Gladstone Estate Pinot Noir

85
Peregrine Wentworth Pinot Noir
Koura Bay Blue Duck Pinot Noir
Konrad Pinot Noir
Gibbston Highgate Estate Soultaker Pinot Noir

[Mike Hawkins]

I've tried quite a few with mixed opinions.

82 Pichon Lalande - no doubt, this is as good as it gets. 100
01 d'yquem - ditto
82 Mouton - a classic. 100
90 Montrose - no chance. A brett monster. Disgraceful.
90 La Chapelle - best Rhone I've had. 100
76 Grange - a good wine, but not 100 pointer. 71 and 86 are much better
01 Creek Block - best from this label, but not 100. mid 90s
03 Creek Block - no chance. Nothing special
98 Roenfeldt Road - pretty good wine. But too OTT to get full marks
Chambers Tokay and Muscat - no doubt. Some of the best wines to leave Aussie shores
89 Haut Brion - an all time great. 100
82 Lafite - yes
00 Lafite - close, but no cigar
03 Lafite - probably 99 points
03 L'Ermite - ditto
03 Pavillon - probably a 96 point. Not as good as the L'Ermite, and on par with Le Meal.

[SueNZ]

Further to this, I did a compilation of Neal Martin's assessment of 2006 vintage NZ pinots. My username and a name on the list will reveal my interest.

Cheers,

Nick

Very interesting Nick. Still, now we have THE WORD, no-one else's reviews will matter, except for the wines that didn't fare so well (Ata Rangi, Dry River, Escarpment Kupe, etc).
Do you know if he tastes blind or not?
Also, have you seen the discussion on NZ pinot noir on EBob with Neal Martin's comments way down the discussion (about the 21st reply - last at the time of posting).
http://dat.erobertparker.com/bboard/sho ... p?t=169016

[Craig(NZ)]

Hey, be happy with what you've got. Parker doesn't like Kiwi wines and it helps keep the price down.

yeah i know was just a tounge in cheek comment. Last thing we need is fat trophy hunting americans, WA in hand, and US$ in pocket trying to queue jump for wines we have be buying and drinking for over a decade

[monghead]

Hi all,

Only tried the 1976 Grange on that list, and I thought it a great wine. Like Mike though, I think the 1986 Grange is better, but I reckon the 1996 will give them all a run for their money, and come up trumps in time...

I thought the 1986 Chateau Leoville Las Casses was also a 100 pointer. This wine I have tried, and I think it is still the most sublime wine I have had the priviledge to consume. Memories of forest mushrooms and hints of truffle hauntingly waft back every time I think of this wine...

Cheers,

Monghead

[Jay60A]

Very interesting Nick. Still, now we have THE WORD, no-one else's reviews will matter, except for the wines that didn't fare so well (Ata Rangi, Dry River, Escarpment Kupe, etc).
Do you know if he tastes blind or not?

Ahh ... Sue, is there a gripe here? Other than Neil Martin is writing for WA?
I found Neil Martin's writing (from his old wine-journal) both open minded and interesting. For sure he does not share Parkers palate - even on Bordeaux - and that can only be a good thing.

He clearly stated he marked some down for being over alcoholic I think. So he's telling you his palate ...

Sorry, not being defensive on his behalf but I don't get the problem?

Jay

[Gary W]

I agree. Neal Martin is excellent. It's good for NZ wine - not bad.
GW

[Craig(NZ)]

Personally after touring C Otago id have to agree with Neil. I actually think C Otago Pinot is over rated (in fact kiwi pinot full stop). I have had some outstanding examples but overall they are lack lustre, many are a bit jammy, shallow, alcoholic and one dimensional. The wines Neil scores 92 for example - ive tried most of them and to me not many on that list would get me excited at all.

For me riesling was the wow wine of my trip to the south. So many $45 pinots i tried down there just made me shake my head. the money just was not there.

Will be interested to see international opinion from someone who has obviously made a pretty comprehensive tour of the hawkes bay region. it would influence my buying about as much as parkers opinion on the hunter would affect Gary's buying, but nevertheless will be worth a read for the sake of it. Will certainly immediately get my head around where his palate is at.

[n4sir]

I haven't tried one...

... anyone willing to donate a bottle?

[SueNZ]

Very interesting Nick. Still, now we have THE WORD, no-one else's reviews will matter, except for the wines that didn't fare so well (Ata Rangi, Dry River, Escarpment Kupe, etc).
Do you know if he tastes blind or not?

Ahh ... Sue, is there a gripe here? Other than Neil Martin is writing for WA?
I found Neil Martin's writing (from his old wine-journal) both open minded and interesting. For sure he does not share Parkers palate - even on Bordeaux - and that can only be a good thing.

He clearly stated he marked some down for being over alcoholic I think. So he's telling you his palate ...

Sorry, not being defensive on his behalf but I don't get the problem?

Jay

Sorry THE WORD statement is in reference to .... I'll try and expain below.

Look at the headline of the Press Release I cited above in green. Is Neal's name mentioned? No. I wonder how long it will take for his name to be omitted altogether, especially for the people (i.e. wine companies and retailers) who use the points for marketing. Even when the previous Parker New Zealand reviewer reviewed wines, his name was more times omitted than it was included. The review's were either attributed to Robert Parker or Wine Advocate.

Also from the Press Release ... Neal Martin visited in January to gather information to help him write the NZ chapter in the upcoming edition of the prestigious Robert Parker’s Buyers Guide and features in The Wine Advocate.

In the hierarchy of reviews, it is hard to dispute that the Wine Advocate and Robert Parkers Buyer's Guide sit at the top of the hierarchy.

I am sure I am not alone in this sentiment.

Cheers,
Sue

[Jay60A]

Sue,

Agree - sloppy journalism and lots of manipulative marketing ... hard to blame Parker for that though. TWA has become so big based on his remarkable palate, especially for Bordeaux.
I'd rather have Neil Martin covering NZ for TWA than Bob Campell and Michael Cooper. The scene seems a bit chummy in NZ ... country and business is too small for robust criticism I always felt ... critics might not get invited / might not get any bottles next year.

Just my 2¢.

Cheers -- Jay

[Craig(NZ)]

I'd rather have Neil Martin covering NZ for TWA than Bob Campell and Michael Cooper. The scene seems a bit chummy in NZ ... country and business is too small for robust criticism I always felt ... critics might not get invited / might not get any bottles next year.

although your comments are full of assumptions Jay, i certainly know where you are coming from. i think many nz writers are too scared to stick their neck out. instead reviews are just poetry often. a bit of criticism wouldnt go astray even if sometimes we dont all agree.

[Bick]

I'd rather have Neil Martin covering NZ for TWA than Bob Campell and Michael Cooper.

I know what you're saying, but I'd rather have both the locals and the outside view. The advantage of Cooper, Campbell and the like is that they have a huge local knowledge and don't miss much. The downside may be that they're too generous in their praise. Too often you see a 98 score from Campbell - NZ just doesn't do that much first growth quality wine, I'm sure. However, given they tend to be generous across the board (Campbell's peculiar score of 88 for Coleraine 05 notwithstanding) you still get a decent relative assessment of a huge number of wines. I think its great to get a truly outside view though, even if he didn't think much of Ata Rangi Pinot - the nutter.

Incidentally, I think Geoff Kelly is pretty objective and has been critical of both Dry River and Te Mata lately - so he's one critic who does stick his neck out, and is local.

[Craig(NZ)]

Incidentally, I think Geoff Kelly is pretty objective and has been critical of both Dry River and Te Mata lately - so he's one critic who does stick his neck out, and is local.

You could equally argue his is too chummy with Craggy Range and Escarpment. However in the end everyone is entitled to personal tastes I believe.

I make no attempt to seperate my personal tastes from my reviews. You could argue im too chummy with Neudorf, Puriri Hills, Unison and Te Mata too!

Its hard at the end of the day to get away from the fact that personal tastes are a huge influence on any reviewer

[SueNZ]

Its hard at the end of the day to get away from the fact that personal tastes are a huge influence on any reviewer

I think personal taste is the most important part of a reviewer's individuality. It also allows a consumer to align their palate with that reviewer.

What I'd also like to know is how the reviewers taste. Do they taste blind or not? Are the tastings that result in the review based on a quick sniff, sip and spit or are the wines in the bottle allowed to evolve? Geoff Kelly, for example, may taste a wine over several days. If you see Geoff at a tasting, he will have his bag to collect wine samples to take home and review again the next day. But I guess with many of the top reviewers, they just don't have the time or opportunity to do this.

Personally I like to taste first to get an initial impression, later to see how it opens up with time or aeration and again with food (unless it is a beverage wine) and to taste over at least two days, if circumstances occur.

As for the varied reviews of Dry River Pinot Noir 2006, on first tasting I thought the wine 'too big' and I can imagine how it would be disappointing and not score high points on the quick sniff, sip and spit method. But letting this wine evolve in the bottle, it revealed more than one could imagine. It reminded me of the 1994, which was still evolving when I tasted it in 2004.

Two tastings of Coleraine 05 last year on subsequent days, from different bottles, from different glasses, you wouldn't even think were the same wine. One was magnificent, one was achingly disappointing, especially when Te Mata principals had stated they were "confident it was the best wine they had ever made". Maybe Bob Campbell's 88 was based on one of those disappointing bottles. Sure sounds like it.

BTW, both these wines are cork closed.

[Craig(NZ)]

What I'd also like to know is how the reviewers taste. Do they taste blind or not? Are the tastings that result in the review based on a quick sniff, sip and spit or are the wines in the bottle allowed to evolve?

yip agree, i personally taste and write up wines all the way from quick 10 second impression label unveiled under less than ideal conditions to formal blind tasting.

Thats how I personally work, that is the way kwfc works, we are never going to be the most formal reviews around neither do I want us to - its a hobby for me not a job. I use all chances no matter how ideal to build an impression though now im learning to at least disclose when it was a half drunken slurp at the end of a party!! Those who dont like the relaxed attitude can read plenty of people that do things more formal.

However just thinking outloud - is blind tasting and formal tasting sorta like testing a boat in a computer model or a car in a wind tunnel?? take the 'real life' out of it and is it just too clinical to be of use to an audience that simply drinks the stuff with friends at a dinner party or in front of tv??

it may offend those you need order, ranking and vinous absolute reference points in life to help their self esteem along but the average joe who just sees wine as part of an entertaining package???

these are just random thoughts and no doubt not without fault but food for thought anyway

[SueNZ]

Sometimes you only need a quick sniff, sip and spit to know the wine is crap, like an Italian Merlot I tasted last night. I told everyone at the table it was disgusting but they all had to taste it anyway to see. Loved it when every one of them screwed up their face. They all agreed, except one who said he would drink it if there was nothing else. None of these people would be considered wine geeks although one might be considered desperate.

But for these serious tasters, it really would be good to know how they do it. And for someone like the Wine Advocate reviewers, I guess it does become a bit clinical.

I like to combine both - do the clinical blind tasting and, if the opportunity arises, then consider what the wine would be like in a social situation when having a drink with friends, when it hasn't had a line-up of wines before or after it, because that's a more real life scenario.

[Jay60A]

But for these serious tasters, it really would be good to know how they do it. And for someone like the Wine Advocate reviewers, I guess it does become a bit clinical.

I like to combine both - do the clinical blind tasting and, if the opportunity arises, then consider what the wine would be like in a social situation when having a drink with friends, when it hasn't had a line-up of wines before or after it, because that's a more real life scenario.

Sue, despite my dig at major Kiwi wine-critics I agree it's important to know how a wine is tasted. I agree with the comment a mixture of local and overseas reviews gives a good picture but you have to know the reviewers so (for me) I'm more interested in say Jancis and Neil Martin than Jay Miller or Robert Parker if reviewing NZ or Aussie wines.

I *do* like Geoff Kelly's reviews once you know his palate. I really have to get some Craggy Le Sol and see if it's as good as he reckons.

I still feel the best reviews are based on drinking a bottle over an extended period ... not the sip and slurp. In all events it's good to know the context.

Cheers -- Jay.

[KMP]

Can someone tell me where his list of 100 point kiwi wines are?? Is he on drugs or what
C

Parker doesn't like (or understand) Kiwi wines. That is why he just sent Neal Martin out here to do his NZ section .

This came out the other day from Hawkes Bay Winegrowers. Note the last word of the heading

HAWKE’S BAY DOMINATES NZ WINE RATINGS BY ROBERT PARKER WRITER

In a just released article and wine reviews featured on www.eRobertParker.com for subscribers, Neal Martin has awarded 78 of Hawke’s Bay’s wines with a score of 90 points out of 100 or more. This is significant for Hawke’s Bay as the region makes up only 20% of NZ’s annual vintage, as opposed to Marlborough’s 59%, but has dominated published ratings. Of the 1500 wines tasted during Martin’s time in NZ, only 311 rated a score of 90 points or more giving the Hawke’s Bay region pride of place having the majority of all those wines awarded.
...
Martin visited Hawke’s Bay in January this year tasting wine and gathering information to help him write the NZ chapter in the upcoming edition of the prestigious Robert Parker’s Buyers Guide and features in The Wine Advocate.


So maybe Parker doesn't like Kiwi wines, but Neal Martin definitely likes some of them.
And so it goes on.

Thanks for this Sue, I've been waiting for more news on Martin's tasting for Parker!!

"I am convinced that there is enormous potential for the country to compete on the global stage, not only in terms of their feted Pinot Noirs, but for the wide variety of styles New Zealand can produce, but I would caution that there is still some way to go before proclamations of taking on the Old World can be made with conviction. " Neil Martin

This is quite a bit more effusive than I believe Martin wrote on his old web site, where he again (from memory) was making comparisons between NZ Pinot and Burgundy. This time he said he did not give many 95+ scores simply because of a lack of a track record for most wines. That may be a good thing but one has to wonder if he is scoring within peer groups (as Parker says he does) or scoring between Old V New World using an old world palate?

Mike

[SueNZ]

Thanks for this Sue, I've been waiting for more news on Martin's tasting for Parker!!

"I am convinced that there is enormous potential for the country to compete on the global stage, not only in terms of their feted Pinot Noirs, but for the wide variety of styles New Zealand can produce, but I would caution that there is still some way to go before proclamations of taking on the Old World can be made with conviction. " Neil Martin

This is quite a bit more effusive than I believe Martin wrote on his old web site, where he again (from memory) was making comparisons between NZ Pinot and Burgundy. This time he said he did not give many 95+ scores simply because of a lack of a track record for most wines. That may be a good thing but one has to wonder if he is scoring within peer groups (as Parker says he does) or scoring between Old V New World using an old world palate?

Mike

I think you can find out more if you subscribe to Neal Martin on EBoB - even discuss the NZ wines with him.

I am not sure if Neal Martin has been to NZ before, but it certainly makes a difference coming to the place where the grapes grow and the wines are made - and seeing across a greater spectrum of wines than he would see at a trade show or New Zealand Winegrowers tasting in the UK (at the latter the wines on show have been selected by panels here in NZ as a representative example of the region it comes from).

The comment about the 95+ scores - or lack of them - is interesting.
In the Hawkes Bay tasting, the top two wines were Craggy Range Le Sol Syrah 2005 and the absolutely sumptuous (my words) Trinity Hill Homage Syrah 2006 - both rated 95 points by Martin.

I don't think he has rated any wine higher than 95 points - unless it is something other than a Hawkes Bay wine or a Pinot Noir.

Your last comment ("scoring within peer groups or scoring between Old World V New World using an old world palate") is thought provoking.

Cheers,
Sue

[Craig(NZ)]

In the Hawkes Bay tasting, the top two wines were Craggy Range Le Sol Syrah 2005 and the absolutely sumptuous (my words) Trinity Hill Homage Syrah 2006 - both rated 95 points by Martin.

damn i must try that homage sometime! its avoided me so far. i need my own opinion!! the le sol 05 was very good but maybe not my style....i liked the 02 better actually.

maybe seeing big textural syrah as his top 2 may indicate his preferences. i remember he did write up the unison syrah quite well too in one of his old write ups???...another example of bold syrah

[KMP]

....I think you can find out more if you subscribe to Neal Martin on EBoB - even discuss the NZ wines with him.........................

I don't think he has rated any wine higher than 95 points - unless it is something other than a Hawkes Bay wine or a Pinot Noir............

Cheers,
Sue

Hi Sue,

Yep, I get EBoB. The wines, notes and scores are up (also just ordered the hard copy). 854 wines rated, Top wine was the Vinoptima Estate Noble Late Harvest Gewurztraminer (97) (never heard of it), and then nine 95s, mostly but not all PN.

Thrilled to see the TerraVin wines do so well.

Mike

[SueNZ]

Hi Sue,

Yep, I get EBoB. The wines, notes and scores are up (also just ordered the hard copy). 854 wines rated, Top wine was the Vinoptima Estate Noble Late Harvest Gewurztraminer (97) (never heard of it), and then nine 95s, mostly but not all PN.

Thrilled to see the TerraVin wines do so well.

Mike

Ah, Vinoptima Late Harvest Gewurz. What vintage? I rated the 2004 as my 'Sweet Wine of the Year' for 2007. Also Trinity Hill Homage Syrah 2006 as my 'Syrah of the Year' last year.
Summary here

[KMP]

Hi Sue,

Yep, I get EBoB. The wines, notes and scores are up (also just ordered the hard copy). 854 wines rated, Top wine was the Vinoptima Estate Noble Late Harvest Gewurztraminer (97) (never heard of it), and then nine 95s, mostly but not all PN.

Thrilled to see the TerraVin wines do so well.

Mike

Ah, Vinoptima Late Harvest Gewurz. What vintage? I rated the 2004 as my 'Sweet Wine of the Year' for 2007. Also Trinity Hill Homage Syrah 2006 as my 'Syrah of the Year' last year.
Summary here

2004 Vinoptima Late Harvest Gewurz was the top wine, and the 2006 Trinity Hill Homage was on the next rung down.

It would be interesting to see which of the top wines make it out of NZ, (and specifically to the US) and whether there is a move to bring more out, and at what prices?

Mike

[SueNZ]

Very interesting Nick. Still, now we have THE WORD, no-one else's reviews will matter, except for the wines that didn't fare so well (Ata Rangi, Dry River, Escarpment Kupe, etc).
Do you know if he tastes blind or not?

Ahh ... Sue, is there a gripe here? Other than Neil Martin is writing for WA?
I found Neil Martin's writing (from his old wine-journal) both open minded and interesting. For sure he does not share Parkers palate - even on Bordeaux - and that can only be a good thing.

He clearly stated he marked some down for being over alcoholic I think. So he's telling you his palate ...

Sorry, not being defensive on his behalf but I don't get the problem?

Jay

Sorry THE WORD statement is in reference to .... I'll try and expain below.

Look at the headline of the Press Release I cited above in green. Is Neal's name mentioned? No. I wonder how long it will take for his name to be omitted altogether, especially for the people (i.e. wine companies and retailers) who use the points for marketing. Even when the previous Parker New Zealand reviewer reviewed wines, his name was more times omitted than it was included. The review's were either attributed to Robert Parker or Wine Advocate.

Also from the Press Release ... Neal Martin visited in January to gather information to help him write the NZ chapter in the upcoming edition of the prestigious Robert Parker’s Buyers Guide and features in The Wine Advocate.

In the hierarchy of reviews, it is hard to dispute that the Wine Advocate and Robert Parkers Buyer's Guide sit at the top of the hierarchy.

I am sure I am not alone in this sentiment.

Cheers,
Sue

Just had an email from otagowine.com. Headline is "Parker rates Rippon".
Neal Martin not mentioned anywhere in the newsletter.

And from a Fine Wine Delivery Company email, the headline is "Robertparker.com Rates NZs Best Wines" (although Neal Martin is mentioned in the text).

Update: Contacted otagowine.com and they are fixing the 'error' for the rest of their mailouts and have changed their website. Neal Martin is now credited with the review.