The Auswine Forum

Ian S wrote:WRT Red Burgundy ageing, I opened the 2nd bottle (of 2) of the following red with a Burg-o-phile. The first (slightly lower level) had been stunning.
1969 Domaine Jaboulet-Vercherre Chambolle-Musigny 1er Cru Les Charmes
The 2nd bottle was even better, and he very genuinely expressed concern that a lifetime's drinking of Red Burgundy had all been done too soon in the wine's development. Shockingly, it still felt like it had a decade or two left in the tank. One of the best red Burgundies he'd ever drunk. There are voices in the UK, who argue that most Red Burg gets drunk at the worst possible moment, when it is in a dumb phase. This timing being driven by wine critics' drinking windows.

Ian S wrote:I doubt this extra opinion will be popular, but I rather think Taltarni's old school reds were the only Aussie wines that genuinely earn the phrase 'iron fist in an iron glove'. The old Reserve wines used to need 2-3 decades until the tannins softened to the level of being 'firm'. I would love to get some more back in the cellar. Proper cellaring wines.

felixp21 wrote:my three most unpopular wine opinions:

1. Wendouree is VERY over-rated.

2. 2005 Red Burgundy is over-rated

3. 2005 Red Bordeaux is over-rated.

yes, yes, I know. I have no idea what I'm talking about.

Mike Hawkins wrote:

brodie wrote:OK here goes...

Wendouree make the most interesting,long lived and complex red wines in Australia.

Disagree

Mike Hawkins wrote:

felixp21 wrote:my three most unpopular wine opinions:

1. Wendouree is VERY over-rated.

2. 2005 Red Burgundy is over-rated

3. 2005 Red Bordeaux is over-rated.

yes, yes, I know. I have no idea what I'm talking about.

I haven’t opened any of the 05 Bordeaux yet. Hope mine are good otherwise Langton’s will see them

Cactus wrote:Natural wine and Orange wine is ghastly.

felixp21 wrote:my three most unpopular wine opinions:

1. Wendouree is VERY over-rated.

2. 2005 Red Burgundy is over-rated

3. 2005 Red Bordeaux is over-rated.

yes, yes, I know. I have no idea what I'm talking about.

sjw_11 wrote:Australian wines are actually very good and some of the best value in the world.
AGREE (Mostly)

Value does matter in appreciating wine.
DISAGREE (We normally taste blind, so how it feels and tastes is what matters. Value only matters in terms of if I can afford to buy it!)

In the right moment, a chilled rose can be absolutely sublime.
AGREE, but not Aussie Rose.

Burgundy is a scam.
DISAGREE, particularly for white. But yes, some of it is extremely expensive. Others aren't.

Cactus wrote:Natural wine and Orange wine is ghastly.
DISAGREE!!!!! (Although I agree a bit of it is)

Polymer wrote:

felixp21 wrote:my three most unpopular wine opinions:

1. Wendouree is VERY over-rated.

2. 2005 Red Burgundy is over-rated

3. 2005 Red Bordeaux is over-rated.

yes, yes, I know. I have no idea what I'm talking about.

I don't know if these are unpopular...but.

1. Disagree..I think they're equally overrated and underrated...given that half the people don't like the wine it is hard to be overrated.

2. 3-4 years ago I'd agree easily....they're starting to come around though..but I'd say agree and disagree .

3. Agree. I don't know if/when these are ever going to come around...30 years from now these might be amazing...but so what? Maybe for the next generation will care...I don't. Even the low end wines here are still tannic beasts...

felixp21 wrote: yes, that is a great point and I thoroughly agree. I still don't understand why people think a wine that takes 40 years to be at it's peak is a good thing. Pretty much no-one can afford high end Burgundy or Bordeaux when they are 30, so waiting more than a generation to drink a wine I think is absurd.
Absolutely, 2005's might well be magic in another 30 years, but frankly, I don't give a toss.
2005 is a great vintage, or may be a great vintage, for the scribes to wax lyrical about, and for billionaires to buy cellared stock in 2060 and marvel at their quality, but none of that helps us poor suckers who purchased the stuff to drink.
I had an 2005 Arnoux VILLAGE Vosne Romanee the other day that is certainly decades from being drinkable. It is currently a tannic monster devoid of any pleasure.

TiggerK wrote:

sjw_11 wrote:In the right moment, a chilled rose can be absolutely sublime.

AGREE, but not Aussie Rose.

gggaz wrote:Increasingly, I have noticed more and more people in the sales arm of this industry loudly espouse, or at least tacitly accept the virtues of biodynamics, the efficacy of it's methods and the veracity of it's claims. The proof would appear to be in the pudding, as there are many big name BD producers who's wines are clearly excellent. It is apparently then "self-evident".

The underlying implication to me in this line of thinking, is that because XYZ practice biodynamics (and they make great wines), that homeopathy, magical thinking, astrology, channelling, cosmic energy, sorcery and alchemy are all true by default and are somehow exempt from any sort of scientific testing. We can take our understanding of Newton's laws, Einstein's equations, we can just bin all of physics really.

phillisc wrote:I have a myriad of unpopular opinions...but will keep them to myself...other wise I will be like Sam and looking for a Brexit strategy...

Ian S wrote:

phillisc wrote:I have a myriad of unpopular opinions...but will keep them to myself...other wise I will be like Sam and looking for a Brexit strategy...

'Brexit' and 'strategy' seem rather incongruous bedfellows

gggaz wrote:Increasingly, I have noticed more and more people in the sales arm of this industry loudly espouse, or at least tacitly accept the virtues of biodynamics, the efficacy of it's methods and the veracity of it's claims. The proof would appear to be in the pudding, as there are many big name BD producers who's wines are clearly excellent. It is apparently then "self-evident".

The underlying implication to me in this line of thinking, is that because XYZ practice biodynamics (and they make great wines), that homeopathy, magical thinking, astrology, channelling, cosmic energy, sorcery and alchemy are all true by default and are somehow exempt from any sort of scientific testing. We can take our understanding of Newton's laws, Einstein's equations, we can just bin all of physics really.

I don't think most BD apologists pursue this train of thought this far. I think most are just ignorant and think it's kind of like an organics beyond organics, like it's the ultimate way to farm grapes. Who can blame them, that's the way it's been marketed. But these people are out of touch with reality. They are either ignorant, or propping themselves up to their peers on a form of grandstanding virtue-signalling, because they are misled by this notion that BD is somehow the most "environmentally friendly" of all farming methods.

And I think vignerons who practice BD are deluded. They are following a set of guidelines that a racist, homophobic,c egocentric old farmer pulled out of his arse a whole century ago.
They cling onto the cliche of "well at least we're tending our vines carefully and not poisoning the earth with chemicals".
Many farming methods eschew systemic pesticides and herbicides, and even many use composting techniques. Apologists love to draw a false dichotomy between BD and "conventional" farming, so they look like angels by comparison. They are even quick to distance themselves from Organics (because it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no conclusive difference between BD and Organic farming in [url=http://www.ajevonline.org/content/56/4/367]soil biodiversity, wine grape health[/url], [url=https://journals.ashs.org/horttech/view/jour ... e-p814.xml]microbial activity[/url], or [url=https://vinepair.com/articles/lunar-cycles-biodynamic-wine/]any[/url] measurable [url=https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id ... ne.0169257]metric[/url] really).
Nobody who cares about wine and cares about the planet wants to poison the earth and is in favour of mass-produced, recipe-made bulk wine. But there are more than 2 ways to farm grapes.

To me, it fundamentally matters what is true and what can be proven. And the burden of proof lies with those who support and practice BD methods. When someone tells you that BD is "self-evidently true" or they rest on cliches like "holistic" and "science doesn't know everything", they should immediately pay an intellectual price for their beliefs, similar to how someone who tells you that Elvis is still alive or that aliens visit them in the night pay an intellectual price and your opinion of them immediately lowers. This is how we should treat people who go on about root days and other such nonsense.

It may not be an unpopular opinion to have on an online message board, but I have found it difficult to find people in this business who agree with me.

Sorry for the rant but it felt good to get that off of my chest.

winetastic wrote:Many / most red wines under screwcap from the mid 2000s onward have not aged gracefully

winetastic wrote:Many / most red wines under screwcap from the mid 2000s onward have not aged gracefully

phillisc wrote:Riesling that cost more than 50 dollars...absurd!!
they are the cheapest wines to make , picked, fermented,put into stainless, filtered, bottled all in the space of a couple of months and on the shelves straight after that.

Cheers Craig

sjw_11 wrote:Australian wines are actually very good and some of the best value in the world. ( A )

Value does matter in appreciating wine. (D)

In the right moment, a chilled rose can be absolutely sublime. ( D )

Burgundy is a scam. ( A )