Merlot in the snow

You've got a wine business. You get a dog. He's got a better nose than Robert parker. You call him "Merlot" because your girlfriend won't let you call him Randall. We think he's the cutest thing on four legs, but then we're all full of doggy pride so we would, wouldn't we?

Not the art of wine by Damien Hirst

Having lavished praise on the art and wine of Sandro Chia, we couldn't let this pass without comment. Damien Hirst, the billionaire bad boy of British art, has "designed" the label for the new Comic Relief wine. Ignored by the mainstream press, you can read more about this exciting story at packagingnews.co.uk.

Sadly, we think you'll agree that it looks alot to us like Damien couldn't be arsed and the Comic Relief teaboy did it/they used a sketch from the design brief instead. Don't get us wrong, doubtless its a great wine (it was chosen by two MWs), and certainly a great cause.

Regardless, we're sufficiently appalled that if any readers of this blog decide to buy Sandro Chia's wine instead, we'll match the quid a bottle that goes to Comic Relief - just mention this blog when completing the checkout and we'll make a donation on your behalf.

What's in a medal?

Wine writers took great delight this week after an extensive study concluded that wine judges rarely gave consistent assessments of the same wine. The four-year investigation into judging at America's oldest wine contest found that only one in ten judges ever regularly rated a wine the same. Researchers at the California State Fair wine competition tested judges' consistency by giving them repeat samples of the same wine during large blind tasting sessions. They discovered that 90 per cent of the judges failed to give identical samples poured from the same bottle matching or close scores at repeated tastings. One panel of judges even rejected a particular vintage twice only to award it a double-gold medal the third time they sampled it.

The study also found that even the most reliable judges were not consistent over subsequent years. It did note, however, that judges tended to be more consistent when it came to wines they did not like. In the light of the findings, shoppers considering medal-adorned bottles on wine shelves are advised to have a "healthy scepticism" about awards handed out at competitions, said Dr Robert Hodgson, who conducted the research. "Consumers need to gain more self-confidence in their own opinions and tastes rather than listen to what other people think wine should be like," he told the Los Angeles Times. The reults of the study are published in the current issue of the Journal of Wine Economics - you can read the full text of the article here.

The stock standard repsonse of UK wine judges was along the lines of "well, it obviously depends on the competition in question". This may be true, but only to a point. The best advice we've come accross was this from the LATimes blog: "I have been a commercial winemaker for 10 years now, and have participated in numerous blind tastings of many different styles and price ranges of wines. It should come as no suprise to anyone that a lot of the so-called "best wines" (which is rubbish because anyone who has even an ounce of knowledge about wine knows that smell and taste are perceptive) are routinely beaten hands down in these blind tastings by small vineyards/wineries that sell for $10-$20. The wine show circuit is just as swayable with "gifts" as any other political establishment. Drink the wine you like. Always remember the best tool for drinking wine is a brown paper bag. Get rid of the marketing, get rid of the perceived eprception of a wine before you even taste it, and taste it on it's own merits. The best wine in the world.....is the wine that you like".