The Auswine Forum

If Parker has been reviewing Australian wines for 20 years, then I stand corrected. I don’t buy any of his books – but I guess I will buy that 89-90 guide to see which wines are specifically reviewed. I know that online there is an article titled THE WINES OF AUSTRALIA from the Wine Buyer's Guide, 5th Edition, 1999, and there are lists of Australia’s Best Producers of…… associated with that. By the 1996 vintage Parker was recommending 200 or more Australian wines..

His online site only goes back as far as Issue 79 of The Wine Advocate (Feb, 1992). But if Parker was seriously into Australian wines in the late 1980s its not reflected in the tasting notes that are recorded by vintage year from his publication from 1992 onward. The following is a list of vintage years beginning in 1987 and the number of wines recommended; Prior to the 1987 vintage the only wine reviewed is Penfolds Grange and those reviews are usually from the early 2000s. Remember that eBob says that Parker only recommends about 25-30% of the wines he tastes but what is interesting in looking at this listing of Aussie wines is that a number are described as “Tasted but not rated”.

1987 3 wines 2>90 points
1988 7 wines, 2>90 points
1989 11 wines, 2>90 points
1990 19 wines, 9>90 points, 2 not rated
1991 26 wines, 7>90 points, 1 not rated
1992 35 wines, 10>90 points, 6 not rated
1993 44 wines, 15>90 points, 5 not rated
1994 81 wines, 33>90 points, 13 not rated
1995 107 wines, 46>90points, 13 not rated
1996 200 wines, 98>90 points, 3 not rated

In terms of identifiable lists of Aussie wines tasted and put into the Wine Advocate post 1992 the first listing is
Issue #86 (Apr 30, 1993) which is The World's Greatest Wine Values: Australia and New Zealand and contains 20 wines from 1988-1992 with scores from 84-87.
Issue #100 (Aug 31, 1995) there is A Vertical Tasting of Penfold's Grange (Hermitage) numbering 23 wines.
Issue # 103 (Feb 1996) there is a note for the 1995 Lindemans Chardonnay Bin 65 under Odds and Ends: Great Chardonnay Bargain from Lindemans.
Issue #106 (Aug 31, 1996) there tasting notes under Odds and Ends (Great Chardonnay Value, Awesome Micro-Production Rarities) which has 7 wines from Australia including Mt Langi Ghiran, Elderton, and Clarendon Hills.
Issue #110 (April 25, 1997) has a listing of Recommended New Releases: Australia and contains 114 wines from 1990 to 1996. Of these 40 are listed as “Tasted but not Rated” and 31 score 90 or better.
Issue #115 (Feb 23, 1998) contains Recommended New Releases: Australia and New Zealand which has 131 wines (4 not rated) from the1991-97 vintages and includes some fortifiieds.
Issue #117 (June 26, 1998) has World's Greatest Wine Values: Australia which lists 35 wines from 1994-97 (none not rated) which score from 90 (one wine) to 84 points.
Issue #122 (April 23, 1999) has Recommended New Releases: Australia which contains 189 wines from 1992 (one wine) to 1998. Of these only 2 are not rated and 87 score 90 and above.
Issue #127 (Feb 28, 2000) has Recommended New Releases: Australia which contains 313 wines (none unscored) from 1990 (two wine) to 1999. Of these 171 score90 and above 90.

And there has been a yearly report since then.

For me this information suggests that Parker began a serious interest in Australia only from the mid-1990s. While he was reviewing Aussie wines before that the numbers suggest that his exposure was not at a level that I would consider gave him broad exposure – unless he tasted many, many more wines than he recommend.

Mike

First, I have no data to back up what I'm about to say, it is just evidence based on observing wine drinkers.

In the U.S., Gallo has had a hard time selling in the high end of the wine market because of their reputation for value wines. Australian wine may suffer from a similar problem. Most U.S. consumers would not know Robert Parker if he came up and kicked them in the shin. However, too many people I know who know very little about wine associate Australian wine with Yellow Tail or Little Penguin. For reasons I can't explain, they don't sufficiently explore higher end Aus. wines after tasting the low end stuff.

When I open a better bottle of Aus. wine for them, they frequently get big eyes and go "wow". It usually doesn't even matter what the variety is.

While Parker may have inadvertantly caused some devastation in the $20 and over market among those who read his publication, I really think that could be recoverable with better marketing and education.

Mike, don't bother buying some old Parker buying guide. I picked this up at some bargain bin just because it was cheap. I'll tell you which wineries he reviewed, likely the ones that were available in the United States back in the late 80's.

I hope I'm not breaching copyright but the following are the wineries (and their wines) that he reviewed:

Amberton
Angoves
Arrowfield
Baileys ( 2x 90-pointers)
Balgownie
Bannockburn
Berri Estate
Bowen Estate
Brokenwood
Brown brothers
Campbells
Capel Vale
Cassegrain Vineyards ( 1x 90-pointer)
Clyde park
Cold Stream Hills
Cullens
De Bortoli
Denman Estate
Elderton
Evans and Tate
Hardy's
Heggies Vineyard ( 1x 90-pointer)
Henschke ( 1x 90-pointer)
Hickinbotham
Hill Smith Estate
Houghton
Hungerford Hill
Huntington Estate
Katnook Estate
Tim Knappstein
Krondorf
Lake's Folly
Leeuwin Estate
Peter Lehmann ( 1x 90-pointer)
Lindemans
Geoff Merril
Mildara
Mitchelton
Montrose ( 2x 90-pointers)
Moss Wood
Mountadam ( 2x 90-pointers)
Orlando
Penfolds ( 4x 90-pointers)
Petaluma ( 2x 90-pointers)
Pewsey Vale
Redbank
Redman
Reynella ( 1x 90-pointer)
Rosemount ( 4x 90-pointers)
Rothbury Estate ( 2x 90-pointers)
St Hubert
Saxonvale
Seppelt ( 5x 90-pointers)
Chateau Tahbilk ( 3x 90-pointers)
Taltarni
Tollana
Tyrrells
Vasse Felix
Virgin Hills
Wolf Blass ( 2x 90-pointers)
Wyndham Estate
Yalumba
Yarra Yerring
Yeringsberg

In total there were 289 wine scored and reviewed. There were other wines that were referred to but not reviewed and scored. In the case of Orlando there were no wines rated or scored but under the Orlando heading he had this to say:

"I have not seen any recent releases of Orlando wines, and the wines for which I do have tasting notes are no longer commercially available. However, Orlando , which is one of the most significant wineries in Australia, makes an entire range of wines with its Show Reserve and Single Bin wines being the top cuvees and often among the best wines made in Australia. Their second-level wines are designated St Helga Riesling or St Hugo Cabernet Sauvignon; these are followed by their third tier of wines which are designated by the letters RF on the label. My experience with some of Orlando's older vintages has demonstrated that the Show Reserve or Single-Bin chardonnays can be quite stunning, but they are virtually impossible to obtain in the export marketplace. The winery's St Hugo Cabernet Sauvignon from Coonawarra is also an excellent wine, and Orlando does one of the best jobs in all of Australia with its Riesling, making it in a multitude of styles, all of which are fresh, exuberent, and lively. This is a winery that I feel deserves far more attention than it has been receiving."

Although there were many prominent wineries that Parker didn't review in his buying guide, it strikes me that he knew a thing or two about Australian wines.

I'm not trying to defend Parker, just to shatter stereo-types and generalizations. I used to rely on Parker when I first started buying Bordeaux wines. Now I know that despite all his experience, he is just another wine critic and, like all other wine critics, he has his opinion and it is not infallible.

Cheers.............Mahmoud.

I'm only interested in Australian wines, their regional diversity of styles so Parker is irrelevant to me as a consumer.

Parker's interest and palate seemed to change between early 90's and mid-90's when I believe he genuinely fell in love with SA old vine shiraz and grenache. Before I think his interest was academic ...

Dr Jay Miller is taking a beating over on eBob in a long thread and it ain't pretty. Not good for Australia either ... but will bring prices down so no worries personally.

Jay60A wrote:Parker's interest and palate seemed to change between early 90's and mid-90's when I believe he genuinely fell in love with SA old vine shiraz and grenache. Before I think his interest was academic ...

Dr Jay Miller is taking a beating over on eBob in a long thread and it ain't pretty. Not good for Australia either ... but will bring prices down so no worries personally.

Gosh you are tempting me to take a look!

cheers

Carl

Regarding Jay Miller, there's a LOT of criticism e.g.

"Originally Posted by <deleted>
<deleted> is certainly a chucklehead ... BUT

The issues he raises are valid ...
40% score only with no notes ...
Spoonfeed by importers ... (manipulated or not)
Austrailia does deserve a better effort ...

Exactly how much wine do YOU (or would you) buy based on a Jay Miller score?"

Punches are NOT being pulled although Mark Squires would have pulled this if it had been airmed are RP. Seriously worth a read and heading for a car crash in an hour or three.

Jay60A wrote:Regarding Jay Miller, there's a LOT of criticism e.g.

"Originally Posted by <deleted>
<deleted> is certainly a chucklehead ... BUT

The issues he raises are valid ...
40% score only with no notes ...
Spoonfeed by importers ... (manipulated or not)
Austrailia does deserve a better effort ...

Exactly how much wine do YOU (or would you) buy based on a Jay Miller score?"

Punches are NOT being pulled although Mark Squires would have pulled this if it had been airmed are RP. Seriously worth a read and heading for a car crash in an hour or three.

Just had a look. That's some serious heat and surprised that MS is letting it go on too. Either JM is being left out to dry or JM thinks he can somehow reverse the major backlash against warm-climate aussie reds that is occurring over in the US right now. Doing a King Canute

cheers

Carl

Yep, its about a 6 page thread now.

The absence of tasting notes is very interesting. If you search the 1072 reviews online by asking for those reviews with "no tasting note given" in the actual tasting note you come up with 475 wines. That means just shy of 600 have a tasting note while all 1072 have a score. Sort of gives an idea about whether its the score or the tasting note (or both) that carries weight. Its true that most of the 475 have somthing like "Red wines $20 and over. Recommended and tasted, but no tasting note given." or "White wines $20 and under. Recommended and tasted, but no tasting note given." There is even "Red values $20 and under .Tasted and recommended, but no tasting note given." So maybe there will be a TWA issue devoted to all these value wines.

I wonder if Halliday or Mattinson/Walsh were to issue reviews that consisted of 40% scores only whether there would be an outcry and not just from the locals but eBobers as well?

Mike

If you look at forums to see where the market is going (and I would say it's a good gauge) then the US market for Australian wines looks a bloodbath.
The UK Wine Forum by contrast has quietly re-aligned it's palate and is happy to discuss the excellence of Rockford BP, Stonewell and Henschke and even Steingarten Riesling from supermarkets without recourse to RP scores while also nodding that a few others like Amon Ra are surprisingly excellent heavyweights. Seems almost like we are back to 1994-1996 and the Parker bubble has been discarded but we have added a few additional classics.

The RP thread will get locked and deleted I suspect. Jay Miller is taking body blows I will be surprised if he can recover from, although all he has done is continue the party line.

Nice to see a bit of life over there, it's been dull since they banned anyone with an opinion.

Been reading that eBob thread... I think this sums up the problems pretty well:

For me the big turn was when Parker decided to give up reviewing the Aussies. It's not that I don't trust or respect Jay's palate. I do. But when the Godfather decides his time and palate are better served on other areas, I think it made a lot of people rethink their Aussie purchases. The resale market also doesn't seem to be lucrative, and for someone like me, who hopes to get to all the wines I've bought, but realistically knows that I may have to sell some one day, I'm tending to buy things that I know will be drinking well in 20-25 years and which there is some optimistic hope that they will hold their value or increase over the years. There doesn't seem to be much confidence that Aussies will do this.

Finally, when I first started going big after Aussie wines (2005-2006) it seemed that a great deal of the high scoring wines were priced in the $25-$80 range. Who didn't want a RP 99 rated wine for under 70 bucks? I bought a great deal of Mitolos and Kilikanoons and Mollydookers that met this criteria.

"Mollydooker is the USA's Racehorse Port of the 21st century" Discuss

cheers,
Graeme

GraemeG wrote:"Mollydooker is the USA's Racehorse Port of the 21st century" Discuss

cheers,
Graeme

Disagree - well cellared bottles of the racehorse ports are still drinking well over 30 years from vintage...

Cheers,
Ian

Anyone can have their opinion about wine and publish them and that is fine. The problem I have with Parker is that he does not taste the wines "blind".

This from the train wreck on ebob

"I believe that Jay rates slightly higher than Bob but any fool with some math sense can interpolate their palate to Jay's."

Does anyone else find this as funny as I do?

Glen

GRB wrote:This from the train wreck on ebob

"I believe that Jay rates slightly higher than Bob but any fool with some math sense can interpolate their palate to Jay's."

Does anyone else find this as funny as I do?

Glen

At least he admits to being a fool unlike many of the other points lemmings on that board.

That thread highlighted an interesting dilemma. I think it's a bit hypocritical for Jay Miller to say that there are great, almost unknown (in the US) wines that come from other regions than the Barossa and McLaren Vale, but then he relies on importers who mainly show wines from just these two regions!

As a wine advocate, shouldn't they show wines from all these other regions as well? And why do they rely on importers for ALL the wines they review? Jay Miller said Australia is too big to visit all the regions, but that sounds like a bit of a cop out. Surely the importers could show all the Barossa and MV wines in the US, so Miller could visit other regions?

I use the same 'mathematics' for assessing both Jay Miller's and James Halliday's scores: subtract 5-7 points!

[quote="Mahmoud Ali"]
One last note. Twenty years ago Parker wrote "Whether it is due to the the excessive filtration of wines or to the excessive emulation of wine making styles, the tragedy of modern winemaking is that it has become increasingly difficult to tell a Chardonnay made in Italy from one made in France or California or Australia. When all the corporate winemakers throughout the world begin to make their wines in the same way, designing them to offend the least number of people, wines will doubtless lose their fascinating appeal and individuality."

It is ironic that today Parker is blamed for the internationalization of wine styles and the loss of individuality.

Mahmoud.[/quote]

Good note. Parker is certainly blamed, alongside Michel Rolland, for the transformation of much Bordeaux wine into a hyper hedonistic, over-ripe, over extracted, over alcoholic and over oaked style. Blind, I would place much modern Bordeaux in California. Where has gone most of the fragrantly elegant, vibrant and firmly structured Bordeaux on which I was brought up?

I think most of you are overstating Parker influence on Aussie market in US. From what I see in the Liquor Stores and Supermarkets in US, I tend to believe that less of 10% of our exports (in volume) to US have a Parker review and maybe 2% would have a score of 90+.
IMO, aussie brands did a fantastic work in the US and European markets in the last 20 years, and now chilean, argentinian, spanish, and even italian and french brands are doing the same recipe: very good marketing, good wines and much better prices.
Producers of inexpensive aussie wines will need to re-invent their business in US and in Europe, while the top-end wines will continue to have a fair market-share, smaller, but fair.
This is just my perception...Am I totally wrong ?

Many reports are suggesting the $40+ Oz wines are almost dead in terms of sales. Many producers have been dropped by importers. I think the impact hasn't been over-stated, and it's still early days. The 'new' economy will have many more casualties.

Even the Bordelais have been asked to drop prices by at least 50% for the 2007 vinatge or some major buyers will not purchase any wine. This is still the time of 'negotiation' via the media, but things are changing very quickly.

Interesting article in the Wall Street Journal about the ethics of the Wine Advocate.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124330183074253149.html

Daryl Douglas wrote:

jeremy wrote:Big, big continent. I'm not suggesting only drinking Australian wines, but if you had to pick a country and wanted diverse regional expression, this large Island wouldn't be your worst choice.

That's the reason I'm happy to drink only Aussie wines

100 % agreed.

Much more interesting is the "What about Now" notes on older Shiraz and Grenache in the lastest issue.

The majority of the wines are from the 96 - 98 vintages and he is quite impressed at how the wines have aged and the further potential of some of them.

2 wines stand out:

- the 94 Clarandon Hills Shiraz gets a 62 rating, which in my experience is a very generous review

- the 100pt 95 Greenock Creek Roennfedlt Road Shiraz which he describes as " the most compelling wine I have tasted in 2009"

Gosh, after drinking wines from all over the world I would find it awfully dull to drink only one country's wine. But then thats just me.

Cheers..............Mahmoud.

I recently borrowed Parker's Wine Buying Guide No.7 (2008) from the local library. As reported there are no tasting notes, just list of scored wines under the heading of individual producers. There are notes on the producer, their quality and range, but just lists of wines, their scores and drinking windows.

After years of recommending that readers refer to the tasting notes to decide if they might like a wine it looks like Parker has either given up or now believes that a score is sufficient.

In the introduction to the section on Australian wines I came across something interesting. First, let me quote what was written about Shiraz in the introduction to the earlier 1989-90 buying guide:

"Shiraz--Despite the Aussies' present-day infatuation with Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, and Pinot Noir, this is the grape that makes their greatest red wines. The problem is that there is an enormous amount of it in Australia, and only a handful of producers treat Shiraz (Syrah) with the respect and care that it accords Cabernet. It can produce Australia's greatest red wine when left to stand on it's own, as Penfolds Grange Hermitage convincingly proves, or it can offer more dimension and character to a red wine when blended with Cabernet Sauvignon, as Penfolds and Petaluma have proven time and again."

Perhaps correct at the time, when export markets carried mostly Cabernet wines from Australia, but not true today. However, the following is what the current 7th edition of 2008 has to say about Shiraz:

"Shiraz--Despite the Aussies' present-day infatuation with such international grapes as Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, and Pinot Noir, it is Shiraz that produces their greatest wines. The problem is that there is an enormous amount of it, and only a handful of producers treat Shiraz (Syrah) with the respect and care that is accorded Cabernet. It can produce Australia's greatest red wine when left to stand on it's own, as Penfolds Grange has convincingly proven over 50 years. Additionally, it can provide more dimension and character to a red wine when blended with Cabernet Sauvignon, as Penfolds and Petaluma have proven time and time again.the greatest examples emerge from only two regions, Barossa and McLaren Vale. Elsewhere, Shiraz usually produces one-dimensional, heavy wines."

First, this is pretty much the same material and not in any way correct. Secondly, Jay Miller recently said wrote that it's the importers fault that wines from regions other than the Barossa and McLaren Vale don't get recognition. According to the buying guide these "other" regions produce one-dimensional Shiraz because they're preoccupied with Cabernet, Merlot and Pinot Noir. Since it is Miller's name at the end of the introduction in the current edition you have to wonder how much he really understands the Australian wine scene.

Cheers..............Mahmoud.

Mahmoud,

the problem with the wine buyers guide is that it trys to do too much. When it was just Parker and Rovanni reviewing the wines, they could just about sqeeze the tasting notes in along with the other information. With the expanded team though comes expanded coverage and I presume they had to choose between making the book 3000 pages, cutting out whole areas or, as they have done, droping the tasting notes.

I presume in the end they are going to produce a lot more area specific books, but if you really want all the tasting notes, then the only thing to do is to subscribe to the online site - even the paper edition does not include everything.

Mychurch,

I read wine critics to keep up with the world of wine, sometimes to see if they like a wine but rarely as a guide to buying wines. I do feel reassured if critics like the wine I've decided to purchase and cellar but it isn't vital. So it is with Parker. I have the older buying guide because it was in a remainder bin for a couple of dollars not because I needed it for the wine scores. Over the years I've discovered too many scores and drinking windows that were so far off the mark that if I relied on Parker I would be missing out on a whole host of wine experiences.

I've also come to the conclusion that a reputable producer can make good wines in almost any vintage and that vintage variation is a good thing. It allows wine to develop and mature (I love the texture and palate of older wines) at different rates. So if Parker, or any other wine critic, doesn't like a reputable producer's wine from a particular vintage it doesn't necessary worry me unless there is a flaw in the wine that I can judge from the tasting note or description, like too much oak, or too fruity and alcoholic.

If the price is right, and the wine is from a reputable producer, I will buy it. Recently I found a bottle of 1998 Castello di Volpaia 'Coltassala' Chianti Riserva. The producer is good, the vintage is poor. I bought it on reputation alone and only later bothered to find out what the critics thought (Parker rates it something like 86 or 87). I know with a weaker vintage it will be an early developer and I will open it earlier than I would a bigger vintage.

So Parker's buying guide may be trying too much. Accepted. But fat good it does. A well balanced wine scoring 86-88 is much more appealing to me that a 90+ wine that has coconut and vanilla, or chocolate and jammy fruit. I borrowed the recent buying guide from the library merely out of curiosity. I do like the bits he has to say about the producers though.

Subscribing to one critic, like Parker, not likely. I enjoy a diversity of opinion and for what it's worth I would trust Jancis Robinson over anyone else.

Cheers...........Mahmoud

Mahmoud,

looks like you've learned the only thing that anyone needs to learn about wine : trust your own instincts. Takes a while to get to that stage though, and for those just starting out on the wine adventure, Parkers Guide, even without the tasting notes, is a good place to start.

86 points from Parker to me usually means a very good wine that will drink well at a young age. Anything with that score and a sensible price is usually worth trying.

Cameron