Looking at Class 6, we have, for example, the '02 Oomoo with a Gold, beating out Grant Burge's Holy Trinity '01, the '02 Annie's Lane Shiraz, and, for goodness sake, the '01 Majella Cabernet. Personal taste and opinion will of course vary ( Amen to that! ) but surely I can't be the only 'a little' perplexed by this list? I
Now you know why I keep on saying a single medal doesn't mean much.
There are a couple of things to consider, firstly some wine are built for show or because of their very nature and style will will perform well whilst some wines being a little different, possibly being built of the longer haul and being tight may not show as well.
Even the temperature the wine was served it can make a difference. Some may show better a degree or two cooler and some may look a bit volatile if a bit warmer.
Now you know why I keep on saying a single medal doesn't mean much.
There are a couple of things to consider, firstly some wine are built for show or because of their very nature and style will will perform well whilst some wines being a little different, possibly being built of the longer haul and being tight may not show as well.
Even the temperature the wine was served it can make a difference. Some may show better a degree or two cooler and some may look a bit volatile if a bit warmer.
I'm very much in agreement with both points, I suppose the level of 'misjudgement' in this particular list is what drew my attention. As for temperature, a recent exhibit at the MoCA in Sydney for 'Victorian Wine Week' proved your statement to the point of the unbearable. Absolute gems, Mitchelton's Print Label, Morris' Durif and Redbank's Sally's Paddock, to name but a few, were all served at 25+ degrees, rendering them 'thin and hot' in both taste and body. Oh dear. The most annoying surprise was the reaction of the winemakers. They seemed almost offended when I pointed out that their wines weren't being afforded a fair chance, though perhaps they were a little tired from the trip. At least the event wasn't a complete waste of time - those Rutherglen stickies just can't get much better, and thankfully they can handle the heat a little easier
There are plenty of other examples of classy/pricey wines missing a medal, eg look in Class 23 (Premium, full-bodied red) where Vasse Felix Heytesbury 2001, Thomas Hardy 2000, Eileen Hardy 99, Tahbilk Reserve Cab 2000, Woodstock the Stocks 2001 and Devils Lair MR 2001 failed to score a medal. The Heytesbury 2001 failed to score a medal at the NWS last November too, it's verrry oaky at present, needs time for the fruit to emerge again, if it ever does. The Majella Malleea 2001 was top gold in that class at the NWS, it scored a bronze in class 35 in Sydney...
As always, trust your own palate and wherever possible try before buying in quantity.
Cheers Brian Life's too short to drink white wine and red wine is better for you too! :-)
have you tried the Oomoo 2002 ?
I am aware of it's price point however new labels from large producers are often deliberately made to outperform their price level to attract new drinkers. Later the producers often lower the standard of wine down to the price level. The 2001 was very good, the 2002 may even be better.
Why not actually drink the wine and then tell us what you think?
The fact your other mentioned wines don't get a gong doesn't make them lesser wines. Again, as Brian mentioned the wine shows can be a hard and fast evaluation.
If I am collecting or still trying to buy certain wines I prefer that my favorites do not attract gold medals or trophys as then they can remain less well known and hopefully their prices do not become inflated, or their availabilty does not become scarce.
guest8 wrote:have you tried the Oomoo 2002 ? I am aware of it's price point however new labels from large producers are often deliberately made to outperform their price level to attract new drinkers. Later the producers often lower the standard of wine down to the price level. The 2001 was very good, the 2002 may even be better. Why not actually drink the wine and then tell us what you think?
I had actually drunk the wine, just neglected to tell you about it, confessedly Baseless dismissal is of course the very essence of being a wan...wine snob, so I do apologise. I've had the wine on two occaisions, both times it has shown a wonderful vibrant deep red-purple colour, good fruit but also over-ripe plum and rubber (!) on the nose, with more of the same on the palate, add burnt tires and sickly sweet cough syrup. The undesirable tones did slightly fade after a long breath, but they never disappear. Not the worst wine at it's price point, and certainly not the best. I haven't tried the 2001, so I can't compare, and everything stated is of course just my personal taste and opinion.
I opened a bottle of the 02 Oomoo last night and can see why the judges would have noticed this wine as the nose was rich and luxurious. The the fruit was more restrained on the palate and it didn't follow through with the fruit intensity that the aromas promised.
I have not tried the other wines the Oomoo beat but suspect from what I have read (never an ideal way to compare wines ) that they a have better structure and will certainly age for longer. The Oomoo is good easy drinking but I doubt I would rate as a gold medal wine.
I didn't see any rubber character in the wine either on the nose or on the palate.
Ben wrote:I opened a bottle of the 02 Oomoo last night and can see why the judges would have noticed this wine as the nose was rich and luxurious. The the fruit was more restrained on the palate and it didn't follow through with the fruit intensity that the aromas promised.
I have not tried the other wines the Oomoo beat but suspect from what I have read (never an ideal way to compare wines ) that they a have better structure and will certainly age for longer. The Oomoo is good easy drinking but I doubt I would rate as a gold medal wine.
I didn't see any rubber character in the wine either on the nose or on the palate.
Thanks for that Ben. Maybe I have had the misfortune of dud bottles, or the wines tasted alongside had a negative impact on the Oomoo's impression. The rubbery note was definitely there - if I end up having it again, here's hoping I have a better experience
Haven't tried the 2002 but the 2001 was excellent value and well made again for what it was. Not for cerebral drinking or even for keeping -if you see it in the shops maybe a better buy than the 2002.
I found significant bottle variation with the 01 Oomoo. Bought two bottles, first one was very good with a grilled vegetable pizza. Was looking forward to the second bottle but found it average. Later had another bottle (given to me by someone who got it in a hamper but doesn't drink reds) which was barely drinkable. I don't think it was corked just totally outclassed by the 1998 Mitchelton Cab Sav that preceeded it.
Adair wrote:Put me down for the Oomoo being a no-way gold medal wine. I would not even give it a bronze!
Adair
Agree totally, I went in to a VC where it was sitting in a nearly full bottle (so I assumed it had been opened not too long ago) and tasted it after all the hype, and walked out without even considering it as an option. Can't remember what it was at the time, now.
I
Baseless dismissal is of course the very essence of being a wan...wine snob, so I do apologise. I've had the wine on two occaisions, both times it has shown a wonderful vibrant deep red-purple colour, good fruit but also over-ripe plum and rubber (!) on the nose, with more of the same on the palate, add burnt tires and sickly sweet cough syrup. The undesirable tones did slightly fade after a long breath, but they never disappear. Not the worst wine at it's price point, and certainly not the best. I haven't tried the 2001, so I can't compare, and everything stated is of course just my personal taste and opinion.
) that they a have better structure and will certainly age for longer. The Oomoo is good easy drinking but I doubt I would rate as a gold medal wine.
