http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...004581,00.html



$2 wine wins gold medal
Article from: The Courier-Mail



Anna Edwards

July 13, 2007 12:00am

A BOTTLE of "two buck chuck" has beaten hundreds of wines to the double
gold prize in a prestigious wine tasting competition in California.
Charles Shaw Chardonnay, which is sold for $US1.99 ($A2.30) beat 359
other Californian chardonnays, including a $55 bottle for the top spot.

Receiving 98 points in the California State Fair Commercial Wine
Competition, the winning drop was described as a "delight to taste," by
one of its judges.

Second place went to an $US18 $A20.86 bottle and the most expensive wine
at the event, which was $US55 $A63.74 didn't win a medal.

Unfortunately, Aussie connoisseurs can't try Charles Shaw for
themselves.The winning tipple is mass produced in California and only
sold through a franchise of grocery stores called Trader Joe's.

"We choose to sell good quality wines at $2 a bottle because we think
it's a fair price," winemaker Fred Franzia told ABC News after the win.

"We think other people are charging too much."

One of the judges of the event said it was likely some people wouldn't
like the winning "two buck chuck."

"You know, there are a lot of wines I don't like. So you drink what you
like, don't drink what you don't and you go home a happy camper," the
judge said.


--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

Skydiving, like wine, is good from the first drop.

Honest, Peter.... it's all hype. Don't believe the advertising.
It's Two Buck UpChuck.

``````````````````````````````

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 04:12:20 +0000 (UTC), PeterLucas >
wrote:

>
>http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...004581,00.html
>
>
>
>$2 wine wins gold medal
>Article from: The Courier-Mail
>
>
>
>Anna Edwards
>
>July 13, 2007 12:00am
>
>A BOTTLE of "two buck chuck" has beaten hundreds of wines to the double
>gold prize in a prestigious wine tasting competition in California.
>Charles Shaw Chardonnay, which is sold for $US1.99 ($A2.30) beat 359
>other Californian chardonnays, including a $55 bottle for the top spot.
>
>Receiving 98 points in the California State Fair Commercial Wine
>Competition, the winning drop was described as a "delight to taste," by
>one of its judges.
>
>Second place went to an $US18 $A20.86 bottle and the most expensive wine
>at the event, which was $US55 $A63.74 didn't win a medal.
>
>Unfortunately, Aussie connoisseurs can't try Charles Shaw for
>themselves.The winning tipple is mass produced in California and only
>sold through a franchise of grocery stores called Trader Joe's.
>
>"We choose to sell good quality wines at $2 a bottle because we think
>it's a fair price," winemaker Fred Franzia told ABC News after the win.
>
>"We think other people are charging too much."
>
>One of the judges of the event said it was likely some people wouldn't
>like the winning "two buck chuck."
>
>"You know, there are a lot of wines I don't like. So you drink what you
>like, don't drink what you don't and you go home a happy camper," the
>judge said.



--

A husband is someone who takes out the trash and gives the impression he just cleaned the whole house.

sf <> wrote in :

>
> Honest, Peter.... it's all hype. Don't believe the advertising.
> It's Two Buck UpChuck.



As we don't get it over here......... I'll have to take your word.


Unless someone over there with some sort of oneology background wants to
disagree with you.......... then you're on your own kiddo :-)







>
> ``````````````````````````````
>
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 04:12:20 +0000 (UTC), PeterLucas >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...3739,22067576-
004581,00.html
>>
>>
>>
>>$2 wine wins gold medal
>>Article from: The Courier-Mail
>>
>>
>>
>>Anna Edwards
>>
>>July 13, 2007 12:00am
>>
>>A BOTTLE of "two buck chuck" has beaten hundreds of wines to the
double
>>gold prize in a prestigious wine tasting competition in California.
>>Charles Shaw Chardonnay, which is sold for $US1.99 ($A2.30) beat 359
>>other Californian chardonnays, including a $55 bottle for the top
spot.
>>
>>Receiving 98 points in the California State Fair Commercial Wine
>>Competition, the winning drop was described as a "delight to taste,"
by
>>one of its judges.
>>
>>Second place went to an $US18 $A20.86 bottle and the most expensive
wine
>>at the event, which was $US55 $A63.74 didn't win a medal.
>>
>>Unfortunately, Aussie connoisseurs can't try Charles Shaw for
>>themselves.The winning tipple is mass produced in California and only
>>sold through a franchise of grocery stores called Trader Joe's.
>>
>>"We choose to sell good quality wines at $2 a bottle because we think
>>it's a fair price," winemaker Fred Franzia told ABC News after the
win.
>>
>>"We think other people are charging too much."
>>
>>One of the judges of the event said it was likely some people wouldn't
>>like the winning "two buck chuck."
>>
>>"You know, there are a lot of wines I don't like. So you drink what
you
>>like, don't drink what you don't and you go home a happy camper," the
>>judge said.
>
>
>



--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

"People sleep safely in their beds because rough men stand ready in
the night to do violence to those who would do them harm"
-- George Orwell

On 2007-07-21, PeterLucas > wrote:
>
>
> Unless someone over there with some sort of oneology background wants to
> disagree with you.......... then you're on your own kiddo :-)

I'm surprised by the date on that article. Charles Shaw wine was
quite a sensation when it first hit the market, years ago. But,
lately it's not what it used to be. When it first came out, it was
pretty darn good for the price and the alcohol content was at least
13.5%, indicative of sweeter grapes. Today, it's down to 12% and a
good batch is a rarity. I used to swear by the stuff, but rarely
drink it anymore, depite TJs finally opening a store in my town.

nb

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 02:02:24 -0700, sf <> wrote:

>
>Honest, Peter.... it's all hype. Don't believe the advertising.
>It's Two Buck UpChuck.
>

When TJ's first came to Chicago I tried several of their brands. I
poured at least 6 bottles of wine down the drain. NASTY stuff.

Lou

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 04:12:20 +0000 (UTC), PeterLucas >
wrote:

>
>http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...004581,00.html
>

You've got Rosemont Estate down there. Let's trade. Actually take
TJ's too.

Lou

"PeterLucas" > wrote in message
0.25...
>
> http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...004581,00.html
>
>
>
> $2 wine wins gold medal
> Article from: The Courier-Mail

TJs 2 buck chuck is a decent little table wine at a great price. As 2
dollar wines go, you can't do better. But that just makes it a good 2 buck
wine. I'd not pay 5 bucks for it, you can do a lot better in that price
range. It's great for cooking too, I made a delightful coq au vin with it.

Paul

"Paul M. Cook" wrote:
>
> TJs 2 buck chuck is a decent little table wine at a great price. As 2
> dollar wines go, you can't do better. But that just makes it a good 2 buck
> wine. I'd not pay 5 bucks for it, you can do a lot better in that price
> range. It's great for cooking too, I made a delightful coq au vin with it.

I disagree. I've tried lots of $5-$6 wines,
and I think Charles Shaw beats most of them
most of the time. I particularly like their
Sauvignon Blanc. I don't think it can be
beaten for less than $10.

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 16:08:57 -0700, Mark Thorson >
wrote:


>I disagree. I've tried lots of $5-$6 wines,
>and I think Charles Shaw beats most of them
>most of the time. I particularly like their
>Sauvignon Blanc. I don't think it can be
>beaten for less than $10.

Yes, it can. Easily. Their Sauvignon Blanc is abysmal. Too sweet,
too oaked, at least to my taste. I much prefer the Sauvignon Blancs
from New Zealand and South Africa. And Trader Joes sometimes sells a
much better Sauvignon Blanc from South Africa called Zarafa, for under
$4/bottle. Try that one some time, if they have it. It is a really
good food wine for the price.

And here in NM, I can find a decent Sauvignon Blanc from New Zealand,
in one of the bigger bottles. I think Red Cliff is the name, but I
don't have the bottle in front of me right now. The price for that
one is about $13, but again, it is one of the big bottles.

Both the New Zealand Sauvignon Blancs and the South African ones are
not overoaked, and many times not oaked at all. That makes for a very
versatile wine, and one that is a good match for food. And they have
a really nice acidity.

Christine

"Mark Thorson" > wrote in message
...
> "Paul M. Cook" wrote:
> >
> > TJs 2 buck chuck is a decent little table wine at a great price. As 2
> > dollar wines go, you can't do better. But that just makes it a good 2
buck
> > wine. I'd not pay 5 bucks for it, you can do a lot better in that price
> > range. It's great for cooking too, I made a delightful coq au vin with
it.
>
> I disagree. I've tried lots of $5-$6 wines,
> and I think Charles Shaw beats most of them
> most of the time. I particularly like their
> Sauvignon Blanc. I don't think it can be
> beaten for less than $10.

Try the Smoking Loon brand. Typically 5-6 bucks a bottle and way better
than Charles Shaw.

Paul

"Christine Dabney" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 16:08:57 -0700, Mark Thorson >
> wrote:
>
>
> >I disagree. I've tried lots of $5-$6 wines,
> >and I think Charles Shaw beats most of them
> >most of the time. I particularly like their
> >Sauvignon Blanc. I don't think it can be
> >beaten for less than $10.
>
> Yes, it can. Easily. Their Sauvignon Blanc is abysmal. Too sweet,
> too oaked, at least to my taste. I much prefer the Sauvignon Blancs
> from New Zealand and South Africa. And Trader Joes sometimes sells a
> much better Sauvignon Blanc from South Africa called Zarafa, for under
> $4/bottle. Try that one some time, if they have it. It is a really
> good food wine for the price.
>
> And here in NM, I can find a decent Sauvignon Blanc from New Zealand,
> in one of the bigger bottles. I think Red Cliff is the name, but I
> don't have the bottle in front of me right now. The price for that
> one is about $13, but again, it is one of the big bottles.
>
> Both the New Zealand Sauvignon Blancs and the South African ones are
> not overoaked, and many times not oaked at all. That makes for a very
> versatile wine, and one that is a good match for food. And they have
> a really nice acidity.
>


Gotta agree, Ausie wines are often dirt cheap, typically 5-8 bucks for
brands like Yellow Tail, Lindemans and Black Swan, and are incredibly good
even at double the price.

Paul

We've had great experience with the new Trader Joe's brand as well
(they actually have TJ on their label). On the East Coast, it's about
$3.99 instead of $1.99, though! The Syrah is great


On Jul 21, 4:53 pm, "Paul M. Cook" >
wrote:
> "Christine Dabney" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 16:08:57 -0700, Mark Thorson >
> > wrote:
>
> > >I disagree. I've tried lots of $5-$6 wines,
> > >and I think Charles Shaw beats most of them
> > >most of the time. I particularly like their
> > >Sauvignon Blanc. I don't think it can be
> > >beaten for less than $10.
>
> > Yes, it can. Easily. Their Sauvignon Blanc is abysmal. Too sweet,
> > too oaked, at least to my taste. I much prefer the Sauvignon Blancs
> > from New Zealand and South Africa. And Trader Joes sometimes sells a
> > much better Sauvignon Blanc from South Africa called Zarafa, for under
> > $4/bottle. Try that one some time, if they have it. It is a really
> > good food wine for the price.
>
> > And here in NM, I can find a decent Sauvignon Blanc from New Zealand,
> > in one of the bigger bottles. I think Red Cliff is the name, but I
> > don't have the bottle in front of me right now. The price for that
> > one is about $13, but again, it is one of the big bottles.
>
> > Both the New Zealand Sauvignon Blancs and the South African ones are
> > not overoaked, and many times not oaked at all. That makes for a very
> > versatile wine, and one that is a good match for food. And they have
> > a really nice acidity.
>
> Gotta agree, Ausie wines are often dirt cheap, typically 5-8 bucks for
> brands like Yellow Tail, Lindemans and Black Swan, and are incredibly good
> even at double the price.
>
> Paul

Lou Decruss > wrote in
:

> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 04:12:20 +0000 (UTC), PeterLucas >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...004581,00.html
>>
>
> You've got Rosemont Estate down there. Let's trade. Actually take
> TJ's too.
>
> Lou
>


LOL :-)

As a matter of fact, I was approached by the management of a club I was at
last night and given a list of wines that they were thinking of bringing on
board. I was told to go through the list and select the best.

Rosemount Estate was one of them. Strictly 'split label' or Diamond label.
*No* jigsaw labels!!



--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

"People sleep safely in their beds because rough men stand ready in
the night to do violence to those who would do them harm"
-- George Orwell

"Paul M. Cook" > wrote in
news:a0xoi.2546$7w.99@trnddc05:

>
> "Christine Dabney" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 16:08:57 -0700, Mark Thorson >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >I disagree. I've tried lots of $5-$6 wines,
>> >and I think Charles Shaw beats most of them
>> >most of the time. I particularly like their
>> >Sauvignon Blanc. I don't think it can be
>> >beaten for less than $10.
>>
>> Yes, it can. Easily. Their Sauvignon Blanc is abysmal. Too sweet,
>> too oaked, at least to my taste. I much prefer the Sauvignon Blancs
>> from New Zealand and South Africa. And Trader Joes sometimes sells a
>> much better Sauvignon Blanc from South Africa called Zarafa, for
>> under $4/bottle. Try that one some time, if they have it. It is a
>> really good food wine for the price.
>>
>> And here in NM, I can find a decent Sauvignon Blanc from New Zealand,
>> in one of the bigger bottles. I think Red Cliff is the name, but I
>> don't have the bottle in front of me right now. The price for that
>> one is about $13, but again, it is one of the big bottles.
>>
>> Both the New Zealand Sauvignon Blancs and the South African ones are
>> not overoaked, and many times not oaked at all. That makes for a
>> very versatile wine, and one that is a good match for food. And they
>> have a really nice acidity.
>>
>
>
> Gotta agree, Ausie wines are often dirt cheap, typically 5-8 bucks for
> brands like Yellow Tail,


I've got a stack of Yellow Tail (Casella) Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay
I'm slowly getting through at the moment. And it certainly doen't sell
for $5-8 here :-(




--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

"People sleep safely in their beds because rough men stand ready in
the night to do violence to those who would do them harm"
-- George Orwell

In article <ISwoi.2537$7w.1888@trnddc05>,
"Paul M. Cook" > wrote:

> Try the Smoking Loon brand. Typically 5-6 bucks a bottle and way better
> than Charles Shaw.

Smoking Loon?
Ah, the Native American child born on a cold winter night as a loon
called out in a pogonip fog or a child of the sixties or someone who
taught a loon to smoke (see child of the sixties above) or a loon struck
by lightning or otherwise set on fire.

leo

--
<http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/>

"Leonard Blaisdell" > wrote in message
...
> In article <ISwoi.2537$7w.1888@trnddc05>,
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>
> > Try the Smoking Loon brand. Typically 5-6 bucks a bottle and way better
> > than Charles Shaw.
>
> Smoking Loon?
> Ah, the Native American child born on a cold winter night as a loon
> called out in a pogonip fog or a child of the sixties or someone who
> taught a loon to smoke (see child of the sixties above) or a loon struck
> by lightning or otherwise set on fire.


Or just a catchy name. Amazingly dull label, though.

Paul

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 00:53:56 +0000 (UTC), PeterLucas >
wrote:

>Lou Decruss > wrote in
:
>
>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 04:12:20 +0000 (UTC), PeterLucas >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...004581,00.html
>>>
>>
>> You've got Rosemont Estate down there. Let's trade. Actually take
>> TJ's too.
>>
>> Lou
>>
>
>
>LOL :-)
>
>As a matter of fact, I was approached by the management of a club I was at
>last night and given a list of wines that they were thinking of bringing on
>board. I was told to go through the list and select the best.
>
>Rosemount Estate was one of them. Strictly 'split label' or Diamond label.
>*No* jigsaw labels!!

Everyone obviously has their own tastes with wine. I was turned on to
Rosemont about 12 years ago and knew instantly is was my new favorite.
And it's consistent year after year. Columbia Crest from California
had one fabulous year in the mid 90's but it's not quite as good now
(IMO) and at double the price I won't buy it. Rosemont's Merlot,
Shiraz, Cab, and blends are the best wine value around for my taste.
Especially for a bottle well under $10.

YMMV

Lou

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 23:53:42 GMT, "Paul M. Cook"
> wrote:

>
>Gotta agree, Ausie wines are often dirt cheap, typically 5-8 bucks for
>brands like Yellow Tail, Lindemans and Black Swan, and are incredibly good
>even at double the price.
>
>Paul
>
Exactly!!! I'd rather spend 5-8 bucks for a great bottle than 2 bucks
for panther ****. Your list is excellent but I'd add Rosemont Estate.
Lindemans is my Favorite from your list.

Lou

Lou wrote on Sun, 22 Jul 2007 17:52:06 GMT:

??>> Gotta agree, Ausie wines are often dirt cheap, typically
??>> 5-8 bucks for brands like Yellow Tail, Lindemans and Black
??>> Swan, and are incredibly good even at double the price.
??>>
??>> Paul
??>>
LD> Exactly!!! I'd rather spend 5-8 bucks for a great bottle
LD> than 2 bucks for panther ****. Your list is excellent but
LD> I'd add Rosemont Estate. Lindemans is my Favorite from your
LD> list.

I guess standards differ. TJs wines are drinkable but I've not
had a *great* bottle of wine for $5 since the 1960s :-)


James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On 2007-07-22, James Silverton > wrote:

> I guess standards differ. TJs wines are drinkable but I've not
> had a *great* bottle of wine for $5 since the 1960s :-)

I have. A 1L bottle, no less. Back around '92-93, Woodside was
closing out the previous year's bottling of Zinfandel. They were
discounting it all over town and I was just getting started on wines.
I bought out all the places that still had some, about 6 cases from
different stores, all bottled in different places, all about $5-6.
Most of it was just ok, a few bottles had turned, but there were 4-5
bottles that were spectacular, even by a neophyte's standards.

While not a $5 bottle, Gallo had a cab in '94 that was fantastic for
only $9-10. When people caught on, it went like wildfire. I wish I
still had some of those.

nb

notbob wrote on Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:01:25 -0500:

??>> I guess standards differ. TJs wines are drinkable but I've
??>> not had a *great* bottle of wine for $5 since the 1960s
??>> :-)

n> I have. A 1L bottle, no less. Back around '92-93, Woodside
n> was closing out the previous year's bottling of Zinfandel.
n> They were discounting it all over town and I was just
n> getting started on wines. I bought out all the places that
n> still had some, about 6 cases from different stores, all
n> bottled in different places, all about $5-6. Most of it was
n> just ok, a few bottles had turned, but there were 4-5
n> bottles that were spectacular, even by a neophyte's
n> standards.

n> While not a $5 bottle, Gallo had a cab in '94 that was
n> fantastic for only $9-10. When people caught on, it went
n> like wildfire. I wish I still had some of those.

Not to downgrade the bargain too much, $10 in 1994 is equivalent
to $13-14 now and $14 will get you a very decent bottle of OZ
Shiraz. Spending over $20 will get something verging on very
good.

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Jul 22, 12:45 pm, "James Silverton" >
wrote:
> notbob wrote on Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:01:25 -0500:
>
> ??>> I guess standards differ. TJs wines are drinkable but I've
> ??>> not had a *great* bottle of wine for $5 since the 1960s
> ??>> :-)
>
> n> I have. A 1L bottle, no less. Back around '92-93, Woodside
> n> was closing out the previous year's bottling of Zinfandel.
> n> They were discounting it all over town and I was just
> n> getting started on wines. I bought out all the places that
> n> still had some, about 6 cases from different stores, all
> n> bottled in different places, all about $5-6. Most of it was
> n> just ok, a few bottles had turned, but there were 4-5
> n> bottles that were spectacular, even by a neophyte's
> n> standards.
>
> n> While not a $5 bottle, Gallo had a cab in '94 that was
> n> fantastic for only $9-10. When people caught on, it went
> n> like wildfire. I wish I still had some of those.
>
> Not to downgrade the bargain too much, $10 in 1994 is equivalent
> to $13-14 now and $14 will get you a very decent bottle of OZ
> Shiraz. Spending over $20 will get something verging on very
> good.
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland

help me out James, still a novice here, although my hubby enjoys
expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine WINS a
competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get anything good for
under $20.00. I am not doubting you or causing a fight. Just wonder,
really, how a wine can win if it is only a couple of bucks but real
wine drinkers insist it can't be good. How do they finagle those darn
contests? >B.T.

wrote:
>
> help me out James, still a novice here

Would it be posssible for you to provide any reliable
documentation that you are not the terrible spammer
known under the pseudomyn D.? You seem to be unusual
as the only person to back up his commercial advertising
and dangerous dietary supplement recommendations.

Potomac, Maryland
> wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 22, 12:45 pm, "James Silverton" >
wrote:
> notbob wrote on Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:01:25 -0500:
>
> ??>> I guess standards differ. TJs wines are drinkable but I've
> ??>> not had a *great* bottle of wine for $5 since the 1960s
> ??>> :-)
>
> n> I have. A 1L bottle, no less. Back around '92-93, Woodside
> n> was closing out the previous year's bottling of Zinfandel.
> n> They were discounting it all over town and I was just
> n> getting started on wines. I bought out all the places that
> n> still had some, about 6 cases from different stores, all
> n> bottled in different places, all about $5-6. Most of it was
> n> just ok, a few bottles had turned, but there were 4-5
> n> bottles that were spectacular, even by a neophyte's
> n> standards.
>
> n> While not a $5 bottle, Gallo had a cab in '94 that was
> n> fantastic for only $9-10. When people caught on, it went
> n> like wildfire. I wish I still had some of those.
>
> Not to downgrade the bargain too much, $10 in 1994 is equivalent
> to $13-14 now and $14 will get you a very decent bottle of OZ
> Shiraz. Spending over $20 will get something verging on very
> good.
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland

help me out James, still a novice here, although my hubby enjoys
expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine WINS a
competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get anything good for
under $20.00. I am not doubting you or causing a fight. Just wonder,
really, how a wine can win if it is only a couple of bucks but real
wine drinkers insist it can't be good. How do they finagle those darn
contests? >B.T.

It depends a lot on how tastings and competitions are organized. Most of
the stuff reported is anecdotal. The only way to really rate wines is a
blind tasting like the famous one of 1976 where California wines came out
ahead of French and most of the tasters were French. The French have been
proclaiming "We wuz robbed" ever since. If Wine Spectator were not in the
business of selling wine, they might be a lot more honest.

--
Jim Silverton

On 2007-07-22, James Silverton > wrote:

> Not to downgrade the bargain too much, $10 in 1994 is equivalent
> to $13-14 now and $14 will get you a very decent bottle of OZ
> Shiraz. Spending over $20 will get something verging on very
> good.

None of which are "fantastic", and the '94 was released in '96.
Prices and greed being what they are today, $20 and "verging" are no
deal in my book.

nb

Lou Decruss > wrote in
:


>>
>>As a matter of fact, I was approached by the management of a club I
>>was at last night and given a list of wines that they were thinking of
>>bringing on board. I was told to go through the list and select the
>>best.
>>
>>Rosemount Estate was one of them. Strictly 'split label' or Diamond
>>label. *No* jigsaw labels!!
>
> Everyone obviously has their own tastes with wine. I was turned on to
> Rosemont about 12 years ago and knew instantly is was my new favorite.



In that's the case, you'd think you'd be able to spell it properly.


http://www.rosemountestate.com/index.asp



> And it's consistent year after year. Columbia Crest from California
> had one fabulous year in the mid 90's but it's not quite as good now
> (IMO) and at double the price I won't buy it. Rosemont's Merlot,
> Shiraz, Cab, and blends are the best wine value around for my taste.
> Especially for a bottle well under $10.


No disagreeing with that.

I just don't like the 'jigsaw' labels.


>
> YMMV
>



My mileage has got nothing to do with it.




--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

"People sleep safely in their beds because rough men stand ready in
the night to do violence to those who would do them harm"
-- George Orwell

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 23:40:53 GMT, "James Silverton"
> wrote:

>Potomac, Maryland
> > wrote in message
roups.com...
> On Jul 22, 12:45 pm, "James Silverton" >
> wrote:
> > notbob wrote on Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:01:25 -0500:
> >
> > ??>> I guess standards differ. TJs wines are drinkable but I've
> > ??>> not had a *great* bottle of wine for $5 since the 1960s
> > ??>> :-)
> >
> > n> I have. A 1L bottle, no less. Back around '92-93, Woodside
> > n> was closing out the previous year's bottling of Zinfandel.
> > n> They were discounting it all over town and I was just
> > n> getting started on wines. I bought out all the places that
> > n> still had some, about 6 cases from different stores, all
> > n> bottled in different places, all about $5-6. Most of it was
> > n> just ok, a few bottles had turned, but there were 4-5
> > n> bottles that were spectacular, even by a neophyte's
> > n> standards.
> >
> > n> While not a $5 bottle, Gallo had a cab in '94 that was
> > n> fantastic for only $9-10. When people caught on, it went
> > n> like wildfire. I wish I still had some of those.
> >
> > Not to downgrade the bargain too much, $10 in 1994 is equivalent
> > to $13-14 now and $14 will get you a very decent bottle of OZ
> > Shiraz. Spending over $20 will get something verging on very
> > good.
> >
> > James Silverton
> > Potomac, Maryland
>
> help me out James, still a novice here, although my hubby enjoys
> expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine WINS a
> competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get anything good for
> under $20.00. I am not doubting you or causing a fight. Just wonder,
> really, how a wine can win if it is only a couple of bucks but real
> wine drinkers insist it can't be good. How do they finagle those darn
> contests? >B.T.
>
> It depends a lot on how tastings and competitions are organized. Most of
>the stuff reported is anecdotal. The only way to really rate wines is a
>blind tasting like the famous one of 1976 where California wines came out
>ahead of French and most of the tasters were French. The French have been
>proclaiming "We wuz robbed" ever since. If Wine Spectator were not in the
>business of selling wine, they might be a lot more honest.
>
> --
> Jim Silverton

....and the wine spectator would have no business if they had a
reputation of being shills. i think it's incumbent on those saying
'it must have been rigged' to provide some evidence, other than the
common 'the fix is in everywhere' attitude. the wine spectator
conducts blind tastings:

<http://www.avalonwine.com/ratings-systems-parker-wine-spec.htm>

....so you might argue that they have poor taste, but i don't think
they're being bribed, or are just 'in the business of selling wine,'
which i don't think they are. they run a magazine, don't they?

your pal,
blake

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Jul 22, 12:45 pm, "James Silverton" >
> wrote:
> > notbob wrote on Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:01:25 -0500:
> >
> > ??>> I guess standards differ. TJs wines are drinkable but I've
> > ??>> not had a *great* bottle of wine for $5 since the 1960s
> > ??>> :-)
> >
> > n> I have. A 1L bottle, no less. Back around '92-93, Woodside
> > n> was closing out the previous year's bottling of Zinfandel.
> > n> They were discounting it all over town and I was just
> > n> getting started on wines. I bought out all the places that
> > n> still had some, about 6 cases from different stores, all
> > n> bottled in different places, all about $5-6. Most of it was
> > n> just ok, a few bottles had turned, but there were 4-5
> > n> bottles that were spectacular, even by a neophyte's
> > n> standards.
> >
> > n> While not a $5 bottle, Gallo had a cab in '94 that was
> > n> fantastic for only $9-10. When people caught on, it went
> > n> like wildfire. I wish I still had some of those.
> >
> > Not to downgrade the bargain too much, $10 in 1994 is equivalent
> > to $13-14 now and $14 will get you a very decent bottle of OZ
> > Shiraz. Spending over $20 will get something verging on very
> > good.
> >
> > James Silverton
> > Potomac, Maryland
>
> help me out James, still a novice here, although my hubby enjoys
> expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine WINS a
> competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get anything good for
> under $20.00. I am not doubting you or causing a fight. Just wonder,
> really, how a wine can win if it is only a couple of bucks but real
> wine drinkers insist it can't be good. How do they finagle those darn
> contests? >B.T.
>

Wine contests are all classified into varietals and price. You do not see a
2 dollar wine competing with a 20 dollar wine. The TJs wine was probably in
the "under 5 dollar" category. And something else that most people don't
know about those contests; the winners often sponsor the contests. It's
just the most amazing of coincidences that they win. Gallo was famous for
this and almost got sued for false advertising. They would advertise their
wines as "gold medal winning" and "triple silver medal winner 3 years in a
row." The thing is the contests were all sponsored by Gallo and only
included their wines. My bet is the contests themselves were held in Joe
Gallo's living room. "Holy Mary datz some a good vino!"

I never pay any attention to any claims about awards. Simply try it and if
you like it, it's good wine.

Paul

On Jul 22, 4:40 pm, "James Silverton" >
wrote:
> Potomac, Maryland > wrote in message
>
> oups.com...
> On Jul 22, 12:45 pm, "James Silverton" > wrote:
>
> > notbob wrote on Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:01:25 -0500:
> >
> > ??>> I guess standards differ. TJs wines are drinkable but I've
> > ??>> not had a *great* bottle of wine for $5 since the 1960s
> > ??>> :-)
> >
> > n> I have. A 1L bottle, no less. Back around '92-93, Woodside
> > n> was closing out the previous year's bottling of Zinfandel.
> > n> They were discounting it all over town and I was just
> > n> getting started on wines. I bought out all the places that
> > n> still had some, about 6 cases from different stores, all
> > n> bottled in different places, all about $5-6. Most of it was
> > n> just ok, a few bottles had turned, but there were 4-5
> > n> bottles that were spectacular, even by a neophyte's
> > n> standards.
> >
> > n> While not a $5 bottle, Gallo had a cab in '94 that was
> > n> fantastic for only $9-10. When people caught on, it went
> > n> like wildfire. I wish I still had some of those.
> >
> > Not to downgrade the bargain too much, $10 in 1994 is equivalent
> > to $13-14 now and $14 will get you a very decent bottle of OZ
> > Shiraz. Spending over $20 will get something verging on very
> > good.
> >
> > James Silverton
> > Potomac, Maryland
>
> help me out James, still a novice here, although my hubby enjoys
> expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine WINS a
> competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get anything good for
> under $20.00. I am not doubting you or causing a fight. Just wonder,
> really, how a wine can win if it is only a couple of bucks but real
> wine drinkers insist it can't be good. How do they finagle those darn
> contests? >B.T.
>
> It depends a lot on how tastings and competitions are organized. Most of
> the stuff reported is anecdotal. The only way to really rate wines is a
> blind tasting like the famous one of 1976 where California wines came out
> ahead of French and most of the tasters were French. The French have been
> proclaiming "We wuz robbed" ever since. If Wine Spectator were not in the
> business of selling wine, they might be a lot more honest.
>
> --
> Jim Silverton

Thank you Jim! I suspect that often a cheap wine gets good marks only
because it is a remarkable bargain. I'd prefer to have wines reviewed
next to each other without regard of any kind for the price. Than you
could really see what the honest feedback is. > B.T.

Paul M. Cook wrote:

>
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> On Jul 22, 12:45 pm, "James Silverton"
>> > wrote:
>> > notbob wrote on Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:01:25 -0500:
>> >
>> > ??>> I guess standards differ. TJs wines are drinkable but
>> > I've ??>> not had a *great* bottle of wine for $5 since the
>> > 1960s ??>> :-)
>> >
>> > n> I have. A 1L bottle, no less. Back around '92-93,
>> > Woodside n> was closing out the previous year's bottling of
>> > Zinfandel. n> They were discounting it all over town and I
>> > was just n> getting started on wines. I bought out all the
>> > places that n> still had some, about 6 cases from different
>> > stores, all n> bottled in different places, all about $5-6.
>> > Most of it was n> just ok, a few bottles had turned, but
>> > there were 4-5 n> bottles that were spectacular, even by a
>> > neophyte's n> standards.
>> >
>> > n> While not a $5 bottle, Gallo had a cab in '94 that was
>> > n> fantastic for only $9-10. When people caught on, it went
>> > n> like wildfire. I wish I still had some of those.
>> >
>> > Not to downgrade the bargain too much, $10 in 1994 is
>> > equivalent to $13-14 now and $14 will get you a very decent
>> > bottle of OZ Shiraz. Spending over $20 will get something
>> > verging on very good.
>> >
>> > James Silverton
>> > Potomac, Maryland
>>
>> help me out James, still a novice here, although my hubby
>> enjoys expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine
>> WINS a competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get
>> anything good for under $20.00. I am not doubting you or
>> causing a fight. Just wonder, really, how a wine can win if it
>> is only a couple of bucks but real wine drinkers insist it
>> can't be good. How do they finagle those darn contests? >B.T.
>>
>
> Wine contests are all classified into varietals and price. You
> do not see a 2 dollar wine competing with a 20 dollar wine. The
> TJs wine was probably in the "under 5 dollar" category.

I don't do wine so I don't have a dog in this fight, but I think
one of the articles said that some of the wines it bested cost
something like $55 a bottle. That would seem to indicate, if my
memory is accurate, that it wasn't only competing with five-buck-
or-less wine.


--
Blinky
Killfiling all posts from Google Groups
Details: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

"Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
.. .
> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
> >
> > > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> >> On Jul 22, 12:45 pm, "James Silverton"
> >> > wrote:
> >> > notbob wrote on Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:01:25 -0500:
> >> >
> >> > ??>> I guess standards differ. TJs wines are drinkable but
> >> > I've ??>> not had a *great* bottle of wine for $5 since the
> >> > 1960s ??>> :-)
> >> >
> >> > n> I have. A 1L bottle, no less. Back around '92-93,
> >> > Woodside n> was closing out the previous year's bottling of
> >> > Zinfandel. n> They were discounting it all over town and I
> >> > was just n> getting started on wines. I bought out all the
> >> > places that n> still had some, about 6 cases from different
> >> > stores, all n> bottled in different places, all about $5-6.
> >> > Most of it was n> just ok, a few bottles had turned, but
> >> > there were 4-5 n> bottles that were spectacular, even by a
> >> > neophyte's n> standards.
> >> >
> >> > n> While not a $5 bottle, Gallo had a cab in '94 that was
> >> > n> fantastic for only $9-10. When people caught on, it went
> >> > n> like wildfire. I wish I still had some of those.
> >> >
> >> > Not to downgrade the bargain too much, $10 in 1994 is
> >> > equivalent to $13-14 now and $14 will get you a very decent
> >> > bottle of OZ Shiraz. Spending over $20 will get something
> >> > verging on very good.
> >> >
> >> > James Silverton
> >> > Potomac, Maryland
> >>
> >> help me out James, still a novice here, although my hubby
> >> enjoys expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine
> >> WINS a competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get
> >> anything good for under $20.00. I am not doubting you or
> >> causing a fight. Just wonder, really, how a wine can win if it
> >> is only a couple of bucks but real wine drinkers insist it
> >> can't be good. How do they finagle those darn contests? >B.T.
> >>
> >
> > Wine contests are all classified into varietals and price. You
> > do not see a 2 dollar wine competing with a 20 dollar wine. The
> > TJs wine was probably in the "under 5 dollar" category.
>
> I don't do wine so I don't have a dog in this fight, but I think
> one of the articles said that some of the wines it bested cost
> something like $55 a bottle. That would seem to indicate, if my
> memory is accurate, that it wasn't only competing with five-buck-
> or-less wine.
>

Not a chance. I've had wines in the 50 buck range and they are light years
beyond anything TJs sells. TJs is just bulk process made table wine. It's
jug wine in a small bottle. TJ sells Fat Cat Cabernet which at 4.99 a
bottle is not only afine bargain but it is a very very nice Cab. And it
could wipe the floor with any of the Charles Shaw stuff. .

Paul

In article <wHbpi.3395$7w.1456@trnddc05>,
"Paul M. Cook" > wrote:

> > wrote in message


> > expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine WINS a
> > competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get anything good for
> > under $20.00. I am not doubting you or causing a fight. Just wonder,
> > really, how a wine can win if it is only a couple of bucks but real
> > wine drinkers insist it can't be good. How do they finagle those darn
> > contests? >B.T.
> >
>
> Wine contests are all classified into varietals and price. You do not see a
> 2 dollar wine competing with a 20 dollar wine. The TJs wine was probably in
> the "under 5 dollar" category.

It was the California State Fair.

It was a blind tasting.

There were no price categories.

The wine was bottled by Charles Shaw, which sells mostly through TJs but
isn't part of it.

It was a chardonnay, competing against other chardonnays.

In article <_Wdpi.12268$U47.6113@trnddc08>,
"Paul M. Cook" > wrote:

> Not a chance. I've had wines in the 50 buck range and they are light years
> beyond anything TJs sells. TJs is just bulk process made table wine. It's
> jug wine in a small bottle. TJ sells Fat Cat Cabernet which at 4.99 a
> bottle is not only afine bargain but it is a very very nice Cab. And it
> could wipe the floor with any of the Charles Shaw stuff. .

My wife drinks a liter of wine a year. I drink lots of beer, but there's
no joy there. When I want to cook with wine, I think two buck Chuck
would be perfect. The only time I cook with wine is when we have some
going stale/sour in the fridge. So there's that going for the cheap
wines.
I've never cooked with it. The damned TJ store is seven miles away and
I'm unfamiliar with it. My more local supermarkets can't touch that
price. I won't go that far. What's a poor boy to do?

leo

--
<http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/>

"Leonard Blaisdell" > wrote in message
...
> In article <_Wdpi.12268$U47.6113@trnddc08>,
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>
> > Not a chance. I've had wines in the 50 buck range and they are light
years
> > beyond anything TJs sells. TJs is just bulk process made table wine.
It's
> > jug wine in a small bottle. TJ sells Fat Cat Cabernet which at 4.99 a
> > bottle is not only afine bargain but it is a very very nice Cab. And it
> > could wipe the floor with any of the Charles Shaw stuff. .
>
> My wife drinks a liter of wine a year. I drink lots of beer, but there's
> no joy there. When I want to cook with wine, I think two buck Chuck
> would be perfect. The only time I cook with wine is when we have some
> going stale/sour in the fridge. So there's that going for the cheap
> wines.
> I've never cooked with it. The damned TJ store is seven miles away and
> I'm unfamiliar with it. My more local supermarkets can't touch that
> price. I won't go that far. What's a poor boy to do?


I cook with it all the time. It's just fine. It's also drinkable, not at
all a bad wine - nothing terribly negative to say. It's just simple wine,
not a lot of body, a fair bouquet, no bad aftertaste, not woody or tart.
But worthy of an award? No.

Paul

"Dan Abel" > wrote in message
...
> In article <wHbpi.3395$7w.1456@trnddc05>,
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>
> > > wrote in message
>
>
> > > expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine WINS a
> > > competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get anything good for
> > > under $20.00. I am not doubting you or causing a fight. Just wonder,
> > > really, how a wine can win if it is only a couple of bucks but real
> > > wine drinkers insist it can't be good. How do they finagle those darn
> > > contests? >B.T.
> > >
> >
> > Wine contests are all classified into varietals and price. You do not
see a
> > 2 dollar wine competing with a 20 dollar wine. The TJs wine was
probably in
> > the "under 5 dollar" category.
>
> It was the California State Fair.
>
> It was a blind tasting.
>
> There were no price categories.
>
> The wine was bottled by Charles Shaw, which sells mostly through TJs but
> isn't part of it.
>
> It was a chardonnay, competing against other chardonnays.

I'd have to see the lineup. The Charles Shaw Chardonnay is something I
drink often and cook with. It's no where close to Sutter Home's offering at
about 3.50 a bottle. Smoking Loon is great at 4.95 on average. BV makes a
jug wine offering for about 9 bucks (1.50 liters) and it is night and day
better than CS.

Here's one guy's take on it.

http://blog.winemag.com/index.php/20...wo-buck-chuck/

Paul

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 04:04:42 GMT, "Paul M. Cook"
> wrote:

>
>"Dan Abel" > wrote in message
...
>> In article <wHbpi.3395$7w.1456@trnddc05>,
>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>>
>> > > wrote in message
>>
>>
>> > > expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine WINS a
>> > > competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get anything good for
>> > > under $20.00. I am not doubting you or causing a fight. Just wonder,
>> > > really, how a wine can win if it is only a couple of bucks but real
>> > > wine drinkers insist it can't be good. How do they finagle those darn
>> > > contests? >B.T.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Wine contests are all classified into varietals and price. You do not
>see a
>> > 2 dollar wine competing with a 20 dollar wine. The TJs wine was
>probably in
>> > the "under 5 dollar" category.
>>
>> It was the California State Fair.
>>
>> It was a blind tasting.
>>
>> There were no price categories.
>>
>> The wine was bottled by Charles Shaw, which sells mostly through TJs but
>> isn't part of it.
>>
>> It was a chardonnay, competing against other chardonnays.
>
>I'd have to see the lineup. The Charles Shaw Chardonnay is something I
>drink often and cook with. It's no where close to Sutter Home's offering at
>about 3.50 a bottle. Smoking Loon is great at 4.95 on average. BV makes a
>jug wine offering for about 9 bucks (1.50 liters) and it is night and day
>better than CS.
>
>Here's one guy's take on it.
>
>http://blog.winemag.com/index.php/20...wo-buck-chuck/
>
>Paul
>

hey, paul, what happened to 'i guess i was wrong - they weren't all
under five dollars'? then we can get back to discussing cabbages and
kings.

your pal,
blake

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 01:28:51 -0000, wrote:

>On Jul 22, 4:40 pm, "James Silverton" >
>wrote:
>> Potomac, Maryland > wrote in message
>>
>> oups.com...
>> On Jul 22, 12:45 pm, "James Silverton" > wrote:
>>
>> > notbob wrote on Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:01:25 -0500:
>> >
>> > ??>> I guess standards differ. TJs wines are drinkable but I've
>> > ??>> not had a *great* bottle of wine for $5 since the 1960s
>> > ??>> :-)
>> >
>> > n> I have. A 1L bottle, no less. Back around '92-93, Woodside
>> > n> was closing out the previous year's bottling of Zinfandel.
>> > n> They were discounting it all over town and I was just
>> > n> getting started on wines. I bought out all the places that
>> > n> still had some, about 6 cases from different stores, all
>> > n> bottled in different places, all about $5-6. Most of it was
>> > n> just ok, a few bottles had turned, but there were 4-5
>> > n> bottles that were spectacular, even by a neophyte's
>> > n> standards.
>> >
>> > n> While not a $5 bottle, Gallo had a cab in '94 that was
>> > n> fantastic for only $9-10. When people caught on, it went
>> > n> like wildfire. I wish I still had some of those.
>> >
>> > Not to downgrade the bargain too much, $10 in 1994 is equivalent
>> > to $13-14 now and $14 will get you a very decent bottle of OZ
>> > Shiraz. Spending over $20 will get something verging on very
>> > good.
>> >
>> > James Silverton
>> > Potomac, Maryland
>>
>> help me out James, still a novice here, although my hubby enjoys
>> expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine WINS a
>> competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get anything good for
>> under $20.00. I am not doubting you or causing a fight. Just wonder,
>> really, how a wine can win if it is only a couple of bucks but real
>> wine drinkers insist it can't be good. How do they finagle those darn
>> contests? >B.T.
>>
>> It depends a lot on how tastings and competitions are organized. Most of
>> the stuff reported is anecdotal. The only way to really rate wines is a
>> blind tasting like the famous one of 1976 where California wines came out
>> ahead of French and most of the tasters were French. The French have been
>> proclaiming "We wuz robbed" ever since. If Wine Spectator were not in the
>> business of selling wine, they might be a lot more honest.
>>
>> --
>> Jim Silverton
>
>Thank you Jim! I suspect that often a cheap wine gets good marks only
>because it is a remarkable bargain. I'd prefer to have wines reviewed
>next to each other without regard of any kind for the price. Than you
>could really see what the honest feedback is. > B.T.

um, it was a blind tasting. do you know what that means?

your pal,
blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 04:04:42 GMT, "Paul M. Cook"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Dan Abel" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> In article <wHbpi.3395$7w.1456@trnddc05>,
> >> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:

> >> > Wine contests are all classified into varietals and price. You do not
> >see a
> >> > 2 dollar wine competing with a 20 dollar wine. The TJs wine was
> >probably in
> >> > the "under 5 dollar" category.
> >>
> >> It was the California State Fair.
> >>
> >> It was a blind tasting.
> >>
> >> There were no price categories.
> >>
> >> The wine was bottled by Charles Shaw, which sells mostly through TJs but
> >> isn't part of it.
> >>
> >> It was a chardonnay, competing against other chardonnays.
> >
> >I'd have to see the lineup. The Charles Shaw Chardonnay is something I
> >drink often and cook with. It's no where close to Sutter Home's offering at
> >about 3.50 a bottle. Smoking Loon is great at 4.95 on average. BV makes a
> >jug wine offering for about 9 bucks (1.50 liters) and it is night and day
> >better than CS.

> hey, paul, what happened to 'i guess i was wrong - they weren't all
> under five dollars'? then we can get back to discussing cabbages and
> kings.


Paul is never wrong. There are many people like this. I tend to avoid
them. I ran into many where I used to work. I just went to their
bosses and explained the facts. This didn't make me popular.

Here is a URL:

http://apps.calexpo.com/fair/WhatsNe...asp?PRelId=157

I think Two Buck Chuck (it's three bucks on the east coast) is fine
for the price.

The real bargain at TJ's -- west coast ones, anyway -- is their beer.
You can get good microbrews and imported beers at several dollars less
per six-pack than they are anywhere else.

TJ's also often has two or three German or Czech pilsners at a mere
$3.99 a six-pack, which is outrageous. The Germans and Czechs don't
"pad" their pilsners with rice or corn; and they add hops to a degree
that they can actually be appreciated.

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 04:04:42 GMT, "Paul M. Cook"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Dan Abel" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> In article <wHbpi.3395$7w.1456@trnddc05>,
> >> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
> >>
> >> > > wrote in message
> >>
> >>
> >> > > expensive champagne. Let me ask you how a cheap wine WINS a
> >> > > competition like this TJ wine did, if you can't get anything good
for
> >> > > under $20.00. I am not doubting you or causing a fight. Just
wonder,
> >> > > really, how a wine can win if it is only a couple of bucks but real
> >> > > wine drinkers insist it can't be good. How do they finagle those
darn
> >> > > contests? >B.T.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Wine contests are all classified into varietals and price. You do
not
> >see a
> >> > 2 dollar wine competing with a 20 dollar wine. The TJs wine was
> >probably in
> >> > the "under 5 dollar" category.
> >>
> >> It was the California State Fair.
> >>
> >> It was a blind tasting.
> >>
> >> There were no price categories.
> >>
> >> The wine was bottled by Charles Shaw, which sells mostly through TJs
but
> >> isn't part of it.
> >>
> >> It was a chardonnay, competing against other chardonnays.
> >
> >I'd have to see the lineup. The Charles Shaw Chardonnay is something I
> >drink often and cook with. It's no where close to Sutter Home's offering
at
> >about 3.50 a bottle. Smoking Loon is great at 4.95 on average. BV makes
a
> >jug wine offering for about 9 bucks (1.50 liters) and it is night and day
> >better than CS.
> >
> >Here's one guy's take on it.
> >
>
>http://blog.winemag.com/index.php/20...wo-buck-chuck/
> >
> >Paul
> >
>
> hey, paul, what happened to 'i guess i was wrong - they weren't all
> under five dollars'? then we can get back to discussing cabbages and
> kings.


Eat me, Blake - I just don't give a damn about your shit. OK?

And one other thing, the CS wines are all blended, they put them up against
vintage wines. A very strange contest indeed. And unlike you I actually go
to wine contests and wine tastings whenever I get the chance. Seeing as how
I live in California I get the chance more than some flyover dipshit like
you.

Now if my comments bug you, you can just be a big boy and shut the **** up
and stop whining like a little girl. I know wines, and I will post any
thoughts I have about them and I don't need some asshole telling me what I
can or cannot do. And if you can't do that then just killfile me.

I'll say it again - it must have been a very strange contest with some very
strange judges to put that incredibly mediocre wine as a winner in any
category other than table.

Paul