Gary,

It is truly a shame that you even had to address us with your topic of the first 5 minutes. I pity people who always seek the ulterior motive, and are unable to take things at face value, they obviously don’t understand how much extra work is involved in dealing with all the minutia of actually reading all the comments and your personal e-mails and everything else. You have to love doing what you do in order to keep it going. If I were running WLTV in addtition to a huge wine retail store and internet operation, I would have given up by now and would have moved on. I have tremendous respect for you and look forward to meeting you in person one day to tell you that face to face.

Thanks again for all you do — and I do like LJ Pouilly-Fousse (don’t know how to spell it though), it is one of the few Chardonnays I do like. Most are just too oaky.

My last comment for a double digit episode of WLTV. I’m feeling a little verklempt. Talk amongst yourselves…

Guys, Gary gets your email with every post. You don’t need to put it in the message.

Gary, I’m a little miffed that you didn’t mention earlier that you were going to be down here in DC. How are we supposed to meet the man and shake his hand for all the honest commentary and heat you must be taking from the ‘suppliers’. I have one thing to say to them:

“Get better wine in the bottle and quit complaining when someone points out you are selling crap.”

Have a great weekend and holiday.

bravo…let em know what you’re about! i have always believed in what you are saying…and i knew i was right when buying your raves and agreeing completely with your assessments…i think you and i like the same things in wine. this was another great “everyman’s” episode. i have not drank any of these wines in a long time, but these were the wines i started out on many years ago, so it is nice to see you taste them and give some thoughts, which seem to follow my thoughts that lead me to “better” wines. these wines are not great for people that like wine, but they are great for people who want to like wine…and therefore lead people, who brave the bad wines, to better ones. “smoky garbage” is classic!!!! once again i will just say thanks for what you are doing…and let me say that my favorite gary v move is the jaw knashing after a taste of bad wine…
and just for you…Go Jets!

Rafa – It’s probably not fair to ask Gary to comment on underage drinking – he could possibly lose his license for doing so. So while he probably can’t, I can. The US is such a puritanical society it’s ridiculous. There’s guys who are 18 getting killed over in Iraq who can’t open a bottle of beer legally. Any kid with even half a brain can make their own alcohol (take a bottle of lemonade, add some sugar, add some yeast and put a balloon over the top). IMO the legislation over this behavior is crazy and leads to more problems. So I say teach your kids to be responsible. Don’t get drunk in front of your kids. Show your kids you can have a glass of wine with your dinner every night and it’s not a problem — it’s all about leading by example. I think a big problem has to do with alcohol being considered forbidden fruit (even though it’s really, really easy to make). We give kids alcohol at church and that’s okay, so why not in our homes?

Gary,
First of all, big thanks for listening to the request from myself and others to get rid of the pea-green screen and return to the standard backdrop with offbeat and occasionally bizarre hanging accompaniments. Please bring back some little action figures (Andre the Giant?) to hug the Vayner-NOD wines and we’ll be all set. I agree with GOL’s comment that it would be great if the shots of the wine labels could be made bigger in the window for a few seconds. Thanks also for mentioning ahead of time what’s happening with the schedule and when we can expect the roll-out on big 100. Really looking forward to it!! Congratulations for all you’ve done to champion your straight shot opinions and weathering the storms behind the scenes for the last 99 episodes. Today was another example with the ’02 Silver Oak. I was hoping it would do better, but like you say, you just weren’t feeling it. Last Silver Oak I drank was a ’95 Alexander Valley a couple years ago, and it showed well, or at least true to its flashy dancer form. I’ll raise a glass of something extraordinary to you on Saturday Gary (it’s my wife’s 40th birthday), and here’s to hoping someone sends in some clips for your crew to put up while we wait for the next WLTV installment. Cheers, C

I have yet to taste a wine that you recommended that i didn’t like.
But at this rate I will have to expand my “wine cellar” or start
drinking earlier in the day. Thanks for a great show everytime.

The question was asked in a previous episode, “Does Robert Parker give 90+ points to EVERYTHING?”
The chart below (if it shows up as a readable chart) says no. While his percentage of 90+ wines has increased over the past 20 years, probably as a result in the improvement of both viticulture and viniculture, it is still signicantly less than the number of wines scored below 90.

Vintage 90+ Below 90
2004 1551 2366
40% 60%
2000 2046 3563
36% 64%
1995 1275 2775
31% 69%
1990 897 2075
30% 70%
1985 286 747
28% 72%

The question was asked in a previous episode, “Does Robert Parker give 90+ points to EVERYTHING?”
The chart below (if it shows up as a readable chart) says no. While his percentage of 90+ wines has increased over the past 20 years, probably as a result in the improvement of both viticulture and viniculture, it is still signicantly less than the number of wines scored below 90.

Vintage 90+ Below 90
2004 1551 2366
40% 60%
2000 2046 3563
36% 64%
1995 1275 2775
31% 69%
1990 897 2075
30% 70%
1985 286 747
28% 72%

On a lighter note!

The Bathtub Test…
It doesn’t hurt to take a hard look at yourself from time to time, and this should help get you started. During a visit to the mental asylum, a visitor asked the Director what the criterion was which defined whether or not a patient should be institutionalized.

“Well,” said the Director, “we fill up a bathtub with cheap wine, then we offer a teaspoon, a teacup and a bucket to the patient and ask him or her to empty the bathtub.”

“Oh, I understand,” said the visitor. “A normal person would use the bucket because it’s bigger than the spoon or the teacup.”

“No.” said the Director, “A normal person would pull the plug. Do you want a bed near the window?”

Long-time viewer, first-time commenter…Irony of ironies! I just got back from a friend’s 40th b-day that included no less than a ’66 Cheval Blanc and ’66 Cote de Beaune (forget the exact app) in addition to ’88 Stag’s Leap, ’95 Krug et. al. and what do I get?? Plonkville!! But seriously, it is truly all good and I can’t believe you had to address the haters but they obviously are newbies and haven’t seen you give the pazzzzz to some big sellers and whatnot. I’m actually in Hiroshima, Japan and since our daily drinkers come at prices a little bit higher than the US it’s good to know that it makes sense to pass on those ultra-cheapies. There’s still lot’s of good deals and decent vino to be had here so I appreciate WLTV on all levels. Can’t wait for episode 100 ….Cheers,

Gary,

I never questioned your rational for doing WLTV. I always thought you were doing the blog to educate your consumers and the public. You knew that by doing a video blog on the internet that your viewer ship would be worldwide, not just the WL marketing area. Therefore, I believe, that when you are shopping in your store for the wines to taste on WLTV, you are not thinking of wines that only WL carries. You pick wines that interest you and wines that have a good distribution. The more wines that you can get people to try, the better for the industry in general.

You rate your wines honestly and without fear of your distributors. While it gets you in some trouble with some of your distributors, they also realize that the audience you reach is greater then much of the marketing that they could do. People like you and listen to what you have to say. While every pallet is different and some may not like the same wines that you do, people will go into their local wine shop looking for the wines that you said were good, no different then wines that are recommended by WS or RP. – There is just no shelf talker yet!

Keep up the good work and I look forward to episode 100.
Thanks Gary.

Chris Stanisci – Thanks for the spreadsheet. I will admit that I thought the links for the code and prices were by WL, not that it made a difference for me. It is just convenient. Great work.

I also have to vote for the CLANK. It is hysterical when Gary does it.

Brce S (Comment #54) – email me for another place for scotch. Gary has a great selection of wine (he even says he does not drink anything else other than coke). I will not promote another store here, but sometimes we need a fix for something other than wine.

Mark Z.

I have been a viewer of WLTV since its inception, and although I have not contributed as many comments as some others, I do submit them when I feel they might be either useful or entertaining. I also, as some others have, offer constructive criticism in the interest of “improving the product.” It is in this vain that I make the following suggestion – stop scoring the wines. It’s great to have you describe the wines (color, nose, palate, etc.) and to give them a Nod or Pass, but since your scoring system is for the most part capricious I would find it more informative to just say that you find the wine to be bad, fair, good, very good, excellent, nirvana or other words of that ilk. Let those (WA, WE, WS, ST) deal with the numbers game. You should just be saying whether you liked it or didn’t like it, how much and why.

On an entertaining note, I offer this excerpt form the Wine Spectator:

The best wine writers, of course, have a distinctive voice. (Having a good palate goes without saying.) I’ve often wondered what it might be like if our most famous writers reviewed wine.

Just imagine, if you will, the possibilities â?¦

Ernest Hemingway: “It is a wine. A good wine, not a great one. It is red. Wet. Its power is obvious, obvious and powerful the way men are, men who hunt and fight in bars. Real men. Except for the smell. The wine smells better than the men.”

J.D. Salinger: “Boy, I hate Pinot Noirs like this, I really do. It’s all big and ripe and phony. I mean, it’s like the winemaker is the most terrific liar you ever saw. He’s from California, so what do you expect. He took these perfectly OK Pinot grapes and decided to make Syrah out of them or something. Anyway, if you like Burgundy then you’ll probably have a hemorrhage or want to commit suicide if you come anywhere near this crap. I am not kidding.”

Deepak Chopra: “Is this wine outstanding or simply mediocre? Just by asking that question we reveal our true agenda. Enlightenment will not come through labeling one wine as good and another evil. The real question we should ask ourselves is: Why do we feel the need to define wines at all? Only by accepting the duality inherent in every wine do we come to know the divine. Price, of course, is also important.”

Charles Dickens: “I can scarcely portray the chronicle of events, morbid and precipitous, that find me at this late hour putting pen to paper in fervored accounting. But, dear reader, I will spare you the circumstances and coincidences and instead will offer vigorous praise of a most delicious claret. The Château Margaux 1847 is not the frail, feminine red portrayed by many in the English trade; instead it is effusive and elegant, with an excellent complexity. At 11 shillings, it will not send you to the poorhouse.”

Woody Allen: “It’s n-n-n-not like I’m the kind of person who drinks Chianti, usually, I mean, I eat pasta and I swell up like a tick on an artery. And garlic, don’t even get me started. Yet I like this tart little red in a half-hearted Jungian sort of way. I think back to those blind tastings with the Rabinsky twins, Doris and Phoebe. I get lightheaded just thinking about it. I still have one of their black leather blindfolds.”

Shakespeare:
“O nectar, a poetry profound, a liquid fair and hedonistic,
a drink meant truly not for mortals but the gods of misty yore.
Burdened not by filtering or fining or such slings and arrows
beset by fools. Get thee to a bottle.”

Raymond Chandler: “I’ve swilled better gasoline. That at least was at gunpoint. I should stick with Scotch but I have a thing for blondes, blondes like this Chardonnay. I thought it was classy, it had legs tall and sleek as the Chrysler Building. But it turned out to be trouble, like most blondes, a lot of flashy oak and cheap perfume. You’d think I’d learn my lesson.”

Mister Rogers: “Can you say â??trockenbeerenausleseâ?? I sure can’t. That’s a big word, boys and girls. Silly Germans. This wine is sweet like candy, fresh little candies. You like candy, don’t you? Sure. Sure. One sip, and I’m off to the Neighborhood of Make-Believe.”

William Faulkner: “A wine that calls to mind those languorous Southern summers when the days were oppressively warm and furious and impotent and you wandered the hills around Jacksonboro with your third cousin twice-removed on your mother’s side, Finnegan Russell (the elder, not his son who everyone called Buck) and his half-witted dog.”

Dr. Seuss:
“One wine.
Red wine.
This wine.
Bad wine.”

Brandon M, sorry about that…I’m sure there’s some full time fans of the Rams like you. We have fair weather fans here too, I mean all the people in the north suburbs of Chicago were all Packers fans during the 90’s and all of a sudden, they’re all Bears fans now. I guess that’s why I stay in the city.

See you later,
Go Bears!
T

Tony S. – What wine do your pair with a Chicago-style hot dog? I usually have a Dr. Pepper with mine on the corner of Van Buren and Clark in the city (I never remember the name of the place) or a Root Beer at Portillos if I’m in the burbs. I haven’t had occasion to drink wine with one. I’m assuming you have?

Here’s some mixology from WIRED to entertain while we wait for the next episode:

These days the menus at the hautest purveyors of haute cuisine may seem more scientific than culinary â?? tobacco-flavored ice cream, extruded vegetable noodles, fried mayonnaise. Chefs call it molecular gastronomy, but why should they have all the fun? Some of the world’s greatest bartenders are working on their own version, molecular mixology, using food science principles and laboratory techniques to develop off-the-wall flavor combinations and surprising textures. We asked a few of our fave drink doctors for the recipes to their most futuristic libations. OK, you may not see military-grade lasers and liquid nitrogen at local watering holes anytime soon, but who knows? Someday “the usual” might just be a cherry tomato filled with solidified gin and served in a shot glass. Bottoms up!

MARY’S FRUIT
Mixologist: Jamie Boudreau
8 cherry tomatoes
4 1�2 oz. gin
3 dashes Tabasco
2 dashes Worcestershire
1 dash of salt
1�4 tsp. agar
Core tomatoes. Whisk remaining ingredients together and boil. Spoon gin mixture into hollowed-out tomatoes and let cool until solid. Serve in shot glasses.

DEHYDRATED RUM AND COKE
Mixologist: Eben Freeman
1�2 tsp. cola-flavored Pop Rocks (special-ordered from Japan)
1�4 tsp. powdered rum (available from industrial flavor houses)
Combine ingredients. Serve on demitasse spoon.

CARAMELASERIZED WINE
Mixologist: Homaro Cantu
1 vanilla bean
6 oz. red wine
Clamp vanilla bean below an inverted wine glass. Heat bean with class-IV laser until mist coats inside of glass. Remove bean, flip glass, fill with wine, and serve.

JELLIED GIN AND TONIC
Mixologist: Eben Freeman
1 frozen lime
2 oz. simple syrup
1 1�4 tsp. citric acid
1�4 tsp. bicarbonate of soda
1â?4 tsp. confectioner’s sugar
1 1�2 sheets of sheet gelatin
1 oz. gin
2 oz. tonic water
Freeze lime and cut into chips with deli slicer. Coat slices in simple syrup and 1 tsp. citric acid; bake at 150 degrees until crisp. Mix bicarbonate of soda, sugar, and remaining citric acid. Soften sheet gelatin in cold water for two minutes. Warm gin and add gelatin. Pour into a shallow baking pan lined with plastic wrap, add tonic, and refrigerate for two hours. Cut into 1�2-inch cubes. Put cube onto lime chip, sprinkle on sugar-soda-acid mixture (the acid combines with the baking soda for a carbonated feeling on the tongue), and serve.

Julius. Truly awesome. I have to copy that for my own repeated use. Gary, I would never accuse you of pushing wine, just occasional bad taste! No but seriously, I’m one of those Silver Oak haters. The crap has been pure adulterated poison since the outset. I think the first time I had it was in the early nineties and my first reaction was, “they sure chose the right name,” and then laughing because just seemed like a charicature of California wine. All fruit and oak with absolutely no depth of flavor, no possible shelflife, almost a charicature of serious wine. Just in case you think I would pan all california Cabs, I have had Dunns, Opus, and Dominus wines that I have loved, as well as the usual Kalin I always cite. Loved the KJ comment–right on spot. Interested to hear the Jadot comments, though I find that Jadot becomes proportionately better the more you spend. By that I mean that his cheap wines have mediocre QPR whereas as you get into the $30-40 range and higher they becomes significantly better buys and classical examples of their appelation(s).
On the whole episode, I liked the concept and there is a great deal more to work with in the same vein. First growth Bordeaux (or slightly lesser ones). How about a Petrus (speaking of overated). Or again, a Beaucastlel from chateauneuf, a DRC, Screaming Eagle, Two Hands, etc etc etc. Might bust the budget but it would be good.
Red Burgundy?
Anyway, looking forward to #100. Have a great “break.”

Man I miss a couple of days and shit hits the fan. Got to go back and review all the comments. You know that making us hang for a week realy puts the presure on you to come though with your biggest episode ever…Enjoy the holiday and see ya next week.

First thing – I think there were only one or two comments that posed the ? about Gary’s motives with WLTV. The folks who did post the question probably hadn’t even given 3 minutes of thought to the idea because if they had, they’d have quickly realized that even a con artist or an actor couldn’t consistently (through some 400+ wines tasted on air) manipulate his choices and responses in order to move inventory or whatever else might have been implied.
Next thing – I kind of wish that the first 5 – 10 comments were comments, not “first”, “in”, “made it”, etc. Just a wish.
Next thing – If Gary CAN use WLTV – (an incredibly inovative and cutting-edge approach to wine-review), to benefit his family’s business, more power to him! It’s not unethical OR bad to figure out ways to PROFIT from providing a unique service! This is America –
Next thing – Rafa – I like your question. My husband and I have a 21+ son, 19+ daughter and 14+ daughter. From the time they were 2, we have encouraged and allowed them to taste what we drink. At age 2, we let them dip and lick the cork or stick their finger in the glass and lick it. At the age of 3 my husband had our son Philip at the LA County Fair and was tasting wine. He put Philip up on the counter and let him stick his chubby little finger into the current taste. Philip (who only knew one wine name), licked his finger and then stated loudly, “Mmmm! Pinot Noir!” Being – by CHANCE – that it was Pinot Noir, the other tasters were blown away! It’s a fun memory! But the thing is, we’ve talked about wine (and other alcohol) and tasted it and, as they grew older, allowed them a short glass with us at the table (15 – 16 years old). When they learned to drive, and until they are past 21, they are not allowed behind the wheel for the rest of the day if they’ve had even 2 swallows of alcohol with us. By the time Philip turned 21, he KNEW how to appreciate and enjoy wine, beer, hard cider, etc. He KNEW his limits and never had any desire to get wasted. Alcohol has become, for our kids, just another fun aspect of cuisine. I think our approach helped to develop that attitude.
Last thing – The cheese/wine show was good. However, I was slightly grossed out by the chewing (while talking), swishing, spitting (ESPECIALLY when GV used the glass of water to do a big mouth swish and spit) and I hope nobody had to look in that spit bucket other than Gary….
PS – How about Rose? There’s some fantastic stuff coming along from Argentina, Italy, even California (I just had a Syrah blush that was really good). The good ones aren’t cheap so, Gary – can you do a broad tasting so we don’t have to?

Good show, I love the stinky feet and burnt garbage nose… I have been watching for a while but this is my first post. Cant wait for the big show.

Gary,

Anybody that accuses you of pushing wine you are just trying to sell for a big profit is stupid. A recent show where you really liked a Merlot (the Charles Creek?) but said to not buy at the current price because you were going to place a big order and get a better price was the biggest evidence of this. Between that and the bad reviews of some wines that you almost have to stock, you have proven yourself to be of the utmost integrity.

Unfortunately, most people do not have this level of integrity and so they look for the worst in those that do. Don’t let it get to you. Keep up what you are doing and let the conspiracy theorists have their evil little suspicions.

PattyO – What Syrah rose are you referring to?

I can tell already from the posts that it is going to be a long week without WLTV.

SS Chris – I’m a purist so I vote for the original Vayner-nod.

PattyO (& other WLTV Viewers),

I could be wrong, but I think that many of you missed the actually exchange that, in my humble opinion, prompted Gary’s decision to address this issue on this Ep #99.

There were some mild references to this subject in comments sections of #97 and #98 and, I believe, this is what Patty O is referring to when she says, “I think there were only one or two comments that posed the ? about Garyâ??s motives with WLTV.”

I suggest that you go back to Comment #127 on Episode #96 which is where, I believe, it all started. I defended Gary and WLTV, but it turned into a quite a debate. I’m not putting this out there to single anyone out, because I believe it has been resolved with that viewer. My intention is to shed light on the reason why Gary felt the need to respond. After reading that exchange (approx. 10-11 comments), I think you will all have a better understanding of why Gary felt the need to respond the way he did. I know that I, for one, understand completely.

Anyway, hope this helps.