WTN: Egon Muller, Nikolaihof, Chave

Dinner with David last night and a great lineup of wine to go with a lot of daal, rice, chicken and a mixed vegetable korma.

2002 Nikolaihof Riesling Reserve Steiner Hund
Incredibly youthful and showing barely any signs of development, though there's tremendous complexity here. Layers of citrus and pear fruit, a vivid stony minerality, fresh herbs and savoury chalky notes conveyed on a polished, medium weight frame with a remarkable sense of purity and calm. Outstanding, though there's so much time and potential ahead as well.

2006 Egon Müller Scharzhofberger Riesling Kabinett
Intensely sweet and rich with an avalanche of ripe peach and white fruited flavours tinged with honey covering everything else at first. With some air it opens out as the fruit takes a step back and fresh herbal, minty and mineral elements emerge. There's a lot of stuffing here and this really needs time.

1994 Domaine Jean-Louis Chave St. Joseph
So much for the travel shock theory. This landed in the afternoon off a UPS truck, and aside from the sediment being stirred up showed no ill effects. I'd say this is pretty much at peak; a beautiful meaty fragrance with mature leathery, earthy and iodine elements framing olives and red fruited flavours. Tannins fully resolved, bright acidity giving the flavours a nice sense of freshness and wonderful balance - pretty much everything I'd look for in an older Northern Rhone.

1994 Domaine Jean-Louis Chave St. Joseph
So much for the travel shock theory. This landed in the afternoon off a UPS truck, and aside from the sediment being stirred up showed no ill effects.

Wouldn't you need to have tasted another bottle next to it, that had been laying still for months/years, to disprove the travel shock theory? While the bottle sounds delicious, there's no telling if it would have shown different, perhaps less resolved, without the travel.

[David M. Bueker]

True, the experiment did not follow any meaningful protocol, but the wine was damned fine! It was a bit cloudy, but that only added to the mystique, with a Truchot-like essence from the opacity of the beverage.

True, though I've just gotten tired of people using travel shock/sudden bottle movement as an excuse as to why a wine hasn't showed well. Moving around on a UPS truck for a couple of days and stirring up sediment didn't do much to harm that bottle.

True, though I've just gotten tired of people using travel shock/sudden bottle movement as an excuse as to why a wine hasn't showed well. Moving around on a UPS truck for a couple of days and stirring up sediment didn't do much to harm that bottle.

Well if they know the wines, they why isn't it a valid excuse/reason?

I haven't done systematic studies of this stuff, but at one point when I was living in London I was drinking a lot of 1996 Nyetimber and it always showed consistently. Then I took a bottle to Italy and drank it at dinner after two days of lots of travel movement. It showed very poorly and disjointed. There could have been other explanations of course, but travel shock seemed very plausible.

Perhaps two folks on the board who each bought the same wine on release from the same source can arrange to have a bottle shipped to the other and then taste test the shipped vs. the non-shipped to see if there are differences. Or have people done similar trials before? There's an industry of wine research, they must be addressing this important question!

Well if they know the wines, they why isn't it a valid excuse/reason?

Because in more than a few occasions the wines tend to be from sacred cow-type producers. Particularly the case when they're expensive. Almost any time there's a disappointing high end wine (e.g. Ch. Margaux, or a disappointing GC Burg), it's either an 'off bottle' or 'travel shocked' and hence not showing well. (Or in the case of most of the Keller GGs, they're invariably opened at the wrong age, or not given enough air, or given too much air...)

And yet I've had a number of experiences with old and young wines lugged all over the place and opened soon after that showed very well.

[David M. Bueker]

Don't mind Salil. He's just been bottled/fined/filtered/shipped/abruptly opened/recently decanted/corked(!)/heat damaged/racked/Audouzed/etc.

He'll be fine in two weeks/15 years/an hour.

At least he wasn't sitting on his lees!

Because in more than a few occasions the wines tend to be from sacred cow-type producers. Particularly the case when they're expensive. Almost any time there's a disappointing high end wine (e.g. Ch. Margaux, or a disappointing GC Burg), it's either an 'off bottle' or 'travel shocked' and hence not showing well.

There are two issues here. One is the dynamic of wanting a wine to be better than it is because of the price/prestige. Another is having a high-quality wine that often shows much better experience an especially poor showing. I can't speak to the percentage of your examples that fit either dynamic, but for the latter it is perfectly logical to seek explanations. Of course we know the standard closed phase and random wine variability issues, but it doesn't seem so far-fetched to include travel shock as one of the explanations, especially if the bottle underwent more travel/agitation than usual.

And yet I've had a number of experiences with old and young wines lugged all over the place and opened soon after that showed very well.

That is interesting evidence, although of course it still doesn't get at the issue of how those wines would have shown if you had not lugged them all over the place. And I don't pretend to understand the chemistry/physics behind the effects of travel shock. But presumably not all types of wines are equally vulnerable. Have you noticed no patterns in your travels?

I haven't done systematic studies of this stuff, but at one point when I was living in London I was drinking a lot of 1996 Nyetimber and it always showed consistently. Then I took a bottle to Italy and drank it at dinner after two days of lots of travel movement. It showed very poorly and disjointed. There could have been other explanations of course, but travel shock seemed very plausible.

Apples and oranges, Rahsaan. As Dale Williams has pointed out, travel shock from plane travel has a lot more empirical support than does travel shock from car/truck transport.

Mark Lipton

You could never assess the existence of travel shock due to one constant law of wine: every bottle of the same wine is different.

[David M. Bueker]

So typically wine geek - we discuss the circumstances around the specific bottle more than the wine itself.

So typically wine geek - we discuss the circumstances around the specific bottle more than the wine itself.

Well, since Salil injected the circumstances of the bottle into his note, I'd say it's fair play.

[David M. Bueker]

So typically wine geek - we discuss the circumstances around the specific bottle more than the wine itself.

Well, since Salil injected the circumstances of the bottle into his note, I'd say it's fair play.

Fair play but still funny to me.

Just goes to show that most of our educated guesses are just intuitive shots in the dark.