Good vs. Great Wine

Let’s again be honest. No one to my knowledge gets up in the vineyard every day and says let's see how we can make bad, awful wine today. Every winemaker I have ever met is there because they truly believe they will make the next 100-point wine or the next Screaming Eagle, or the next DRC Montrachet. You have to wonder are they delusional. Sometimes they are. It always boils down to two things in general. Things the winemaker can control and things they cannot. They cannot control the weather. All you need to do is look back at the weather for the past decade and you will notice that the changing weather has severely impacted wine production everywhere in the world. On the other hand, the technical aspects of winemaking and the basic chemistry have advanced a hundredfold and today, again across the world, the things winemakers can control, have become somewhat consistent from vineyard to vineyard with most winemakers now graduating from some 4-year college winemaking program. When they make wine they can “tweak” these technical details which in my opinion changes the “style” of the wine, percentage of alcohol, concentration of fruit, etc. but in the end, the actual production of the wine produces fermented alcoholic grape juice which again comes out in many ways the same.

When you read Wine Spectator or The Wine Advocate you immediately notice “scores”. Their wine experts do a report card on every wine they taste and publish for your information a score which has the intent, good or bad, to direct you to “better” or “higher quality” wines in that wine writer's opinion. Truthfully I have done the same thing. But every wine writer has a “bias” myself included. Every wine writer has a different number of taste buds on their tongue meaning no two might taste the same exact wine the same so hence their “opinion” might differ. Robert Parker to most people's understanding was biased towards big, high alcohol, jammy wines. For me my bias is balance. Wine again is grape juice with alcohol in it. But the alcohol should not be so high that all you taste is alcohol. If that is what you want you should buy vodka or grain alcohol. If all you want is sweet fruit juice then buy Welsh grape juice. But if you are like most wine buyers you want something in between. A beverage with enough alcohol to be pleasant and a taste experience that makes you think a little improves your food tastes, and in the end fits your budget.

What dawns on me is this. The question I need to answer is what is the difference between “good” wine and for me, 99% of all wine produced is “good”. But what defines “great” wine that stands out from the rest? What I have discovered over the years is that those “scores” don’t always mean the wine is a “great” wine. Usually, a higher score means a “greater” wine but not always, and maybe not for you or me but just the guy or gal writing about the wine due to their and our genetic makeup and number of taste buds on the tongue. In basic logic in order for a statement to be “true,” it has to be “true” 100% of the time. To my knowledge, I have never seen 100% of wine writers come out and say we all agree this is a “great” wine or the best ever, etc. Maybe close to 100% but still not 100%. So I have to ask is there something more fundamental or even complicated that I am overlooking?

Years ago I came up with a list of what I called spiritual wines. In short, my great wines. I have never forgotten them and I can usually list them by heart. In no particular order they are 1990 D’Yquem Sauternes, 1989 Aux Allots Leroy Red Burgundy, 1977 Sonoma Hanzell Chardonnay as well as the Pinot Noir, and 2003 Chateau Guiraud Sauternes as examples. Clearly what I consider “great” wines. But why? For one thing, they were unique. They had a unique taste profile I had not tasted before or after. Something special about them. Of the batch, the 1990 D’Yquem is a repeat favorite. Every time I drink it the sensation and thought “velvet” comes to mind, “smooth”, not too sweet, just right. Sort of the Goldilocks syndrome. Nothing out of place. The Red Burgundy had the most memorable cherry taste I can remember. A perfect cherry. None of these wines tasted anywhere close to similar wines and vintages, again very unique. As previously stated they were perfectly balanced, nothing out of place. And finally, a long pleasant hedonistic finish that evolved into a lifetime memory. You simply never forget.

I do understand that my list will not be yours or others, primarily due to our genetic differences. Your “great” wine may only be a “good” one for me or vice versa. That’s OK. In the end, all those scores help point you in the right direction but they should not be the only direction. The only way to find a “great” wine is to drink a lot of “good” wines. I sometimes deer hunt and was told years ago that you will never harvest a deer if you are not out in the woods(getting mosquito bit, stepping on snakes, being wet and cold, etc.) so the same rule applies with wine. You have to be in the arena.

My conclusion in the end for me a “great” wine is a perfectly balanced unique wine that surprises and delights me and I never forget. In fact, as I have said before it sends me on a quest to find it again at $10 a bottle. I also understand that “great” wines take time(remember the Gallo TV ads?) and usually cost a little more, but not always. There is no question that when you look at a list of great winemakers as Wine Spectator recently did writing about the founding fathers of California Chardonnay every winemaker there was meticulous and obsessed with getting it right and another factor you cannot quantify is that those winemakers and many others have is the “art” of wine. Something that only they, and sometimes even they don’t, know.