Just how trained does your palate need to be?

I always love movies about wines. Its interesting to see how many movies that dealt in some degree about wines were made before the 1970's
Well, as I almost always digress, in the movie Bottle Shock, one of the characters was doing a blind tasting of several different wines. Now , even though the
contest at hand was fixed, I am very curious to know just how much of an educated palate do you need to distinguish various wines.

I think I am past the point where that I would know in a blind tasting if the wine was from Italy, France or California (except for the dead giveaways about New Zealand Sauvignon Blancs)
And in many situations, I can detect a Bordeaux from Pauillac vs from the other regions.

But so many others to consider. A vintage year, two side by side tastings of the same vineyard, a Reserve Chianti from a Super Tuscan, etc, etc

We can read so much about theories, how the wine is made, the grapes, the aging, what type of oak, etc. But theory can not replace reality.
I'd love to be able to pick out all the different wines, countries, grapes, regions, etc just with a small tasting. Can we do that? And just how much training and work does one need to accomplish this?

Training, work, yes; quite a lot, consistently, every day, copiously. to keep your taste memory constantly fed.

Memory. A very good memory, which if not innate can be trained. (see above).

Focus. Incredible focus (see above, see above).

Notes, to refer back to if/when needed.

But you also need the basic faculties. Some people/palates simply will never get to the ultimate point you're talking about.

Passion. Desire. Will. (Not just for drinking, or enjoying, but passion for knowing and trying to understand, never resting, always trying to learn more).

As with anything else that matters, only a miniscule number of people ever come close. Slightly larger group gets pretty refined. Slightly large group gets the general idea. Whole big group never gets beyond "it tastes good." Which, I think is as it is and probably as it should be.

Ron, Hi...

Its all rather simple. All that is required is 30 or more years of blind tasting an average of 30 wines daily, visiting at least 10 wine regions and a minimum of 120 wineries annually and long-term memory that is finely tuned to tastes, textures and aromas. And then, when push comes to shove, the chance is that your palate may despite all of that confuse a Bordeaux with a Burgundy.

Identifying a wine by its overall region, sub-region, variety or blend, vineyard, winery and vintage year is something one reads about frequently (especially if one reads Georges Simenon) and sees frequently in films but the probability of being that accurate in real life is pretty close to nil.

Best
Rogov

All that is required is 30 or more years of blind tasting an average of 30 wines daily, visiting at least 10 wine regions and a minimum of 120 wineries annually and long-term memory that is finely tuned to tastes, textures and aromas. And then, when push comes to shove, the chance is that your palate may despite all of that confuse a Bordeaux with a Burgundy.

Well that makes me feel at least a tiny bit better regarding my pathetic inability identify wines at blind tastings.

Rogov will disagree with me, but it was not I who said this, although I don’t doubt it. I visited an interesting wine store today in Saratoga Springs, New York, called Prudy’s. First time there; went because they have 2009 Souverain Chard; and then, of course, I walked out with some other stuff, including my first Musar.

But the owner, Paul Parker, recognized me because of my unique name. Years ago I dined at his restaurant, Chez Sophie, which he closed the doors of and walked away from after many years in operation. He said the combination of having two children and the economy made its continuation impossible.

He is a student of taste. He told me, without any provocation from me, that the ability to taste well, identify blind, and appreciate both fine food and fine wine is largely genetic. But even people who are born with palates (one in ten, he said) need to be acquainted with fine food and wine somehow, have the cultural imperatives, and money, to be able to learn much about them. He said that limited the rarified group to a tiny minority of people. He said one test is whether you like Coke or Pepsi. Tasters tend to prefer Coke.

I talked about some of this stuff recently on this forum. From my experience, over many years, I firmly believe that if you were to pour fine wine for easily nine out of ten people, they would not like it. And if you told them that you would pay them one million dollars if they developed their palates so that they could distinguish a Saint-Julien from a Pauillac, they wouldn’t be able to do it; and they would hate every minute of the work.

My brother never appreciated wine growing up and oldish. But he recently enjoyed a ten year romance with a wealthy woman who was on the Board of the James Beard Foundation and devoted much of her life to every aspect of fine food and wine; cooking like a four-star chef in her professional kitchen; knowing virtually every chef who was anybody in Manhattan, personally; dining regularly with Alain Ducasse and even flying with him to Paris to dine at his restaurant there; and taking my brother to the eponymous Manhattan restaurant, as well as other fine restaurants, of course, in New York and Europe. While the lady spent most of her time in her 2,500 square foot Manhattan penthouse apartment, she weekended at her beautiful country estate in the Berkshires on 100 acres of land, much of it manicured. And she has there a deep and mesmerizing wine cellar, kept naturally, surrounded with subterranean damp cellar rocks, at the right temperature.

The lady helped my brother understand wine, and he drank the best of the best of it regularly, at the country house and in fine establishments in New York and Europe, usually in the company of epicureans and wine connoisseurs endlessly talking about what they were drinking. My brother phoned me occasionally to talk wine, and he was pretty educated.

Now he has another girlfriend who enjoys a glass of Chardonnay once in a while. He phoned me. I asked him, knowing the answer. Do you drink any wine, now? No.

I think that blind tasting is far more difficult than most people think. I do far better single blind (I know what wines are in lineup ) than double blind (I don't know). In a general double blind tasting (no info at all) it's very very easy to go off on a tangent.

A few semi-random thoughts:
As noted above, blind tasting is a combination of genetic abilities, experience, memory, and training (which is a bit different from experience). I personally have to accept that I am probably in the lower 40 percentile as far as physical prowess- I just don't have the nose or tastebuds to ever be a great blind taster (or taster period- that's why I put disclaimer on my notes). If I had to put a number on it, I'd say by I have a lot of experience, training, and pretty good memory, so I'm a bit above average. But it's like a person with average or slightly below coordination- I can work my ass off and play Div II ball, but I could never get a Div I scholarship, much less play pro. But by same token someone could be in the top tenth of one percent of physical abilities, but without experience and paying attention they'll never be among the best.

Re physical abilities, with tasting there actually is no way to rate. There's the non-taster/taster/supertaster codes, but it's more a spectrum/continuum than 3 distinct classes. And real supertasters find so many sensations unpleasant they'd probably be shitty candidates for blind tasting. Plus there are other genetic sensitivities - I know people who was good tasters but are fairly insensitive to TCA, reductive aromas, sulphur, brett, pyrazines, etc.

When people say "I could always spot X" I'm sceptical. Some things tend to be easier- Sauvignon blanc is probably easier to identify for most than Chardonnay. But in the complex combination of things that make wines distinctive (grape, terroir, vintage characteristics, vineyard choices, cellar choices, etc) it gets very complicated blind.

I've seen some incredible blind tasting. But as Rogov noted, in a double blind tasting the "ah, this is obviously the 1961 Domaine Dale Williams Volnay Caillerets" is almost impossible. I've seen some great guesses, but usually they were in situations where the wine was narrowed down- kind of a vinuous 20 questions. Last year I hosted my SOBER group, On first wine in first flight, John Gilman's guesses were:
JG: Riesling? Me: Yes
JG: Alsace? Me: Yes
JG: Trimbach? Me: Yes
JG: Cuvee Freddie VT? Me: Yes
JG: 1989? Me: Yes
Incredibly impressive. But not quite the same thing as tasting and saying "1989 Trimbach Cuvee Frederic Emile Vendange Tardive."

(you knew I couldn't resist) there's a story that circulated for years re an amazing tasting feat Parker did on French TV. Surprised with 11 wines blind, told they were Bordeaux, he nailed all 9 he had tasted before (including the Montus ringer) and gave accurate descriptors of the other 2. But when questioned (after this circulated for years) it turns out, oh it was never shown, oh I have a tape somewhere, etc. I call BS. If true, greatest blind tasting ever. But it's not true.

I'm a believer in terroir. I believe a good taster can pick out a Pauillac from a St. Estephe or St,. Julien more times than chance. But I don't believe anyone can reliably do so for a particular wine. Same applies to Musigny vs. Bonne Mares, Barolo vs Barbaresco, Sonoma vs Napa, Sancerre vs Pouilly Fume. I think percentages go up with grapes, but I'll bet a pretty substantial amount of money that no one can always get CS vs Merlot, PN vs Gamay, Gruner vs Chardonnay, etc.

The tangents I referred to in first paragraph. In a totally double blind setting, like my most serious group does, when you have no knowledge, it's really really hard to isolate variables. This is a REALLY ripe wine- is that because:
a)it's a 2003 European?
b) from a really hot area?
c) from a winemaker who picks 2 weeks after everyone else?

Anyway, those are some unorganized thoughts. But a couple of the best tasters I know used to be in a group with a great motto, "Often wrong, never in doubt!"

This has been posted before, but, for Ron's sake, here it is again: Vincent Price as Fortunato Luchresi.

Blind tasting of wines is one of the hardest things to do. When I got into this mess (wine mess, that is) I had a real hard time with it. I'm still fair to midland, but have gotten a lot better at it. It's helped that I've gotten into a group that does it on a weekly basis.

One thing that really helped, was to break down the wine into it's components ( Appearance, nose, Palate) and the sub stradations of them (i.e. sweetness, acidity, body, tannin, etc.). This is what the professional certification programs do. Then put it back together. Differences are subtle, but can be learned. (Think about all the MS and MW's out there)

It really helps to do blind tastings with both people who are much more experienced at it. you can learn a lot from them.
However, it also helps to do it with newbies. It forces you to really explain what you are doing - breaking down the wine, and explaining why you came to the conclusion that you did.

Identifying a wine by its overall region, sub-region, variety or blend, vineyard, winery and vintage year is something one reads about frequently (especially if one reads Georges Simenon) and sees frequently in films but the probability of being that accurate in real life is pretty close to nil.

I have seen it happen on numerous occasions, most often done by a fellow WLDGer. Although not a professional, his ability to nail cru, year and producer in Burgundy or Germany is admirable.

I, however, usually fare much worse. One exception though took place in Nice at the then great Chantecler restaurant a couple of years ago. The stiff sommelier had done as I asked him and served me something blind to accompany dessert. I recognized the wine and blurted out: "This must be Mas Amiel Charles Dupuy 2001!". I was a bit disappointed when the sommelier´s expression did not change one bit, he just looked at me sternly, said "Oui, monsieur" and turned his heel...

Greetings from Sweden / Fredrik L

Frederik,
I too know some folks who are phenomenally good, but no one who can consistently nail cru, year and producer - at least in a totally doubleblind format.
If they know who supplied the wine, it can dramatically increase odds. My SOBER group has a couple of guys -both excellent tasters- who have been close friends for 20 years. They're good guessers, but they are even better at each other's home. Similarly, with one guy who works at an auction house, he's remembered what someone has bought (no mean feat, as some guys buy really heavily).
Another factor is if there is narrowing down. It's a lot harder to say 1993 Drouhin Griottes-Chambertin than to do a series of guesses- Burgundy> Gevrey? Grand Cru? Griottes? 1993?

There is one person whose actual abilities approach being able to exactly call a wine blind, sometimes based on nose and color alone, and that is Broadbent. But even for him, I think this applies primarily to Bordeaux, though I suspect he can do so for Madeira as well.

P.S.: Doesn't this belong in the Wine Forum?

There is one person whose actual abilities approach being able to exactly call a wine blind, sometimes based on nose and color alone, and that is Broadbent. But even for him, I think this applies primarily to Bordeaux, though I suspect he can do so for Madeira as well.

P.S.: Doesn't this belong in the Wine Forum?

I believe that Broadbent no longer tries to do this as he doesn't want to be shown to be wrong - and he, like all of us, has been wrong many times in the past.

Dale, I do blind tastings a couple of times a month, normally similar to your example, where you work at one criterion, get confirmation and then go on narrowing down the possibilities. Still bloody hard, but I agree, not nearly so hard as having to go straight to a specific wine right off the bat. The problem is that it is so easy to pick up on one particular element in the taste of a wine and allow it to lead you way off base and never find your way back.

I've pretty much nailed a wine on quite a few occasions in our tastings, but have never had the sense to shut up and rest on my laurels, I always get into the next wines and usually immediately erase any impression I may have made of expertise by badly blowing the next selection (just ask Jenise if this isn't true!).

For a while in my early wine 'career' I did do competitive tasting, won the provincial round and had to pass on a free trip to the East for the finals to write university exams. I can attest that that sort of tasting is very, very hard, and no one that undertakes it should be worried about saying anything silly about a wine, because it isn't a question of if, it is simply a question of when and how many times!

Must be human nature, but despite the fact that so many times your first impressions of a wine turn out to be correct, we all seem to go on to confuse and misdirect ourselves and wind up somewhere else entirely.

BTW, the last vintages that showed reliable communal typicity in Bordeaux were made in the early 1980s. The influence of Parker et al has had the effect of homogenizing winemaking to the point where the old clues about terroir often have ceased to exist. Anyone who says they can reliably pick out a single commune is a fibber, or has an unusually flexible definition of reliability!

[Robin Garr]

P.S.: Doesn't this belong in the Wine Forum?

Good point. I'll move it.

Just how trained does your palate need to be?

1. For taking tests, highly
2. For enjoying wine, somewhat.

BTW Howie thank for the post, I'd never seen that one.

Frederik,
I too know some folks who are phenomenally good, but no one who can consistently nail cru, year and producer - at least in a totally doubleblind format.

I said "on numerous occasions", I never said "consistently". I once saw him nail three out of ten in a double blind arranged by a guy we had just met. Maybe I am easily impressed, but I did find that admirable.

Greetings from Sweden / Fredrik L

As usual, I agree with what Hoke and Dale have already written, but I'd like to add a few thoughts. First is that blind tasting is largely a parlor game to begin with. I doubt that it has much, if anything, to do with wine appreciation. Secondly, one of the great feats of blind tasting (documented) was that of the late Harry Waugh. Given a wine to identify after he'd been robbed of his sense of smell in a car accident, he correctly identified a claret blind from its mouthfeel. Of course, he also famously quipped in response to a question of whether he'd ever mistaken a Bordeaux for a Burgundy "not since lunch."

Mark Lipton

...First is that blind tasting is largely a parlor game to begin with...

Parlor games can be fun.

A few years ago I attended a blind tasting with some scientist/engineer nerd-geek acquaintances who were also wine buffs and experienced tasters. The format was to disclose the eight red wines to the tasters ahead of time, and to let them pre-taste the wines (no notes). They were then served the eight wines blind, as a group, and simply had to identify each wine. The wines varied in varietal and style. There was no attempt to trick people.

Though most of the nine tasters were confident up front, the end result was not statistically much different from blind guessing. They immediately started blaming temperature change, lighting, food accompaniment, etc. for their abject failure. I wasn't an official participant, but I couldn't have done any better myself.

I am more than willing to admit that any accuracy at blind tasting is beyond my abilities. I do not know if it is beyond my capabilities, but I certainly know that I am unwilling to invest the time and effort necessary to find out. At my age (I will never see 60 again) all I want is to truly enjoy the wine that I do drink. So what I do want is to find wines that give me pleasure. Blind tasting skills do not seem to me to aid in reaching my limited goals. But I do profoundly thank the posters here who have exposed me to wines that I probably would not have found otherwise. And as a simple consumer of wine, I believe my palate needs only to be trained enough to be able to identify what wines I do truly enjoy. And that much ability, I do think I have attained.

Best,
Glenn

[Jenise]

First is that blind tasting is largely a parlor game to begin with. I doubt that it has much, if anything, to do with wine appreciation.

I'm asking myself if I agree with this, and I lean toward 'no'. Enjoyment is one thing--all you need is a glass of wine and the time to drink it-- but I've always felt that 'appreciation' implied a more deliberate, thoughtful level of enjoyment. And toward that goal, though I enjoyed wine for years it wasn't until I started blind tasting that my appreciation began real and measurable advancement, because blind tasting gave me the ability to start learning why I liked what I did and further gave me the skills to differentiate between wines in the company of people with great palates and greater experience. Going to Bill Spohn's monthly wine lunches is like going to school, and the more I learn the more I appreciate each and every wine. Of course, it's also true that the more I learn the pickier I get, so knowledge does come with a price.

First is that blind tasting is largely a parlor game to begin with. I doubt that it has much, if anything, to do with wine appreciation.

I'm asking myself if I agree with this, and I lean toward 'no'. Enjoyment is one thing--all you need is a glass of wine and the time to drink it-- but I've always felt that 'appreciation' implied a more deliberate, thoughtful level of enjoyment. And toward that goal, though I enjoyed wine for years it wasn't until I started blind tasting that my appreciation began real and measurable advancement, because blind tasting gave me the ability to start learning why I liked what I did and further gave me the skills to differentiate between wines in the company of people with great palates and greater experience. Going to Bill Spohn's monthly wine lunches is like going to school, and the more I learn the more I appreciate each and every wine. Of course, it's also true that the more I learn the pickier I get, so knowledge does come with a price.

Interesting! I agree that I have learned a lot from tasting with keener and more experienced palates but haven't found that the occasions when I was blind enhanced that; perhaps I haven't done it often enough.

Most of the stories of a non-professional connoisseur being able to identify reliably the year, vineyard and producer of a wide range of wines are apocryphal, except where the wines in question come from his/her cellar. I am content if I can get broad region and rough age; non-taste clues like bottle shape, colour and embossing can help to avoid embarrassment.

However, I do think that remarkable prowess in wine identification can be found in wine professionals, particularly négociants, in the narrow geographical area in which they specialise. For example, I would expect, say, Dominique Laurent to dazzle us with his perceptiveness in Burgundy, his colleague Michel Tardieu in the Rhône valley and so on.

This all reminds me of a trick which my first wine merchant friend played on some distinguished visitors from Bordeaux. He first decanted behind the scenes a Burgundy into a Bordeaux bottle and then decanted it into a decanter in front of his guests. After a few misses around Pomerol and St.Emilion, one of the guests was shrewd enough to remark "are you sure that there was nothing wrong with the bottle?" to general mirth all round the table.

[Jenise]

Interesting! I agree that I have learned a lot from tasting with keener and more experienced palates but haven't found that the occasions when I was blind enhanced that; perhaps I haven't done it often enough.

Most of the stories of a non-professional connoisseur being able to identify reliably the year, vineyard and producer of a wide range of wines are apocryphal, except where the wines in question come from his/her cellar. I am content if I can get broad region and rough age

I think what happens in blind tasting is that you're forced to find every nuance of aroma and flavor possible and then process it against prior experience. With that in hand first, you then bond those impressions with the wine upon reveal. Palate memory helps preserve the experience for later reference. Otherwise, non-blind, you skip all that thinking and go straight to reaction, to 'ah....'--or ick or even WTF? . At yesterday's lunch, I correctly guessed a lovely red wine in my glass to be a youngish Merlot from Bergerac. I can promise you that without the experience and discipline of blind tasting, that would not have been possible.

First is that blind tasting is largely a parlor game to begin with. I doubt that it has much, if anything, to do with wine appreciation.

I'm asking myself if I agree with this, and I lean toward 'no'. Enjoyment is one thing--all you need is a glass of wine and the time to drink it-- but I've always felt that 'appreciation' implied a more deliberate, thoughtful level of enjoyment. And toward that goal, though I enjoyed wine for years it wasn't until I started blind tasting that my appreciation began real and measurable advancement, because blind tasting gave me the ability to start learning why I liked what I did and further gave me the skills to differentiate between wines in the company of people with great palates and greater experience. Going to Bill Spohn's monthly wine lunches is like going to school, and the more I learn the more I appreciate each and every wine. Of course, it's also true that the more I learn the pickier I get, so knowledge does come with a price.

Jenise,
I said what I did in a provocative way, but I stand by my sentiment. The finest tasters I've known are also probably the best at blind tasting, but I have known many fine palates who were either not inclined or not disposed to taste wines blind, yet those same people offered amazing insights and knowledge about the wines they did taste. I think that it's pretty well summed up by Clive Coates.

Mark Lipton

[Jenise]

but I have known many fine palates who were either not inclined or not disposed to taste wines blind, yet those same people offered amazing insights and knowledge about the wines they did taste. I think that it's pretty well summed up by Clive Coates.

Mark Lipton

Enjoyed the Clive article, thanks for the link. And he makes an excellent point about the importance of a good memory. I happen to have a far better than average memory, so perhaps it's why I personally have benefitted so much from blind tasting.