.png)
In 2017, I took it up a challenge to blind taste about five Left Bank Bordeaux, and though then categorize them by price. I was nearly successful at matching all five with their Classe, and pretty close on price for all except one. In regards to this particular wine, I was not just a bit shy of price, I also guessed nowhere near the blend, or appellation.
The wine in question was actually quite a dear bottle, at forty-dollars a pop, but not nearly as expensive as the Chateau Tour De Bassan Margaux 2013 that was also present. It struck me as strange that I actually preferred the drinkability, and relative complexity of the forty dollar bottle to to Ch. Haut Badges Liberal 2011. Both were stunners, but something about the former contained just slightly more charm.
There as almost more presence, and a lightness and interesting minerality to it. It is worth noting as well, this is one of the few woman-owned Châteaux in Margaux. There is something strikingly reserved, and feminine in this wine. It’s very floral with good earthiness, and even a spring of red fruit, and dewey moss accompanied by cigar box, and blackcurrant.
I didn’t reflect much on this idea until I had arrived back home after work, and sat down to enjoy a Fixin with dinner that evening: some value from Burgundy. That wine, though I can’t remember for the life of me its maker, was also of stellar quality, and only ran me about twenty-five dollars. It had a fantastic aroma of stewed cherry, cinnamon, truffle and a finish of fig that lingered for quite a while. It was nothing extremely complex, but it was just what I wanted to taste at that moment, and there was not a bottle in the world I would have otherwise chosen.
I was really pressed by this idea when I picked up a bottle of Stag’s Leap Napa Merlot 2018, which I enjoyed with the Spaghetti Nero I had made. I’m not the biggest jammy California wine over. I do like a little leafiness, and pepper, old french oak, even if it’s technically an imperfect wine. there’s just something unappealing about the whole concept of a polished, mass market Californian Cab that just turns me off to the whole region in general.
But, I set my prejudices aside and decided to try something new, and I must say, while it certainly isn’t the best bottle I’ve ever bought, the price was a mere twenty-five dollars and the wine was lovely. It was reserved, charming, interesting, fruity, and tannic with a beautiful burst of floral acid. It wasn’t until I tried it with my pasta that I really loved it, though.
I know I had just written a column about Pomerol, a region with no Cru Classé, and claimed, of course that price dictates value, as right-bank enthusiasts tend to say, but I will tell you that I’ve also had plenty of Fronsac that was gracious and satisfying. So here I beg the question: Should we shop for value, or name? Can less dear wines more satisfying?
When I’m out at a restaurant or bar my tendency to shop for value becomes extraordinarily irritating to my fellow diners. Before even sitting down to eat I’m already on Vivino, searching the various domaines and pricing out the wines, and the markups. But you need to be fastidious these days, restaurant wine markups are extraordinarily expensive.
Upmarket restaurants like The French Laundry require a payment in advance, and an approval from the chef of the bottle that you wish to drink. At most dining establishments the fees for bring your own bottle can be twenty to one hundred dollars. I’m always fascinated by people who choose to do this, because places that allow BYOB typically have a pretty decent wine menu with most of the staple makers from various regions.
To stomach the BYOB concept this ridiculous fee, buy the bottle, bring it in, give it to the restaurant to serve, and mind you they won chill it or take any care in serving it. You also need to travel with it, and the majority of the time realistically, fans of this practice are just bringing a Caymus, or Robert Mondavi somethingorother. Wine menus are typically written by either chefs or Sommeliers specifically for the fare at the restaurant.
A server who has half a brain can help distinguish a good pairing, even if they may not be able to answer a garage of questions. Sure you may save five dollars here or there bring in in a bottle, or maybe just order off the menu, and look for value? Oppositely, for those looking to BYOB of Petrus to the Olive Garden, may you be richly rewarded in all of your pursuits. I think that you should stop reading here, because I can offer you no more help.
Here’s how I shop for value. First, I get an idea of what I want to eat, generally if you know the restaurant then you’ll be able to browse the menu online. Let’s say it’s a steakhouse par example. I want a filet mignon, lobster tail, truffle frites, and we’re going to order an appetizer. Let’s say we spring for the classic artichoke dip.
Nothing fancy this evening, just an old-fashioned American meal. I’m going to definitely avoid buying multiple bottles for the table, and everyone is looking to my discerning palette to tell them which bottle we should order for the table. This is rapidly leaving the territory of plausibility, and becoming somewhat of a wet dream, but hang in there.
Artichoke is very hard to pair. It ends up making wine taste metallic. When it is made into artichoke dip,this becomes less of a problem, but now you have the edition of fatty cream, and garlic. So we know that this is going to be the hardest pairing, thus, in in an effort to save time, lets skip it and find something that will fit the rest, then circle back Jen Psaki style.
The place has ten wines on the list, so let me make up an imaginary perfect wine with very generic parameters. Filet Mignon is a super flexible, easy breezy meat pair. It will go with almost any red regardless of how delicate it is or tannic. Lobster tail is tougher, it likes lighter fruitier, lower-tannin, herbaceous reds, or aromatic whites.
Truffle fries are earthy and starchy, they need something with medium tannin that is acetic to compliment the sugar in the starch. Furthermore, it would be good if this wine were earthy, and mellow, and had some complexity of its own, as we will be probably sitting for a while drinking and chatting. More complex wines bring more flavor out in the food, anyway.
Back to the filet, I think the way that we discussed what the other dishes require would fit the filet perfectly. Usually I tend to skip the easiest, and hardest foods to pair until I have the wine list in front of me. Now, I do think a brasher more tannic wine goes well with steak, to match the fattiness, but as discussed we need higher acid, dark fruit flavors, and something aromatic. Here’s a sample wine list at our made-up steakhouse.
RED WINES
J. Lohr Hilltop Cabernet 2018 - Central Coast, CA - $58
Domaine Anderson Estate Pinot Noir 2017- Willamette Valley, WA - $52
Guigal Gigondas 2017 - Rhône, FR - $47
Rocca Della Macie Chianti Classico 2018 - Tuscany, IT - $36
WHITE WINES
Brook’s Willamette Valley Riesling 2019 - Willamette, WA - $32
La Crema Chardonay 2017 - Sonoma, CA - $24
Dom. Gerard Tremblay 2018 - Dijon, FR - $48
Clos St. Michel Châteauneuf-du-pape 2017 - Rhône, FR - $61
Aside from this being a wine list with some stellar candidates, let’s open Vivino and see what these are retailing at. First I’ll go over the reds. The Lohr Cabernet is about $30/bottle, the Anderson Pinot goes for about $25/bottle, the Guigal runs around $30/bottle, and the Chianti is about $15/bottle. All that factored in, we know that the best value is in fact the Guigal Gigondas, at $13 over retail. This could be because this wine is rarely selected, or there’s a surplus for some other reason.
Now let’s find the best value on the whites list. The Riesling is $20/bottle, the Chardonnay is $11/bottle, the Chablis is $25/bottle, the Ch.9 is $50/bottle. Best value is the Châteauneuf. Now we must return to our meal at hand. The food requires a medium tannin, medium body, acetic; aromatic, herbaceous, dark-fruit; or tree fruit-driven wine.
Seeing as we are having steak, it would be better to stick to red. Also, the top value contender in the red category is far easier on the wallet. Not that steak can’t pair with a white, rather seemingly better pairings tend to be red, and juicy. Sautéd steaks are also typically deglazed with red wine, so this helps our cause, as well.
Now we can evaluate our reds. The cabernet is a hefty twenty-eight dollar markup. It’s also very jammy, kinda bland and will not pair with lobster or truffle. There’s no earthiness or complexity, and its incredibly warm on the palette making the fat in the fries taste soupy.
The pinot may be a better fit. This Willamette Valley is quite good value at twenty-five dollars. It’s got a lovely firm body and fruity overbite. It also has very nice herbal and barnyard subtleties, as well as an excellent amount of tannin. At fifty-two dollars, however, the markup is just appalling.
There’s very little markup on the Guigal Gigondas. Only thirteen dollars. It’s also a lighter-bodied Grenache-driven wine, with decent tannin, and higher acid with lots of floral and herbal notes. It would be a stellar pairing with our fries, and this wine is a big crowd pleaser! Looks like we may have a winner.
But wait! The Chianti is also a very nice wine. While fuller, and richer than the Guigal, this wine is okay value, but is easier on the wallet. It has less heat from the alcohol and is suitable for the sweetness of tomato pasta without being overbearing in that regard. However, I think this wine may clash with the artichoke dip, seeing as it does have a more dramatic oaken to it and red fruit. Red fruit turns metallic with artichoke easily, and it’s better to find a plummier wine. It’s also not as good value.
In the end, we have eliminated all of the competitors. Looks like it’s Guigal Gigondas with dinner tonight, and I feel comfortable declaring the winner here. Now let’s celebrate with a drink!
Shall we have Priorat or Crozes-Hermitage?
That's all,
~K
Comments