While here in Cambria my wine racks were buried under a staircase down a
flight of stairs. I forgot about my wines. I now have 6 more bottles of 22
buck Chuck.

That's 2 buck Chuck (Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's) Cabernet that is 11
years old. DELICIOUS!

Have you ever accidentally aged some red's ?

Dimitri

"Dimitri" > wrote in message
...
> While here in Cambria my wine racks were buried under a staircase down a
> flight of stairs. I forgot about my wines. I now have 6 more bottles of 22
> buck Chuck.
>
> That's 2 buck Chuck (Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's) Cabernet that is 11
> years old. DELICIOUS!
>
> Have you ever accidentally aged some red's ?
>
> Dimitri

Found a couple of bottles of 1945 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild Jeroboam in my
wife's grandmother's house about 20 years. I forgot I had them until I read
your post.



Tom

"Tom Biasi" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dimitri" > wrote in message
> ...
>> While here in Cambria my wine racks were buried under a staircase down a
>> flight of stairs. I forgot about my wines. I now have 6 more bottles of
>> 22 buck Chuck.
>>
>> That's 2 buck Chuck (Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's) Cabernet that is 11
>> years old. DELICIOUS!
>>
>> Have you ever accidentally aged some red's ?
>>
>> Dimitri
>
> Found a couple of bottles of 1945 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild Jeroboam in my
> wife's grandmother's house about 20 years. I forgot I had them until I
> read your post.
>
>
>
> Tom


You might want to check their value before opening one.

Have they been stored properly?

One time on an anniversary trip I had purchased some Inglenook Cab that at
the time it was 7 to 10 years old - stored it and forgot it. Some 15 years
later I took the bottle on another anniversary trip. Before opening it I
checked the price - it had gone to $350.00 - I drank it anyway - it was very
good but I am incapable of appreciating a $350.00 bottle of wine.

Dimitri

On Jun 24, 3:58*pm, "Tom Biasi" > wrote:
> "Dimitri" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > While here in Cambria my wine racks were buried under a staircase down a
> > flight of stairs. I forgot about my wines. I now have 6 more bottles of 22
> > buck Chuck.
>
> > That's 2 buck Chuck (Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's) Cabernet that is 11
> > years old. DELICIOUS!
>
> > Have you ever accidentally aged some red's ?
>
> > Dimitri
>
> Found a couple of bottles of 1945 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild Jeroboam in my
> wife's grandmother's house about 20 years. I forgot I had them until I read
> your post.
>
> Tom


Aw you lucky so and so's. A friend of mine has a case of Robert
Modavi Cabernet he had fogotten about...20 years ago.

We cracled one bottle....oh my, was it wonderful. He won't
touch the rest , says it's worth a bunch of money.

"Tom Biasi" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dimitri" > wrote in message
> ...
>> While here in Cambria my wine racks were buried under a staircase down a
>> flight of stairs. I forgot about my wines. I now have 6 more bottles of
>> 22 buck Chuck.
>>
>> That's 2 buck Chuck (Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's) Cabernet that is 11
>> years old. DELICIOUS!
>>
>> Have you ever accidentally aged some red's ?
>>
>> Dimitri
>
> Found a couple of bottles of 1945 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild Jeroboam in my
> wife's grandmother's house about 20 years. I forgot I had them until I
> read your post.
>
>
>
> Tom
>
>

I thought you would know I was joking.
Look what they would go for.
http://www.newluxuryitems.com/expens...hild-1945.html

Tom

"Tom Biasi" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tom Biasi" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Dimitri" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> While here in Cambria my wine racks were buried under a staircase down a
>>> flight of stairs. I forgot about my wines. I now have 6 more bottles of
>>> 22 buck Chuck.
>>>
>>> That's 2 buck Chuck (Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's) Cabernet that is 11
>>> years old. DELICIOUS!
>>>
>>> Have you ever accidentally aged some red's ?
>>>
>>> Dimitri
>>
>> Found a couple of bottles of 1945 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild Jeroboam in
>> my wife's grandmother's house about 20 years. I forgot I had them until I
>> read your post.
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>
> I thought you would know I was joking.
> Look what they would go for.
> http://www.newluxuryitems.com/expens...hild-1945.html
>
> Tom
>

i thought you were. or maybe an oenophile.

On 6/24/2010 6:08 PM, Dimitri wrote:

> One time on an anniversary trip I had purchased some Inglenook Cab that
> at the time it was 7 to 10 years old - stored it and forgot it. Some 15
> years later I took the bottle on another anniversary trip. Before
> opening it I checked the price - it had gone to $350.00 - I drank it
> anyway - it was very good but I am incapable of appreciating a $350.00
> bottle of wine.


Me too. I can't tell the difference between a $3 bottle and a $300
bottle of wine. I was once invited to a very hoity toity wine tasting
and must have sampled 10 different wines. The Head Wine Mahaffadon
would go on and on about how this one had a good "nose" and the other
had good "legs" and after-tones... and he used words like "amusing" and
"captivating"...... and they all tasted like crap to me.

And while we are at it... all beer tastes the same to me. Bitter. When
I was young I would drink the stuff by the case... but now I can't stand
it. Every once in a while we'll go to some place that brews their own
beer and I'll try it out of curiosity and end up paying $4 for a glass
of something that tastes terrible. Go figure.

George L

I have left rather inexpensive wines to age a long time.
Results are mixed, but so are those with more expensive wines.
There's always the chance of something continuing to improve,
or at least become interesting, but IME it seldom corresponds
to wine reviewers' predictions.

The only wines I have found that absolutely, reliably hold up
and improve with age are ports. Claret and California cabs
are good candidates but not certainties. It goes downhill
from there but I have had old Rhones and some Italians that
were very nice. And also, Champagnes.

Steve

"Tom Biasi" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dimitri" > wrote in message
> ...
>> While here in Cambria my wine racks were buried under a staircase down a
>> flight of stairs. I forgot about my wines. I now have 6 more bottles of
>> 22 buck Chuck.
>>
>> That's 2 buck Chuck (Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's) Cabernet that is 11
>> years old. DELICIOUS!
>>
>> Have you ever accidentally aged some red's ?
>>
>> Dimitri
>
> Found a couple of bottles of 1945 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild Jeroboam in my
> wife's grandmother's house about 20 years. I forgot I had them until I
> read your post.
>
>
>
> Tom
>
>
As you probably already know, a bottle 45 Mouton Rothschild in good
condition is worth around $5,000. You can sell it on consignment.

Kent

"Kent" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tom Biasi" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Dimitri" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> While here in Cambria my wine racks were buried under a staircase down a
>>> flight of stairs. I forgot about my wines. I now have 6 more bottles of
>>> 22 buck Chuck.
>>>
>>> That's 2 buck Chuck (Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's) Cabernet that is 11
>>> years old. DELICIOUS!
>>>
>>> Have you ever accidentally aged some red's ?
>>>
>>> Dimitri
>>
>> Found a couple of bottles of 1945 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild Jeroboam in
>> my wife's grandmother's house about 20 years. I forgot I had them until I
>> read your post.
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
> As you probably already know, a bottle 1945 Mouton Rothschild in good
> condition is worth around $5,000. You can sell it on consignment.
>
> Kent
>
My 1982 Mouton Rothschild is only worth $1,500/bottle. 1945 was a
spectacular year for Bourdeaux wines, something I've never been able to
understand. How could or would that occur in the waning moments of WWII. The
French are making wine as per usual, and the allied forces are crossing the
Rhine into Germany.

Kent

On 2010-06-24, Dimitri > wrote:
>
> That's 2 buck Chuck (Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's) Cabernet that is 11
> years old. DELICIOUS!

I bet.

2$CHK was pretty good wine when it first hit the market. BTW, Charles
Shaw wine didn't hit the market till 2001. Do your bottles give an
earlier year?

nb

"Kent" > wrote in message ...
|
| "Kent" > wrote in message
| ...
| >
| > "Tom Biasi" > wrote in message
| > ...
| >>
| >> "Dimitri" > wrote in message
| >> ...
| >>> While here in Cambria my wine racks were buried under a staircase down a
| >>> flight of stairs. I forgot about my wines. I now have 6 more bottles of
| >>> 22 buck Chuck.
| >>>
| >>> That's 2 buck Chuck (Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's) Cabernet that is 11
| >>> years old. DELICIOUS!
| >>>
| >>> Have you ever accidentally aged some red's ?
| >>>
| >>> Dimitri
| >>
| >> Found a couple of bottles of 1945 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild Jeroboam in
| >> my wife's grandmother's house about 20 years. I forgot I had them until I
| >> read your post.
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >> Tom
| >>
| >>
| > As you probably already know, a bottle 1945 Mouton Rothschild in good
| > condition is worth around $5,000. You can sell it on consignment.
| >
| > Kent
| >
| My 1982 Mouton Rothschild is only worth $1,500/bottle. 1945 was a
| spectacular year for Bourdeaux wines, something I've never been able to
| understand. How could or would that occur in the waning moments of WWII. The
| French are making wine as per usual, and the allied forces are crossing the
| Rhine into Germany.
|
| Kent

About the same way that 1941, when the US got into the whole mess and
Japan attacked and chaos reigned, France produced virtually no wine
of any mention; one of the worst years in the last century. No one ever
said that Bacchus lacked a sense of humor.

pavane

"Dimitri" > wrote in message
...
> While here in Cambria my wine racks were buried under a staircase down a
> flight of stairs. I forgot about my wines. I now have 6 more bottles of 22
> buck Chuck.
>
> That's 2 buck Chuck (Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's) Cabernet that is 11
> years old. DELICIOUS!
>
> Have you ever accidentally aged some red's ?
>
> Dimitri

Hi Dimitri

Funny, but I often have accidentally aged whites. I go in assuming reds,
especially cabs, cab francs, Cahors, Madiran wines must be aged.

But I guess two buck chuck is "engineered" to be bought at 2PM and served at
7PM. Nothing wrong with that. But the very nature of tannins in reds will
allow for aging. Glad you were rewarded for your "patience."

alan

"ImStillMags" > wrote
> Aw you lucky so and so's. A friend of mine has a case of Robert
> Modavi Cabernet he had fogotten about...20 years ago.
>
> We cracled one bottle....oh my, was it wonderful. He won't
> touch the rest , says it's worth a bunch of money.

I bought a couple of bottles for $10. Drank most, but put a couple away.
Went back to the same store about 6 or 8 years later and they were selling
the same vintage for $80.

"Kent" > wrote
> 1945 was a spectacular year for Bourdeaux wines, something I've never been
> able to understand. How could or would that occur in the waning moments of
> WWII. The French are making wine as per usual, and the allied forces are
> crossing the Rhine into Germany.

War does not affect the rainfall and temperature needed for a spectacular
vintage. War or no, wine makers still had to earn a living, so they
harvested and bottled..

Kent > wrote:

> 1945 was a spectacular year for Bourdeaux wines, something I've
> never been able to understand. How could or would that occur in
> the waning moments of WWII. The French are making wine as per
> usual, and the allied forces are crossing the Rhine into Germany.

I have always assumed they hid away all the great Bordeaux made during
the occupation years, and sold it all as '45 afterwards.


Steve

Steve Pope wrote:
> Kent > wrote:
>
>> 1945 was a spectacular year for Bourdeaux wines, something I've
>> never been able to understand. How could or would that occur in
>> the waning moments of WWII. The French are making wine as per
>> usual, and the allied forces are crossing the Rhine into Germany.
>
> I have always assumed they hid away all the great Bordeaux made during
> the occupation years, and sold it all as '45 afterwards.


According to the book "Wine and War: The French, the Nazis, and the
Battle for France's Greatest Treasure ", the Germans pillaged most of
the good wines and drank them or sent them back to Germany. The author
claims that the vintners changed the labels so the Nazis thought they
were getting the good stuff.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 18:42:03 -0700, "Motzarella" >
wrote:

>.... But the very nature of tannins in reds will
>allow for aging. Glad you were rewarded for your "patience."

But not all, and not indefinitely. A good friend inherited a hundred or
so cases from his father, who was an importer of Italian wine. Barolos,
Amarones, Barbarescos.

It's depressing to find only one drinkable bottle out of each case on
average.

My earliest fine wine futures purchases were from the '64, '66. '70, and
'78 vintages. Only the '66s are still going strong. The '70s are all
brown-edged and very tired. '78 Haut Brion and La Lagune are at the end
of their lives.

The worst feeking is to open an old expensive bottle and find it
undrinkable. Drink up! They're always making more, using better and
better methods.

-- Larry

Dave Smith > wrote:

>Steve Pope wrote:

>> I have always assumed they hid away all the great Bordeaux made during
>> the occupation years, and sold it all as '45 afterwards.

>According to the book "Wine and War: The French, the Nazis, and the
>Battle for France's Greatest Treasure ", the Germans pillaged most of
>the good wines and drank them or sent them back to Germany. The author
>claims that the vintners changed the labels so the Nazis thought they
>were getting the good stuff.

I started reading that book but didn't get very far... great
subject matter but stilted writing style.

I should buckle down and plow through it sometime.

Steve

Steve Pope wrote:
> Dave Smith > wrote:
>
>> Steve Pope wrote:
>
>>> I have always assumed they hid away all the great Bordeaux made during
>>> the occupation years, and sold it all as '45 afterwards.
>
>> According to the book "Wine and War: The French, the Nazis, and the
>> Battle for France's Greatest Treasure ", the Germans pillaged most of
>> the good wines and drank them or sent them back to Germany. The author
>> claims that the vintners changed the labels so the Nazis thought they
>> were getting the good stuff.
>
> I started reading that book but didn't get very far... great
> subject matter but stilted writing style.
>
> I should buckle down and plow through it sometime.


Stilted? I had to wonder when I got to the part about how French troops
were the first to Eagle's Nest and got all their wine back. I watched
Band of Brothers and saw the episode about capturing the Eagle's nest
and finding all the wine, and he also talks about it in his book. It
seems there is some controversy over who was the first there, with
Americans and French both claiming the honours.

George Leppla wrote:
> Dimitri wrote:
>
>> One time on an anniversary trip I had purchased some Inglenook Cab that
>> at the time it was 7 to 10 years old - stored it and forgot it. Some 15
>> years later I took the bottle on another anniversary trip. Before
>> opening it I checked the price - it had gone to $350.00 - I drank it
>> anyway - it was very good but I am incapable of appreciating a $350.00
>> bottle of wine.
>
> Me too. I can't tell the difference between a $3 bottle and a $300
> bottle of wine.

Your story says you don't like either beer or wine. No matter you
aren't interested in differences in quality.

I'm fussy about beer and I only want the good stuff. For wine I can
tell the difference in quality but I'm not fussy about it so I don't
much care. I've had $3 wines and $300 dollar wines. I can tell the
difference. I free the performance curve is worse than logrythmic. I
don't know if that means I don't appreciate good wines or not.

For beers I'm happy to pay the much higher price for the very best, but
it's rare to find a bottle of beer/ale for over $20. Drinking only one
every week or so that sort of price on a beer doesn't bother me.
Drinking only a bottle of wine or two a year the $300 price range is
extreme enough for me tha tit has been a few decades since I've sprung
for the best.

Next up - Extremely good cognac. But for about 25 years I've been
saying a $200 bottle of cognac is next in line and it still hasn't
happened again. Must be too low on my priorities to happen any time
soon. Yet next month I'm likely to buy another $20 bottle of fine ale.

On 2010-06-25, Doug Freyburger > wrote:

> don't know if that means I don't appreciate good wines or not.

I think it means you can't really afford them!

> For beers I'm happy to pay the much higher price for the very best, but
> it's rare to find a bottle of beer/ale for over $20. Drinking only one
> every week or so that sort of price on a beer doesn't bother me.

They are out there. Samuel Adams $100 btl Utopia's. DogFishHead $12
for 12 oz IPA 120. I once had a privately brewed barley wine that was
$150 for a champagne sized bottle. Worth every cent. $10-20 for
large btl is average price for Belgian beers. I pay $6 for the
occassional 8 oz btl of Duchess De Bourgogne (there's one to try!).

> Drinking only a bottle of wine or two a year the $300 price range is
> extreme enough for me tha tit has been a few decades since I've sprung
> for the best.

I've not gone down that $100+ bottle of wine, yet, but I will gladly
pay $20-30 for a btl of French Champagne rather than suffer "sparkling
wine", no matter how trendy or who makes it. I don't know if wine
really does get that much better over $300.

> Next up - Extremely good cognac. But for about 25 years I've been
> saying a $200 bottle of cognac is next in line and it still hasn't
> happened again. Must be too low on my priorities to happen any time
> soon. Yet next month I'm likely to buy another $20 bottle of fine ale.

Not so sure about spirits, too. I've tasted $350 tequila and it
wasn't that much better than $60-80 tequila. Certainly not $270
better. I'm not a Scotch drinker. I know I like $80 Bourbon better
than $20 Bourbon. Vodka cracks me up! The more you spend, the less
flavor. That seems pretty dumb.

nb

notbob wrote:
> Doug Freyburger > wrote:
>

>> For beers I'm happy to pay the much higher price for the very best, but
>> it's rare to find a bottle of beer/ale for over $20. Drinking only one
>> every week or so that sort of price on a beer doesn't bother me.
>
> They are out there. Samuel Adams $100 btl Utopia's. DogFishHead $12
> for 12 oz IPA 120. I once had a privately brewed barley wine that was
> $150 for a champagne sized bottle. Worth every cent. $10-20 for
> large btl is average price for Belgian beers.

I love blue label Chimay Cinq Cents in the $15-20 range for a 750 ml
bottle. I have a few per year nearly a quarter of the beer I drink at
home.

> I pay $6 for the
> occassional 8 oz btl of Duchess De Bourgogne (there's one to try!).

I tried the 750 ml bottle over the last weekend. It was much to sweet
for my tastes. Or maybe I should describe it as having citris tones not
just sweet? I get that it was very well crafted but it happened to
clash with my personal tastes.

Instead I had a Samual Smiths Cider. They make wonderful ales so it was
worth trying one of their ciders. It was delicious but there's less
various among ciders than there is among beers. Their ales stand out
more distinctly.

>Vodka cracks me up! The more you spend, the less
> flavor. That seems pretty dumb.

When I still lived in the college dorms we tried a blind tasting. Three
discount brands and three top shelf brands. No one could tell any of
the top shelf brands apart (this was before flavored vodkas. For that
matter one of the top shelf brands was Stoli from the Soviet Union). No
one could tell any of the discount brands apart. Only half could tell
the discount brands from the top shelfs brands, and that was neat and
side by side.

I get that we were college students in a dorm doing the tasting.
Experts would get different results. But those results were sure good
enough for my purposes. I never have to care among Finlandia, Absolute
or Gray Goose.

On 2010-06-25, Doug Freyburger > wrote:

> I tried the 750 ml bottle over the last weekend. It was much to sweet
> for my tastes. Or maybe I should describe it as having citris tones not
> just sweet? I get that it was very well crafted but it happened to
> clash with my personal tastes.

It's considered a Flanders red ale, which is a sour ale. I consider
it a sweet n' sour ale, so sweet as to be, IMO, a dessert beer.
Definitely something to be taken in small doses. I can imagine one
losing one's taste after trying to down 750 ml of it! I drank five 8
oz bottles in a period of 2 mos and have lost my taste for it, too.
But, I've done the same thing before and will no doubt come back for
more.

My brewing mentor tried to brew it. It requires one part, the sour
part, to be aged for 18 mos and then mixed with the other part. It's
the only beer I've ever seen him fail to not only duplicate, but
better. Neither of us were surprised.

> I get that we were college students in a dorm doing the tasting.
> Experts would get different results.

Not necessarily! I happened to catch a radio interview with Anthony
Dias Blue, a World renown wine and spirits critic, who had just come
from the San Francisco Spirits Competition. This back in the emerging
heyday of high end spirits. He cracked me up when he asked his
interviewer, "I just came from judging the vodka competition. Do you
know how hard it is to judge premium vodkas?" In short, he had the
same complaint as I do. The higher the price, the less character.
What's to taste!?

The only time I ever bought Belvedere and Grey Goose Vodka is when
Albertson's had some sort of vodka insanity sale and was selling all
their stock of high end vodkas for $20-24 per btl. Otherwise, I wouldn't
even bother with Vodka. I figure all the rage over it is because if
you spend enough money, you don't have to taste it. Buy the most
expensive tasteless vodka you can get, then freeze it to near ice
temps so when you drink it, you taste nothing at all. Real popular
with young people who are still too wimpy to actually embrace the
strong unique flavors of good booze.

nb

Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
> Your story says you don't like either beer or wine. No matter you
> aren't interested in differences in quality.
>
> I'm fussy about beer and I only want the good stuff. For wine I can
> tell the difference in quality but I'm not fussy about it so I don't
> much care. I've had $3 wines and $300 dollar wines. I can tell the
> difference. I free the performance curve is worse than logrythmic. I
> don't know if that means I don't appreciate good wines or not.

I enjoy good beers and I am with you there. Better to have one really
good beer than a lot of the crappy brand names. When it comes to wines,
I appreciate the better wines. I don't bother with cheap plonk, though
there are some decent cheap slurping wines, few and far between, but
there are some. I appreciate that there are some characteristics to the
really expensive wines, but my palate is not developed enough to justify
huge prices.


> For beers I'm happy to pay the much higher price for the very best, but
> it's rare to find a bottle of beer/ale for over $20. Drinking only one
> every week or so that sort of price on a beer doesn't bother me.
> Drinking only a bottle of wine or two a year the $300 price range is
> extreme enough for me tha tit has been a few decades since I've sprung
> for the best.

My brothers are beer drinkers, preferring quantity over quality. The
tease me about drinking yuppie beers. They spend a lot more on beer than
I do.

On 2010-06-26, Dave Smith > wrote:

> My brothers are beer drinkers, preferring quantity over quality. The
> tease me about drinking yuppie beers. They spend a lot more on beer than
> I do.

No kidding!!

I can spend $9 on a sixer of a killer IPA and get a good buzz. The same
buzz would require $10-12 for a 12-pak of canoe beer and require you
drink to near pukedom. No contest.

nb

notbob wrote:
> On 2010-06-26, Dave Smith > wrote:
>
>> My brothers are beer drinkers, preferring quantity over quality. The
>> tease me about drinking yuppie beers. They spend a lot more on beer than
>> I do.
>
> No kidding!!
>
> I can spend $9 on a sixer of a killer IPA and get a good buzz. The same
> buzz would require $10-12 for a 12-pak of canoe beer and require you
> drink to near pukedom. No contest.

I readily admit that I like to drink alcoholic beverages..... beer,
wine, liquor, liqueurs. I have never set out to get a buzz. Not that
it's never happened. I do not drink to get drunk.

On 2010-06-26, Dave Smith > wrote:

> it's never happened. I do not drink to get drunk.

I HATE drunk! Have spent my life learning how to drink and avoid it.
OTOH, a short "happy" is always welcome. I occasionally indulge in a
couple coffees w/ a shot or two in the morning to get a nice "happy"
going and watch stand up comedy or a funny movie. I love a good laugh
in the morning.

nb

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:49:44 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> wrote:

>Next up - Extremely good cognac. But for about 25 years I've been
>saying a $200 bottle of cognac is next in line and it still hasn't
>happened again. Must be too low on my priorities to happen any time
>soon. Yet next month I'm likely to buy another $20 bottle of fine ale.

Out of curiosity, what do you classify as a "fine ale"? Even Chimay
Reserve doesn't cost $20 for a 700 ml. bottle.

-- Larry

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 19:18:34 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> wrote:

>I love blue label Chimay Cinq Cents in the $15-20 range for a 750 ml
>bottle. I have a few per year nearly a quarter of the beer I drink at
>home.

Chimay Cinq Cents is the gold label tripel. Chimay Blue is the Grand
Reserve.

-- Larry

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:19:41 GMT, notbob > wrote:

>I've not gone down that $100+ bottle of wine, yet, but I will gladly
>pay $20-30 for a btl of French Champagne rather than suffer "sparkling
>wine", no matter how trendy or who makes it.

$20-30 Champagne is pretty low-end wine.

And "French Champagne" encompasses a broad range of flavor profile,
depending in large part on the grapes used.

Are you in the US? If so, seek out a bottle of Gruet Blanc de Noirs,
made in Albuquerque, New Mexico by members of the French house of Gruet.
~ $15, and better than anything from France you can touch for <$40.

If you're in Europe, try a fine cava. Or, under the right circumstances,
a top prosecco.

> I don't know if wine really does get that much better over $300.

You can't discuss "wine" in such general terms. Some wines do; some
don't.

>> Next up - Extremely good cognac. But for about 25 years I've been
>> saying a $200 bottle of cognac is next in line and it still hasn't
>> happened again.

Why should it, when you can get a major producer's XO for <$100? If
you're not familiar with the lesser bottlings, you'de be wasting your
time and money trying anything older -- or paying a ton of money for a
crystal bottle whose contents you can't appreciate.

>.... I know I like $80 Bourbon better than $20 Bourbon.

Ummm, that's a really uninformed statement. How do you know if Pappy Van
Winkle 22/23 yr. (the absolute best, IMO) is worth $125 if you haven't
tasted a broad range of bourbons, including Woodford Reserve ($28) and
Buffalo Trace ($20), for example?

> Vodka cracks me up! The more you spend, the less flavor. That seems pretty dumb.

Flavor is not the only characteristic of a liquor. And in the US, vodka
identified as such -- without flavorings -- is by law flavorless and
odorless.

Price snobbishness is pretty pointless, IMO. We have over 100 bottles of
different single malt Scotches in the house, whose prices range widely.
Our enjoyment of each does not correlate strongly to price.

-- Larry

On 2010-06-26, pltrgyst > wrote:

> Out of curiosity, what do you classify as a "fine ale"? Even Chimay
> Reserve doesn't cost $20 for a 700 ml. bottle.

Depends on where you live. In my relatively remote neck of the woods,
I think Chimay Blue is about $15-16 at the single store that stocks it.
Add 8% tax, that puts it closer to $20 than $10.

nb

On 2010-06-26, pltrgyst > wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:19:41 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>
>>I've not gone down that $100+ bottle of wine, yet, but I will gladly
>>pay $20-30 for a btl of French Champagne rather than suffer "sparkling
>>wine", no matter how trendy or who makes it.
>
> $20-30 Champagne is pretty low-end wine.

I look for seasonal discounts.

> And "French Champagne" encompasses a broad range of flavor profile,
> depending in large part on the grapes used.

Whether is was "low-end" or not, it's still better ...IMO... than any
CA sparkling wines I've tasted.

> Are you in the US? If so, seek out a bottle of Gruet Blanc de Noirs,
> made in Albuquerque, New Mexico by members of the French house of Gruet.
> ~ $15, and better than anything from France you can touch for <$40.

That would be interesting. Perhaps I can find it stocked in Colo Springs.

> If you're in Europe.......

No such luck at this time. I only know I prefer some French white
wines over anything I've tasted stateside. I'm from CA and wasted a
lot of time exploring CA Chards. Seems the more I learned and the
more I spent and tasted, the more disappointed I became. I finally
discovered French White Burgundies. Bingo!

To me, it's about personal taste preferences, not social status. I
don't care what is considered "low-end", I care about what I like to
drink, tempered by what I can afford.

> Ummm, that's a really uninformed statement.

Ummm, that's a really judgemental statement.

> How do you know if Pappy Van Winkle 22/23 yr. (the absolute best,
> IMO) is worth $125 if you haven't tasted a broad range of bourbons,
> including Woodford Reserve ($28) and Buffalo Trace ($20), for
> example?

How do you know I haven't. You're making these assumptions based on
what?.

> Flavor is not the only characteristic of a liquor.

Duh

> And in the US, vodka identified as such -- without flavorings -- is
> by law flavorless and odorless.

Site, please.

> Price snobbishness is pretty pointless, IMO.

A rather curious statement after making it a point inform everyone you
prefer $125 Bourbon.

> We have over 100 bottles of different single malt Scotches in the
> house.....

No doubt everyone is duly impressed. Any other subjects you'd care to
be "pretty pointless" about?

nb