Dave Smith wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
>
> > I've had $10 a bottle wine, $100 a bottle wine, and even $200 a bottle
> > wine. �I can't tell where any one is so much better that it's worth
> > more than any other. �After the third glass it could be the box wine
> > version and no one can tell the difference. �I actually I enjoy some
> > of the less popular styles of New York State wines... lately I've been
> > drinking NY State Finger Lakes wines, I enjoy Ruby Port... $9.99.
>
> >http://www.taylorreserve.com/index.htm
>
> I would expect $20 wine to be a lot better than $10 wine, When it goes past that point I expect them
> to be a lot better, but I don't think my palate is sophiticated enough to justify the extra cost.

With $100 wine if you're not tasting $90 worth of better over $10 wine
then it's not you, it's the wine. Wine is 90pct hyperbole, all that
sniffing, swishing, and spitting is pure BS.

At one point I spent more than ten yers making my own wines. For me
wines are not better or worse, just different. Lately I've been
working my way through the various dessert wines, particularly the
Ports. The pricey Ports are imported from Portugal; I've tried a
couple in the $50/.750 Liter range.. I've no intention of buying those
at the $100-$300 range. I actually much prefer the domestics from
NY's Finger Lakes region; $10/1.5Liter. As far as I'm concerned NYS
wines are the world's finast, and certainly the best value... I'm
especially partial to Lung Guyland wines.

Wine snobs remind me of Han's Christian Anderson's "The Emperor's New
Clothes". http://deoxy.org/emperors.htm

And once folks educate themselves perhaps they'd not be so quick to
bash my Crystal Palace.

SHELDON