|
| Professional Reviewer? |
| Category : General Discussion |
| |
|
|
|
I think Beute B has done this before. Check out his Los Vascos review.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like it was written by SOME professional.
Even after years of tasting and drinking, my review abilities
come down to a few basic descriptors like Berry nose, dark cherry,
choc, hot finish, smooth, light, tannic, I ike it, I don't like it, etc.
I do not have the ablity (olfactory really) to describe a wine like:
A nose of sweet late spring Rainer cherries from Yakima Valley.
The vibrant mid palate coats the left side of the tongue like a
Ralph Lauren's Tamarack yellow paint on fresh new pine siding.
This wine was obviously finished in 37.5% - 2 year old Limousian
oak and the balance in new Trafalthat oak from the northern
shores of Tripoli.
There is a slight back palate hint of Himalayan Yak urine which
is quickly over taken by the finish of 3 day old Columbian coffee
filtered through an old sweaty gym sock.
The finish is similar to having the entire Chinese Army washing
their underwear in your mouth. Because the pungent barnyard flavors
of dry clay coated with chicken maure, I'll give it a 93.
--- Robt Parker
(This is a parity!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jim - I think you could publish a parody website where you reviewed only bad wines. Yak urine would be the ultimate complement. Now, could you charge $99 a year for that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's a market for everything.
All it would take was a 1,000 people!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Groups > View Threads
