Is Wine Spectator's Top 10 Overrated? | 5 Challengers Put to the Test

I prepared 10 wines today for us to taste. Five wines are from Wine Spectator top 10. I chose five wines that looked interesting for us to taste. The other five that I chose is just to compete or to challenge those five wines and see which one that you prefer between those two. Every year the Wine Spectator comes out with a top 100. We've got five of the top 10 wines. Exactly. And actually four of the top five wines. And so we're going to have those wines blind with a competitor and to see how these wines match up. We're going to start off with the top white wine, which is wine number two. Auber, California Chardonnay, with a competitor. And then immediately afterwards we're going to do wine number one because the rest of the wines are all reds. Wine number one, Chateau Jusque from Margaux in Bordeaux with a competitor. So it should be fun. But again, we're looking at these wines that were at the top of the Wine Spectator top 100 list. Let's do it. All right, let's do it. What do you think, Pat? Well, we've got here, first off, we've got the second wine in the top 100, which is Chateau Aubert from Sonoma. And I've had this wine, a friend of mine, Fred Brander, does the top 100 party every year. And so I opened up all the bottles that we had. We had about 70 of the top 100. And I pretty much know which wine it is. Do you recognize it? I recognize it. And the other one that we have is a Flowers that is also from Sonoma. The Chateau Aubert, as I recall, I could be wrong, was trying to be more like a white Burgundy. And the Flowers is into that style as well, but more Merceau-like, more rounded, more buttery, or more, let's say, refined California Chardonnay. I think number one is more of what you just described, kind of in between American and then Burgundy and white. The first wine, it's got a fairly deep yellow color, medium plus yellow. It's got a slight tropical fruit, but you get buttery notes, good buttery notes, not the rancid butter that you find in some terrible Chardonnays, and French oak. It's full-bodied. The city is fairly good. Alcohol is 14-ish. Oak is very well integrated. So this is barrel-fermented with some leaves stirring, but they didn't overdo it. Between the two wines, this has a silkier mouthfeel and the more overt creaminess, good butter. Most Chardonnays have bad butter. And then the second wine, slightly less color, I get classic Chardonnay notes that I find in Burgundy, which is tea, oatmeal, a hint of butter, and French oak. Full-bodied, crisper acidity in this wine. Alcohol around the same level. The tannins are a bit more pronounced. Length is very good, and the quality is very good. I did write more Burgundy style for number two, and then the acidity was higher in this one than number one. Yeah, so it's fresher, and I'd rather have this one with some food. I like them both. Well, let's see what they are first. All right. Number one is the flowers. Flower Chardonnay from Russian River Valley. 2023. Which is in Sonoma. $50. $50, okay. Number two is the Aubert. Aubert. The UV SL Vineyard. So this is from Sonoma Coast, which generally tends to be a bit cooler than the Russian River Valley. So that increased coolness gives you higher levels of acidity. Well, I'm sure it was cheaper when they released, but then I bought it after the Wine Spectator top 10 release, and man, it was super expensive. How much was it? I paid $204. I thought that they were both equally pleasant. If I had my druthers, I would rather have the Aubert, but only by a slight amount. I wouldn't pay four times as much money for the Aubert than you paid for the flowers. I wouldn't pay twice as much money as you did. But if you were to just pick one of your favorite, regardless of price, which one would that be? I'd rather drink Aubert right now. Okay. Aubert makes sure their wine is on the lees, but he does not stir the lees, no batonnage, just to keep the freshness. He wants to focus more on the fruit. Now, for certain wines, Unfined and Unfiltered is terrific. For other wines, which we may see later on, Unfined and Unfiltered is a disaster, right? Because in order to ship the wines, particularly if the wines may see some warmer temperatures, the wines need to be microbially stable. To be microbially stable... That was a tongue twister. To be microbially stable, the wine cannot have any residual sugar or minimal residual sugar or residual malic acid because the microbes that remain in the wine can ferment those, right? And have sometimes unpleasant aromas and flavors and then carbon dioxide. I believe many winemakers are hesitant to filtering because they believe that it would take away the aromas and flavors. Yeah, and there have been studies that have been done. And for the most part, after a certain period of time in the bottle, maybe immediately afterwards, the wine that's been filtered is going to taste a bit less. But over a period of time, it's pretty darn close. And what's far worse is when I get a bottle of wine that is fizzy. I love fizzy wine, but the fizzy one I like is called Champagne or other sparkling wines. I don't want my red table wine or my Chardonnay to be fizzy. That's a defect. There's a difference in the color between the two ones. The first one is much deeper in color and it's much more purple to it. The second one is more garnet red. It's a little clearing at the rim. So wine number two has less intense color. Its aromatics are a bit less intense as well, right? So good intensity. Cassis, cedar, leather, and some warm bread. It smells like Bordeaux with dominant Cabernet Sauvignon. It has some Merlot in it. It's pretty round and smooth. The tannins are more elegant than the first wine. For me, Margot, the charm of Margot is that Margot can be elegant compared to some of the other left bank wines. To me, this has the elegance and the femininity, relative femininity of Margot. It's ready to drink right now and it's very pleasant. Now the next wine, the first one, is much deeper in color. It has more intense aromatics of cherry, cassis, French oak, warm bread. And when you taste it, you put it in your mouth, you get those very good aromatics for a short time. And the reason being is that this wine has much more powerful tannins than the second one. So this wine is a more intense wine. I think it's a higher quality wine for aging. For drinking now, I prefer the second one because even though the aromatics and flavors are less intense, they're much longer. How many years would you say, from your experience, we should age this wine to be able to drink pleasantly? If I had a case of this in my cellar, I wouldn't touch it for at least five years. Which one do you think number one is? This is going to be the Giscourt. Right. So number one is the Giscourt. 2022 Margot, 50% new oak, 17 months of aging in barrels. So it's a very extracted wine, right? So the tannins are coming from the method of production, in part, pumping over regimens, and then also in part from the oak regimen, combining and giving you the tannins. Number two, Chateau de Saint, 2020, $63. But there's a little bit more Merlot in here. Yeah, there's less Cabernet Sauvignon and more Merlot. And that's giving you that rounder mid palate. And again, it's not just the amount of oak and how long you have it in barrel that gives you tannin. The method of extraction in terms of pumping over and then how long the post, a big word, post-fermentation maceration is. All right, so red wines are made on the skins and the seeds, and that the longer you keep the wine after fermentation is finished on the skins, that determines extraction as well as the pumping over. A wine that has a longer post-fermentation maceration, generally, is going to have more extraction and more extracted tannins. The tannin can be managed on the vineyard as well, based on the picking timing, right? Right, so as you go through and you're tasting grapes, it's not only just measuring sugar levels, you can also measure polyphenol levels. But usually, people are going through, tasting the grapes and seeing how much, what the flavors are like, and seeing what the bitterness level is. So if you've got Bordeaux varieties, you want to see the level of pyrazines, green pyrazines, decrease in that grape as it gets closer and closer to ripening, and the tannins becoming less harsh, less astringent, less bitter. There are many things. In Bordeaux, a technique that used to be used and still is used is called egg white fining. So tannins, this is permission to be geeky, tannins are negatively structured, negatively charged. And so they bind to things that are positively charged. Opposites attract, as they say. If one has a very tannic wine, at the end of production, before you bottle it, one technique is to separate eggs, the oaks become custard, the whites they beat up, and dump those egg whites into the wine. The egg whites protein, sometimes folks can use milk protein, but it's usually egg whites in Bordeaux, and then the positive charge of the egg white protein binds to some of the tannins that drops out, and you wind up having a softer wine. You were asking me, which wine do I prefer for drinking right now? It's the slightly older wine that has more elegance, and it's more ready to consume, which is going to be the better wine long-term, no doubt about it, the Giscard. And again, for people who love big tannic wines, that would be the one for you to buy and drink now, but it's a matter of choice. I like both wines a lot. Okay. Okay, round three. Cheers. The second best red wine, overall wine number three in the top 100, right? Second from the red wine, yes. Yes, it's a Ridge Linton Springs. I believe it's a field blend, mostly Zinfandel, but I think it's only 76% Zinfandel or something, and it has some other things in it as well. It would be a very similar blend from year to year, so we're comparing the 2023, which was the second top red, the third wine overall in the top 100, versus the one that's just a year... One year younger. As they say, a visual daily double, just by looking at the color, you can see that the first wine is much more purple. One of the wines has a defect. Very subtle. Most people didn't pick up on the tasting. Not volatile acidity, nope. It's not? No. From number one, I did pick up a little more VA than number two. Maybe it's just in my head. There may be a hint, and it's related to the VA. The wine has a little carbon dioxide. First, put it in your mouth, on the tip of your tongue, as a little spritz. It has wonderful fruit. Fred Brander and I and friend's winemaker, Fabian, we were opening up the bottles and then tasting all the wines together. We could tell the spritz, but the fruit was so good underneath, most folks ignored it. For people who are not pros and mega geeks, they're not going to taste that spritz. They're going to get wonderful fruit, and they're going to be happy with the wine. I definitely get it. It's subtle. Let's do the older one first. Okay. So lighter in color. It's got somewhat less intense blackberry fruit, largely, but it's got spice on it. It's got some American oak, but the fruit exceeds the oak. It's full-bodied. It's got a really nice mouthfeel. The Zinfandel can be very high in alcohol. The Ridge Zinfandels tend to be relatively moderate in alcohol, so I don't see the alcohol is very much in balance. It's a beautiful Zinfandel. Round, long, nothing not to like. I feel like number two is more serious than number one. Number two has softer tannins, and so the flavors are lasting longer. Wine number one has got a wonderful, intense blackberry fruit and some black pepper, and that intensity is there, but because it has firmer tannins, it's not as long. And so, again, we come into this situation, what do you like, right? If I was judging these two and trying to give a number to them, it would be difficult because I would mark the first wine down for the little spritz on it, though it has more intensity, and if not for the spritz, I would say this is going to live longer than the second wine. Both very nice wines. For me to drink right now, hands down, it's the second wine, and you're in the same boat. Yeah, I'm in the same boat. Zinfandel is an interesting variety in that most varieties, let's say black grapes that produce red wine, when the grapes ripen, they sort of ripen at the same pace, okay? There's slight differences in terms of place in the bunch and slight differences in sweetness level, but the colors are all the same. So you look at a bunch of Cabernet Sauvignon, when it's ripe, they're all approximately the same color. With Zinfandel, it's a mosaic in a way. That's why I wore this shirt. On the Zinfandel bunch, as it ripens, you're going to find raisin grapes, ripe, dark-skinned grapes that aren't raisins, some red grapes that are a bit less intense in color and maybe less ripe, and then some grapes even that may be green. So you now have on the bunch, ripe grapes, underripe grapes, overripe grapes. Some are very underripe grapes. And so some producers are into this hang time, meaning how much time the bunch of grapes stays on the vine before you harvest it. The one has to be careful because with too much hang time, they hang themselves because the raisin grapes are more apt to start developing volatile acidity. Okay. Some people like drinking nail polish remover. I don't. That all said, like both wines, prefer the second one. We've been to Lytton Springs twice. It's beautiful. So if you haven't been there, I recommend. Yeah. Ridge is one of my favorite wineries. I've received wines from them for a couple of decades. Both the Ridge Montebello, which comes from Santa Cruz Mountains, and then their Zinfandels and some Rhone wines. They make some beautiful Rhone wines as well from Sonoma. The number one, 2023, the younger one. Yeah, the younger one. 14.4% alcohol. So 14.4% for Zinfandel. In these times of climate change, it's a very elegant Zinfandel. This blend, again, represents a field blend. It's not that they're saying, okay, fine, we've got this vineyard where most of the vines are Zinfandel and they're all Zinfandel over there. And we've got some Petit Sorat over here and some Alicante Boucher and some Carignan. No, these are interspersed. Right. The second wine, which 2022, Lytton Springs. The vast majority of producers, if faced with a field blend, would pick a time and they would harvest. Some people just harvest everything at the same time. The folks at Ridge are very peculiar in a wonderful way. They would go through and harvest Zinfandel from a given block, perhaps at the same time, and leave alone or harvest Sorat at a different point. Harvest, probably the last thing that they would harvest would be the Petit Sorat. Then they would ferment some of these separately and then decide upon the final blend. They are very particular as to how they go about business, which is why they've been very successful. So we're now into our fourth pairing. Right. This is top four. So you've got the William Sellum. This is another wine that I've been buying for a couple of decades. William Sellum Pinot from Sonoma, sometimes from Russian River Valley, sometimes now outside Russian River Valley. And then we paired that with another Flowers wine. Flowers is from Sonoma Coast. So I've got here, I like to compare the colors. So we've got very different colors. The first one is more deeply colored. There's some purple to it. There's greater depth of color. The second wine, there's no purple to it. Ruby red. The other one is garnet purple. Lighter depth of color, more clearing at the rim. Almost a little brick at the rim too. So they look very different. You know, I got medium intensity of some berry fruit, maybe a hint floral. I get some background French oak. There may be a little hint of mushroom development in here, but that's about it. The aromatics are pretty elegant. Sweet berry, sweet raspberry, maybe a hint of cherry fruit that lingers on your palate. There's no residual sugar there, but it's a sweet entry because the fruit is sweet. A hint of perfume, though not the kind of perfume you would find in some burgundies. Very nice mouthfeel. Pinot's not a wine that grabs you and says, I'm here. Beautiful ones that said, I'm here. And they're there for a long time. And you could have this wine with a lot of food or not. So wine number one, a different animal by its color, right? More purple, deeper, more depth of color. I think that the berry fruit is more black fruit, a bit more intense than the previous wine on the aromatics. It's wrapped in some French oak, but the fruit exceeds the oak. Sweet entry. It says that it's Pinot Noir from Legueco, fairly silky tannins, more floral notes in this wine than in the second one. And it's more reminiscent of, in some ways, of burgundy than the second one, which is not to say that that is better. If I had this blind, I would be doing the dance. Is this from the new world or is it from burgundy, from a warm vintage or a warm spot? But it doesn't have that barnyardy character, though. It's a very floral. Well, very good burgundy doesn't have that anymore. But there used to be a lot of brettanomyces, and there still can be in burgundy. Anthony Hansen, who's a fellow master of wine, who wrote one of the essential books on burgundy, I think the quote was, good burgundy smells like ----. And meaning at that point in time, all burgundy had lots of brettanomyces. That was many years ago. And so in the ensuing time, the grape growing practices have improved in burgundy. And the hygiene in the winery has improved considerably in burgundy. Are there producers that still have brettanomyces? Absolutely. Would I buy any of those wines? Absolutely not. Let's see what wine number one is. I think this is going to be the William Sullivan. Number one is a William Sullivan. 2023, Russian River Valley, East Side Road Neighbors. Looks like they buy grapes too. Yeah, and they've increased their reach in buying grapes. And they've actually now started to produce some very top quality Pinot Noir. Speaking of Zinfandel, you can only buy it on their list. Their Zinfandel is one of the best Zinfandels in the state of California that I've ever had. I was on a radio program 15 years ago. Could be longer. Could be 20 years ago. And I was waiting for my turn. So this fellow who preceded me was the winemaker at William Sullivan. He had brought for us a taste. I'm sitting there sipping this bottle of wine. One of their, I believe it was a 1985. It was stunning. Wonderful man. And I said, afterwards, before I got called in, I said, I love your wines. I love this wine. It's just gorgeous. I said, is there any way? I know that there was a waiting list to get on their buying list, right? A wait to buy. I said, is there any way I can get on the waiting list? And he said, no, you're not on the waiting list. You're on the buying list. That all said, delicious wine. Very well done. And I think this will age longer than the Flowers wine. Because of concentration. Yeah, some concentration and depth and intensity. They're both wonderful wines. That do nothing but put a smile on your face. So now, number one is my best beer I ever had this year. So now, the wines have put a smile on our face. How much is it going to cost to put that smile on our face? So this is $140. The Flowers, $51. The Flowers delivers some wonderful quality at a very affordable price. Whereas the William Salomon, which is much more rare and rarefied, is better. But you're going to have to dish out some money for that. This one actually, you get what you pay for, is what my feeling. Alan and I went to William Salomon winery, and then they make Zinfandel like Pinot. It's very delicious. It's been my preference to have Zinfandel from producers, from folks who produce Pinot. And they make it like Pinot. And the Zinfandel, to me, those are the best Zinfandels. And also, those folks tend to be in cooler climates. And so the Zinfandels tend to be less muscular. Less jammy. Not as jammy, without the raisin characteristic. Right. Which one was your favorite? If you don't consider the price to drink right now? I've been drinking the William Salomon for a long time. So what we've got now is our final flight. We have Barbarescos. Two Barbarescos, which for those of you who don't know, is Nebbiolo from Piemonte in the subregion called Barbaresco. Nebbiolo grapes, like Pinot, tend to have thin skins. And because of that, tend to have lighter color. This is the only wine that I'm challenging that's more expensive than the top 10 wine. Cascina Roccalina Barbaresco. This is $75. That's a challenger. And again, the champion, being in the top 10 of the top 100, is Produttore del Barbaresco at $45. Cheers. Now again, when I look at these, right, we were talking about this off camera. Very different colors, right? They're both on the lighter side. The first wine, much more browning, much more brick change. If I were just to be looking at this not knowing the vintage, I would think that this was a, you know, compared to the second, a much older wine. Whereas the one on the right has a bit more red in it. You couldn't confuse the one on the left with Pinot. You could confuse the one on the right with being a Pinot Noir. Classic aromas of Nebbiolo are roses and tar. Though there can be earthiness, and then once they're in the barrel for a long time, you can have prune characteristics and other layers of more savory flavors. One of the wines has a flaw, the first one. On the nose, I didn't pick up anything. Did you pick up on the palate or on the nose? Well, the nose, there's a little bit of, there's more volatile acidity on the first one than the second one. Something else that you get on the palate straight away. On the tip of your tongue. Is there another spirit? Carbidoxide in this wine, right? So this wine is refermenting. And so what you have is that there's been something. It's either got residual sugar or residual malic acid. That's some microbes that they didn't sterile filter out are waking up and saying, yum, yum, yum, yum. And they're producing some volatile acidity and carbidoxide. In my mind, that's a flawed wine that I would, if I got this in a restaurant, I'd return it. Okay. Now let's try the second one, right? So this one has much less browning. Both are light colored, but this has got more red tint to it. The nose is a little tight, huh? There's the tar there. I'm not getting the roses on the nose. Tight meaning more aeration. If there's a potential that you would get more character? Yeah, possible. Or with age. Okay. Now I'm getting the roses. I'm getting some berry fruit. Both wines have very crisp acidity and the tannins tend to be firm tannins. The tannins like Cabernet Sauvignon that are big and round and roundish, but still can be quite astringent. But there's an elegance to the tannin. Often Nebbiolo needs time to breathe from the time you open it. So you see more potential on wine number two? Yeah, it's a tough thing because right now, wine number one has more complexity than wine number two. Wine number two has got better fruit than wine number one. If I had to choose what to drink, I'd choose the two pinots. But that all said, with the right food, either of these wines could be delicious. With the Proviso, you're getting more complexity. And the first one, and it's had a different regimen in terms of either years in the barrel or how often they rack the barrels or oxygen exposure in the barrels. But there's a lot of complexity there. But the price you're paying, it's got a little bit more volatile acidity. Here, this is a newer style wine. This is classic. Prettier fruit. I don't have any spritz here. So my preference would be for this one. Let's see what they are. Number one is the Barbaresco Roccalini. This is a $75 challenger. Well, I'd say it comes down to the challenger. But you did say there's more complexity there. There's more complexity. Yes. So number two would be the Barbaresco Podutori del Barbaresco. And so it's also the less expensive of the two wines. It's less expensive. $45, 20 months in 50 hectoliters oak cask. And then 54 growers supply their grapes. And so it's a wine co-op. It's a pretty famous co-op in the area. Though it is interesting. It's a more modern style. And they put this in there because for a co-op wine, it's a very good co-op wine. And it's very well priced. And again, there's more complexity in the second wine. But you're paying more money for it. First wine, right? Yeah, the first one. You're paying more money for it. And you're paying with the spritz and the increased VA. But I definitely get the VA. Yeah, and you get the VA. And there are people who don't mind that. But there are also people who drink sour milk. All right. So how was the tasting today? I thought this was a fantastic tasting. Because again, we were quibbling. That all said, I thoroughly enjoyed this last pairing. We had some absolutely delicious wines. And it was fun contrasting. And at times, you say, OK, fine. This one only got, I was scored at 93. And the other one, you scored 98. But there wasn't a single wine that was terrible. And again, there's been this move of these producers producing, quote unquote, these natural wines. And many of the natural wines are flawed. And there are people who like to drink flawed wines. I mean, in a way, these wines that have flaws in them, they're more historical. They're more the way wines used to be. It's really only in the 1950s, which in the realm of how long wine has been produced around the world is a very short span, has there been a push towards better hygiene in the winery and trying to produce wines, at least keeping an eye to science. Prior to that time, or certainly prior to, there's been an increased push towards greater hygiene in wines starting in the 1980s, 1980s, 90s. And so wines got cleaner. And then this natural wine thing came about. And folks now using this non-intervention as a selling point. But it comes at a risk. Right. All right. Thanks for having this tasting together. And thanks for putting it together. You did a wonderful job. Thank you. And thanks to our members for supporting our wines here. A big shout out to you guys. Cheers. Thank you. Till next time.