As I get more into this blogging thing, more producers and marketing types are contacting me to send me wine samples. I would be lying if I said I did not think (hope?) that would eventually happen, but that is not even one of the top five reasons I started writing this blog (maybe that might be its own post someday). The samples are certainly not pouring in, but I am struggling to find time to both try the wines and subsequently write about them.
I have also been behind recently trying to keep up with all the other blogs I follow; there just never seems to be enough time to get to them all. I guess I need to quit my day job so I would have more time–if only I could get my wife to sign off!
I did manage to read Steve Heimoff’s blog today where he wrote “Thoughts about retasting a wine after a producer complains.” In the article, he laments the desire of producers to send him another bottle of their wine after having received a seemingly undesirable score from Mr. Heimoff. Although Mr. Heimoff states that this is a somewhat rare occurrence, when it does happen, the producer almost invariably proclaims that it must have been a “bad bottle” that was scored.
Mr. Heimoff goes on to suggest that there are only a few explanations for why the bottle that he received could have been “bad”:
1. The wine was somehow damaged in transport, likely due to heat. Mr. Heimoff suggests that if this were the case, it was the producer’s fault for not having checked the seven day weather forecast first.
2. The wine could have been either spoiled or have “bacterial issues.” He implies that he would detect these and that the review of the wine would not be released. (Whether or not wine critics should include these types of reviews is a topic for another post–are the critics charged with informing the consumer or with aiding the producer [or somewhere in between]?)
Mr. Heimoff concludes by saying these are really the only two options to explain the producer’s claim of a bad bottle and that what is really at play is that the producer does not agree with the score assigned and is simply pleading for another chance.
While I have little doubt that the producer is trying desperately to improve the rating his wine received (and by extension, his potential profits), as a wine drinker (and pseudo-wine critic) I have tasted the same wine (from different bottles) and noticed what I have always considered “bottle variation”: some bottles seem to taste different than others.
While reading Heimoff’s piece, I was skeptical that there were only two legitimate reasons why two of the same bottles could have (sometimes dramatically) different showings in the glass. Just a few weeks ago I had a bottle of Alsatian Riesling that was not what it should have been, so I decided to have another bottle just a day or two later. Big, big difference. While under normal circumstances (i.e., purchasing the bottles in a store) it might be plausible to say that the two bottles had different paths to that particular store (although in reality, I imagine that would be highly unlikely) and that resulted in the mistreatment of the “bad” bottle.
Or something along those lines.
The only problem? I was personally handed these (six) bottles by the wine maker/owner in the town of Niedermorscwhir, Alsace and they had all received the exact same handling from the moment they were purchased until I pulled their corks.
Vastly different wines, however.
Clearly, at least to me, the “faulty” wine had a more porous cork, resulting in more oxidation.
After reading Heimoff’s article, I did a bit of research on bottle variation and found an interesting article that enumerated several different reasons for a variance between two bottles of the same wine (my emphasis for readability):
– Transit. A bottle may have been exposed to excessive heat, say, in the back of a UPS truck on a summer day.
– Poor storage.
– The unequalization of production. Production of a wine is said to be equalized if all the barrels or tanks in which it was raised are blended together in one large tank. If this isn’t possible (and it’s often not), then you can have two different wines, both bottled with the same label.
– Time between tasting. Even if two bottles are identical, they can leave different palate impressions if tasted at different ages. Just a few months can alter a wine’s profile.
– Dishonest winery practices. Just because two bottles have identical labels doesn’t mean the winery didn’t knowingly put different wines in them. What, you think it never happens?
– Glass differences. The same wine, tasted in different glasses, will taste differently. This isn’t exactly “bottle variation,” but we don’t drink wine from bottles, we drink it from glasses.
Clearly, the professional critic tries to mitigate as many of these as possible (and at least a few are the fault of the producer), but it does seem possible that there is such a thing as bottle variation and the disgruntled producer might have some basis for requesting Mr. Heimoff to retaste the wine in question.
The author of the second article (also a professional wine critic) continued, stating:
I once scored the same wine 9 points apart on 2 different occasions over a period of a few months. I don’t like saying that, but it’s the truth, and any critic who says it never happened to him isn’t being honest.
Having said that, more often, when I accidentally re-review a wine (only to discover I’d previously reviewed it), my scores are either identical, or within 2-4 points of each other — a tolerable discrepency [sic].
A 2-4 point difference does not seem like all that much, but it depends on where those 2-4 lie. While there might not be much of a difference for those involved between say, a 91 and a 94, there is a huge difference between a 87 and a 90 (at least for the producer–a 90 will likely sell-out, while a 87 will struggle). A difference of nine points? Whoa.
So what do you think? Is there such a thing as bottle variation? If so, should wine critics be more responsive to requests to retaste wines?
By the way, the second author cited above? Steve Heimoff in 2009.
[Note: This should not be taken as a critique of Steve Heimoff. Although I have never met him, I have a tremendous amount of respect for his blog and his wine reviews in the Wine Enthusiast. I simply see his article today as a catalyst for a larger discussion.]
the drunken cyclist 
Heimoff must have posted that article before, because I definitely read it a few months ago and was quite astonished by how sure he was of his only two explanations possible.
I have made the same experience as you regarding wines tasting astonishingly different although they are supposed to be the same.
Let me also add that from a German perspective, there are many of the lower quality end wines (usually non-Prädikat but even in very respectable wineries!) that are labelled the same vintage and name but come from different batches, are even bottled at different times. It would be impossible for producers to bottle the vast production at the same time, so bottling is staggered out over months at times. With German wines, at least you can tell by the different AP number, which will list assign them different numbers for having been submitted at different times for approval. Except for that number, the label will be exactly the same….and who would check that? All that you are left with is amazement why this wine tastes so different from what you remembered…
LikeLike
That’s a great point and perhaps it is even more common with smaller producers that do not have access to large blending tanks!
LikeLike
You betcha. Bottle variation exists.
LikeLike
Thanks!
LikeLike
This is a great article. I’ve often wondered exactly the same thing about bottle variation. I once ordered a half-dozen of the same wine online. You’d expect that the crate and the wine inside it would have been exposed to exactly the same conditions… and that the wine would’ve been from the same batch. Strangely, I tasted two bottles within a week of each other and they were vastly different. One almost tasted ‘corked’, though the bottles were screwcaps. Lots to consider in this article. Oh, and I wish that I got sent wine samples! I need to write more about wine on my blog… 😉
LikeLike
I thought getting samples would be the best thing in the world, but it creates unforeseen issues, but those are problems that most people would welcome (at least in the short run).
LikeLike
Agreed bottle variation can and does exist.
LikeLike
Thanks!
LikeLike
Que Sirah, Sirah. Just one of the little quirks in the enjoyment of wines, and I guess that is why I will try a wine again at another time, just to give the wine the benefit of the doubt.
I guess as a raconteur and not a rater, I do not get such wonderful offers, but I am happy for you.
– John
LikeLike
It was not really the point of the post, but getting samples is not all that it’s cracked up to be….
LikeLike
I was not trying to belittle your fine essay, I think that by the time I had read your article, the salient points were well covered and anything I would have added on that would have been redundant. I thought it was a very fine, thoughtful piece of insight.
LikeLike
I did not take it that way at all! I was just surprised that so many people picked up on the samples aspect, that’s all. I always appreciate your comments!
LikeLike
No offers here either, what’s up with that??? LOL But, yes I agree. Bottle variation exists and even more so if you add mood, setting etc. I’d call it taster variation.
LikeLike
I get the feeling that you have your fair share of tastings! 😉
LikeLike
Bottle Variation – I have definitely experienced it, but really didn’t know what to call it. Do you think that it could ever be our “state of mind” as we drink based on our experiences of the day or our mood at the moment??? Great article, BTW!
LikeLike
I certainly think that state of mind plays a huge role!
LikeLike
We hadn’t really thought much about the freebies! Our blog was/is just for a laugh (at ourselves of course) and to put our passion out there for anyone crazy enough to read. BUT, I am thinking now that freebies would be a pleasant addition (not that we’ll actually get any) and I have now noticed your samples policy. Might do something similar but add “best to send us 2 bottles just in case we don’t like the first one, or 4 even … 1 each!” Yes, bottle variation definitely exists!
LikeLike
Yeah, it was a bit of a surprise, but, again, it is not just “free wine” there is a real responsibility that goes along with it.
LikeLike
Great information! More on variation…often wines arrive to a distributor and the next day or that week they try to taste you on them. Would you compare “air sickness” to a bottle variation?
LikeLike
I am not quite sure what you mean by “air sickness” if you mean a type of “bottle shock” from being transported I would not necessarily say this was bottle variation but rather differences due to storage conditions.
LikeLike
Bottle variation does exist, although, in my humble opinion, it is uncommon, so if a producer does request a re-taste, then that request must be regarded as legitimate – especially if the producer is footing the bill. BV, is only adequately explained (from the producers point of view) if the wines are bottled in separate batches – this is not uncommon particularly in smaller operations. If the wine comes from a larger producer where HACCP is reliable, then the variation experienced can only be through storage, handling or shipping. We can all feel a little out of sorts after a long journey, and many wines don’t travel well. Be generous as a taster, accept your off days, be vigilant of times of day (mornings are best – before food) and always taste at room temp – especially white wines as chilling hides faults.
LikeLike
These are all great points! I really do not understand why Heimoff seemed to be so put out by a producer requesting a retaste, is it not his job to accurately represent the wines? If the accuracy is questioned, it is his duty to revisit even if (since?) “most” of the retasting is within “just” 2-4 points.
LikeLike
I agree with @RedWineDiva. Were you happy? Sad? Had you eaten something spicy? Acidic? I think so much can influence a bottle every time you taste/enjoy it (including everything listed above).
LikeLike
You are certainly correct that context means a lot. I imagine that the critic would claim that they keep the context constant, but there is no way to do this. As I read somewhere once before–you never step in the same river twice…..
LikeLike
You’re correct. Variation between bottles is absolutely the case. As part of my job I reguarly taste the same wines on different days, and the wines vary largely. Other members of my team also have noticed the same discrepancies.
One of the reasons which has been floated (although it sounds a bit wacky) is which day of the biodynamic calendar the tasting of the bottle falls – fruit & flower and the fruit character in the wine comes to the fore, leaf and root day and the fruit takes a back seat. So much so that our company will never host a major tasting on a root or leaf day!
Also, even the most consistent tasters will have off days, It will even depend on what time of day you taste and what food/drink you have had prior to tasting…
LikeLike
I was going to mention the whole biodynamic thing, but I really think it is a bunch of crap, so I didn’t. There are certainly those who believe it though….
LikeLike
Pingback: Liquor Industry News/Links 9-20-13 | Franklin Liquors