Pittnauer Zweigelt Burgenland 2007, meta, and the future

Posted on January 26, 2012 by drunkard

First, wine. After failing the certified sommelier exam yesterday (but before I had the failing grade in hand) I had lunch. Sad, unfortunate, and in some ways avoidable (certain for the next time I face such an exam), but alas, even if things are going badly it rarely helps to deny oneself food (and drink). Thinking of the quote attributed alternatively to Napoleon and Churchill, I knew I was in the category of needing it. It was fine, but I wouldn’t fill a blog with it, let’s just say. However, the red wine I had by the glass to go with some lovely venison is worth an entry.

Pittnauer Zweigelt Burgenland 2007

I had my first Zweigelt. I know, everyone remembers their first Zweigelt, and it’s always special, and this was no exception.

What? What’s a Zweigelt, you ask? Well it’s only the most popular dark grape in Austria! It’s apparently a cross between Blaufränkisch and St-Laurent, though you could be forgiven for not knowing that (and over the past three weeks I certainly have developed an appreciation for forgiveness in the face of not knowing something). Austria exports no more than a quarter of their wine, and most of their exports go to their close neighbours, with roughly 70% going to Germany and the next biggest market being Switzerland. So to find a Zweigelt on a wine list, much less to find one available by the glass, well who could say no?

Anyway, back to Zweigelt itself. As I mentioned, it’s a dark grape. It’s relatively low in acidity and in weight, with common flavours being cherries, peppers, and currants. It was originally crossed in 1922, so it’s a relatively young variety, and while very popular in Austria, has only started to go international with some plantings in Germany, the United Kingdom, and apparently Japan.

So this one in particular from Pittnauer – I just had one of those moments where I am pleased to have been keeping this blog. My memory isn’t the greatest (so I’m not sure how I managed to pass all the exams in 2010 and 2011) and while there logo on the bottle was familiar, it wasn’t until just now that I realized that I’ve blogged about them before, in particular about their Pittnauer Rosé 2010. Now their Rosé didn’t do a whole lot for me, but their Zweigelt was just the thing.

It had a very fruity nose, but with hints of chocolate, that went perfectly with my meal. It wasn’t heavy, maybe a medium minus body, and the alcohol was medium, but the intensity of flavour on the nose and the palate was fantastic. I really enjoyed this wine, and would rate it very good quality.

Right, meta update, just for kicks. This is post 53, which isn’t too bad really. I meant to mention it when I hit post 50, but didn’t realize until I was already on 51. I have 4 Likes on Facebook, and I’m not related to any of them (as far as I know). The number of impressions I’m getting on search results are way up, though I started from such a low base it’s pretty insignificant. And since I’m on the Internet, I’m getting spam – up to 111 posts blocked so far.

Also, it’s apparently still a done thing to tweet “drunk.com”, presumably when you’re drunk. Not really much to do with me, and if it makes people happy, more power to them. I only once saw evidence that anyone who tweeted it had read the blog, which made it even funnier. I almost feel like I should put up a special page just for people who should hit my homepage via Twitter so they get a special message congratulating them on being drunk and telling them to party on.

The trend does mean I’ve been asked to sell the domain more times in the last couple of months than in the past couple of years, but that’s fine. If I ever can’t afford my next drink, I know I can probably cash this in and get a case or two of something good.

Lastly, the future. I’m going to keep on blogging, though you may have noticed I’ve dropped the formal WSET style of writing up a tasting note. If it turns out I failed the tasting part of the exam, it will return. Also, I’m thinking of trying to work out some study materials for myself to do with wine geography. I love maps, and I have some good ones from a variety of sourse, including Vinodiversity. However, they mostly sit around and I only look at them when I’m after something specific, not as a general study aid.

So, I’m thinking it might be worthwhile to make up some maps online, probably using Google Maps/Earth. In an ideal world, I’d love to make up a game where the name of a wine region would appear and you would have to click on a continent, a country, possibly a state, and then zoom into the region itself. So if, for instance, if Umpqua Valley came up, you would click North America, then the USA, then Washington, and finally click within a polygon that would be the area of the AVA.

The problem, of course, is getting data for the multitude of wine regions into a map. While there are fine maps out there, I’m not sure how easy I’d find it to use them as reference for making my own, and with something like Google in particular you can zoom down to street level and I’m certainly not going to have that find a detailed set of data for most regions. There’s also the rights issue with regard to referencing third party maps – I can’t infringe on anyone else’s copyright, especially as there might be some way to turn a penny or two out of having good online maps of the wine regions of the world. There would be one further problem, and that’s staying on top of region changes. The Champagne region has increased in size recently, areas are upgraded from DOC to DOCG with increasing regularity, and the USA adds AVAs all the time. Keeping the maps up to date would be a job in itself.

But first things first – I’ll start having a look at what’s possible and what’s easy, which is always a good way to start. Thanks for reading.

Not a certified sommelier

Posted on January 25, 2012 by drunkard

Today I sat the certified sommelier exam with The Court of Master Sommeliers. Of the three parts, I failed two. I didn’t put I the hard yards for the theory and so I have no one to blame but myself. It was more geography than anything else, something which is very different from the WSET. There were no questions about wine style or questions which required any insight – just straight geography, with some matching of grape to region. I also failed on service, which was unsurprising given that I have never professionally poured a glass of wine in my life. Still, I had done some prep work but clearly not enough. Finally I did pass the tasting section. I did better with the white than the red, and the structural analysis was my strong point, but alas you need to pass all three in one go.

So I’m a bit gutted, but not completely surprised. Really disappointed with the service result. I didn’t fail by a huge margin. The theory was a wash, but the service was close. Alas, now it’s done and there are a load of things about which I haven’t even been able to think with exams looming. Tomorrow I sleep in and play games, and then it’s on to the rest of my life.

Pradio Priara Pinot Grigio 2007

Posted on January 23, 2012 by drunkard

So hey, it’s a post about a bottle of wine that I’m working my way through which is a bit of a return to form I like to think. Just to bring everyone up to speed as to who I am, what this blog is, and what one might expect to find here, here is a quick recap.

This blog was started a few months back to document my work in preparing for the Wine and Spirits Education Trust (WSET) Diploma Unit 3 Exam. The Diploma is broken down into six parts, five of which are typically covered in the first year and are all relatively bite-sized, and cover things like spirits, fortified wines, sparkling wines, what have you. Unit 3, however, is Light Wines of the World, which is pretty much everything that’s wine which is neither sparkling nor fortified. So everything really.

Over the last few months I outlined a study plan, wrote about various bits of the course material I was meant to know, and wrote up official WSET style tasting notes for most of what I drank. Nearly two weeks ago I finally took the exam. It was challenging, and I wasn’t particularly well prepared, but it’s done and I will know the result in two or three months. In the meantime, I have another exam in two days with the Court of Master Sommeliers and if I am able to pass that, I’ll be a Certified Sommelier.

So, since I’m done with my first attempt at the exam, this blog could potentially be done, and then I could write a concluding chapter when the results are known? And hey, I could sell this domain to one of the many people who seem to have expressed an interest since “drunk.com” started being used as some kind of thing on Twitter. Not going to happen.

I’ve actually enjoyed writing this blog, and so since I’m likely to be drinking for quite some time, I’m going to continue to write about what I drink so that I have a record of what I was drinking when. And who knows, some people might find it useful or entertaining. (Yeah, right.) But seriously, I’m doing this because I’m enjoying it, and see no reason to stop, even if this has outlived it’s initial charter leading up to the exam.

Pradio Priara Pinot Grigio 2007

So anyway, tonight we opened up a bottle of Priara Pinot Grigio 2007 from Pradio. This wine is from DOC Friuli Grave, which is of course in Italy, in the North East over by the border with Slovenia. Two weeks ago I could have recited a fair bit about Friuli, but tonight I had to pull out a map, which is a bit embarrassing. I do remember that the region is dominated by a huge collection of varietal wines, some of which not really well known in the greater wine world.

Pinot Grigio, on the other hand, is one of the few Italian varieties that has been elevated to International status. Actually I’m not sure that’s completely accurate – it’s Italian, but Pinot Gris is French, and the same grape. So maybe it’s one of those grapes, like Grenache, which has been International from the get go. So while I know that there are great Pinot Gris from Alsace, I still think of Pinot Gris/Grigio as Italian/International.

So this wine is not bad, but it’s a bit of a morality tale in terms of cellar management. I bought this wine three years ago as part of a mixed case after a lovely wine dinner held by a local wine merchant. It went into the cellar, and then when we moved house, some of it went into storage as the temperature in our new place has some serious fluctuations. I’m not sure how/when this bottle moved from storage back to the house, but it did so a year or two later than would have been ideal.

I liked wines that have a few years on them. The Ridge Monte Bello from a few nights ago was fantastic at the 20 year mark. Even whites I have been known to enjoy after careful cellaring. My favourite aged varietals are Chardonnay, Chenin Blanc and to some extent Riesling. Semillon and Marsanne can also age very well. Pinot Grigio though, is not especially well known as a cellaring wine, and there are reasons for that.

This wine was not bad, with some candied pear notes and still a little citrus zest. However, I’m sure it was much better two or three years ago. It’s my own fault – I’ve had this wine that whole time, but have not carefully managed my cellar and so things like this wine have peaked and started to fade without being drunk. So this year I resolve to get a handle on what wines I have so as to not let this happen again.

Theory section

Posted on January 23, 2012 by drunkard

So, I’ve covered the four flights of wines that were served blind during the exam, but I have yet to discuss the questions asked in the theory section of the WSET Diploma Unit 3 Exam. I’ll do so now, almost two weeks after the fact, though it must be said my enthusiasm have waned somewhat. I guess I’ll just try to ease into it.

First off, my predictions from a few weeks back were not very close to the mark. I expected the obligatory question to be either Bordeaux or Burgundy. Right country, wrong regions – it was actually on the topic of Languedoc-Roussillon, with the question being to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of it as a wine producing region. There was nothing on Germany, but a question each on Italy and France. Nothing on California, but one on South America. There was a New Zealand question, but with Australia as well. There was no grape specific question, though the Italian and Spanish questions certainly required grape knowledge. Instead of Pinot Noir, there was a bit question about Merlot. And instead of a question about the Rhône, it was a Bordeaux question.

I think most students thought it was a reasonable paper, and I would not disagree with them. Unfortunately, my heart sank as I realized I could give possibly better than halfway decent answers for the compulsory question and three out of the four required other questions, but one of my answers was going to be weak from the get go.

So here’s the rough text of the exam questions:

Compulsory:

Strengths/weaknesses of the Languedoc-Roussillon wine region.

Pick four out of six:

Wax poetic about Merlot.

Write about five of these topics as they relate to Australia/New Zealand: Hawke’s Bay, Grenache, 2011 harvest in Australia, Tasmania, Screw Cap, Pinot Noir

Write about the classification systems in St-Emilion and Cru Bourgeois, and recent developments therein.

Write about five of these topics as they relate to South America: Carmenère, El Niño, Coquimbo, Bonarda, Joint Ventures, Brazil

Write about three wines of Piemonte.

Write about the white wines of Rioja, Rudea, and Rías Baixas.

So, I had to take the compulsory question, which was fine. I don’t actually know that many specific facts about the Languedoc-Roussillon wine region, but I think I had enough to have passed the question. Essentially it’s something akin to a New World region within an Old World country, meaning it has lots of different grapes, people trying new varieties and techniques, and making lots of wine with the name of the grape variety right on the bottle. On the other hand, if someone gives you a bottle from Languedoc-Roussillon you really have no idea what to expect.

I went for the Merlot essay, because essay questions are relatively easy. The point of them is to make a convincing argument, and while I’m not sure I did that, I think I was moving in that direction in terms of how successful it has been as a wine and how it’s great in the vineyard, blah, blah, blah. Not an amazing piece of work, but not bad I hope.

Australia/New Zealand – how could I resist? I didn’t write about Tasmania, largely because you risk the wrath of the examiners if you mention sparkling wine and that’s what I know best from Tassie. All the others were pretty straightforward. I even name checked some of my favourites in the Pinot Noir section, in particular Barratt Wines, Shaw + Smith, and Ashford Hills.

So, St-Emilion and Cru Bourgeois – skipped it. I was in St-Emilion in June and really all I remember is that their classification system get re-evaluated periodically, and the last few times they’ve tried to do so, it’s ended up in the courts. I am not a fan of a grading done in 1855 being pretty much set in stone, but on the other hand having classifications go to court every time one is changed is pretty silly as well.

South America – somewhat iffy. Carmenère – hero grape of Chile, Bonarda – mystery grape of Argentina, Joint Ventures – would have been more convincing if I had mentioned a few more actual companies, Brazil – big country, makes wine, consumes most domestically, too warm really. I wrote something down for El Niño but I don’t think it was worth any points and I’m too embarrassed to look it up.

Finally, Piemonte or Spanish whites – I went with Piemonte but it was an incredibly weak answer. A shame as well, because I do like a good Nebbiolo once in a while, but really I just didn’t have the knowledge in me. At least it was the question I did last so perhaps the examiners will think I ran out of time. Or maybe they’ll just laugh.

I could go through and make an estimate as to how many points I managed to pick up for each question and see if I think I’ll pass, but I’d rather just move on for now and hope for the best. If I have to retake the exam in June, so be it, but with any luck I’ll be through by the skin of my teeth (which are very thin skinned, a bit like Pinot Noir).

On an unrelated note, I’ve been practicing for the Certified Sommelier exam. As I mentioned, there is a service component, and I have it on good authority that typically candidates are asked to open a bottle of sparkling wine and serve it to six or eight guests without having to revisit any glasses. I picked up the cheapest case of bubbles I could find and am about halfway through it doing just that – practicing professional service. It’s harder than it looks, it must be said. Still, if I can pick up a pin and a professional certification this week, I’ll be happy. And it’s nice to have an excuse to brush up on cocktail recipes.

A birthday treat – Ridge Monte Bello 1992

Posted on January 21, 2012 by drunkard

I still need to finish the write-up of the exam, now fading fast as a distant memory. I also want to write a bit about the upcoming CMS exam. But you know, I recently celebrated my birthday, and had an awesome bottle of wine, and that’s far more interesting than any other topic on the agenda.

Ridge Monte Bello 1992

So once upon a time I lived near a wine merchant who had a small but perfectly curated shop in London. His selection was on the high end of things, and while he also had some value wines for everyday drinking, I suspect he remained in business through a small group of regular customers who picked up a dozen cases of their favourite listed Bordeaux every year as well as the odd case of Krug when they were throwing a party. While there were wines that he highlighted every week from the New World, they came and went, while the bulk of wines on display week in and week out were almost entirely French.

That said, he always had one or two shelves which had some wine from California, and Ridge was commonly seen on it. I’m not sure exactly when I noticed he had the Monte Bello 1992 in particular, but it would have been roughly ten years ago. I bought two bottles, and having had one last year, we opened up this one last night.

So I don’t know a whole lot about the wines of California, despite having spent a fair amount of time there in the days before I cared so much about wine. I can, however, remember my first bottle of Ridge in the days leading up to the millennium at a restaurant in Colorado. They had a dozen listed on their extensive wine list, and unfortunately it too the sommelier a few tries to bring out the exact bottle I was after. However, the effort was worth it in the end.

Ridge is something of a legend in the annals California wine. The Monte Bello vineyard produced its first vintage in 1892 (which makes this bottle the 100th anniversary), but Ridge Vineyards itself was founded in the 1960s by a group out of Stanford University. Paul Draper was hired in as the winemaker. From very humble beginnings, he quickly established Ridge Monte Bello as a world class wine, with the 1971 being featured in the Judgement of Paris tasting.

Ridge makes a number of wines, with the Monte Bello being a Cabernet dominated Bordeaux red blend. I just had a quick look at their site and was surprised at how many other wines they have – I would have listed their Lytton Springs and Geyserville Zinfandels, but they also have ten other Zinfandels and other varietals with which I’m not yet familiar. While they do some “estate” wines, the emphasis is very much on single vineyard productions, with each expressing as much about that particular property as possible. I believe the Monte Bello is still their flagship.

So this bottle, as I said, already had a fair amount of age on it when I picked it up almost a decade ago, and I managed to put it away for another decade. While in theory I wish I had been able to keep it under better conditions, it was subjected to a cross-equator move, spend some time in storage in a less than ideal environment, and undoubtedly was stood upright for a little too long on at least on occasion. However, it’s brother bottle that was opened last year had shown well, and I retained high hopes for this one even though it took two attempts to get the entire cork out of the neck. We had it decanted (we BYO’d this to a restaurant) and as you can see from the side of the bottle there was a fair amount of deposit.

The wine itself was still very dark in colour, with a lovely brick rim. Over the last few months we’ve tasted a fair amount of wine, but I can’t remember the last time I had one that was a full 20 years old. So while a recent 10 year old Bordeaux had signs of ageing, the colour of it was nowhere near as brick as this Ridge.

On the nose was a wide spectrum of lovely secondary characters. There was tobacco, spices, chocolate, and even a hint of coffee. The fruit wasn’t entirely gone – it had turned into a perfume of sorts. On the palate was much the same – very rich. It was so different as compared to drinking a wine when it’s released, that I had to stop myself and actually try to refer to the WSET tasting guide. Nothing about the acidity or tannins made me consider them, but when I concentrated on both I was glad I did. The acid was actually still very zingy, and the tannins were definitely there. I didn’t initially notice either because everything was so perfectly balanced. I don’t know for how long they had been that way, but the tannins were silky and incredibly well integrated. An absolute joy to drink.

Having a look at the label, this blend is 80% Cabernet (Sauvignon – pet peeve when people don’t use full variety names), 11% Merlot and 9% Petit Verdot. I can’t say I could pick out the influences of the constituent parts, but they fit together wonderfully.

I wish I had taken a photo of the back label as well, because the note from Paul Draper from 1994 when it was bottled said something along the lines of it’s fine to drink now, but will continue to develop further complexity over the next 20 years. That’s quite a bold statement for any winemaker to put out there, but in this case he was absolutely right. It was such a thrill to open up such a bottle and to have it at just the right time. And it’s certainly a bit of a wake-up call in terms of having a look through my cellar as to what I should be drinking now lest I let something slip past its peak.

Quick note on what’s happening with this blog

Posted on January 18, 2012 by drunkard

So I’m done with my exam, or at least I’m done until I have to retake it (should that be required). However, rather than just drop it, I have every intention of continuing to write about drinks, mostly wine but certainly other beverages as they cross my palate. Now that the exam is finished, I will feel less guilty drinking things other than wine.

This week I haven’t actually had much to drink. After the exam, I did have a drop of single malt whisky, and then over the weekend that followed there was much beer consumed, but this last week has been dry in a mild detox. However, it must be said that I hate not drinking, and will certainly be back to it shortly, though possibly not until I write up a recap of the theory part of the exam.

One thing worth a mention is that while the big exam is finished, I have another exam next week for which I’m now studying. The Court of Master Sommeliers (CMS) is coming to town, and while the qualification they offer is similar to the Wine and Spirits Education Trust, there are areas where they differ. I passed the Introductory Course with CMS 18 months ago, and will be attempting the Intermediate Course which is the one you need to pass to call yourself a Certified Sommelier.

As you might expect, CMS has an additional emphasis on service which WSET does not. So for the Certification Exam, I’ll have a theory test, a blind tasting test, and a service test, which will be either wine service, sparkling wine service, or decanting. Sadly, I’ve never been paid to open or decant a bottle of wine, so this is all a bit new to me, but I’ll be giving it a go. I mean there are videos on YouTube as to how to do it, so it can’t be that hard, right? Sure.

The theory and blind tasting, however, are largely a subset of the material covered by the WSET, with a few exceptions. I’ll need to brush off my mixology skills as cocktail knowledge is required. Likewise, some information as to beer and sake is covered. But really, pass or fail will come down to me being able to open and pour a bottle of wine while being asked questions by a Master Sommelier (of which I think there are less than 200 in the world).

Anyway, that’s where things stand at the moment – me not drinking, recapping the exam of last week, and getting ready for another one next week. This time next week I’ll be finished with the exam itself, and will have an hour until I know the results. Most likely I’ll be enjoying a stiff drink of something. So wish me luck, and I’ll get back to studying, and practicing.

Exam Tasting recap (part 4)

Posted on January 18, 2012 by drunkard

Flight 4, the last flight, and with it the end of the tasting section of the WSET Diploma Unit 3 Exam. Nearly there.

So flight three was a selection of three red wines, and we were told nothing about them except that they were from areas covered in our studies. So no wines from say, Madagascar, which as I just Googled it, does in fact produce wine. (Who knew?)

It’s not a week since the exam, and my recall has faded somewhat. Suffice to say, I could have put down “Madagascar” for each and been just as correct as the answers that I did put down. Only by looking at the sheet in front of me as to what the wines actually were can I recall in the slightest as to what I was tasting and what I thought they might be.

As I said, they were all red, they were all relatively young, and here’s what I remember:

Wine 10 – cherry and light. I guessed a Valpolicella, with the grape being Cortese. Unfortunately, the grape that goes into Valpolicella is actually Corvina, so even if I had correctly guessed the country and region, I flubbed the actual grape. Bah.

Wine 11 – tart and full of cranberries. I guessed a Bordeaux, of moderate quality, with Cabernet Sauvignon at its core.

Wine 12 – ripe, juicy red berries, and a bit of fruit sweetness (not residual sugar). I guessed a Barossa Grenache, which was a bit dumb, in that if they were going to give us a Barossa wine, it would have had to have been a Shiraz. Still, it was clearly (to me) New World and I thought it was Granache, and so Barossa or McLaren Vale were my best choices.

So how did I do? Well, not brilliantly. Wine 10 was not Italian, rather French, a Beaujolais Villages from the best known producer. Where was the bubble gum and/or banana in my tasting note? A real shame, as I am a big fan of Gamay, and I failed to pick it. In my defense, on my De Long’s Wine Grape Varietal Table, Gamay and Corvina both are shown as moderate to high acidity, and on adjacent rows as far as lightweight versus light/welterweight. And they’re both Old World. But no, they’re not the same, so I might have picked up a fair few points for the observation part of the note, but alas not quite right with the region or variety.

Wine 11 was a Chinon from the Loire Valley. Well I was in France, and it’s a type of Cabernet, but really, I wouldn’t even be so bold as to call it a near miss – more the type of shot that would leave an observer uncertain as to my actual target. They both have moderate to high acidity, but Cabernet Franc produces a much lighter wine than a Cabernet Sauvignon, so a careful observer would not be likely to confuse the two. Alas, right World, right country even, wrong grape and region.

Wine 12 was a California Zinfandel, not a Barossa Shiraz. Geographically, this was the furthest afield, on the order of 13,000 km. Zinfandel and Granache on the chart are on the same row, but Zinfandel is in the high to very high acidity range and Granache is in the low to moderate acidity range. Still, both very fruit forward, berries and a bit peppery. OK, I’m kidding myself – no one would mistake the two, but somehow I did.

Anyway, that’s it for the tasting section of the exam. I really couldn’t say if I passed or failed, but fingers are crossed, and I have a sense that I may have done better on the tasting than I did on the theory, which I will start to describe tomorrow.

Exam Tasting recap (part 3)

Posted on January 17, 2012 by drunkard

So, flight three. For those who are just joining, this is a recap of the tasting portion of the January WSET Diploma Unit 3 Exam in which wines are served blind (that is, with little or no information to identify the wines – the students are still able to see) and students then evaluate them according to a very specific tasting methodology.

Flight three was a bit of a pain. We were told that all the wines were from the same region and we had to evaluate them on the basis of their relative quality levels. My mind has gone a bit fuzzy, but I don’t believe we had to give the region or even the grapes. Or maybe we did and that was a big pile of points I lost. Either way, this was a difficult flight.

Often this sort of flight is someplace like Burgundy or Bordeaux, where there are strict classification systems that go along with the AOC rules. So unless something has gone wrong, you know that in Burgundy a Grand Cru is going to be better than a Premier Cru which will be better than a Village wine, and when you are given wines to evaluate based on their quality, you can use those terms if you’re confident as to their origin. It’s a similar system for Bordeaux, and for many other strictly regulated regions. Germany, Austria and other countries have systems that do the same sort of thing at a national level. In the New World though, the local governing rules typically don’t govern quality levels beyond the base minimum, and any indicator of quality on a label is not legally backed.

Also, with that sort of framework, you can often count on having the same variety or blends. If you’re comparing red Burgundies, you’re going to be almost always talking Pinot Noir. With red Bordeaux the blend will vary depending on the bank.

The three samples came out and it was clear that this wasn’t going to be quite like that. The first wine was an orange colour, or perhaps amber. The second a slightly less than pale lemon, and the third was somewhere in between the first two. My first thought was Bordeaux, and that we had a Sauternes, a still white, and something else. Not the most solid of first impressions, but rather than just try to get somewhere on appearance alone, I stuck my nose in each.

As I mentioned a post or two ago, tasting order is apparently important, in that you are meant to taste light to dark, dry to sweet, and I believe old to new. Essentially you are better off having the most delicate wines first. So having sniffed all three, it was clear on the nose that the first sample, wine 7, was sweet. Being the clever chap I think myself, I started instead with wine 9 and took a swig, only to find that it too was somewhat sweet, even if it didn’t especially indicate such on the nose. Wine 8 was dry, and wine 7 as expected was particularly sweet.

I honestly was at a loss for what was in front of me. I could not place the region, but fortunately that was not required. I couldn’t even name the variety, but again, I think I lucked out. In terms of relative quality, I essentially went in order of sweetness, with wine 7 being highest, wine 9 being next, and wine 8 being the lowliest. The difficult part was trying to figure out the basis on which I thought that to be the case, not knowing what they were. There’s a formula the WSET uses which goes something along the lines of balance, length, intensity, and complexity. Typicity is also awarded, but I think they’ve added that somewhat recently to their tasting format and it hasn’t sunk into my head yet. So while sweetness was the obvious key I used, that just happened to line up based on the formulaic considerations.

So, it turns out they were not just from the same region, which in this case was Alsace. They were also all the same variety, Pinot Gris.

For many reasons, neither the region nor the grape was on my radar when I was tasting and making my notes. I didn’t really have a clue as to either, but at the same time I wasn’t really thinking in those terms because that wasn’t what this flight was about. Still, in retrospect I’m a bit embarrassed that it felt so out of the blue when I read the sample key after the exam.

So the wines themselves – wine 7 was a Selection Grains Nobles, meaning wine made from botrytized grapes. That is, grapes which have been afflicted by a mold which drains them of their water and concentrates their sugars. Making wine from botrytized grapes is fraught with peril, in that some years you may get it and other years your grapes may go to ruin as you wait patiently for the mold. This one in particular came from a Grand Cru, and will set you back roughly $80/bottle.

Wine 8 was an ordinary Alsatian Pinot Gris from a large and well known producer, and would probably cost about $25/bottle.

Wine 9 was also from a Granc Cru (the same one as wine 7) and will set you back something on the order of $35/bottle.

So, it may be that I did managed to correctly order the relatively quality levels, at least if the price is any indicator. I can tell you right now that the final flight was not so tidy, but that will have to wait until tomorrow.

Exam Tasting recap (part 2)

Posted on January 16, 2012 by drunkard

So, where was I? Oh yes, recounting the exam, and having described wines 4-6, it’s time for 1-3. 4-6 were whites, so I tasted them first, and while I don’t know if I believe that’s the right thing to do, it’s what I’ve been taught and it’s what everyone does.

So wines 1-3 were a flight where we were told all the wines were of the same variety, so the points for the flight were divided between some points per wine, and then some points for a section at the end where you described what variety of grapes went into the wine and why you thought that. While I wasn’t 100% accurate with this section, I had a go and I hope I didn’t do too badly.

Unfortunately, I remember a bit less about the individual wines on this flight. I remember them as fairly pale for reds, but I can’t remember which were garnet and which were ruby. I picked up lots of sour cherry, some herb notes, and a little forest floor. With lighter reds, I’ve been advised it’s often a good idea to have in your head a short list of what it might be, in that there are a few varieties which are well known for being somewhat on the paler side. Pinot Noir and Gamay spring to mind immediately, and Nebbiolo is often one to consider as well. I’ve also been told that Grenache is often lighter, but unfortunately most Grenache I’ve had has been from old vines, and therefore has been lower yielding with higher concentration.

Another thing to consider when given three wines of the same variety is that most often they will be from different regions, and generally they try to give wines with distinct enough profiles from those regions that a student might have some hope of not only telling them apart but also identifying the regions in question. So in this context, it would be weird to get two Napa Cabernets in a flight, or even a Napa and a Sonoma. More likely would be a Napa, a Right Bank Bordeaux and a Coonawarra.

Finally, as far as three wines from different places but of the same grapes does also come into play as far as which grape it could be – some grapes aren’t particularly well known to come from three different regions. So for Gamay, you’d have one from Beaujolais, and possibly one from the Loire, but where would you get the third? There’s Gamay in California, Australia, and probably a dozen other countries in the New World, but really it would be unlikely that students would be expected to be able to pick one. Nebbiolo is similar in that there are a number of regions within Italy and it’s scattered throughout the New World, but almost all New World Nebbiolo is consumed within the country it is produced, so it’s not something students from around the world would be expected to identify.

So I decided they must be Pinot Noir. It could have been a trio of Grenaches from France, Spain and Australia, but I went with Pinot Noir because to my palate Grenache often has a fruit sweetness that wasn’t present in the samples. And I picked one from Burgundy, one from Central Otago, and one left me stumped. It was lighter, and so I was thinking either Alsace or the Loire Valley. I picked Alsace, not for any reason in particular, but because I had to put down something. However, I really didn’t think they would be so cruel as to give us a Pinot Noir from Alsace or the Loire Valley.

I didn’t do too badly, at least as far as the guessing game part of the scoring. They were all in fact Pinot Noir. Two were Old World, and one was New World, and they were the ones I thought were such. As to the two Old World wines, I’m not actually positive which region I wrote for which sample, but fingers are crossed. One Pinot Noir was from Burgundy, and the other was from Germany, and Alsace hasn’t been part of Germany for many, many vintages. So if I did managed to write the right region down for each, I at least wasn’t too far off.

The New World Pinot Noir was not from Central Otago, but rather from the Adelaide Hills. I feel a bit bad about that, as I thought I had a fairly good reference for Adelaide Hills wines, but to be honest I wasn’t really looking for them on the exam. In my head, I have a notion of classic regions for grapes (in the Old World) and then usually one or two places that I would mention for them in an exam for the New World. So Chenin Blanc – the Loire Valley, and then South Africa. Riesling – Germany and then the Clare Valley. Pinot Noir – Burgundy and then Central Otago. So I had a knee jerk pick of the wrong New World region, but at least I was in the Antipodes, just on the wrong side of the Tasman.

Anyway, that was probably my most accurate flight of wines, which means the next two are seriously downhill, but they’ll have to wait until tomorrow.

Exam Tasting recap (part 1)

Posted on January 15, 2012 by drunkard

So this past week I took the WSET Diploma Unit 3 Exam, and it was interesting. It was an all day affair, with four flights of three wines each, and then a theory exam with one required question and a choice of four of six other questions. My mind is still a bit of a muddle, and it’s time to write up my recollections and to let you know what I faced. I won’t be able to say officially how I did for probably a couple of months, but I’m sure it wasn’t my best performance. There’s a retake option for June, and there’s a good chance that I will be required to do so. Sigh.

Anyway, the exam was broken down into three parts – two tasting sections where we were given two flights of three wines each with an hours in which to write our notes, and then three hours for the theory section. Today I’m going to write about the first tasting flight.

I took the exam with roughly 20 other students, and as the exam was set to begin, we sat with our examination packet of papers in front of us and six empty tasting glasses. Out came the wine decanters and we each poured a tasting sample.

The first hurdle was the order of wines and keeping track of which was which. We had place mats with numbers on them, and the decanters were marked with the sample number, so you would think it should be easy enough. However, wines 1-3 were red, and wines 4-6 were white.

That might not mean anything to most people, but in the wine trade, whites are nearly universally tasted before reds. I personally have no opinion as to that being a good or bad thing, but it’s certainly the way I was taught and the way I’ve always done it, so having samples 1-3 as red and 4-6 as white meant I tasted 4-6 first. Not a big deal, but it means starting halfway through the papers provided and then going back to the beginning. However, it’s just one more thing to keep in mind if you notice it. Unfortunately, I know of at least one student who wasn’t watching to closely and in exam autopilot mode tasted the whites first and recorded them as though they were wines 1-3. I didn’t make that mistake, but I was somewhat distracted by the order and making sure I was matching sample with notes with flight.

Typically a flight will be worth 100 points total. If the wines are unrelated, each is worth about 33 points. If there is some theme, the wines may be worth 25-30 points each and a section at the end will be worth the balance. In an exam, typically there will be a theme of three of the same grape with points awarded for picking the grape and saying why, a theme of three wines from the same region and points given for picking the region and wine/grapes, an unspecified theme which the student must ascertain and for which points are awarded, and finally there’s usually a flight in which the wines are unrelated and points are just for the notes on each wine.

So you can see a problem with getting your flights mixed up – obviously you’re not going to get points for writing up a note for a Cabernet Sauvignon when the sample is a Chardonnay. If the examiners take pity on your and swap the notes to the right samples, you can still get most of the points. However, if you have a flight all from the same country (say South Africa, Pinotage, Cabernet Sauvignon and Pinot Noir) and a flight of all the same variety (say a Napa Cabernet Sauvignon, a Coonawara Cabernet Sauvignon and a Left Bank Bourdeaux), the notes your write at the end are going to get you no points. Also, if you think you’re tasting three wines of the same variety and in fact they’re only from the same region, it can really mess up your notes. Tasting a Pinot Noir and a Pinotage with the misunderstanding that they’re the same grape will just leave you muddled.

Everyone has their own way of approaching exam tasting. With three glasses in front of me, I like to write up appearance notes for each, then nose, the palate and conclusion. The way the points are distributed, relative to the amount of time it takes to make a determination, the simple sensory points are the most time effective. Writing up colour, intensity of colour and another note about the appearance is maybe three points and takes a minute. Deciding the region and country is maybe four points but for some samples I could go back and forth all day. Therefore, before I get into the heady world of “what is this and why” I always try to make sure I’ve at least written what the acidity and intensity is like. If I run out of time going back and forth on one of the later sections, I’ll at least have given an answer for the easy bits.

So I started with 4-6, the whites. Our exam paper said that they were linked by a theme, but I can’t remember if it was more specific. It was one of the ones where you had to determine the theme and write what it was, and why. They were all fairly pale, a light lemon to lemon green colour, and I noted them as such. Next were sniffs and nose notes. Finally tastes, notes, conclusions and more notes. I can’t say I felt especially confident as I made my notes. I felt best about the middle sample, 5. It yelled out New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc, and most typically that means Marlborough. Sample 4 was much less distinct. It had decent body, and was very citrusy with a fair whack of minerality. I went with a Chardonnay from Chablis. The third had zesty acidity and I thought a bit of spice. I guessed Gewürztraminer from Alsace. I couldn’t for the life of me, however, see what they had to do with one another. A mix of Old and New World, a mix of varieties, and a mix of winemaking styles. At a loss, I wrote that I thought they were all cool climate wines, due to the good acidity and the crisp refreshing flavour profile. I was reaching.

So, I wasn’t quite right on the wines. In fact, one out of three. Wine 4 which I thought had citrus and minerality was in fact a Muscadet-Sèvre et Maine Sur Lie. I tasted a Muscadet-Sèvre et Maine back in December just before Christmas, however it didn’t spring to mind. While most students would probably be able to differentiate between a Muscadet and a Chablis very easily, they’re not actually wines I taste very often, and Chablis is a much more commonly occurring wine on wine lists. So while I’m sad I didn’t pick the right wine, I’m OK with it given that I think the flavour profiles aren’t a million miles apart and they can have similar levels of adicity. Also, while Muscadet is a light-bodied wine and Chardonnay is full-bodied, the Sur Lie treatment greatly enhances the body of the Muscadet. So hey, possibly not a bad start. Indicators of a Muscadet instead of Chardonnay would have been strong green apple or if it had been slightly salty, but I didn’t notice either.

Wine 5 I pegged as a Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc. It was grassy, it has green peppers, with sharp acidity and a clear flavour profile. Amazingly, that’s exactly what it was. Not much else to say about that.

Wine 6 I thought was a Gewürztraminer and I went with Alsace, largely because it was either there or someplace in Germany that I probably couldn’t spell. (I had a hard enough time with Gewürztraminer.) Turns out it was a German Riesling from the Mosel, and a light one at that with only 7.5% ABV. I don’t know what I wrote about it, but I’m guessing a fair amount of it wasn’t quite right. That said, I try to think of tasting notes in a Venn diagram manner. The area of overlap between the profile of a Riesling and a Gewürztraminer is a decent size – much larger say than between a Riesling and a Sauvignon Blanc. Probably not large enough to pass, but we’ll see.

Anyway, just thinking back to the day is still somewhat draining. I should have had a great night of sleep last night, based just on hours, but in fact I had weird school dreams. You know the one about having an exam for a class you haven’t attended all semester? It wasn’t quite that, but there was an element to the dream of me turning up to my Diploma class with my arms clutching a pile of laundry just out of the dryer, and having to spend the first 15 minutes of the class folding the laundry. There was also some history class I wasn’t even bothering to attend with the expectation that I would drop it before the end of the semester and possibly take it again sometime. I do not need dreams like that. I woke up exhausted. More recollections of the exam over the next few days.